Should FA Cup Games be Streamed on Gambling Sites?

Posted by Harry Kane on Tuesday, February 11, 2020

The relationship between football teams and iGaming brands has been discussed for years now, with some concerned that our country’s national sport has become too reliant on the lucrative investments made by operators such as Bet365 and Betvictor.

There’s no doubt that this uneasy marriage remains a source of huge controversy in the UK, while the recent decision of the Football Association to allow selected FA Cup matches to be streamed live by gambling sites has sparked further debate.

But what exactly are the terms of this agreement, and why has there been such a backlash amongst responsible gambling lobbyists? Let’s find out.

What Do We Know so Far?

Interestingly, this agreement came into play from the beginning of the 2018/19 season, with the broadcast rights for selected FA Cup games having been sold to a total of seven gambling websites through a third-party organisation.

The terms of the agreement are relatively simple; with the FA having signed a contract with IMG Arena to grant streaming rights for cup ties that are not selected for broadcast by either BT Sport or the BBC.

IMG Arena currently holds the global betting rights to the FA Cup from 2018/19 to 2023/24, with the original deal having being struck around two years ago.

The seven iGaming brands to have benefitted from this deal are Bet365, Betfair, William Hill, Coral, Ladbrokes, Unibet and Paddy Power, while the FA stipulated that these entities cannot stream contests that clash with other television broadcasts of live matches.

Of course, brands are also prohibited from streaming matches that kick-off between the hours of 15:00 and 17:00 GMT on Saturday, thanks to a long-standing rule which prevents firms from airing televised broadcasts to the detriment of live attendances at domestic matches.

This new agreement has certainly had seismic impact, however, with Bet365 making a whopping 23 matches available for streaming during the third round of the FA Cup earlier this month.

What Criticisms Have Been Levied at the FA?

The FA has faced a barrage of criticism after the terms of the deal were released, with many accusing them of cashing in at the expense of potentially vulnerable gamblers.

More specifically, it was revealed that viewers must at least have an account in credit with a particular gambling website to successfully stream content, while individuals who placed a bet on the game in question would also be granted access.

This compels individuals to place a bet or deposit funds into their account to watch their chosen match, which in turn encourages gambling activity from people who may otherwise have abstained.

When you also consider that an estimated 76.1% of the total football audience is already known to casually wager on matches, this creates a scenario where a rising number of potentially vulnerable gamblers are enticed into betting their hard-earned rewards.

Not only this, but the FA was also accused of rank hypocrisy after this season’s third round cups matches were used as a platform for the Football Association’s ‘Heads Up’ campaign.

This saw the kick-offs for all third-round matches delayed until one minute past the hour, allegedly so that fans could ‘“take a minute to think about their mental health”.

However, engaging in a deal that compels online gambling and fuels potential addiction is directly at odds with such a campaign, with this unfortunate juxtapose also capturing the attention of both the UKGC and UK Sports Minister Nigel Adams.

Adams declared his anger at the arrangement, for example, while urging the FA to address the deal and rescind the clause that allows for live streaming through online gambling sites.

Additionally, the constant negative coverage also compelled the UKGC to initiate an investigation into the precise terms of the deal. It’s thought that this may ultimately encourage significant changes to the Gambling Act 2005, particularly in terms of iGaming advertising, sponsorship and the live streaming of content.

With Nigel Adams also set to meet with FA representatives and discuss the matter in further detail, action will need to be taken soon rather than later to avoid any significant fall-out.

How Did the Parties Respond?

Brigid Simmons, the chairperson of the Betting and Gaming Council, was quick to have her say, claiming that the group’s members did not seek exclusivity for the rights to screen FA Cup games.

As a result, the council has authorised IMG to offer these broadcasting rights back to the FA or another appropriate (and most importantly approved) body so that the games in question can be viewed for free with immediate effect.

The FA has also moved to ensure that matches will no longer appear exclusively on gambling sites, while stating authoritatively that it would review elements of the media rights sales process ahead of tendering contracts for the 2024/25 season.

While these initial measures have been welcomed and will do much to ease the controversy surrounding the original deal, there’s a sense that the damage has already been done.

The government has also urged the FA to review its rights sales process and the distribution of live matches as a matter of urgency, rather than waiting for the tendering of packages prior to the 2024/25 season.

This remains a major concern for both the FA and iGaming brands, primarily because it raises the prospect of further government intervention in the near-term.

If the results of the UKGC review also encourage Parliament to undertake a similar investigation, we could see a scenario where live streaming on gambling websites is restricted and further rules are put in place to reduce the reliance of English football clubs on the sponsorship of iGaming brands.

Interestingly, the FA already announced that is was severing its own sponsorship ties with gambling brands back in 2017, which is arguably why the organisation’s deal with IMG came as such a surprise.

However, the Premier League and its clubs have made no such commitment, and if the UK government follows the Italian template by banning gambling sponsorship throughout English football, both top-flight teams and the leading lights of the gambling industry could face a significant financial fall-out.