Gambling and the NRL
- Thread starter lsz
- Start date
-
We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
It is,but if we cut these stupid addictions out of our lives totally then we're conforming to quasi-communism
As was stated earlier in this post,drag racing almost went broke from smoking ads removal
Now we had the leagues that kept us running,then the government taxed the pokies so harshly you might as well sell them all,they then banned smoking making most clubs make outside pokie smoking areas,now condemning gambling to the same fate,i realise how hard it is to beat addictions and there are a million help lines,if you really want to you will beat it,i think its time we said enough,we cant lose any more money from our great game or it might fade into obscurity
As was stated earlier in this post,drag racing almost went broke from smoking ads removal
Now we had the leagues that kept us running,then the government taxed the pokies so harshly you might as well sell them all,they then banned smoking making most clubs make outside pokie smoking areas,now condemning gambling to the same fate,i realise how hard it is to beat addictions and there are a million help lines,if you really want to you will beat it,i think its time we said enough,we cant lose any more money from our great game or it might fade into obscurity
Berkeley_Eagle
Current Status: 24/7 Manly Fan
good luck Bonesbones said:
I like betting on the footy. Now C'mon steve matai. First try tomorrow please!!
You can't really see in my pic. This ticket
is a two leg multi. Jarred hayne first try Into Steve Matai first try. $20 @ 169/1 for $3380
readable now
Thanks for some very interesting views by posters in this thread, prompting me to offer the following.
Firstly, no we don't want funding for the team at any cost. I expect few fans would be comfortable to see us sponsored by prostitution rings, drug dealers, or exploiters of child labour.
Second, yes gambling is a major social problem in our community. Darren's account above is a pretty powerful example.
The argument has been advanced that, like with alcohol, most people can deal with legal gambling without it being a problem, either by not using it to excess, or not using it at all. But is this really the case? Walk into any court in the land on any given day and I guarantee you will see numerous persons up on drink drive charges. Plus numerous more on violence charges, often domestic, where alcohol features heavily in the facts alleged. And as we all know, those caught and charged are only the tip of the iceberg.
The gambling culture fostered in our society is at least as big a problem. Without wanting to resuscitate what I've heard was a mighty debate in the history of this forum, I'd suggest that in some respects gambling plays a similar role to religion, namely, it's an opiate for the masses. As is alcohol and of course, in modern times as are actual opiates themselves. So what if we are poor, we might get lucky with the lottery, or at least get the jackpot tonight on the pokies. Who can be bothered to organise to change the obvious social injustice between rich and poor, hell we have a chance to be rich as well. Yeah, right… The gambling mentality and the opportunity to gamble play a role, along with charity, religion, and mood altering substances, in papering up the cracks in our social system.
So to the NRL. Is the NRL, or the Sea Eagles for that matter, supposed to play a leadership role in the major political and cultural issues of the day? Of course not. Rugby league is a sport, and at NRL level it's a big entertainment business. It needs revenue, and the limits on where that comes from will continue to be determined as they have been in the past: by the absolute need to not offend prevailing values (because that would be counterproductive), and - when there is some sort of shift in those prevailing values - then as decided by government regulation. As happened with cigarette sponsorship in the past.
There has been a strong backlash against the Channel 9 commentators updating odds through the telecast, and I see they've now toned it down as a result. Issues around gambling will continue to be a bugbear for the game, but that is not a reason to illegalise gambling. The modern game was built largely on funding by leagues clubs through poker machine revenue, and there remains a very strong link between the game and a gambling mindset.
The game's leadership has been well off the pace in ensuring the association with gambling does not offend common sensibilities, such as it has lately, with the Channel 9 live games being the most blatant example. Beyond that, the gambling industry as big business is simply another big business, and will continue to do all it can to promote itself in order to increase profits.
So where is the 'moral' difference between the gambling industry and arms dealers, petrol companies, cigarette and drug manufacturers, or a host of industries that can easily be identified as having some negative impact on sections of the population? Slum lords, importers of goods manufactured by poorly treated workers overseas? These are all legal.
Gambling itself is not the problem. Who is to say that selling your cow for a few beans might not be a worthwhile gamble? Or winning the toss and running into the wind? It is the economic system within which the gambling occurs that makes it a problem. To use again the cigarette example - how different would things have been over the last 40 or 50 years if there were not massive amounts of money put up by private companies who had – and have - a vested interest in keeping people smoking?
So agitate by all means for restrictions on NRL gambling options, or less visibility during TV telecasts, and the rest. But don't pretend it is just a rugby league issue, like everything else it is a political issue and the big money will hold sway under our current system.
Rant over.
(And go Steve, for Bones's sake!)
