Next seasons shirt sponsor.

[Rileybobs]

While it's legal I'd take the gambling firm money like Pace. I suspect we can ill afford expensive virtue signalling that will achieve nothing but a warm glow. I'd sooner put it toward another young winger or even a player we could actually use.

I don’t have any problem with this view, but where do you draw the line? I think I asked this time last year would you take a huge shirt sponsorship deal from a porn website if it was legal for example? Would you take a huge investment from a nation state with an appalling human rights record such as Saudia Arabia?

I’m not equating either example with gambling before anyone suggests that. But it’s clear that there is a moral line that you would expect a business not to cross and it isn’t virtue signalling to stick to what you believe is ethically and morally the right thing to do.

It’s only natural that all of us draw that line at a different point, but I don’t really understand some of the snipes towards people who are not in favour of a gambling firm as a shirt sponsor.

[ClaretTony]

The way i see it, albeit simplified, there are 2 options:

3m Gambling sponsor - decent chunk in the coffers, some held noses.

1.5m non gambling sponsor - Wholesome community club status maintained, fuzzy feelings in tummies, BFCITC projects mothballed due to 1.5m shortfall

Pick one

What BFCITC projects would be mothballed? As we were told in no uncertain terms by Russell Ball, BFCITC are a different company. This was when he decided the club would not promote the food bank collections.

[Rileybobs]

To add to the above, it’s not just the gambling and affect this has on society, but the underhand way some of these Asian betting firms operate. I have no idea if our new sponsor falls into this category as I haven’t looked into tit.

[daveisaclaret]

I don’t have any problem with this view, but where do you draw the line? I think I asked this time last year would you take a huge shirt sponsorship deal from a porn website if it was legal for example? Would you take a huge investment from a nation state with an appalling human rights record such as Saudia Arabia?

I’m not equating either example with gambling before anyone suggests that. But it’s clear that there is a moral line that you would expect a business not to cross and it isn’t virtue signalling to stick to what you believe is ethically and morally the right thing to do.

It’s only natural that all of us draw that line at a different point, but I don’t really understand some of the snipes towards people who are not in favour of a gambling firm as a shirt sponsor.

I think the answer to this is that there are people who absolutely would accept sponsorship from porn companies or human rights abusing states, and they would still act superior while doing so.

[Rileybobs]

I think the answer to this is that there are people who absolutely would accept sponsorship from porn companies or human rights abusing states, and they would still act superior while doing so.

Absolutely right there will be some people who don’t have a moral compass. But I suspect a lot of people who are happy with gambling sponsorship would be unhappy with the two scenarios I mentioned, which would make their ‘superior attitude’ all the more hypocritical.

[Foshiznik]

No one is saying ban gambling online or bookies being able to operate on match days. Why do so many miss the point of the countering opinions here?

[123EasyasBFC]

No one is saying ban gambling online or bookies being able to operate on match days. Why do so many miss the point of the countering opinions here?

So your only problem is gambling sponsors being on shirts, you are love than happy for them to be all around the advertising boards?

[jdrobbo]

I don’t have any problem with this view, but where do you draw the line? I think I asked this time last year would you take a huge shirt sponsorship deal from a porn website if it was legal for example? Would you take a huge investment from a nation state with an appalling human rights record such as Saudia Arabia?

I’m not equating either example with gambling before anyone suggests that. But it’s clear that there is a moral line that you would expect a business not to cross and it isn’t virtue signalling to stick to what you believe is ethically and morally the right thing to do.

It’s only natural that all of us draw that line at a different point, but I don’t really understand some of the snipes towards people who are not in favour of a gambling firm as a shirt sponsor.

Quite right! I’ve used the same examples before and been absolutely shot down by people with kids, who claim that a porn sponsor is morally different. It made me laugh as it showed just how little thought people put into it.

Both legal industries
Both extremely lucrative
Both (to some) highly addictive
Both offer huge sertraline releases potentially
Both with very shady aspects to their operations
Both proven to have significantly affected the mental health of large numbers of people.


But if it’s a porn website…‘it’s not appropriate for children to be inquiring about what the sponsor means’

Yes I’ve been told that by many….and don’t get me wrong, I wholeheartedly agree…but gambling (I have absolutely no issues with people gambling…I can see it’s fun when done safely…I used to participate and enjoy it myself) and the endorsements that are constantly pushed into people…nah, that’s wrong! Just under £2 billion was put into gambling advertisements in the UK alone last year…it’s a huge business that hooks so many vulnerable people.

[Foshiznik]

So your only problem is gambling sponsors being on shirts, you are love than happy for them to be all around the advertising boards?

No but you and others in this thread have gone from gambling sponsors on shirts to alcohol, to tobacco, to wider advertising, to in ground advertising without actually listening or responding to actual counter arguments.

I have no real stance on the issue but completely understand that shirts aren’t like advertising hoardings in that you wear them and therefore you as a fan as a walking billboard for that company and how it’s also not the same as a bookies across the road from a football stadium.

