Sure Thing

Where fellow sufferers gather to share the pain, longing and unrequited transfer requests that make being a Wanderer what it is...

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

User avatar
Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 23959
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Sure Thing

Post by Prufrock » Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:25 pm

https://www.bwfc.co.uk/news/2021/septem ... ing-links/

Club has announced no more gambling partnerships, and no more on site kiosks.

What do we reckon?

I'm definitely for no more sponsorships etc. Not sure about the kiosks. Not sure that's really the problem. But hey ho.
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

User avatar
Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 32273
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Re: Sure Thing

Post by Worthy4England » Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:41 pm

Does anyone still use bookies/kiosks? Thought they'd onlined it all, so not sure that's a biggie. I'm good with seeking sponsorships outside of betting companies, but doesn't bother me one way or t'other...

User avatar
The_Gun
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 3147
Joined: Tue May 22, 2018 9:54 am

Re: Sure Thing

Post by The_Gun » Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:41 pm

I find it a bit odd to be honest. We’re happy to take money from car and junk food companies, but are making a big song and dance about disassociating with betting firms. Which of those industries do you think is most detrimental to society?

User avatar
Mar
Icon
Icon
Posts: 5123
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:23 pm
Location: Bolton

Re: Sure Thing

Post by Mar » Fri Sep 24, 2021 8:52 am

The_Gun wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:41 pm
I find it a bit odd to be honest. We’re happy to take money from car and junk food companies, but are making a big song and dance about disassociating with betting firms. Which of those industries do you think is most detrimental to society?
I suspect that the availability online has meant that the setup inside stadiums isn't as attractive a proposition and therefore we've had lower offerings for positioning within the ground. Given the value of the proposition is less and the chance to make some steps towards addressing addictions is available I think its probably a reasonable step.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 43133
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.

Re: Sure Thing

Post by TANGODANCER » Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:33 am

Mar wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 8:52 am


I suspect that the availability online has meant that the setup inside stadiums isn't as attractive a proposition and therefore we've had lower offerings for positioning within the ground. Given the value of the proposition is less and the chance to make some steps towards addressing addictions is available I think its probably a reasonable step.
My View. Poor Bookies are as rare as chocolate teapots.
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 36009
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Sure Thing

Post by BWFC_Insane » Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:40 am

The_Gun wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:41 pm
I find it a bit odd to be honest. We’re happy to take money from car and junk food companies, but are making a big song and dance about disassociating with betting firms. Which of those industries do you think is most detrimental to society?
You know what I find odd - this view right here.

If I have £100 to donate to charity - I might pick say - feeding hungry kids. But then you'd say 'what about cancer, what about kids abroad, what about child cruelty, what about old people dying of cold etc etc'. So is the response to that to keep my £100 in my pocket and say 'I'm doing nowt'?

The club is taking a stand on betting because presumably it can and it matters to those involved. I've never had a gambling addiction and don't bet on football (or anything else) so to me its absolutely no difference. When the club was financially in peril I don't think we had the luxury of deciding against sponsors but now if FV feel we can be selective then why wouldn't they?

As for most damaging to society - they all are - but football is more intimately tied to gambling than it is to cars or junk food so it makes sense it would be something they'd maybe look at if they were that way inclined.

When people do a good thing why is the response always that they are doing a good thing but not a million good things? That just makes no sense at all.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 43133
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.

Re: Sure Thing

Post by TANGODANCER » Fri Sep 24, 2021 10:33 am

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:40 am




When people do a good thing why is the response always that they are doing a good thing but not a million good things? That just makes no sense at all.
A good thing/deed,however small, is one more than when you didn't do it. The sizeable amounts raised by events like the recent football one and Save the Children prove people care and give. Every one is important.
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?

User avatar
Prufrock
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 23959
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:51 pm

Re: Sure Thing

Post by Prufrock » Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:57 am

Mar wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 8:52 am
The_Gun wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:41 pm
I find it a bit odd to be honest. We’re happy to take money from car and junk food companies, but are making a big song and dance about disassociating with betting firms. Which of those industries do you think is most detrimental to society?
I suspect that the availability online has meant that the setup inside stadiums isn't as attractive a proposition and therefore we've had lower offerings for positioning within the ground. Given the value of the proposition is less and the chance to make some steps towards addressing addictions is available I think its probably a reasonable step.
Good luck gambling online from the Reebok!
In a world that has decided
That it's going to lose its mind
Be more kind, my friends, try to be more kind.

User avatar
Harry Genshaw
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9097
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Half dead in Panama

Re: Sure Thing

Post by Harry Genshaw » Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:59 am

Am i still ok to carry on with golden gamble, golden goal,lifeline and goldline?
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"

User avatar
The_Gun
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 3147
Joined: Tue May 22, 2018 9:54 am

Re: Sure Thing

Post by The_Gun » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:00 pm

BWFC_Insane wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:40 am
The_Gun wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:41 pm
I find it a bit odd to be honest. We’re happy to take money from car and junk food companies, but are making a big song and dance about disassociating with betting firms. Which of those industries do you think is most detrimental to society?
You know what I find odd - this view right here.

