AutoWindscreens

I don't think anyone is telling you what to do. 
The petition is not about what you get up to.
I signed the petition because I don't want our club to lend its support to online gambling companies. Online gambling is designed to be addictive, and the online gambling companies pursue the addicts for every penny they have and then some. It's a long way from the Saturday coupon.
That's not telling anyone they can't have a bet, is it?

Yes I do support you. I was meaning to say that it was not really fair to criticize you for putting 'pressure' on David Clowes by saying that 'he's a good guy - I'm sure he'll listen', when you were not addressing that comment to David Clowes, but to us.

I don't think anyone is telling you what to do. 
The petition is not about what you get up to.
I signed the petition because I don't want our club to lend its support to online gambling companies. Online gambling is designed to be addictive, and the online gambling companies pursue the addicts for every penny they have and then some. It's a long way from the Saturday coupon.
That's not telling anyone they can't have a bet, is it?

You may be right. We'll probably never know.

If it helps get a floating hologram of Ray Winstone's head off my screen,
Or it stops Patrick O'Power's Bantersaurus Rex philosophy on life pervading my podcasts,
Or it persuades the 'lads' who spend their entire lives talking about lumping on and laying off, and wasting their money on 10 team 'accas' to do something more productive with their time,
Or frees up space and creative time to advertise reading a book, or talking to elderly relatives, or learning a skill, or visiting a museum,
Or stops someone placing their first bet,
Or stops someone placing their last...
Then it seems like a good idea to me.
Keep gambling, but don't promote it. Same as keep smoking, but don't promote it, keep fast food and booze but don't promote them. They do enough damage on their own.
 

So if we can't cut all links with gambling we should cut none, is that what some are saying. 
Got to start somewhere, maybe it will act as a reminder of companies 'social responsibilities', maybe it won't.

Making a decision not to put gambling companies on shirts is not stopping the vast majority who don't have a problem from having a bet.
It's deciding not to be a part of a system designed to normalize gambling, which adds more and more young people to the list of those who do have problems and helps the gambling companies hoover up more cash.
I'm all for the petition, help turn off the ducking hoover (and I speak as a regular and reasonably happy gambler).
As for those who say we'll do it when we can afford it: if you only have principles when they are not uncomfortable then you don't have principles. And I don't believe that gambling money is the difference between survival and liquidation.

I don't think anyone is telling you what to do. 
The petition is not about what you get up to.
I signed the petition because I don't want our club to lend its support to online gambling companies. Online gambling is designed to be addictive, and the online gambling companies pursue the addicts for every penny they have and then some. It's a long way from the Saturday coupon.
That's not telling anyone they can't have a bet, is it?

Making a decision not to put gambling companies on shirts is not stopping the vast majority who don't have a problem from having a bet.
It's deciding not to be a part of a system designed to normalize gambling, which adds more and more young people to the list of those who do have problems and helps the gambling companies hoover up more cash.
I'm all for the petition, help turn off the ducking hoover (and I speak as a regular and reasonably happy gambler).
As for those who say we'll do it when we can afford it: if you only have principles when they are not uncomfortable then you don't have principles. And I don't believe that gambling money is the difference between survival and liquidation.

Interesting and relevant debate this. 
I'm not a gambler and have never particularly been interested in it, beyond a social flutter on the grand national or whatever. I always lose and have never seen the appeal.
However, through work, I have spoken to numerous people affected by gambling addiction and the tragic consequences outlined by the OP. 
As with many issues of this nature the situation will only change through regulation and a handful of clubs making a stand is unlikely to have much impact. That doesn't mean they shouldn't make that stand. Just because the money is there and we need it, doesn't mean that we should take it. 
Some have commented that gambling had been around for years, so why get Draconian now. The simple issue is that gambling online, with enticing free bets and in-play betting is so much more accessible and instantaneous. This drives a chemical reaction in the brain that is highly addictive. After being suckered in, there's often a downward spiral and there will be many, many more like the OP talked about. It's a bigger issue than people realise and we'll only start to see the scale of the devastation over the next few years.
Will it make much difference if we choose to ban gambling adverts from shirt sponsorship etc? Probably not systemically but if there's the slightest chance that one youngster will avoid the fate of the young lad in the OP, then I think it's a moral stand worth taking. I also think we will be on the right side of history when (and it will be when) online gambling is regulated and marginalised.
Regardless of our recent history, Derby are an exciting proposition for a whole host of potential sponsors and we should challenge ourselves to take a difficult stand if that's what it takes.
The short version of this tome is: I agree with the petition, I'm in. Should have probably written that at the start...