I also don’t see an issue with it being regulated and being the sponsor in the years it’s unregulated and legal. It is well known that a lot of the far east gambling companies have used sponsorship to whitewash and in some circumstances launder money for criminal enterprises.

However, I also understand that some people have had their lives destroyed by gambling yet you and others seem to think that all addictions are the same given your one size fits all argument that all addictive sponsorships are the same in terms of the moral spectrum.

P.s the “your” is not specifically your own personal opinion but the general pro-gambling sponsors opinion for which you are a part of.

[Rileybobs]

I have no real stance on the issue but completely understand that shirts aren’t like advertising hoardings in that you wear them and therefore you as a fan as a walking billboard for that company and how it’s also not the same as a bookies across the road from a football stadium.

Not only that, but kids’ heroes are running around wearing these logos.

[123EasyasBFC]

No but you and others in this thread have gone from gambling sponsors on shirts to alcohol, to tobacco, to wider advertising, to in ground advertising without actually listening or responding to actual counter arguments.

I have no real stance on the issue but completely understand that shirts aren’t like advertising hoardings in that you wear them and therefore you as a fan as a walking billboard for that company and how it’s also not the same as a bookies across the road from a football stadium.

I also don’t see an issue with it being regulated and being the sponsor in the years it’s unregulated and legal. It is well known that a lot of the far east gambling companies have used sponsorship to whitewash and in some circumstances launder money for criminal enterprises.

However, I also understand that some people have had their lives destroyed by gambling yet you and others seem to think that all addictions are the same given your one size fits all argument that all addictive sponsorships are the same in terms of the moral spectrum.

P.s the “your” is not specifically your own personal opinion but the general pro-gambling sponsors opinion for which you are a part of.

The issue can’t just be about shirt sponsors, people can’t have an issue with shirt sponsors having gambling in it but then not caring about all the advertising boards around the ground.

In the 22/23 season when we had classic football shirts, on a match day when your sat in your seat, you notice the advertising board more than you do the sponsor on the players shirt.

You have completely misunderstood my point of view, I haven’t for one second said we should be ok with gambling sponsorship, my point of view was that the same energy put into disapproval of gambling should be put into alcohol.

You said ad a fan you are a walking billboard, well that’s your choice to buy one or not. Are you not a walking billboard for every ‘sky bet championship’ match you buy a ticket for?

People having their lives ruined by gambling is the same as people who have had it by alcohol to

[123EasyasBFC]

Not only that, but kids’ heroes are running around wearing these logos.

You really think kids worry about the sponsor on the shirts, by boys have never once asked what a sponsor means or for example last season they had a different sponsor on their shirts than the players

[Rileybobs]

You really think kids worry about the sponsor on the shirts, by boys have never once asked what a sponsor means or for example last season they had a different sponsor on their shirts than the players

I don’t think kids worry about the sponsor. That’s not the point. It’s about whether or not people think it’s appropriate, you obviously do, others don’t.

As for your post above about alcohol, people have put the same, in fact more energy into football’s relationship with alcohol as I previously mentioned to you. Which is why we don’t have any alcohol sponsorship in football grounds or competitions sponsored by alcoholic drink brands.

[123EasyasBFC]

I don’t think kids worry about the sponsor. That’s not the point. It’s about whether or not people think it’s appropriate, you obviously do, others don’t.

As for your post above about alcohol, people have put the same, in fact more energy into football’s relationship with alcohol as I previously mentioned to you. Which is why we don’t have any alcohol sponsorship in football grounds or competitions sponsored by alcoholic drink brands.

Again misreading me, I’m not saying I think gambling is appropriate, in the UK we might not but you mentioned children seeing their hero’s, many clubs across Europe still have alcohol sponsors, every press conference had the World Cup had bottles of bud next to each microphone.

The issue can’t just be about shirts sponsorship, every single people who pays for a ticket for a sky bet championship game is promoting gambling

[Rileybobs]

Again misreading me, I’m not saying I think gambling is appropriate, in the UK we might not but you mentioned children seeing their hero’s, many clubs across Europe still have alcohol sponsors, every press conference had the World Cup had bottles of bud next to each microphone.

The issue can’t just be about shirts sponsorship, every single people who pays for a ticket for a sky bet championship game is promoting gambling

Yes, but we’re Burnley fans so we’re discussing decisions made by the owners of ‘our’ club. It seems like you’re insinuating that because there are wider problems with alcohol in society, or with football’s relationship with gambling firms, this invalidates our opinion on the gambling firm that will be on the front of Burnley’s kits next season.

[Foshiznik]

The issue can’t just be about shirt sponsors, people can’t have an issue with shirt sponsors having gambling in it but then not caring about all the advertising boards around the ground..

Who are you to tell people how they can and can’t feel? There are different levels of opinion across the spectrum. Nothing in life is as black and white as you are insinuating.