If I have £100 to donate to charity - I might pick say - feeding hungry kids. But then you'd say 'what about cancer, what about kids abroad, what about child cruelty, what about old people dying of cold etc etc'. So is the response to that to keep my £100 in my pocket and say 'I'm doing nowt'?

The club is taking a stand on betting because presumably it can and it matters to those involved. I've never had a gambling addiction and don't bet on football (or anything else) so to me its absolutely no difference. When the club was financially in peril I don't think we had the luxury of deciding against sponsors but now if FV feel we can be selective then why wouldn't they?

As for most damaging to society - they all are - but football is more intimately tied to gambling than it is to cars or junk food so it makes sense it would be something they'd maybe look at if they were that way inclined.

When people do a good thing why is the response always that they are doing a good thing but not a million good things? That just makes no sense at all.
The success of your analogy is entirely predicated on the belief that cutting ties with gambling firms is a 'good' thing, which is in turn presumably based on the notion that betting is a 'bad' thing. I fundamentally do not believe this to be the case, and as the vast majority of punters bet safely and responsibly, betting is likely to be at worst neutral, but far more likely a net benefit for society.

Of course, those who have a problem with gambling should be helped, and I'm certain that there's more to be done in that area. However, the framing of betting as some kind of nasty vice which needs to be stamped out is lazy, puritanical, and indicative of a slippery slope we seem to find ourselves on, heading towards over-zealous regulation/prohibition.

Anyway, I don't doubt that the club have done this with good intentions, but I personally believe the underlying sentiment to be misguided.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 43133
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.

Re: Sure Thing

Post by TANGODANCER » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:13 pm

Harry Genshaw wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:59 am
Am i still ok to carry on with golden gamble, golden goal,lifeline and goldline?
Since my chances of winning anything on Lifeline are a million to one, I don't regard it as gambling..more small donations.. :D
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?

User avatar
Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 32273
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Re: Sure Thing

Post by Worthy4England » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:23 pm

I'm offering 100/30 that this thread will go off at a tangent....b'dum tish.

User avatar
Harry Genshaw
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9097
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Half dead in Panama

Re: Sure Thing

Post by Harry Genshaw » Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:24 pm

TANGODANCER wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:13 pm
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:59 am
Am i still ok to carry on with golden gamble, golden goal,lifeline and goldline?
Since my chances of winning anything on Lifeline are a million to one, I don't regard it as gambling..more small donations.. :D
:D

I won £250 on Goldline about a month after i joined it and won a decent prize on golden gamble once. I've been hooked ever since!

I'm sure the club is coming from a good place in taking this stance but it's a little hypocritical no?
"Get your feet off the furniture you Oxbridge tw*t. You're not on a feckin punt now you know"

User avatar
BWFC_Insane
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 36009
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:07 pm

Re: Sure Thing

Post by BWFC_Insane » Fri Sep 24, 2021 1:48 pm

The_Gun wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:00 pm
BWFC_Insane wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:40 am
The_Gun wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:41 pm
I find it a bit odd to be honest. We’re happy to take money from car and junk food companies, but are making a big song and dance about disassociating with betting firms. Which of those industries do you think is most detrimental to society?
You know what I find odd - this view right here.

If I have £100 to donate to charity - I might pick say - feeding hungry kids. But then you'd say 'what about cancer, what about kids abroad, what about child cruelty, what about old people dying of cold etc etc'. So is the response to that to keep my £100 in my pocket and say 'I'm doing nowt'?

The club is taking a stand on betting because presumably it can and it matters to those involved. I've never had a gambling addiction and don't bet on football (or anything else) so to me its absolutely no difference. When the club was financially in peril I don't think we had the luxury of deciding against sponsors but now if FV feel we can be selective then why wouldn't they?

As for most damaging to society - they all are - but football is more intimately tied to gambling than it is to cars or junk food so it makes sense it would be something they'd maybe look at if they were that way inclined.

When people do a good thing why is the response always that they are doing a good thing but not a million good things? That just makes no sense at all.
The success of your analogy is entirely predicated on the belief that cutting ties with gambling firms is a 'good' thing, which is in turn presumably based on the notion that betting is a 'bad' thing. I fundamentally do not believe this to be the case, and as the vast majority of punters bet safely and responsibly, betting is likely to be at worst neutral, but far more likely a net benefit for society.

Of course, those who have a problem with gambling should be helped, and I'm certain that there's more to be done in that area. However, the framing of betting as some kind of nasty vice which needs to be stamped out is lazy, puritanical, and indicative of a slippery slope we seem to find ourselves on, heading towards over-zealous regulation/prohibition.

