Jump to content

Saints renew partnership with Sportsbet.io


SuperSAINT
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Baird of the land said:

Personally don’t see why it should be banned. There’s certainly not the health reasons to justify a ban like tobacco.

Depression....?

Anxiety...?

Suicide....that one seems pretty bad for your health?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Turkish said:

I’ve never meant anyone who has became a compulsive gambler because they saw an advert on a football teams shirt. In the same way I’ve never meant an alcoholic who became an alcoholic because of something written on a football teams shirt.  Be interested to know if anyone else 

Betting companies wouldnt pay 7 million a season to sponsor a shirt if it didn't encourage new customers.

So if we can agree on that, we just need to agree that gambling is something that some people do compulsively.

Then join the dots.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sifter said:

Depression....?

Anxiety...?

Suicide....that one seems pretty bad for your health?

 

Divorce for example would also cause these issues I would imagine as well. Shall we ban that too? I enjoy a small multi every now and again but don't see how people can spend big $$ they don't have to bet. Weak minded.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, JRM said:

I'm sure I remember you telling me you'd invested in some of that mate, any truth in the rumour that you're part of a consortium looking to buy Saints with crypto currency? 

All true. They are using my whole investment contribution to cover a few days of Wesley Hoedt's wages. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SFC Forever said:

I don't know how most of you began drinking, gambling, smoking etcetera but but I would hazard a guess that it was when younger and going out with your mates. I know my first bet was in 1962 whilst serving in our armed services. It was after a few drinks in a pub that didn't ask my age. 

My son followed my example last year after starting work at Richard Hannon's racing stables as groom rider. He smokes drinks and gambles but also, like I was, is far more interested in the fit young fillies of his age working beside him. Trust me I know some of them and they are fit.

Maybe many of these addicts don't have such stimuli to take their attention away from the other vices but I personally knew one Irish chef I worked with and he would disappear for days at a time due to his need for alcohol. His addiction was not made worse through adverts.

How many of us look forward to a drink before a game, and afterwards at times? Not because we have seen an advert but more because we can meet up with fellow Saints fans. For me Mary Whitehouse springs to mind with the gnashing of teeth and hair pulling caused by a simple advert.

That post took off on a weird diversion halfway through.

Remind me next time I'm commenting on something that I need to add in an irrelevant sentence on the perceived aesthetics of previous work colleagues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, sifter said:

Betting companies wouldnt pay 7 million a season to sponsor a shirt if it didn't encourage new customers.

So if we can agree on that, we just need to agree that gambling is something that some people do compulsively.

Then join the dots.

A very simplistic view. Of course it encourages new customers and of course it is something people do compulsively but there is a huge leap between being an addict, an addict would be an addict regardless of what was written on a football teams shirts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine having an addiction problem that is destroying your life and you are trying give up gambling, but every time you turn on the TV you are bombarded with gambling advertising. It's not going to help is it. Yet banning it will have no impact on the rest of us, so why not just do it to help other people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

A very simplistic view. Of course it encourages new customers and of course it is something people do compulsively but there is a huge leap between being an addict, an addict would be an addict regardless of what was written on a football teams shirts.

The betting companies don't care about whether the gambler is an addict or a casual punter, as you know the purpose of their advertising is to get the punters to bet with them rather than a competitor.  Addiction is several steps down the line, but there has to be an entry point and the 'normalisation' of betting culture through adverts / sponsorships / etc has the potential to make gamling seem like a normal part of life.  No one will become a gambling addict only because of a football sponsorship but there is an argument that the sponsorship helps normalise something which has the potential to devastate lives.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, skintsaint said:

Divorce for example would also cause these issues I would imagine as well. Shall we ban that too? I enjoy a small multi every now and again but don't see how people can spend big $$ they don't have to bet. Weak minded.

You should be a speaker at a self help group. That would be hilarious from the sidelines. 

'There's no such thing as addiction......you are just weak minded.'

Problem solved. 😆

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

Imagine having an addiction problem that is destroying your life and you are trying give up gambling, but every time you turn on the TV you are bombarded with gambling advertising. It's not going to help is it. Yet banning it will have no impact on the rest of us, so why not just do it to help other people.

That’s an argument to ban advertising of all things, not to pick on one industry.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Baird of the land said:

That’s an argument to ban advertising of all things, not to pick on one industry.

Yeah, I know loads of people who have ruined their lives by buying too many Muller Yoghurts or from getting a good insurance deal through Compare the Market. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Alanh said:

The betting companies don't care about whether the gambler is an addict or a casual punter, as you know the purpose of their advertising is to get the punters to bet with them rather than a competitor.  Addiction is several steps down the line, but there has to be an entry point and the 'normalisation' of betting culture through adverts / sponsorships / etc has the potential to make gamling seem like a normal part of life.  No one will become a gambling addict only because of a football sponsorship but there is an argument that the sponsorship helps normalise something which has the potential to devastate lives.

No Corporate company Who advertises cares about individuals. They are there for one thing only, to make money. Where do you draw the line? Should Cadbury’s be banned from advertising chocolate because some people are addicted to it, eat too much Get fat which can give them heart disease and diabetes? Gambling is a normal part of life and has been for centuries, same as booze, millions of people do it, for a small minority it Can become a big problem. I would guarantee that someone not addicted to gambling is going to still not be addicted to gambling If saints were sponsored by sportsbet or Unicef 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Were alcohol sponsors banned or did they just drift away because if all the criticism. Maybe this will happen again, however I reckon gambling sites won't be as bothered by the PR as global drinks brands are. 

I did some planning work for a landlord who wanted to change some of his shops to flats including a couple of highstreet bookies. I had to map all the bookies in the area for the planners and it was amazing how many there are in close proximity, in some cases the same brand opposite each other. All because they could have fixed odds betting machines. These companies rinse people for very little local benefit and lobbied hard to keep the amount that could be bet as high as possible. 

I'm against banning things and would rather things are seen for what they are, bricks or clicks these are scum bag companies looking for more ways to take more money off people. I have an occasional bet but this isn't the gambling industry of the 80's, it's now on steroids and I'm increasingly reluctant to be the mug punter making some people very rich.

Edited by Fan The Flames
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/04/2021 at 01:04, sifter said:

Betting companies wouldnt pay 7 million a season to sponsor a shirt if it didn't encourage new customers.

So if we can agree on that, we just need to agree that gambling is something that some people do compulsively.

Then join the dots.

Actually, that's a common but largely fallacious argument. Overwhelmingly, it's about getting customers to switch brands rather than recruting wholly new ones.

No one watches an advert for Pedigree Chum and rushes out and buys a dog.

No one watches an advert for Andrex and thinks, "I'm going to take a dump much more regularly having seen that"

Yet both of these brands have spent a lot on adverts.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Turkish said:

I thought the Bitcoin stuff was a joke but turns out it’s true 🤣🤣🤣

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/southampton/transfers-cryptocurrency-sponsorship-deal-b1828953.html

 

 

Serious question for any IT/'cyber itk's' , but what benefit or advantage does this offer us in reality?

Edited by Badger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...