I know, I'm commenting re: online poker - not sure that it is an issue though??? Seems more like FOBT and online casino nonsense is.
bet365 boss pays herself £265 MILLION
- Thread starter BoyceyLDN
- Start date
I know, I'm commenting re: online poker - not sure that it is an issue though??? Seems more like FOBT and online casino nonsense is.
Soldato
Ministers now looking at the link between sports and gambling, particularly football. It's crossing a line when you're forced to place a bet before you can watch a match.
Sports Minister Nigel Adams says football is 'too dependent' on gambling - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51242829
Sports Minister Nigel Adams says football is 'too dependent' on gambling - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/51242829
Soldato
Not really. Just too many folk that can't recognise something is bad for them and look to blame other folk. Gamblings bad blame the company, drink is bad blame the company, drugs are bad, blame someone else. Take responsibility for your own actions is a more astute point of view ....
Man of Honour
Like
People make choices, that's fine, what's not fine is the tertiary effects on families, friends and strangers who have to deal with the excess from these 'addicts' through the results of financial problems, declining mental health and perhaps falling into other addictions.
I feel your view is rather unhelpful, you can't just tell people to change and expect that to be enough. So, while this lack of responsibility from society-at-large continues, the damage to society worsens and everyone affected through no fault of their own, contributes to other stresses in the 'system' as it were in a domino effect. One person's 'free will' is everyone else's torture, these people aren't isolated little boxes in of themselves, they're walking disasters waiting to happen.
This is a public health problem, and requires broad action to mitigate the worst of it. There's no need to ban it or whatever other overly puritan nonsense approach, but there does need to be more help available and more regulation in the industry.
https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/PDF/Gambling-related-harm-as-a-public-health-issue.pdf
Last edited:
Soldato
It's not much of a choice when you have to place a bet or you can't watch the match.
Don’t watch the match then.
Soldato
As long as you have a balance in your account, you can watch. My dad keeps 1p in his bet365 account for such reasons
Man of Honour
This concept seems to be lost on a lot of people
Soldato
Which concept is that?
Man of Honour
That you don't have to watch the match so you don't need to put a bet on.
My Father couldn't walk past a Bookies so I do have experience.
With his new wife (since 1989) he bets continually every day but I don't think he's ever got her into debt.
Caporegime
I’m getting sick and tired of this blame culture
Man of Honour
That is utterly irrelevant to the damage it is doing, do you seriously think that telling people to "stop gambling" is going to help any stranger on the street randomly running into a heavily indebted gambler on the edge of a mental breakdown after being kicked out/divorced? (This but a single example, i can think of plenty more)
This isn't really about the gamblers themselves as they have the right to do as they please with their money, even if it ultimately helps create less of them, it's about everyone else that they abuse. Calling it a blame game doesn't help those people who never made the choice in the first place.
It really needs treating like smoking was, tax it and mitigate it, at the very least the services having to deal with the criminality, domestic issues and mental health issues it undoubtedly creates with a subsection of gamblers, can be sufficiently funded to be there when it spills over into other peoples' lives. It's far too easy to just say it
Last edited:
Is it enough to deal with cost of dealing with the after effects? The estimates of it are so preliminary i hazard to involve them in discussion.
That said it's about using it well, which i guess is the problem.
What cost are you referring to?
The gambling commission need to step up their game in regard to online.
I can see this turning into another "easy credit" style social change in the UK.
As always however, the government seem to be unable to grasp / make solid decisions about E-Anything.
I can see this turning into another "easy credit" style social change in the UK.
As always however, the government seem to be unable to grasp / make solid decisions about E-Anything.
Soldato
It's not compulsory to watch the match, and it's true that you could feasibly miss the match if you really don't want to engage with the gaming company. However, it's absurd that the decision is presented in the first place. The issue isn't that a person would feel compelled to gamble based on the association, it's that the association exists and is therefore normalised. It's symptomatic of how closely aligned the sport is to the industry.
It's progressing from a foundation for gaming companies to exploit a market, to the point where the sport is becoming financially dependant on the gaming industry. It's literally reached the stage where gambling addicts are funding the sport. It's not healthy for either party, only the gaming companies truly benefit. That's why the government is putting pressure on the industry.