Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
PaulB wrote:Geelong have publicly distanced themselves from all other AFL clubs by stating they will support betting limits. http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/art ... inion.html
We should at least do that. I concede that it is nothing tangible other than a step in the right direction but it is far more than what we have done.
Blues and Pies have close association with Woolworths (Australia's largest pokie operator) who own some of the Blues and Pies' pokie pubs and manage their pokie licenses. This also applies to the Hawks and Bulldogs. Those are the clubs most opposed to any reform. This is the sort of nasty in-house dealings we, thankfully, avoid much to the credit of our St Kilda board. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/c ... 5854279428 - and - http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/carlt ... 1b73t.html
As my mate Verdun66 correctly points out, brand association with gambling is on the nose so that the Saints are now unlikely to attract any other sponsor. That is why my request was only for the board to make it clear that the Centrebet deal would not be renewed. This way, our team really starts 2012 with a slate that is becoming clean - and - a bright future.
I agree, I can't offer real alternatives but I really don't like the club being sponsored by such a destructive force. I think our club has to stand for something and not just sell out to the biggest buyer. I hear what Enrico is saying and I agree that it's hard to draw a line, but I think there are companies out there not involved with the conscious destruction of families and lives that could be persuaded to increase their exposure. I'd be going after Apple or HTC or Sony but I'm not sure they need to advertise.
Agree with all those saying practically it's going to cost us being associated with a lowlife sponsor, but that's just my opinion.
I dunno, I have a suspicion this will divide us up into "non-political libertarian footy fans" and "bleeding heart footy fans". Good on you if you all you care about is the Saints, I care about them too, but I care far more about decency and integrity.
Just My Opinion
------------------------------------------------
saintbrat wrote:can someone fill me in ( PaulB) on what Geelong are doing to distance from pokies- given their cats Bistro survives on them? and they are bringing in 95% of gate taking to our 40%.. when we can do that then we may be able to make more stands.
St Kilda FCs pokies are hidden away in the backstreets of Moorabbin.
The club wanted to bring them out in the open by relocating them to South Road.
The Kingston (local) council refused to support the move.
This led to the club realising they were not wanted by the Kingston council hence the move to Seaford.
Geelong FC is wanted, the local council having built them a new stadium at Kardinia Park.
The more you know, the more you know you don't know.
When I was a young child, I knew that I knew so much about so much.
Now that I am old and know so much more, I know that I know so much about so little, and so little about so much.
If you are not engaging AI actively and aggressively, you are doing it wrong.
You are not going to lose your job to AI.
You are going lose your job to somebody who uses AI.
Your company is not going to go out of business because of AI.
Your company is going to go out of business because another company used AI.
- Jensen Huang, CEO of NVIDIA
PaulB wrote:Enrico - you simply got your facts wrong. Research shows that when pokies are taken away, problem gambling simply drops. But that's not the real point.
Really? You believe this? You obviously have no idea about the mind of a problem gambler.
If they can't give their money away one way, they will find another to do so. Whether it is pokies, races, even Tattslotto, they will find a way to do it.
Removing the pokies isn't the answer, public education is.
Sorry HSV but you're wrong here. Addiction is not just about the 'mind' of the person addicted it is also to do with access to outlets by which to pursue that addiction. And just because a person is addicted to pokies doesn't necessarily mean that he will also turn to other forms of gambling (though of course many do) - there are specific addictive qualities about pokies that are not necessarily replicated by other forms of gambling.
I'm not in to banning pokies or gambling altogether, but I can't help thinking it should be treated in a similar way to cigarettes i.e. available for those that want to seek it out, but not allowed to be advertised.
I too would prefer that St Kilda was not a party to this industry, but IMO really the issues need to be legislated for at a State or preferably Federal level
Hird... The unflushable one is now... just a turd...
I'm not totally comfortable with our major sponsor, but betting is legal so people are allowed to pursue it at their leisure. Banning everything is just the nanny state hard at work. I tend to see this as a personal responsibility issue.
Having said that, I'd prefer for the saints to seek a more family friendly alternative for a major sponsor. If you want to look hard enough, however, you'll find a negative to nearly very major sponsor of all the clubs. (look for the negatives in cars, banks or financial institutions, airlines, food companies, clothing brands, etc)
I don't like gaming machines and don't play them (as I get bored playing them) and don't bet on-line. But many of the footy clubs (of all codes) rely on gaming machines as a major source of income, with the saints one of the lowest in the AFL (compared to Hawthorn/Collingwood/Carlton). That means our overall revenue is lower and we get further behind the big clubs in terms of spending on things that matter. We really need to get any sponsorship we can, within legal limits, to make our club prosper.