Firstly, no we don't want funding for the team at any cost. I expect few fans would be comfortable to see us sponsored by prostitution rings, drug dealers, or exploiters of child labour.
Second, yes gambling is a major social problem in our community. Darren's account above is a pretty powerful example.
The argument has been advanced that, like with alcohol, most people can deal with legal gambling without it being a problem, either by not using it to excess, or not using it at all. But is this really the case? Walk into any court in the land on any given day and I guarantee you will see numerous persons up on drink drive charges. Plus numerous more on violence charges, often domestic, where alcohol features heavily in the facts alleged. And as we all know, those caught and charged are only the tip of the iceberg.
The gambling culture fostered in our society is at least as big a problem. Without wanting to resuscitate what I've heard was a mighty debate in the history of this forum, I'd suggest that in some respects gambling plays a similar role to religion, namely, it's an opiate for the masses. As is alcohol and of course, in modern times as are actual opiates themselves. So what if we are poor, we might get lucky with the lottery, or at least get the jackpot tonight on the pokies. Who can be bothered to organise to change the obvious social injustice between rich and poor, hell we have a chance to be rich as well. Yeah, right… The gambling mentality and the opportunity to gamble play a role, along with charity, religion, and mood altering substances, in papering up the cracks in our social system.
So to the NRL. Is the NRL, or the Sea Eagles for that matter, supposed to play a leadership role in the major political and cultural issues of the day? Of course not. Rugby league is a sport, and at NRL level it's a big entertainment business. It needs revenue, and the limits on where that comes from will continue to be determined as they have been in the past: by the absolute need to not offend prevailing values (because that would be counterproductive), and - when there is some sort of shift in those prevailing values - then as decided by government regulation. As happened with cigarette sponsorship in the past.
There has been a strong backlash against the Channel 9 commentators updating odds through the telecast, and I see they've now toned it down as a result. Issues around gambling will continue to be a bugbear for the game, but that is not a reason to illegalise gambling. The modern game was built largely on funding by leagues clubs through poker machine revenue, and there remains a very strong link between the game and a gambling mindset.
The game's leadership has been well off the pace in ensuring the association with gambling does not offend common sensibilities, such as it has lately, with the Channel 9 live games being the most blatant example. Beyond that, the gambling industry as big business is simply another big business, and will continue to do all it can to promote itself in order to increase profits.
So where is the 'moral' difference between the gambling industry and arms dealers, petrol companies, cigarette and drug manufacturers, or a host of industries that can easily be identified as having some negative impact on sections of the population? Slum lords, importers of goods manufactured by poorly treated workers overseas? These are all legal.
Gambling itself is not the problem. Who is to say that selling your cow for a few beans might not be a worthwhile gamble? Or winning the toss and running into the wind? It is the economic system within which the gambling occurs that makes it a problem. To use again the cigarette example - how different would things have been over the last 40 or 50 years if there were not massive amounts of money put up by private companies who had – and have - a vested interest in keeping people smoking?
So agitate by all means for restrictions on NRL gambling options, or less visibility during TV telecasts, and the rest. But don't pretend it is just a rugby league issue, like everything else it is a political issue and the big money will hold sway under our current system.
Rant over.
(And go Steve, for Bones's sake!)
See you can't bar some of the gambling types because the nrl only have jurisdiction over Australian based betting agencies.
So if you bar betting on first goal kick or penalty the Australian based agencies will not be allowed to bet those options. Leaving the 53 (I think that's the number) off shore agencies to bet on those methods, because they can bet on whatever they like.
Once you allow that you lose any control at all.
So if you bar betting on first goal kick or penalty the Australian based agencies will not be allowed to bet those options. Leaving the 53 (I think that's the number) off shore agencies to bet on those methods, because they can bet on whatever they like.
Once you allow that you lose any control at all.
bones said:
I like betting on the footy. Now C'mon steve matai. First try tomorrow please!!
You can't really see in my pic. This ticket
is a two leg multi. Jarred hayne first try Into Steve Matai first try. $20 @ 169/1 for $3380
A few times I thought you were going to make a bit of money, but alas it wasn't to be...
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
6 | 5 | 1 | 59 | 12 |
|
6 | 5 | 1 | 20 | 12 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 53 | 10 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 30 | 10 |
|
7 | 4 | 2 | 25 | 9 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | 40 | 8 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | 24 | 8 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | -8 | 8 |
|
7 | 4 | 3 | -18 | 8 |
|
7 | 3 | 3 | 20 | 7 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | 31 | 6 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | 17 | 6 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -31 | 6 |
|
7 | 3 | 4 | -41 | 6 |
|
7 | 2 | 5 | -29 | 4 |
|
6 | 1 | 5 | -102 | 4 |
|
6 | 0 | 6 | -90 | 2 |