Anyway, I don't doubt that the club have done this with good intentions, but I personally believe the underlying sentiment to be misguided.
The problem is that the gambling industry have increasingly relied on targeting those with addictive personalities - there is research showing that the money you can make from 'rational gamblers' is a lot lot less than that from 'irrational gamblers' and simply doesn't sustain the betting market in the UK. So they've gone out of their way to court repeat bets from small numbers of customers the majority of whom are 'addicts'.

Now whilst drink is inherently bad for people if consumed without moderation the drinks industry has been heavily regulated regarding advertising and sale and pricing in some cases. They're not 'clean' by any means as an industry but I also think they are far far less reliant on 'addicts' than the betting industry is.

That's the distinction. We know that in effect the betting market today wouldn't exist were it not for relatively small numbers of gamblers betting incredibly frequently and likely because they are out of control. That would suggest there is a problem that the industry has courted rather than the other way round.

So I think this is the distinction. Nobody has an issue with gambling in moderation or drinking in moderation BUT the industry itself has created the problem and I'm unconvinced that without action and regulation they will ever address it because in this case they are absolutely reliant on those addicts.

nicholaldo
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2360
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: Sure Thing

Post by nicholaldo » Fri Sep 24, 2021 2:28 pm

I don't think it's about the activities themselves but the promotion (or particularly in the case of sports betting, the over promotion) of them.

There are no shirt sponsorships or advertisements for alcolohlic drinks or tobacco companies in footbal anymore either.

LeverEnd
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9969
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:18 pm
Location: Dirty Leeds

Re: Sure Thing

Post by LeverEnd » Fri Sep 24, 2021 6:24 pm

Harry Genshaw wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:24 pm
TANGODANCER wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:13 pm
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:59 am
Am i still ok to carry on with golden gamble, golden goal,lifeline and goldline?
Since my chances of winning anything on Lifeline are a million to one, I don't regard it as gambling..more small donations.. :D
:D

I won £250 on Goldline about a month after i joined it and won a decent prize on golden gamble once. I've been hooked ever since!

I'm sure the club is coming from a good place in taking this stance but it's a little hypocritical no?
I'm not in favour of their anti-betting stance, but feel that Lifeline etc is a fixed price thing and more like a community charity raffle.
Which I've won. Repeatedly. So I like it.
...

Burnden Paddock
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 3733
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 8:14 pm
Location: Bury

Re: Sure Thing

Post by Burnden Paddock » Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:26 pm

LeverEnd wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 6:24 pm
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:24 pm
TANGODANCER wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:13 pm
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:59 am
Am i still ok to carry on with golden gamble, golden goal,lifeline and goldline?
Since my chances of winning anything on Lifeline are a million to one, I don't regard it as gambling..more small donations.. :D
:D

I won £250 on Goldline about a month after i joined it and won a decent prize on golden gamble once. I've been hooked ever since!

I'm sure the club is coming from a good place in taking this stance but it's a little hypocritical no?
I'm not in favour of their anti-betting stance, but feel that Lifeline etc is a fixed price thing and more like a community charity raffle.
Which I've won. Repeatedly. So I like it.

Alison Bell referred to it as a ‘fund raiser’ rather than gambling on FB, when someone accused the club of hypocrisy.

LeverEnd
Legend
Legend
Posts: 9969
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:18 pm
Location: Dirty Leeds

Re: Sure Thing

Post by LeverEnd » Fri Sep 24, 2021 10:21 pm

It's chalk and cheese. You can't run up £1000s off debts on lifeline. Any comparison is just daft
...

User avatar
Worthy4England
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 32273
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:45 pm

Re: Sure Thing

Post by Worthy4England » Sat Sep 25, 2021 1:01 am

Burnden Paddock wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 7:26 pm
LeverEnd wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 6:24 pm
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:24 pm
TANGODANCER wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 12:13 pm
Harry Genshaw wrote:
Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:59 am
Am i still ok to carry on with golden gamble, golden goal,lifeline and goldline?
Since my chances of winning anything on Lifeline are a million to one, I don't regard it as gambling..more small donations.. :D
:D

I won £250 on Goldline about a month after i joined it and won a decent prize on golden gamble once. I've been hooked ever since!

I'm sure the club is coming from a good place in taking this stance but it's a little hypocritical no?
I'm not in favour of their anti-betting stance, but feel that Lifeline etc is a fixed price thing and more like a community charity raffle.
Which I've won. Repeatedly. So I like it.

Alison Bell referred to it as a ‘fund raiser’ rather than gambling on FB, when someone accused the club of hypocrisy.
They're all fund raisers. Just that most of it funds bookies.

nicholaldo
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 2360
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: Sure Thing

Post by nicholaldo » Sat Sep 25, 2021 7:58 am

Who's Alison Bell?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Mar and 93 guests