The problem is not that the recipients of the votes were unexpected.

It's that people got to learn who got the 3 votes.

2 hours ago, Roger Mellie said:

I think the AFL will go hard after Pell and give him a lifetime ban even if he doesn't get jail time. They'll want to be seen as taking a strong stand so there will be lots of outrage. They'll also be miffed because they can't control the judicial process. But, they and media entities enjoying the support of betting agencies wont look at the toxicity of their relationship - nothing to see there!  That'll be left to media outlets that don't depend on gambling ads for revenue.

Seriously I don’t get the outrage directed at betting organisations. 
I acknowledge that it can be a slippery slope for some people just like with drugs and alcohol. 
 

People need to learn how to show restraint, practice temperance and take on a little virtue called self accountability in many facets of life and having a punt is just another. 
 

I have a bet but have put in place all of the available restriction’s provided by the agencies with regards to deposit and bet limits. 
It’s not up to them to check in on you to make sure you’re in control of your activity. They provide a service, it’s your choices that affect the outcome. 
 

When was the last time Fritta got 3 votes for kicking 4, 5, 6 or seven goals???

22 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Seriously I don’t get the outrage directed at betting organisations. 
I acknowledge that it can be a slippery slope for some people just like with drugs and alcohol. 

The problem is more to do with the overkill on advertising and the acceptance of gambling money by the AFL and AFL media...

It puts the AFL in difficult position.

Edited November 16, 20222 yr by rjay

Who got the votes, and gave them in Gold Coast's last game of year.

4 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Who got the votes, and gave them in Gold Coast's last game of year.

Swallow 3

Anderson 2

Sexton 1

Umpires - Fisher, Johanson, Wallace

 

56 minutes ago, rjay said:

The problem is more to do with the overkill on advertising and the acceptance of gambling money by the AFL and AFL media...

It puts the AFL in difficult position.

Just like it was with Ciggies and booze?

The money has to come from somewhere that is relatively recession proof. People’s ‘vices’ are really just addiction and advertising does it’s job to get them hooked. 
I take no notice of the excessive advertisements. 

22 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Just like it was with Ciggies and booze?

The money has to come from somewhere that is relatively recession proof. People’s ‘vices’ are really just addiction and advertising does it’s job to get them hooked. 
I take no notice of the excessive advertisements. 

Good for you.

It targets 2 things...one is getting you to change allegiance to another brand of bookie...

...and the other is at kids, to normalise the activity (make you feel the odd one out if you don't) and keep a steady flow of new customers.

Edited November 16, 20222 yr by rjay

48 minutes ago, rjay said:

Good for you.

It targets 2 things...one is getting you to change allegiance to another brand of bookie...

...and the other is at kids, to normalise the activity (make you feel the odd one out if you don't) and keep a steady flow of new customers.

Like new toys, Pokémon cards, sugary treats etc?

It would all stop if the players were prepared to take a pay cut for the amount that gambling promotion delivers to the AFL.

I am not holding my breath.

8 hours ago, McQueen said:

People need to learn how to show restraint, practice temperance and take on a little virtue called self accountability in many facets of life…
 

I have some Colombian friends who agree with you. 

 

8 hours ago, McQueen said:

Seriously I don’t get the outrage directed at betting organisations. 
I acknowledge that it can be a slippery slope for some people just like with drugs and alcohol. 
 

People need to learn how to show restraint, practice temperance and take on a little virtue called self accountability in many facets of life and having a punt is just another. 

I have a bet but have put in place all of the available restriction’s provided by the agencies with regards to deposit and bet limits. 
It’s not up to them to check in on you to make sure you’re in control of your activity. They provide a service, it’s your choices that affect the outcome. 
 

Young people especially need support and guidance..... but ultimately you're correct Steve ..... we must take responsibility for our own actions.

8 hours ago, McQueen said:

Seriously I don’t get the outrage directed at betting organisations. 
I acknowledge that it can be a slippery slope for some people just like with drugs and alcohol. 
 

People need to learn how to show restraint, practice temperance and take on a little virtue called self accountability in many facets of life and having a punt is just another. 
 

I have a bet but have put in place all of the available restriction’s provided by the agencies with regards to deposit and bet limits. 
It’s not up to them to check in on you to make sure you’re in control of your activity. They provide a service, it’s your choices that affect the outcome. 
 

I wasn't directing outrage at betting organisations nor am I averse to a punt. My beef is with the saturation of all things sporting with gambling ads/odds quarter time, half time etc etc and the reliance of the AFL, SEN etc on the income of betting agencies. It puts them in a compromising position.

