- This topic has 41 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Racing seeking to be exempted from this ban.
Logically, why should racing be exempt from an advertising ban on gambling??
David, my post from the previous page:
Utterly nonsensical idea pitched and reported in today’s RP that Racing will plead for an exemption if these rules are brought in. No better way to make a complete @rse of the sport in the eyes of the public.
However it’s dressed up, in essence, the reason for the exemption request is this: ‘We’d like to continue exposing children to gambling ads because we need the money and football doesn’t.’
I hope Nick Rust kills this idea off double quick.
Racing seeking to be exempted from this ban.
Logically, why should racing be exempt from an advertising ban on gambling??
This is being proposed primarily because of increased gambling problems in 18 to 24 year olds. As I understand, Racing does not attract many 18 to 24 year olds. I’d imagine the big increase is because of Football betting and FOBT’s.
If that is correct, it would imo be good reason for exemption?
ie Is banning adverts around horse racing TV going to make any difference? If not, then surely there’s no reason to ban it.Value Is EverythingGinger, I think the point is that if they are exposed to gambling adverts from the age of 3, then by the time they’re legally able to bet (and possibly long before that date) the damage has been done.
Gambling is gambling. Racing has stated its viewpoint – (paraphrasing) ‘we should be treated differently because our sport depends on gambling for its survival’. Which is a bit like pubs saying, ‘don’t ban beer ads because we depend on beer sales for our survival’.
A rational argument?
This is being proposed primarily because of increased gambling problems in 18 to 24 year olds. As I understand, Racing does not attract many 18 to 24 year olds
I thought one of the main remits of racing’s various acronyms in recent times is to try and attract yoof: the Ben and Brian guff and the appointment of ostensibly bright young things to front TV coverage. That being the case, racing’s ‘partners’ of which the bookmaking industry is a major one surely have some sort of duty not to lure the young and naiive into bad ways by inciting them to bet with a myriad of enticing special offers: the equivalent of plugging cut-price booze, which I think the ASA forbids on commercial TV, and rightly so
I watch little sport on the goggler and if I do I record it in order to fast-forward through adverts; but what I’ve seen of bookmakers ads they do seem to be of the loss-leader type – ‘money back if your horse is second’ ‘free bet if you open an account’ etc. Give them a morsel and hope they’ll pay for the full meal
Anyway why would the banning of tawdry bookies ads be ‘the beginning of the end’ for televised racing? It survived perfectly well on the BBC for decades and on ITV/C4 prior to gambling advertising being legalised
On the assumption that the demographic tuning in still are and will remain Brian rather than Ben, which does seem likely, then advertising from Stannah Stairlifts and dodgy outfits offering help with ‘those final expenses’ if allowed the advertising slots all to themselves will probably generate more income than if having to compete for air-time with bookmakers
Ginger, I think the point is that if they are exposed to gambling adverts from the age of 3, then by the time they’re legally able to bet (and possibly long before that date) the damage has been done.
Gambling is gambling. Racing has stated its viewpoint – (paraphrasing) ‘we should be treated differently because our sport depends on gambling for its survival’. Which is a bit like pubs saying, ‘don’t ban beer ads because we depend on beer sales for our survival’.
A rational argument?
No, I don’t find your arguement rational Joe.
Gambling is NOT gambling. Some types encourage under-age gambling more than others. Some types of gambling is more addictive than others. So why should it be treated the same? Lottery and scratch card betting is gambling but it is not treated the same as horse racing and neither should horse racing be treated the same as football or FOBTs if there is a good reason not to.
I don’t particularly care what “Racing’s viewpoint” is. I am just saying if youngsters are not betting on Horse Racing then there is no need to ban advertising on it. If 18 to 24 year olds are not that interested in horse racing I dare say 8 to 17 year olds are not interested in it either. Therefore, solely horse race betting adverts restricted only to ad breaks of horse racing programmes… add very little or nothing to this particular problem.
Surely kids will NOT be “exposed to gambling adverts from the age of 3, then by the time they’re legally able to bet (and possibly long before that date)”… because youngsters are NOT interested in Racing won’t be watching?
Football is something most boys and a lot of girls are interested in and therefore watch and susequently exposed from a young age. So yes, ban football betting ads if it’s found 3 to 17 year olds… And cut the maximum stake for FOBT’s to £2 (or whatever) because they cause a big problem to youth and more addictive to adults.
Youngsters are exposed to scratch card/lottery betting/adverts too and they’re allowed to bet and win/lose from the age of 16. Would’ve thought that far more encouraging to kids gambling than horse racing ads.
This should NOT be about discouraging adults gambling. If it is then we’d might as well close this site.
It SHOULD be about discouraging kids gambling and to help stop adult addiction/problem gambling. I don’t see horse racing ads are a problem in this area.
I also think teachers should pay particular attention to the mathematics of betting, am sure understanding this would lead to fewer children getting involved. Some of you will have seen a class of kids being taught about racing at a day’s racing. I asked one of the maths teachers if he teaches them the mathematics of betting in the ring. He said “no, they are not allowed”.
Value Is EverythingI also think teachers should pay particular attention to the mathematics of betting, am sure understanding this would lead to fewer children getting involved. Some of you will have seen a class of kids being taught about racing at a day’s racing. I asked one of the maths teachers if he teaches them the mathematics of betting in the ring. He said “no, they are not allowed”.
