Jump to content

The Telegraph deserve opprobrium for their association with the gambling industry


David

Recommended Posts

Clubs have to get sponsorship as a way of increasing revenue as the FFP rules forbid owners putting their own money into the club past a certain amount.

They conveniently forget to mention that one when moralising about gambling sponsors who, incidentally, seem to be the ones who offer the most money to Championship clubs!

If a club took the stance of not using gambling sponsors, then they would lose out monetarily compared to the clubs that do and they can't even make up the shortfall themselves to get on an even keel with them.

It's the same with ticket prices, if a club wanted to make tickets cheap for the fans benefit, they put themselves on a back foot with the rest of the clubs who don't, and again, they can't put the money in to make up the shortfall as they're not allowed by the rules.

And people wonder why football is going the way it is!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply
7 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

I'm not seeing that at all... I'm seeing 3-2... like a subliminal message... it has to be tomorrows scoreline... This may be the game I place my first bet in 30 years on a single footy match!  

That's a good idea.  Which gambling company will you choose to place said bet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

How long do you watch a conversation before settling on the most irrelevant input possible? ? 

Do you have a little notebook?

it is relevant though, have you never been in the newsagents when the person in front of you is buying their weekly 20 or 30 lottery tickets, that they dare not give up, in case that one line gets the jackpot?

Because of this the national lottery is harder to give up than normal gambling. When it first started 25 years ago, I told my wife not to have the same numbers.  I changed my numbers every week and soon got bored and gave up, she could never give her numbers up and now we pay by direct debit to make sure we don't miss out. Fortunately, it's only one line, but those numbers are imprinted in our heads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ram59 said:

it is relevant though, have you never been in the newsagents when the person in front of you is buying their weekly 20 or 30 lottery tickets, that they dare not give up, in case that one line gets the jackpot?

Because of this the national lottery is harder to give up than normal gambling. When it first started 25 years ago, I told my wife not to have the same numbers.  I changed my numbers every week and soon got bored and gave up, she could never give her numbers up and now we pay by direct debit to make sure we don't miss out. Fortunately, it's only one line, but those numbers are imprinted in our heads.

I know the lottery is gambling; and all forms of gambling hurt plenty of people.

However, when discussing a media circus regarding what is being perceived (by some) as overreaching advertisement for gambling within an industry of football; I don't think a larger scale discussion of what gambling is and isn't done is relevant.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, RandomAccessMemory said:

Clubs have to get sponsorship as a way of increasing revenue as the FFP rules forbid owners putting their own money into the club past a certain amount.

They conveniently forget to mention that one when moralising about gambling sponsors who, incidentally, seem to be the ones who offer the most money to Championship clubs!

If a club took the stance of not using gambling sponsors, then they would lose out monetarily compared to the clubs that do and they can't even make up the shortfall themselves to get on an even keel with them.

It's the same with ticket prices, if a club wanted to make tickets cheap for the fans benefit, they put themselves on a back foot with the rest of the clubs who don't, and again, they can't put the money in to make up the shortfall as they're not allowed by the rules.

And people wonder why football is going the way it is!

Agreed. And to echo something Martin Samuel mentioned in his piece, the FFP rules are set-up in such a way that teams like us need to find these sources of income as the owner simply cannot invest that level of capital in to the club should he be inclined to.  

This is especially relevant to those clubs aiming for promotion, who are competing with the relegated Premier League teams and the parachute payments which count towards their FFP total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CHCDerby said:

One thing I did notice though - you chose the same pattern for your settee that Derby did for the shirt. 

I noticed that, Umbro have been watching my social media posts and taken inspiration from my sofa. They would deny it, call it a “coincidence”, but I know the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, angieram said:

Here's another great article from The Metro. I like this one because it centres on the whole hoo-ha around Rooney's signing, including the gambling links.

 

Excellent article, straight to the point and full of refreshing honesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, tinman said:

Aren’t those adverts based on the users browsing history?

Yep. It's only ironic too and not hypocritical. It's a good thing that a publication posts articles it doesn't abide by itself. Or do we just want to settle for propaganda and only one 'correct' view on everything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

Yep. It's only ironic too and not hypocritical. It's a good thing that a publication posts articles it doesn't abide by itself. Or do we just want to settle for propaganda and only one 'correct' view on everything. 

Can be browser history but these ads are not.

Easy way to tell is use a private browsing window and see if the same adverts show, which they do. 

Telegraph are actively forcing gambling ads on their football pages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of places seem to be reporting that some of his wages are being paid by 32 Red. I haven't seen any reliable sources close to the club say this, just Mel saying the signing has led to a new sponsorship deal. Moreover, having a gambling company (or anyone else) pay for some wages is surely not allowed. I can't see how this can have any truth to it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RamsFan10 said:

Lots of places seem to be reporting that some of his wages are being paid by 32 Red. I haven't seen any reliable sources close to the club say this, just Mel saying the signing has led to a new sponsorship deal. Moreover, having a gambling company (or anyone else) pay for some wages is surely not allowed. I can't see how this can have any truth to it. 

Exactly my take as well. 32Red may well incress their sponsorship but how Derby spend it is up to the club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...