Ciggies are a good comparison. Tobacco Co's certainly have the marketing budget and could easily (and would be desperate to) replace the betting agency ads in terms of media saturation but they can't for a good reason. What's the difference between kids watching gasper ads versus gambling ads?

I also agree with you that for most people it's a bit of fun or makes it interesting, but the level of advertising is ridiculous and there are too many people that 'take it to the next level' (pardon the pun). I'm quite surprised by the amount they get away with in advertising.

56 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

I wasn't directing outrage at betting organisations nor am I averse to a punt. My beef is with the saturation of all things sporting with gambling ads/odds quarter time, half time etc etc and the reliance of the AFL, SEN etc on the income of betting agencies. It puts them in a compromising position.

Ciggies are a good comparison. Tobacco Co's certainly have the marketing budget and could easily (and would be desperate to) replace the betting agency ads in terms of media saturation but they can't for a good reason. What's the difference between kids watching gasper ads versus gambling ads?

I also agree with you that for most people it's a bit of fun or makes it interesting, but the level of advertising is ridiculous and there are too many people that 'take it to the next level' (pardon the pun). I'm quite surprised by the amount they get away with in advertising.

Gotcha. Agree with the above. 
 

11 hours ago, Roger Mellie said:

I wasn't directing outrage at betting organisations nor am I averse to a punt. My beef is with the saturation of all things sporting with gambling ads/odds quarter time, half time etc etc and the reliance of the AFL, SEN etc on the income of betting agencies. It puts them in a compromising position.

Ciggies are a good comparison. Tobacco Co's certainly have the marketing budget and could easily (and would be desperate to) replace the betting agency ads in terms of media saturation but they can't for a good reason. What's the difference between kids watching gasper ads versus gambling ads?

I also agree with you that for most people it's a bit of fun or makes it interesting, but the level of advertising is ridiculous and there are too many people that 'take it to the next level' (pardon the pun). I'm quite surprised by the amount they get away with in advertising.

I know this is off-topic, but can anyone remember whether we had one of the Gasper brothers on our list at the same time as Craig Smoker?

As to the difference between betting ads and tobacco ads, let's remember that every cigarette is bad for you; not every bet is. That's not to say betting is not dangerous for some people, but for most people it is safe whereas there is no safe level of tobacco use. A better analogy would be to compare betting ads with liquor ads. Both are safe in moderation but dangerous for some people.  

3 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I know this is off-topic, but can anyone remember whether we had one of the Gasper brothers on our list at the same time as Craig Smoker?

As to the difference between betting ads and tobacco ads, let's remember that every cigarette is bad for you; not every bet is. That's not to say betting is not dangerous for some people, but for most people it is safe whereas there is no safe level of tobacco use. A better analogy would be to compare betting ads with liquor ads. Both are safe in moderation but dangerous for some people.  

Agree. But I go a step further. Why do they need to be advertised?  Have you ever seen a beer ad that actually gives you any evidence as to why brand A is better than the rest other than suggesting you'll have more mates or sexy girlfriends if you drink A.  What a waste.

At least the gambling companies offer slightly different products whose differences can be explained in an ad (though they still largely rely on the mates/girlfriends motivation. Perhaps a better word is manipulation).

5 minutes ago, sue said:

Agree. But I go a step further. Why do they need to be advertised?  Have you ever seen a beer ad that actually gives you any evidence as to why brand A is better than the rest other than suggesting you'll have more mates or sexy girlfriends if you drink A.  What a waste.

At least the gambling companies offer slightly different products whose differences can be explained in an ad (though they still largely rely on the mates/girlfriends motivation. Perhaps a better word is manipulation).

I think there's a code of conduct for liquor advertising which expressly forbids advertising which promotes anything that suggests "you'll have more mates or sexy girlfriends if you drink A." There are a few other things in that code, too, such as not showing minors, etc. I suspect the betting industry (or gambling generally) also has a code which puts some limits on what the can say (eg, that you can't expect to make money by gambling). And if there's not such a code, there should be.

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I think there's a code of conduct for liquor advertising which expressly forbids advertising which promotes anything that suggests "you'll have more mates or sexy girlfriends if you drink A." There are a few other things in that code, too, such as not showing minors, etc. I suspect the betting industry (or gambling generally) also has a code which puts some limits on what the can say (eg, that you can't expect to make money by gambling). And if there's not such a code, there should be.

If there is a liquor ad code that expressly forbids suggesting "you'll have more mates or sexy girlfriends if you drink A" then it is more honoured in the breach than in the observance, to misquote Hamlet.

