Coventry City and Derby County are two of 15 championship teams that have betting partners
“Faulty” evidence submitted to the English Football League for the government’s gambling review should be ignored, according to an MP who chairs a parliamentary group on gambling reform.
The EFL, which is sponsored by Sky Bet and whose clubs receive £40million a year from gambling companies, commissioned a study overseen by the ` which says there is “no evidence” that sponsorship affects betting participation .
It also said that participation in gambling in sports “had remained stable at about 9% of the population between 2010 and 2018” and that over the same period “the rate of problem gambling in sports had halved from 6% to 3%”.
However, a critical review of these results by a research firm, Vita, said the results were “flawed” and “misleading” and questioned whether the analysis “was undertaken to reach a predetermined conclusion”.
The EFL and University of Liverpool research author Professor Ian McHale stood by the findings when presented with the criticism.
Carolyn Harris, Labor MP and leader of the All Party Group for Gambling Related Harm, said Gambling Secretary Chris Philp should “ignore” the research in the Gambling Review, for which a white paper is due to be published within weeks.
Vita’s critique, commissioned by campaign group Clean Up Gambling, said the research was “flawed” because two different types of surveys were used to assess gambling participation and rates of problem gambling.
One of these surveys, conducted by the NHS and running from 2012 to 2018, warned against combining the results of an earlier version of the survey because different methods were used to collect the data.
The EFL’s research also revealed that there is “no evidence that betting sites’ sponsorship of clubs or leagues affects participation in betting or membership with Skybet”.
But the influence of playing or not was only based on fans whose team had a gambling sponsor on their shirts and whether their team played in the Sky Bet sponsored EFL, disregarding any other sponsorship or advertising in football altogether.
It also concluded that “not being a football fan reduces the likelihood of being a bettor and being a Skybet customer”.
Vita said, “The assumption that support for a team determines the scale [sponsorship] The portrayal is deeply flawed considering how much gambling advertising is in all football content of all kinds.”
The EFL research is part of 16,000 pieces of evidence submitted to the Gambling Act Review, with Philp saying any changes to the law will be based on an “evidence-based” approach.
Harris said on The Sports Desk podcast: “A decent thing would be to retire [the EFL] Evidence, but they won’t. So you need to take it with a massive pinch of salt, which I suspect [the government] do.
“[The minister] can ignore, he can choose to ignore or discard it. And I’d like to think he would, but we know he’s being overwhelmed with evidence right now. I don’t think the Gambling Minister is being completely duped. I think he sees much of the content of his white paper as flawed.
“The minister spent a lot of time looking at the background. I know he’s been with the gambling companies, I know he’s met with the Commerce Board, but he’s also met with the families of people who have committed suicide.
“I think he’s absorbing things and he’s able to push the truth out of fiction. Hopefully the white paper will reflect that.”
“No causal link between sponsorship and problem gambling”
Football’s relationship with gambling and betting sponsors has come under scrutiny in the run-up to the expected reform.
Nine teams in the Premier League have gambling companies as shirt sponsors, with all top 20 teams having at least one betting partner. In the championship there are six teams with shirt sponsors and 15 teams with betting partners.
Activists have called for a total ban on betting advertising and sponsorship in football, but the EFL says this would leave a £40million hole in their clubs’ finances each year and could force some to retire after a difficult financial period during the Covid-19 pandemic “going under”. 19 pandemic.
The EFL also says it wants all of its gambling partner relationships to be socially responsible.
The Premier League has presented evidence to the Gambling Review and says it supports a self-regulatory approach to sponsorship rather than legislation or a ban.
And it shares the view of the Betting and Gaming Council, which says: “The government has previously stated that research has not found a causal link between exposure to advertising and the development of problem gambling.”
Gaming industry sources have indicated that the intent of the sponsorship and advertising was to attract a larger proportion of the existing customer base, rather than attracting new customers.
However, recent research from the University of Glasgow showed that over 700 betting logos were visible in a televised Premier League match, while separate research from Goldsmith’s University showed that gambling logos or brands were visible on the screen between 71% and 89% Game of the day running time.
A spokesman for the Betting and Gaming Council added: “Betting advertising and sponsorships must comply with strict guidelines and messages about safer gambling will be displayed regularly and prominently.
“However, we strongly support gambling review as another opportunity to raise standards and promote safer gambling.”
Comments are closed.