Victorian AFL clubs raked in $40m from poker machines last financial year

[The Educator]

Yikes!
Yes...

....no. I'd be potentially a hypocrite if I were the AFL. I am not the AFL.

To call me a hypocrite for suggesting the AFL's relationship with wagering is different to clubs owning pokies is mind numbingly dumb.

Clubs doing it = bad
AFL doing it = good

Yikes!

Betting has existed long before the companies were involved in advertising/sponsorship. There are markets for all kinds of things. Presidential elections, Logies, The Block, The Voice, the Neighbours return, Triple J's hottest 100. Do they all get kickbacks?
Betting agencies constantly make money off content they aren't contributing to. They only contribute to it because it increases their market share and the money they make off it, not under some obligation to give back to the product they are making markets on.

But the AFL can and should derive a commission from the wagering on its sport and it can and should do this with an accreditation system that exchanges two way access to information to ensure integrity.

This is literally what exists at the moment.

Dude, we just had an umpire accused of providing info about Brownlow betting. It is VERY open to corruption. Very naive to think otherwise.

Dude, the umpire was discovered by the betting agencies who reported it to the AFL. It is precisely why there needs to be a relationship between the AFL that obligates betting agencies to identify such activity.

How is it different? Both are forms of gambling. Both are legal, but perhaps morally corrupt. Both cause the same damage to society.

There is copious amounts of evidence that pokies do considerably more social harm overall than sports betting. Just as Sports betting is clearly worse than lottos which is why we are not hearing about lottos advertising being

Pokies also have nothing to do with the game. They are also directly owned by the clubs.

The AFL is getting a commission from gambling on its own sport. It is activity that would be happening anyway.

You seem to have decided that the AFL profiting off gambling is fine, but clubs doing it is bad. That's a perfectly fine opinion to have, but it's just an opinion. Reality is, neither is better or worse than the other.

Clearly not true. People with better critical thinking skills generally have better opinions than people without them.

As we have seen.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Lol, rubbish.

If North can survive without it every club could.

Not that North are some sort of moral compass on this issue though, they only got out of it because they couldn't turn a dollar with them, not because they had a moral epiphany.

North are surviving on the back of AFL top-ups, straight from the bank of Sportsbet.

No gambling revenue = no competition.

That is not to say it shouldn’t be phased out over time.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

....no. I'd be potentially a hypocrite if I were the AFL. I am not the AFL.

To call me a hypocrite for suggesting the AFL's relationship with wagering is different to clubs owning pokies is mind numbingly dumb.




Yikes!



But the AFL can and should derive a commission from the wagering on its sport and it can and should do this with an accreditation system that exchanges two way access to information to ensure integrity.

This is literally what exists at the moment.



Dude, the umpire was discovered by the betting agencies who reported it to the AFL. It is precisely why there needs to be a relationship between the AFL that obligates betting agencies to identify such activity.




There is copious amounts of evidence that pokies do considerably more social harm overall than sports betting. Just as Sports betting is clearly worse than lottos which is why we are not hearing about lottos advertising being

Pokies also have nothing to do with the game. They are also directly owned by the clubs.

The AFL is getting a commission from gambling on its own sport. It is activity that would be happening anyway.



Clearly not true. People with better critical thinking skills generally have better opinions than people without them.

As we have seen.

Your standards for clubs vs the AFL are indeed hypocritical. You are taking this stance as the supporter of a club who does not rely on pokie revenue, whilst looking down on those who do. Again, hypocritical.

Trying to argue semantics is just deflection.

 

[The Educator]

Your standards for clubs vs the AFL are indeed hypocritical. You are taking this stance as the supporter of a club who does not rely on pokie revenue, whilst looking down on those who do. Again, hypocritical.

Trying to argue semantics is just deflection.

Trying to argue with an idiot is my downfall here

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Trying to argue with an idiot is my downfall here

Ironic username. Pretentious even.