1 hour 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.

this a good article on what the afl gets out of gambling. it's from a year or two ago

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-afl-s-engine-how-gambling-money-underpins-footy-20220214-p59wa7.html

8 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

this a good article on what the afl gets out of gambling. it's from a year or two ago

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-afl-s-engine-how-gambling-money-underpins-footy-20220214-p59wa7.html

I think I just had a bit of vomit in my mouth reading that article.  I'm horrified it's to the extent it is.  

This quote from Tripp was an eye opener - “If we took that tool away from the AFL, we’d be back in the draconian days of illegal and offshore wagering,” Tripp said. “This would compromise the player behaviour and the integrity of the game more broadly, there’s no doubt about that.”

Instead we have umpires getting charged with dodgy betting behaviour......

22 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 love a good bet as much as anyone. Know your limits.  A minority will make more out of it than needs to be.

53 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

But I do think that the horse results should be in the papers next to the Tattslotto numbers, and not in the sports section.

Except for the spring and autumn carnivals when the real group 1 horses race.

The rest of the year and for all non-metropolitan races I agree.

6 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

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".

 

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.

I agree with all that. As for 'alcohol mates'certainly  it is not explicit like some gambling ads, but any product which shows happy groups of people, totally unrelated to the actual product, is manipulating the you'll be happy with lots of mates and sexy women if you drink this stuff line.

6 hours ago, Mazer Rackham said:

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.)

It's interesting to note that the Octagon for Mixed Martial Arts, which is necessary to host MMA events, was banned in Victoria until 2015. Meanwhile 100's of horses were dying on the track each year with many 1,000's more being turned into dog food if they were not good enough at racing.  Governments are highly conflicted when it comes to gambling regulation.

9 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

 A better analogy would be to compare betting ads with liquor ads. Both are safe in moderation but dangerous for some people.  

I agree but how someone like The Ox or Daniel Ward would have dealt with our current level of ad bombardment beggars belief. If you were a gambling addict today (there are plenty in that minority) it would be impossible to watch/enjoy a game of footy.

15 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

I agree but how someone like The Ox or Daniel Ward would have dealt with our current level of ad bombardment beggars belief. If you were a gambling addict today (there are plenty in that minority) it would be impossible to watch/enjoy a game of footy.

Or half the other programs on FTA. 

18 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

I agree but how someone like The Ox or Daniel Ward would have dealt with our current level of ad bombardment beggars belief. If you were a gambling addict today (there are plenty in that minority) it would be impossible to watch/enjoy a game of footy.

It is hard enough to watch almost any TV programme without that intrusive gambling advertising - and commercial radio especially SEN which I rarely listen to both for the gambling advertising but also the appalling often unintelligible signal (at least in the Bayside area).

31 minutes ago, monoccular said:

It is hard enough to watch almost any TV programme without that intrusive gambling advertising - and commercial radio especially SEN which I rarely listen to both for the gambling advertising but also the appalling often unintelligible signal (at least in the Bayside area).

Are you talking about SEN or Derm now?

35 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Are you talking about SEN or Derm now?

QD - maybe the poor signal of 1116 actually spares me pain, are you suggesting ? 🙄

On 11/16/2022 at 2:22 PM, 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. 

But they are still bloody annoying and intrusive. 

21 hours ago, Ugottobekidding said:

I love a good bet as much as anyone. Know your limits.  A minority will make more out of it than needs to be.

No, money down. 

1 hour ago, monoccular said:

But they are still bloody annoying and intrusive. 

Maybe it's me, but I don't find them any more intrusive or annoying than ads for cars, supermarkets, political parties or anything else.

2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Maybe it's me, but I don't find them any more intrusive or annoying than ads for cars, supermarkets, political parties or anything else.

i don't know how people see them as much as they claim

but then again i don't watch free to air tv

7 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Maybe it's me, but I don't find them any more intrusive or annoying than ads for cars, supermarkets, political parties or anything else.

It's you LDC.

5 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

i don't know how people see them as much as they claim

but then again i don't watch free to air tv.

Edited November 18, 20222 yr by DeeZone
See below

I must agree Wwsw I mainly watch recorded shows or stream shows without ads. When I do watch live shows I do get annoyed by certain adds, gambling is the most hideous but car adds no longer provide any data just ambient lighting and cool music / people, it’s rare that you see an add that you can relate to.!!!

1 hour ago, old dee said:

It's you LDC.

Reading through this thread, it's not just me. But, on the other hand, there are also many others who find gambling advertising annoying and invasive. Each to his or her own, I guess. 

Edited November 18, 20222 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia
Inadvertent sexism

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Reading through this thread, it's not just me. But, on the other hand, there are also many others who find gambling advertising annoying and invasive. Each to his or her own, I guess. 

My big problem with it LDC is it is aimed at the young in saturation levels. 

On 11/16/2022 at 9:30 AM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

We can't have it both ways. We can't complain it's a "midfielder's medal" and then complain again when a key forward who kicks four goals outpolls a midfielder.

Are you seriously comparing a potential tainted or corrupt betting scandal with an irrelevant comment about general bias in an industry award?

'It might be corrupt but its OK and we can't say anything because a fwd - who rarely get votes - received votes'

 

OK then

On 11/19/2022 at 10:34 AM, jnrmac said:

Are you seriously comparing a potential tainted or corrupt betting scandal with an irrelevant comment about general bias in an industry award?

'It might be corrupt but its OK and we can't say anything because a fwd - who rarely get votes - received votes'

 

OK then

I'm trying to argue the alternative. It's a very, very long bow to say the Brownlow medal process might have been corrupt because Mihocek was awarded the three votes.

3 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm trying to argue the alternative. It's a very, very long bow to say the Brownlow medal process might have been corrupt because Mihocek was awarded the three votes.

Not really. If the bookies worst result was Oliver there is an incentive for dodgy umpires to not award Oliver 3 votes for example. Plausable deniability that they awarded Mihocek the votes.

There are a large number of ways the potential corruption could play out

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Not really. If the bookies worst result was Oliver there is an incentive for dodgy umpires to not award Oliver 3 votes for example. Plausable deniability that they awarded Mihocek the votes.

There are a large number of ways the potential corruption could play out

I find it hard to believe that the bookies would have been that concerned about Oliver's prospects at Round 13. 

3 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I find it hard to believe that the bookies would have been that concerned about Oliver's prospects at Round 13. 

Maybe but you wouldn't necessarily know.

It's not just a straight out win. There are so many multi's and combos that can affect the P&L. If for example Oliver could be knocked out of contention (or nobbled) then they might have a million or so riding on that.

Regardless, an umpire has been stood down with evidence suggesting he is compromised. They are clearly allegations at this point. But its like Warney giving pitch information. You don't know what is of importance to the Bookies