Michael Moynihan: Sligo Rovers should be applauded for stance on betting sponsorship

A detailed view of the Sligo Rovers jersey ahead of the start of the 2021 SSE Airtricity League Premier Division season. Picture: Stephen McCarthy/Sportsfile

Last week in these pages John Riordan gave an insight into the sports gambling scene in the US as the Super Bowl approached.

This is fascinating, the American attitude to gambling on sport, because it sometimes seems to be some distance behind our own. A sweeping generalisation, yes, but the breezy incorporation of odds and prop bets in some sports coverage still jars: on this side of the Atlantic there’s at least the acceptance that gambling is inherently problematic.

More credit, then, to Sligo Rovers.

The club issued a statement saying it had been approached by two large gambling companies offering sponsorship but had rejected those offers, adding: “As a community-funded club, we believe it would be irresponsible to accept these proposals.

“Sponsorship is a critical aspect in the running of Sligo Rovers and turning down five-figure sponsorship offers is not a straight-forward decision, particularly given the club is self-funded with no individual benefactor like many others in the League of Ireland. The ethos of our club is to be inclusive and open to welcome all ages and demographics. We feel such advertising, directly aimed at our supporters and particularly to our young fans, could have a detrimental outcome going forward and is not in the spirit of the football club.” 

This decision is all the more laudable when you flick on the television and see immensely wealthy individuals shilling for gambling companies with no visible embarrassment on their features, not a tinge of regret as their credibility evaporates like smoke.

Sligo’s statement is all the more striking given, as they say, that the relatively small amount of funds on offer would make a significant difference to their fortunes. A pity that their good example isn’t followed by others.

However, as noted, at least there’s an awareness of the problems posed by gambling. What about more insidious threats?

Last week we had another announcement: that the Women’s Six Nations is to be sponsored by social media platform TikTok.

The company stated: “As a platform designed to bring fans even closer to the action, TikTok will offer new and existing rugby fans a window into one of the fastest growing areas of the sport, Women's rugby.” 

Yes, TikTok: the company which has spawned headlines such as ‘TikTok shares your data more than any other social media app — and it’s unclear where it goes, study says’ (CNBC), or ‘TikTok may owe you money from its $92 million data privacy settlement’ (Business Insider).

There’s something particularly unsettling about the alliance of TikTok with sport if you have a long memory. It’s only three years ago that the company had to apologise when it came to light that younger users of the platform were “'exploited' for digital gifts”, according to the BBC.

That revelation came hot on the heels of a record fine for the platform in America when it was exposed as collecting data from children as young as 13.

Accordingly, a cynic would be forgiven for smelling a rat when he or she sees a partnership which by definition will attract the younger sports fan and draw them into TikTok’s web. The child wants to see the sports content and therefore has to log onto TikTok: zip, there goes their data.

By the way, the retort that sponsors don’t grow on trees, and that accessing financial support is a challenge for organisations in all sports is, of course, a valid response.

Sligo Rovers made that very same point, in fact.

The unease you might be feeling was crystallised nicely last week by a pal who pointed out that there was a time when Big Tobacco was one of the more obvious villains in popular culture.

How long will it take before Big Tech is recognised as a far more dangerous influence even than tobacco?

Recycling has replaced route one

The events of last Saturday in Croke Park no doubt burned themselves on your memory — if they didn’t you can see them well chronicled in these pages today, don’t worry.

One of the big takeaways —from both finals — is that the day of the ignorant lump-it-in, it’ll-rebound-off-someone, high dropping ball in around the house when you’re two points down is gone.

Harry Ruddle’s finish in the hurling final is bound to become the new template for a team fishing for a late, dramatic winner. Don’t force your shot, just try to get it past the first rank of bodies and watch it shoot off the turf.

Bending the rules (a little)

The NFL has come to life. Whether in the manner of Frankenstein’s monster*, or a beautiful butterfly emerging, etc., is up to you. What I’ve noticed is a low hum of interest in innovative forays by goalkeepers like Rory Beggan venturing far afield.

A genuine question: why don’t the deep football thinkers among us — presumably there are a few somewhere — exploit the rulebook to really challenge the prevailing orthodoxy?

According to those rules, rule 2.7 (a) states: “When the ball is played over the end-line by the team attacking that end, play is restarted by a kick-out off the ground from within the small rectangle. The player taking a kick-out may kick the ball more than once before any other player touches it but may not take the ball into his hand(s).”

Therefore a goalkeeper may dribble upfield as far as he can without handling the ball. Now that would be innovative.

Once you look at the rules the opportunities keep on coming. Rule 1.5 tells us “when the ball has not been caught, it may be bounced more than once in succession.”

The obvious inference is that without taking the football in one’s hands — catching it — one may dribble it a la Michael Jordan from one end of the field to the other. Don’t get me started on rule 1.4: “When a player is in possession of the ball, it may be:- (a) carried for a maximum of four consecutive steps or held in the hand(s) for no longer than the time needed to take four steps.”

A law student on some college football team will surely argue the one man’s time for four steps is another man’s five minutes, and hold the ball in hand for that length of time.

You’re welcome.

*(I used this turn of phrase to share a cartoon seen recently in which said monster says, ‘Genuinely, I don’t mind if you call me Frankenstein or the monster.’)

If you know, you know

Too late for the centenary? If you were even half-awake last week you’d have noticed it was the 100th anniversary of one of the most celebrated books ever written.

I need hardly mention the name, just a few of its celebrated sentences.

‘Sufficient to the day is the newspaper thereof.’

‘Noisy self-willed man. Full of his son. Quite right too.’

Or Martin Amis’s favourite: ‘The heaventree of stars hung with humid nightblue fruit.’

All due respect to the man who used the phrase ‘I’ll vault a five-barred gate’ in another of his books (If you know, you know).

Contact: [e-mail]