17 hours ago, tiers said:

It would all stop if the players were prepared to take a pay cut for the amount that gambling promotion delivers to the AFL.

I am not holding my breath.

Is it the AFL or the TV networks that receiving the revenue from gambling sponsorships?  Because if it's the TV networks, it shouldn't really affect AFL player payments.  Certainly the amount of gambling ads seem to be at odds with a lot of clubs' focus on the "love the game, not the odds" campaign.

Edited November 16, 20222 yr by Katrina Dee Fan

6 minutes ago, Katrina Dee Fan said:

Is it the AFL or the TV networks that receiving the revenue from gambling sponsorships?  Because if it's the TV networks, it shouldn't really affect AFL player payments.  Certainly the amount of gambling ads seem to be at odds with a lot of clubs' focus on the "love the game, not the odds" campaign.

It's a more complex ecosystem. The TV networks pay for the AFL TV rights using money they earn from advertising. The more advertising revenue they can earn, the more they can bid for the rights. So, in effect, the AFL is a downstream collector of betting ad revenue. There have also been separate sponsorship deals between betting companies and individual clubs, although I'm not sure there are any still in place.  

Just now, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

It's a more complex ecosystem. The TV networks pay for the AFL TV rights using money they earn from advertising. The more advertising revenue they can earn, the more they can bid for the rights. So, in effect, the AFL is a downstream collector of betting ad revenue. There have also been separate sponsorship deals between betting companies and individual clubs, although I'm not sure there are any still in place.  

Fair point. I guess the next question is what percentage of the advertising revenue is from gambling companies, and can they be subsidised/replaced by more appropriate advertisers?  

17 minutes ago, sue said:

Agree. But I go a step further. Why do they need to be advertised?  Have you ever seen a beer ad that actually gives you any evidence as to why brand A is better than the rest other than suggesting you'll have more mates or sexy girlfriends if you drink A.

There is an ad for some non-alcoholic drink that you can drink so you'll still be "one of the boys". Hard to dunk on a non-alcoholic drink though. It's hardly a "gateway" drink; more of the opposite.

A lot of ads infer being part of the group ...camping with the boys (and girl) ... as part of the beer drinking experience, but I can't recall any (maybe I am just too inured to the whole ad business) that link "mates" and "alcohol" as explicitly as the gambling companies do "mates" and "betting".

 

17 minutes ago, sue said:

At least the gambling companies offer slightly different products whose differences can be explained in an ad (though they still largely rely on the mates/girlfriends motivation. Perhaps a better word is manipulation).

It's insidious. "You can't be part of a group of mates if you're not gambling with them" is the barely-disguised subtext. It's borderline social engineering.

9 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

 

 

It's insidious. "You can't be part of a group of mates if you're not gambling with them" is the barely-disguised subtext. It's borderline social engineering.

Exactly right.  There are some sports that rely on gambling for it to be relevant - horse racing for example. And its why I don't support that sport.  Football is different, when I was a kid gambling was barely on the agenda when it came to VFL footy.  Now as a teacher I find it terrifying that kids are talking about betting odds as a factor if a club is favourite or not to win.  That is definitely social engineering, it should not be part of the venacular of footy.  I'm a big supporter of the "enjoy the game, not the odds" campaign, and I'm pleased a lot of the clubs, including Melbourne, have done away with revenue from gambling and pokies.  

Edited November 16, 20222 yr by Katrina Dee Fan

21 hours ago, McQueen said:

Seriously I don’t get the outrage directed at betting organisations. 
I acknowledge that it can be a slippery slope for some people just like with drugs and alcohol. 
 

People need to learn how to show restraint, practice temperance and take on a little virtue called self accountability in many facets of life and having a punt is just another. 
 

I have a bet but have put in place all of the available restriction’s provided by the agencies with regards to deposit and bet limits. 
It’s not up to them to check in on you to make sure you’re in control of your activity. They provide a service, it’s your choices that affect the outcome. 
 

McQueen, I don't have an issue with whether people gamble either but do have concerns with the amount of gambling related advertising in sport. This not only presents issues for those addicted to gambling but also normalised gambling for kids, e.g. they are so heavily exposed to advertising that glamorises gambling at a young age that by the time they are an adult they are de-sensitised to it's harmful effects. As a parent I want to be able to take my kids to the Footy or watch a game on TV without gambling ads everytime the play stops.

If gambling was removed from horse racing, it would overnight shrink to the size of competitive dressage.

(Note to the horse lovers: I am not advocating that. But I do think that the horse results should be in the papers next to the Tattslotto numbers, and not in the sports section.)