|
Post by shrewspotter on Sept 7, 2017 7:28:09 GMT
I am certainly not saying we should ban gambling. I like many do enjoy a flutter, I will have a bet on the National, Gold Cup and on several Stoke games and my post isn't suggesting a ban on gambling. and I agree with you regards personalities to an extent. What I don't agree with is though is online casino's, slot machines that take £20 notes, I also think its unhealthy to encourage free bets when you win money that has to be deposited back into the gambling company and has to be recycled several times before you can draw your winnings, all these things are attempts by gambling companies to get you hooked and that is not healthy. Perhaps (like I alluded to is a later post) the Government should do more with gambling companies help to help addicts
|
|
|
Post by TrentValePotter96 on Sept 7, 2017 11:21:12 GMT
. he gave them money in the days of Blair and co, where they went hand in hand with gambling. He's said before he doesn't like corbyn. utter bollox what do you disagree with?
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Sept 7, 2017 11:50:42 GMT
I don't really gamble but on the odd occasions that I have it's never been because I've seen an advertisement.
Would be utterly pointless to ban betting logos on shirts unless I'm missing something obvious.
|
|
|
Post by miggoscfc on Sept 7, 2017 11:53:42 GMT
I've been watching football for all of my life and, in spite of all of the advertising for gambling and everything else (such as the handing out of betting slips when you go into hospitality), I've never placed any kind of bet, and have never had even the slightest inclination to do so. Maybe, just maybe, there are other, more complicated causes for people initially getting themselves into gambling trouble that go beyond there being a lot of advertising. If politicians were really bothered, maybe they'd try to address those causes, rather than merely trying to be seen to be doing something with a daft sticking plaster solution. I must admit, that I too have never placed a bet or even had an inkling to place a bet. I just blank out the advertising as it has no relevance to me. However, I do feel for those who are hooked on gambling. Can I suggest that any thread on our message board that encourages betting (and there have been a fair few) be immediately removed by our friends in admin. This might seem draconian, but any thread encouraging the sale of cigarettes would be swiftly removed. Bollocks !!! Let's penalise the majority for the flaws of the few. Let's ban cars because some idiots can't drive, let's ban cake because if rising obesity levels etc etc how far do we go ? There are many of us on the oatcake that like a flutter and do so responsibly and enjoy discussing what and why we have backed so should we have our threads taken away really ? Football is somewhat of an addiction to me should we stop talking about that too ?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Sept 7, 2017 11:56:55 GMT
I don't really gamble but on the odd occasions that I have it's never been because I've seen an advertisement. Would be utterly pointless to ban betting logos on shirts unless I'm missing something obvious. One has to assume that 9 major betting companies would not each be pumping £millions in sponsorship into 9 Premier League clubs unless they felt that the money they were spending was benefiting their companies in terms of increased turnover. I've never heard anyone accuse them of doing it out of a spirit of charity! As I said above, I personally, don't have a problem with betting companies sponsoring shirts and/or football stadia, but I don't delude myself that their sponsorship doesn't have an effect on betting turnover.
|
|
|
Post by Not_Nick_H on Sept 7, 2017 12:04:08 GMT
Rest assured that if either party gets a big majority at the next election they will smash the entire gambling sector with a raft of burdensome regulation and restrictive red tape. The Gambling industry is on both of their radars. It's the latest moral football for politicians. If you want to save the Coates family from the embarrassment of only climbing 5 places a year in the Sunday Times Rich List rather than 50 then keep voting for hung parliaments! Don't worry, I hate May too. I just think they should leave them to it. If people want to gamble they will gamble. Not the gambling companies faults. Correct. Betting sponsors' names on Shirts don't encourage people to gamble per se, it just encourages them to gamble with that particular sponsor that's all - it's called competitive marketing. Stoke used to be sponsored by Carling (owned by BASS). Did it make me drink Carling when I had a pint or bought lager from the shops? - No. Sponsorship raises brand awareness, but you can't force people to choose your brand - that's where you have anoffer in place to lure them in. Don't get me wrong - gambling addiction (like any other: drugs, booze) is tragic, but it's naiive to think that seeing a company's name in a shirt encourages someone to start betting from scratch. So, how about saying it's OK to have betting company logos on shirts - BUT - the phrase "Gamble Responsibly" has to be added to each one? Not exactly rocket science to think that through was it? Then again, "Politician" and "think" don't exactly go together do they?
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Sept 7, 2017 12:56:09 GMT
I don't really gamble but on the odd occasions that I have it's never been because I've seen an advertisement. Would be utterly pointless to ban betting logos on shirts unless I'm missing something obvious. One has to assume that 9 major betting companies would not each be pumping £millions in sponsorship into 9 Premier League clubs unless they felt that the money they were spending was benefiting their companies in terms of increased turnover. I've never heard anyone accuse them of doing it out of a spirit of charity! As I said above, I personally, don't have a problem with betting companies sponsoring shirts and/or football stadia, but I don't delude myself that their sponsorship doesn't have an effect on betting turnover. Fair point. I'd be very interested to know how much they pump into sponsorship/advertising and what effect it has on their turnover.
