When speaking with street newspaper the Big Issue, Leicester City fan David Bevan criticised the prevalence of betting advertising in football and expressed disappointment in Leicester City’s own betting sponsorship for the upcoming Premier League season. Meanwhile, a bookmaker got in trouble with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for an ad that lacked transparency.
David Bevan is the co-founder of the Fosse Way website, which contains a wealth of information about the history of Leicester City, as well as regular updates and news regarding club activities. Bevan is also an advocate for severing the ties between football and the betting industry, and his conversation with the Big Issue began with him emphasising that those behind such sponsorship deals were aware of “the misery that gambling addiction can cause” and that they accepted money from betting companies despite the complaints of victims.
As noted by the Big Issue, Bevan has been Leicester City’s supporter for over 30 years, and he said he was fond of the idea that Leicester City could “stand up for what is morally right” by refusing to accept funds from gambling companies. However, Leicester City has not done so and has instead chosen to partner with crypto gambling platform BC.game. Its logo will be displayed on the front of Leicester City’s shirts during the 2024/25 Premier League season. Criticising this decision, Bevan stressed that Leicester City was “no better than anyone else responsible for normalising football’s deeply unhealthy relationship with gambling.”
In contrast to Leicester City and other clubs that have embraced betting, there are English clubs that have taken the opposite stance and no longer accept betting sponsorships. One such club is AFC Wimbledon, which became a member club of the Big Step charity last November.
ASA Rules GB Sports Advisors Has Breached the CAP Code
While advertising plays a crucial role for gambling companies, as is evident by their insistence on sponsoring football teams, bookmakers can occasionally make blunders when promoting their products and face regulatory scrutiny as a result.
GB Sports Advisors Ltd, owner of bookmaker Geoff Banks Online, is an example of this. The company has been mandated to improve the transparency of its promotions because one of its ads has been deemed misleading. The ad in question was released on April 13th and stated the following: “FOR THE MISSUS: Place a bet on the Aintree Grand National and get a free £10 bet on the Scottish Grand National.” Further details outlined the minimum wager requirement, how both winning and losing bets can allow one to qualify, and when a bet must be placed for it to count. In addition, the ad also specified when participants would receive their free bets and that previous free bets were not suitable for qualification.
A user of Geoff Banks Online who failed to redeem the free bets sent a complaint to ASA, alleging the operator did not include enough information regarding the conditions of the promotion in its ad and was, thus, violating ASA’s CAP Code.
GB Sports Advisors argued that “all significant conditions” were included in the ad and that participants received both a text message and a follow-up email with further details. The deadline (5 pm April 19th) was included in the aforementioned email according to GB Sports Advisors, yet the complainant failed to respond to the text message on time.
As information regarding the deadline of the promotion was not included in the original ad, ASA upheld the complaint and ruled that GB Sports Advisors Ltd had breached multiple CAP Code rules. Moreover, the advert did not specify that consumers who wished to take part needed to reply to a text message prior to the closing date. GB Sports Advisors Ltd has been ordered to no longer display the ad in its misleading form, and ASA stressed the company should ensure future promotions are up to snuff in terms of clarity.
- Author
Daniel Williams
