At the end of last year, the UK Advertising Standards Authority raised eyebrows as the regulator claimed that an advert featuring ex-footballer Gary Neville had significant appeal to young audiences.
Flutter, clearly dismayed at the ruling, fired back at the decision and stated that it defied all common sense. In many ways, the group’s statement embodied the frustrations of an industry that was simply treading on thin ice as it navigated activations with current and ex-footballers.
A Flutter spokesperson reached out to iGaming Expert at the time, stating: “We are now in a situation where a regulated operator is reprimanded over a tweet promoting a football show to over-25s while illegal black-market operators flood the internet and social media without any checks.”
Flutter also noted that the ASA chose to lodge a complaint against the post to itself, before upholding its own complaint, and suggested that the advertising watchdog is being put under “intense pressure” by anti-gambling campaigners.
“Not one person complained about this tweet, either to us or the ASA. This ruling defies both precedent and common sense,” added the spokesperson.
Furthermore, this genre of activation will take on heightened importance as we enter the World Cup and as bookmakers are significantly limited after the front-of-shirt sponsorship ban is implemented in the UK.
Interestingly, the ASA was on the attack this week as a trio of strikers came up again in the watchdog’s most recent set of rulings, with only one slipping beyond the sanctioning of the body.
An Oddschecker Instagram post featured images of Harry Kane and Erling Haaland alongside betting data, which were cited as being editorial but also promoting gambling. Notably, though, they were deemed to have a significant appeal to minors.
The ASA told Oddschecker to take both posts down, and the comparison site was warned not to feature players with a strong appeal to minors.
In the same set of rulings, a Betway advertisement featuring Arsenal legend Thierry Henry was cleared following a complaint from a researcher at the University of Bristol.
The ASA found that Henry was not of a significant appeal to a younger generation, having been retired since 2014.
When it came to the ruling over Neville last year, the ASA acknowledged that Neville’s role as a TV pundit placed him only in the “moderate risk category”. However, its decision to uphold the complaint hinged on the former Manchester United right back’s social media following.
The same data on social media followers was used to distinguish that Henry was not of significant appeal to a younger generation.
Henry does remain almost as prevalent as Neville in the punditry world, though, and whilst the culture of the next generation often bewilders, the idea that Neville is significantly more enticing than Henry to an extent that a different decision was arrived at is simply absurd, whatever the Instagram followers indicate.
Much like the handball rule in the Premier League, a new framework can be navigated – but the industry needs clarity on what is and is not acceptable. The lines have become so blurred on the use of players and famous figures that it becomes an increasingly difficult task to ensure successful and compliant brand deals.