If by “mathematics of betting” you mean the mathematics of probability and chance then yes I agree that should form part of the National Curriculum, as much of that subject is superficially counter-intuitive even at a complexity basic enough to be suitable for teaching to 11-16 year-olds
The Gamblers’ Fallacy is universal as it’s in essence a facet of human nature, and a regrettable one at that
I am just saying if youngsters are not betting on Horse Racing then there is no need to ban advertising on it. If 18 to 24 year olds are not that interested in horse racing I dare say 8 to 17 year olds are not interested in it either. Therefore, solely horse race betting adverts restricted only to ad breaks of horse racing programmes… add very little or nothing to this particular problem.
Surely kids will NOT be “exposed to gambling adverts from the age of 3, then by the time they’re legally able to bet (and possibly long before that date)”… because youngsters are NOT interested in Racing won’t be watching?
According to Ginger no one age 3 to 24 is interested in racing, don’t know where he gets this info from or what evidence his opinion is based upon but if it’s true I reckon racing is in big trouble, there will come a time when no one is betting or interested in racing at all or do a lot get interested once they reach 25?
not that interested
“Not that interested” does not mean “no one” Yeats.
Yes, it’s a bit of a generalisation, suppose I should’ve made myself clear. Apologies.The only point really should be:
How much of the increase in problem gambling is because of horse racing betting ads being shown between horse racing programmes?…
And
How much of the problem is due to football betting?
And
How much of the problem is due to FOBT’s?
Value Is EverythingGinger, what I was asking you was from racing’s viewpoint: is their argument rational?
And if ‘gambling is not gambling’, is drinking not drinking? Drinking a pint of beer a day is different from drinking a bottle of vodka a day, so should beer companies be allowed to advertise as they like and vodka companies barred from it?
Gambling IS gambling GT. I get there are different types with differing profiles but, at the end of the day, arguing that advertising gambling offers on horse racing is acceptable while advertising gambling offers on football is not won’t be an argument that racing can win. Why is racing any less gambling than slots or bingo? In some cases the over-rounds on racing are higher. the Grand National, the most popular single gambling event in the racing year, is a rip-off if you bet with a high street bookmaker at SP. Why allow that to be advertised and not roulette?
I suppose you might argue that it is a bit like allowing beer adverts but not allowing super-strength lager ads. Or allowing menthol cigarettes to be advertised but not capstan full strength. Is that an analogy that makes your point GT?
for ‘junk’ food, banned from dedicated children’s TV or progs likely to appeal to children.
I find this rational and the most sensible way of controling gambling. Football programmes are “likely to appeal to children”. Horse racing progs are unlikely to appeal to children. Please note: “Unlikely” does not mean none.
Value Is EverythingGambling IS gambling GT. I get there are different types with differing profiles but, at the end of the day, arguing that advertising gambling offers on horse racing is acceptable while advertising gambling offers on football is not won’t be an argument that racing can win.
I disagree, for the reasons already stated.
And
If levels of gambling does not matter, should this website be banned?
Apparently “Gambling is gambling” David and this site encourages gambling, shows ads by bookmakers and can be accessed by children.Value Is EverythingWhy is racing any less gambling than slots or bingo? In some cases the over-rounds on racing are higher. the Grand National, the most popular single gambling event in the racing year, is a rip-off if you bet with a high street bookmaker at SP. Why allow that to be advertised and not roulette?
I suppose you might argue that it is a bit like allowing beer adverts but not allowing super-strength lager ads. Or allowing menthol cigarettes to be advertised but not capstan full strength. Is that an analogy that makes your point GT?
I do not know how addictive every form of gambling is and just how much every type encourages children to gamble. But am sure there are experts and good research on the subject and those two things should be what matters in what type of advertising should be allowed, when and how. However… Strongly suspect FOBTs cause more addiction and problems than racing, so should be more restricted… And fact is Footall is far more interesting to kids than horse racing.
Am not a drinker or smoker (never taken a drag in my life) know next to nothing about the laws so unfortunately can’t comment. But it would all depend on how addictive each form of drinking/smoking is and how much it encourages/leads to children/problem drinking/smoking.
Grand National SPs should be taken up by media and I blame them. Is it Liverpool on course bookmakers at fault or high street bookmakers or both?
The over-round will be higher than any other race, because there are more runners, but it should not be 149%!Value Is EverythingThe ads don’t bother me personally
I do find however that when I’m losing I’ll get flooded with emails and texts
but not when I’m winning. It doesn’t matter to me, I know you can change the settings to stop receiving them. The natural thing to do when having a loss is to try and win it back, chase the loss, which we know is the worse thing to do although at times I’ve chased and come up smelling of roses the regular pattern ends up doing your bollocks and the only good thing about the lost chase is you won’t be able to afford the Mug tattoo on the forehead the next morning.What was the advert.? “When the fun stops, stop”
the emails would suggest “when the fun stops, deposit more”Blackbeard to conquer the World
The ads don’t bother me personally
I do find however that when I’m losing I’ll get flooded with emails and texts
but not when I’m winning. It doesn’t matter to me, I know you can change the settings to stop receiving them.Jeez, is this for real
Coercion as well as incitement, charming
One should not have to change settings to stop them; they should not be sent in the first place. A despicable practice that should most certainly be banned
This has been an enlightening thread and it now seems obvious to me that the laws on gambling and the associated advertising are due a wholesale revision
Yes, for real.
Maybe it’s just a coincidence but almost nearly everytime I’ve done my nuts one will pop up within the hour and not always the bookies I lost to.Blackbeard to conquer the World
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.