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Sept 7, 2017 13:28:36 GMT
Labour can fuck off So can the Tories And the Lib Dems And UKIP And all of them I'll be in charge And the first thing I'll change Is that all message board posts have to be written in the tonydreamtheatre style That's sounds reasonable.... I can live with that.... I think!!! 🤔
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Sept 7, 2017 13:32:17 GMT
One has to assume that 9 major betting companies would not each be pumping £millions in sponsorship into 9 Premier League clubs unless they felt that the money they were spending was benefiting their companies in terms of increased turnover. I've never heard anyone accuse them of doing it out of a spirit of charity! As I said above, I personally, don't have a problem with betting companies sponsoring shirts and/or football stadia, but I don't delude myself that their sponsorship doesn't have an effect on betting turnover. Fair point. I'd be very interested to know how much they pump into sponsorship/advertising and what effect it has on their turnover. One for the supporters council?😎
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Sept 7, 2017 13:45:03 GMT
They could make a start by banning all gambling advertisements on tv, even the fuckin Jeremy Kyle show is sponsored by gambling in the freakin "MORNINGS!!!"
I doubt advertising gambling brands on shirts would have the same effect as the shit that gets spewed out on tv, tv makes it look alot more appealing!!!
And while they're at it, ban those fuckin begging averts in the afternoon too!!! 😡
|
|
|
Post by generationex on Sept 7, 2017 14:03:48 GMT
Unregulated betting won't continue forever. It's a murky business but I don't suppose any pottery firm will make a billion quid a year again.
|
|
|
Post by Boothen on Sept 7, 2017 14:27:50 GMT
Yet another case of trying to ban something because people are too weak-willed to control their own life. Fucking pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2017 14:32:49 GMT
It does seem a little bit of a contradiction....helping etherington and advertising gambling
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Sept 7, 2017 15:20:35 GMT
Sponsorship of programmes and on shirts is intercompany competition, has very little effect on the amount of gambling, but affects which company people who bet use. The tobacco comparison is totally false, smoking does directly affect the health of everyone who smokes, gambling only affects a very small number of people with psychological problems. Perhaps we should ban all slimming product adverts because they affect bulimic people and encourage them not to eat properly. Labour are an authoritarian party which would legislate to stop all kinds of things if it could get away with it.
|
|
|
Post by terrorofturfmoor on Sept 7, 2017 15:33:53 GMT
How many people actually take much notice of shirt sponsors, I mean, c'mon, how many really?????????????
How many times has anyone actually thought "I need such and such a thing....now, what was the name of that sponsor such and such a team had on the front of their shirts???"
TV advertisement is where it begins, and gambling adverts should be taken off the tv like cigarette adverts and drink adverts!!!
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Sept 7, 2017 18:07:47 GMT
Whilst I accept that out wealthy backers have a business that is to do with gambling. They basically don't do much more than guarantee our financial status. If bet365 weren't shirt sponsor or ground sponsor wed Just get another. It doesn't affect us any differently than the other 9 clubs. They don't pay over the odds, the accounts show that. If you want to look into financial doping in football I'd be happy. But an advertising ban in football of any product should just follow the national rules. I can advertise drink outside of football and gambling outside of football but not smoking. Football shirts, stadiums should just be in line with other advertising standards and not a special case. It matters not its bet365, with a world wise audience companies are queuing up to put a logo on football shirts. Why are there 9 because they are paying the best and the placement is perfect for the intended audience, simples. If its not bet365 it will be something else that football fans like, booze, gambling Waitrose prawn sandwiches. I don't give a flying fk,
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Sept 9, 2017 8:52:57 GMT
Another reason not to vote for the red filth then 😎
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Sept 9, 2017 9:04:32 GMT
Sponsorship of programmes and on shirts is intercompany competition, has very little effect on the amount of gambling, but affects which company people who bet use. The tobacco comparison is totally false, smoking does directly affect the health of everyone who smokes, gambling only affects a very small number of people with psychological problems. Perhaps we should ban all slimming product adverts because they affect bulimic people and encourage them not to eat properly. Labour are an authoritarian party which would legislate to stop all kinds of things if it could get away with it. Correct. The power of advertising is the subconscious impression made on the mind. No one's actions are driven conciously by what they see in an advert, unless they are very gullible. But the constant impression made by adverts does influence decision making at a later date.such as which company to chose to place a bet with. www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/9191107/Think-Tank-Its-the-subconscious-that-makes-ads-work.html
|
|
|
Post by jeycov on Sept 9, 2017 9:18:39 GMT
How many people actually take much notice of shirt sponsors, I mean, c'mon, how many really????????????? How many times has anyone actually thought "I need such and such a thing....now, what was the name of that sponsor such and such a team had on the front of their shirts???" TV advertisement is where it begins, and gambling adverts should be taken off the tv like cigarette adverts and drink adverts!!! Wonder how many fans can name all 20 sponsorship shirt advertising for the Premiership clubs?
|
|
|
Post by Gaz on Sept 9, 2017 10:22:51 GMT
Dear Mr. Corbyn, will Labour also be banning Skybet from the Championship? And while addictive gambling is an illness that needs to be addressed there is no proven link between advertising and incidence. In contrast global warming and use of fossil fuels are clearly cause-and-effect - so will Labour be banning the sponsors of Man Utd (Chevrolet), Man City (Etihad) and Arsenal (Emirates). And surely alcoholism is just as worthy of notice as gambling, so Labour will be removing Carling from all footballing sponsorship? Etc. etc... Dear Mr. Corbyn, when will Labour grow up?
|
|