Mina charged with appearing in a betting advert

[Quickenthetempo]

You couldn't make it up.

Most premier league clubs have betting companies on their shirts for crying out loud.

https://twitter.com/DominicKing_DM/stat ... 99521?s=09" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Imploding Turtle]

An individual Participant, when acting in a personal capacity, shall not be permitted to advertise or promote any betting activity that the Participant is prohibited from engaging in by Rule E8(1) or E8(2)

http://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thef ... 18-19.ashx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Rick_Muller]

An individual Participant, when acting in a personal capacity, shall not be permitted to advertise or promote any betting activity that the Participant is prohibited from engaging in by Rule E8(1) or E8(2)

http://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thef ... 18-19.ashx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So its one rule for one, and another rule for others...

[Quickenthetempo]

An individual Participant, when acting in a personal capacity, shall not be permitted to advertise or promote any betting activity that the Participant is prohibited from engaging in by Rule E8(1) or E8(2)

http://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thef ... 18-19.ashx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yeah ******** isn't it?

They would rather see lots of kids running around in premier league tops, advertising betting companies instead.

[Imploding Turtle]

Yeah ******** isn't it?

They would rather see lots of kids running around in premier league tops, advertising betting companies instead.

Yeah. It's a double standard. Probably requested by the clubs so that they don't have to be the bad guy by fining or punishing their players for endorsing products in competition with their sponsors.

Edit: Although they'd still have to do that with other products, so maybe not. **** knows. It's all dumb.

[deanothedino]

An individual Participant, when acting in a personal capacity, shall not be permitted to advertise or promote any betting activity that the Participant is prohibited from engaging in by Rule E8(1) or E8(2)

http://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thef ... 18-19.ashx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why wasn't Klopp charged?

[Imploding Turtle]

Why wasn't Klopp charged?

When?

Edit: Oh, the Bet Victor advert. Because his appearance didn't violate the rules. He was not acting in a personal capacity. Bet Victor were Liverpool sponsors.

[deanothedino]

When?

Ah, I've re-read and see the 'personal capacity' get out clause.

He was in a BetVictor advert but evidently they'd class that as acting in a professional capacity. What a nonsense rule.

[Tall Paul]

Why wasn't Klopp charged?

Probably because he was appearing in those BetVictor ads on behalf of Liverpool and not in a personal capacity.

[dsr]

There are probably FA officials who genuinely believe that if put restrictions on 1% of gambling advertising, then they have done their job and the 99% that carries on as before will not matter.

[Imploding Turtle]

There are probably FA officials who genuinely believe that if put restrictions on 1% of gambling advertising, then they have done their job and the 99% that carries on as before will not matter.

I don't think they're regulating up, i think they're regulating down (does that make sense?) What i mean is that they probably want to ban betting advertising altogether but it's the clubs who are lobbying them to not go that far (because it's lucrative to them), which is perhaps why there are loose strands of double-standards in the rules.