/ THE BRIEFING / NEWS
NO
YES
THE BIG DEBATE
THIS MONTH, WE ASK:
WAS THE ASA RIGHT TO PUNISH
PADDY POWER FOR ITS OSCAR PISTORIUS
MARKETING CAMPAIGN?
JOE SAUMAREZ SMITH
JASON CHESS
s CEO at Sports Gaming
B
ritish bookies bet on
everything, don't they?
The colour of the Queen's
hat at Royal Ascot, whether
interest rates will remain
unchanged or how many
sips of water the Chancellor
will take during his Budget
speech. The one thing they
have always not bet on is
death and the result of trials.
The latter is for a very good
reason. Anyone offering
odds on the outcome of an
English legal case would
almost certainly be found in
contempt of court. Bookies
don't tend to bet on death
because if someone decided
to influence the result by killing someone then the bookie
could have been considered
to have provided a motivation
to murder. Bookies didn't bet
on when the Queen Mother would die (even when
regularly asked by punters for
odds) because it was considered in bad taste.
With the Oscar Pistorius
case Paddy Power have overstepped a mark of decency.
W W W. E G R M A G A Z I N E . C O M
s Betting & Gaming Partner, Wiggin LLP
Betting on the outcome of
a murder trial and offering
refunds "if he walks" isn't
funny, it's wrong. The ASA
did the only sensible thing
a regulator could do and
banned the ad.
Everyone knows Paddy Power is cheeky and irreverent.
But I have talked to senior
people in the betting industry
who are livid at Paddy Power.
It does the gambling industry
no favours at a time when
FOBTs are under attack, the
details of the introduction of
the Point of Consumption tax
are being finalised and rules
on gambling advertising are
under the spotlight.
I agree the ASA can
sometimes be pedantic and
humourless in their rulings
on gambling advertising.
But when faced with this
sort of 'mischief' it is hardly
surprising that they look at
all gambling campaigns with
a degree of scepticism and,
like most regulators across
the world, err on the side
of caution.
I
t’s true that Padd