Jon Bruford questions whether the Premier League’s gambling sponsorship ban is, at best, belated or at worst ineffective.
The English Premier League, in a move that is not surprising, has agreed to collectively remove the gambling sponsors from front match shirts.
The Premier League, for those who are not sports fans, is the sport of football. It is the league that is watched the most by professionals in any sport.
Most industry critics will smile, but let’s be honest, it’s a pointless decision made by the League to ensure they do not lose their gambling revenue. At best it’s a placatory move, at worst it is pointless. Why?
It’s an excellent question, and I am glad that you asked it. Where do we start?
Since a long time, the gambling industry and its critics have acknowledged that sports advertising can be a serious problem. The Betting and Gaming Council, the industry’s guardians, has been amorally colossal in their “ban” of advertising around sport.
Later, we will return to this topic.
It’s a positive, but small step
The issue is first. This is a good step, but it’s not a big one. It’s not on all shirts. For example, you can have the name of your gaming company on the sleeves.
It will take about 15 seconds (the start of 2025-2026, for sports fans) after the new ban is implemented before I see a team with an entire strip that is the logo of a gambling firm.
The positives are that it removes the gambling sponsor logos from football stickers (more below). They are less noticeable, but not completely invisible. That’s all I can think of.
This was a very short list. It took Premier League for how long before they decided this was the right thing to do.
This does nothing to deter critics. Why? It ignores the fact that there are other forms of sport-related advertising which is equally prominent.
For me, pitchside hoardings is the biggest one. The BGC tried to… do something with its whistle-to-whistle-ban on television gambling advertisements, which, they claimed, reduced the number of ads seen by 4 to 17-year olds by 97%.
We know that their maths are sometimes a little faulty, even on good days. It’s important to note that “TV Gambling Ads” refers to actual TV adverts and not passive advertising. The BGC’s “ban” did not do anything of the kind and gave critics even more ammunition to use.
The pitchside hoardings are brighter than the sun and digitally enhanced in the Premier League.
They’re also in pretty much every photo from each game. The coverage continues, even in websites and magazines aimed at kids who are interested in soccer. Even BBC Match of the Day features them.
There are images of them everywhere that you can see football. The BGC thought it had saved all those children aged 4 to 17.
The main sticking point
According to an article published in The Guardian, “Pitchside ads are the largest conduit for gambling brand during a match, according a study conducted by academics from the University of Stirling. They account for 38% of all the places where sponsors can be seen.
The study found that logos appeared more than 500 time during an average match.
Goldsmiths University of London, and University of East Anglia conducted a study some years back that was quite insightful and highlighted the importance of removing gambling sponsors from the visible areas of the game.
In the UK, it is against the law to advertise gambling products for children. Of the 636 Panini stickers from the Official Premier League 2020-21 sticker collection, there were 270 with a gambling logo visible – 42%. All five magazines analyzed had logos visible. They’re only logos, right?
Perhaps not. According to the study, kids have a completely different relationship with this product than adults.
Even when the logo is meant to be used to market products for adult consumers, the image of a footballer is reflected multiple times onto football cards, sticker, magazines, and other merchandise.
The gambling logos will be visible in the world of football for children.
Normalisation and visibility
This “ban” will reduce the visibility of vehicles on a daily basis.
Sponsorship on the front of a shirt can increase social awareness and, one could even argue, imply endorsement from those who wear it. It’s hard to say how much impact something like that might have on the developing brain. It’s not hard to imagine that a child who grows up with football-loving parents might prefer the same brand on their shirts.
It is common sense that children’s replica kit sponsors are not on the kits. If I spill food on my shirt, I don’t usually notice, because I rarely look at it.
You’ll see it right away if you spill it on your face. I will silently judge you for it because I can easily spot it. On a poster in a child’s room with an adult player on it, the sponsor is visible; on the website, the sponsor appears, etc.
Drinking and smoking
Normalisation can be a real problem when dealing with addictive substances. It doesn’t matter if it is a primary or secondary addiction. The normalisation of tobacco smoking took many decades, despite the fact that it was highly successful in general. In the UK, the use of tobacco is down significantly.
Normalisation of alcohol consumption has led to a generation of bing drinkers, and even widespread alcoholism. Alcoholism is now socially accepted and encouraged in many circles. The social impact of gambling is not as great, but the effects on vulnerable people are. We are making a huge gamble if we allow gambling advertising for the youth. The potential rewards simply do not justify the risk.
The pyramid falling down
Even if you ignore other league advertising by pretending that it doesn’t exist, it is still a complex issue. This is the Premier League’s gambling sponsorship.
Three clubs will be relegated each season to the Championship and three others promoted. How will this work if the whole football league doesn’t adopt it? What happens if a club is promoted and has a sponsor from the gambling industry? Thank you for your support in helping us to rise out of the second division…Seeya!”
The contract is .
Remember that many brands banned in the UK aren’t even present there.
The league’s visibility in their countries of operation is important to them.
Shirt sponsors include some online betting companies that are or were based in Asia (don’t forget there’s only one legal gambling jurisdiction and it isn’t China). It’s safe to assume that some advertisers operate illegally. This seems to be a problem.
We will not achieve anything by making bumbling moves, such as a ban on shirts. If it’s a problem (and many in the industry, and outside, believe that it is), then treat it as if it were a real issue. Disarm critics, take decisive action and don’t mess with kids.
Jon Bruford is a gambling expert who has worked in the industry for more than 17 years. He was previously managing editor at Casino International, and now he works as a publishing director with Kate Chambers, and Greg Saint, as part of The Gaming Boardroom. His large dog has a sensitive stomach. He spends most of his time in the free-time learning how to remove stains.