I'm not saying its sportswashing.
I'm saying that the normalization has gone way too far and entrapped too many people. Plenty of grownups enjoyed a bet before deregulation and that's fine by me. But the amount of money in gambling advertising now tells you how much more money is being hoovered up since deregulation. There is absolutely no question on the facts that deregulation has led to thousands (probably hundreds of thousands) more problem gamblers. It's their money that pays for the dividends and the shirt sponsorship (and let's not kid ourselves that the companies give a flying one about them).

I'm not saying its sportswashing.
I'm saying that the normalization has gone way too far and entrapped too many people. Plenty of grownups enjoyed a bet before deregulation and that's fine by me. But the amount of money in gambling advertising now tells you how much more money is being hoovered up since deregulation. There is absolutely no question on the facts that deregulation has led to thousands (probably hundreds of thousands) more problem gamblers. It's their money that pays for the dividends and the shirt sponsorship (and let's not kid ourselves that the companies give a flying one about them).

Making a decision not to put gambling companies on shirts is not stopping the vast majority who don't have a problem from having a bet.
It's deciding not to be a part of a system designed to normalize gambling, which adds more and more young people to the list of those who do have problems and helps the gambling companies hoover up more cash.
I'm all for the petition, help turn off the ducking hoover (and I speak as a regular and reasonably happy gambler).
As for those who say we'll do it when we can afford it: if you only have principles when they are not uncomfortable then you don't have principles. And I don't believe that gambling money is the difference between survival and liquidation.

Making a decision not to put gambling companies on shirts is not stopping the vast majority who don't have a problem from having a bet.
It's deciding not to be a part of a system designed to normalize gambling, which adds more and more young people to the list of those who do have problems and helps the gambling companies hoover up more cash.
I'm all for the petition, help turn off the ducking hoover (and I speak as a regular and reasonably happy gambler).
As for those who say we'll do it when we can afford it: if you only have principles when they are not uncomfortable then you don't have principles. And I don't believe that gambling money is the difference between survival and liquidation.

Making a decision not to put gambling companies on shirts is not stopping the vast majority who don't have a problem from having a bet.
It's deciding not to be a part of a system designed to normalize gambling, which adds more and more young people to the list of those who do have problems and helps the gambling companies hoover up more cash.
I'm all for the petition, help turn off the ducking hoover (and I speak as a regular and reasonably happy gambler).
As for those who say we'll do it when we can afford it: if you only have principles when they are not uncomfortable then you don't have principles. And I don't believe that gambling money is the difference between survival and liquidation.

Yes it would. The logos on the shirts are part of a system designed to make it seem normal and everyday.

It's not about banning gambling or alcohol. It's about making it less socially acceptable. 
I hate the link between gambling and making sports more exciting.
 

i find betting companies sponsoring football teams an appalling reality. 
If we state our opposition to betting company sponsorship, it would be hypocritical of us to allow for exceptions because of financial needs.

It's a nice try Mucker, but your example only works if all those people also paid for ticket to come to your birthday party!!
Edit: I do agree with you on the meaning of attendance, though.

Come on. Own up. Who shed a little tear? 

From the EFL statement, this is all good:
The League has already commenced the process in respect of its Owners and Directors’ Test, as well as an assessment of the ultimate source and sufficiency of funding to support the proposed business plan for the Club.
The League understands and acknowledges that there is a desire from Derby County’s stakeholders, including supporters and staff, for a swift conclusion to matters and its focus remains on the Club’s prompt exit from administration.