[123EasyasBFC]

Yes, but we’re Burnley fans so we’re discussing decisions made by the owners of ‘our’ club. It seems like you’re insinuating that because there are wider problems with alcohol in society, or with football’s relationship with gambling firms, this invalidates our opinion on the gambling firm that will be on the front of Burnley’s kits next season.

No what I’m saying is there are multiple problems associated with people’s activities relating to football, whether that be gambling or alcohol, but I’ll leave it at that, I’m not trying to debate with you, I appreciate your point of view.

For the record I don’t agree with gambling sponsorship across football not just on shirts. Along with a number of other issues

[dandeclaret]

I think the answer to this is that there are people who absolutely would accept sponsorship from porn companies or human rights abusing states, and they would still act superior while doing so.

Physician heal thyself…..

[dandeclaret]

No gambling sponsors on shirts…..

Ps sign up for the final fantasy competition and first goal sweep draw…. Don’t forget to pay your monies in.

[GetIntoEm]

Arms, Israel, Palestine, spring to mind, to name a few

Proudly supporting the defence of democracy sounds like a positive thing to me. Might me wrong tho

[distortiondave]

I think the answer to this is that there are people who absolutely would accept sponsorship from porn companies or human rights abusing states, and they would still act superior while doing so.

I've no dog in this fight, but you have the greatest superiority complex on this board!

[GetIntoEm]

I'd wear a shirt with HAMAS on the front if they want to pay up

[Whitgord]

^^^^ I wouldn’t

[jdrobbo]

I'd wear a shirt with HAMAS on the front if they want to pay up

The thing is, I suspect you mean this too…

[bfc-njr-2017]

Found this thread on twitter around 96.com

https://x.com/ronniehotdoggs/status/1808047506506355093

[AGENT_CLARET]

I'd wear a shirt with HAMAS on the front if they want to pay up

Disgusting quote

[ClaretAndJew]

I'd wear a shirt with HAMAS on the front if they want to pay up

Harry's Antique Market And Stalls is a good place to get old furniture to be fair.

[GetIntoEm]

Disgusting quote

Thanks for quoting it

[BigGaz]

Once again, the only way to police stuff like this is to adopt the stance that all of it is ok or none of it is.

Reminds of me that song we sing about lady parts and clarets, and the amount of folk that pearl clutch about those, then in the next breath they'll be chalking off all sorts of protected characteristics about the referee and calling that 'banter'.

[Hanoverusaclaret]

Here's the way I look at it. Clubs should be able to have sponsorship from almost any legitimate business. If they can advertise on the streets, what is the difference? That said, clubs need to understand their roles in their communities and should balance this with the financial gains.
It always disappoints me when I see we've signed up with another random betting firm. It seems to be far outside the brand of the club. The sponsorship during our last Championship season was fantastic. A great company that was fully aligned with what I believe the club's values to be.
Like I said the club need to balance the financial considerations with how it reflects on the club. Until it is banned for all clubs, I suspect we will continue to do similar deals. Money talks and if we turn them down, they will more than likely go to a rival.
Being proud to wear your clubs' shirt is a lot easier when it's Holland's Pies or Endsleigh than the alphabet soup of the betting firms. Yes, I can stomach it and at least this season's seems a little more ambiguous (i.e. doesn't mention betting). Just seems totally unconnected to the club and the community. A local or regional firm would be more on brand IMO.

[Burnleyareback2]

Here's the way I look at it. Clubs should be able to have sponsorship from almost any legitimate business. If they can advertise on the streets, what is the difference? That said, clubs need to understand their roles in their communities and should balance this with the financial gains.
It always disappoints me when I see we've signed up with another random betting firm. It seems to be far outside the brand of the club. The sponsorship during our last Championship season was fantastic. A great company that was fully aligned with what I believe the club's values to be.
Like I said the club need to balance the financial considerations with how it reflects on the club. Until it is banned for all clubs, I suspect we will continue to do similar deals. Money talks and if we turn them down, they will more than likely go to a rival.
Being proud to wear your clubs' shirt is a lot easier when it's Holland's Pies or Endsleigh than the alphabet soup of the betting firms. Yes, I can stomach it and at least this season's seems a little more ambiguous (i.e. doesn't mention betting). Just seems totally unconnected to the club and the community. A local or regional firm would be more on brand IMO.

Perfect summary.

[RammyClaret61]

Most if not everyone would’ve had to Google them. I’d no idea what or who they are. Yes I could guess, and was correct. But still never heard of them. Also, like I’ve mentioned before, doesn’t help when you do Google them here in Australia. It just says………

IMG_9162.png (203.34 KiB) Viewed 712 times

[Dyched]

Really don’t see the fuss at all.


Someone sits down to watch our first game of the season. Watches the ads on tv “etc etc first goal 14-1 skybet”, “Burnley to win 5-1”, doesn’t fancy a bet. Game starts “oohh look at that on the Burnley shirt, might stick a fiver on now I’ve seen that”.

Whatever is on a Burnley shirt is not gonna influence anybody in what decisions they make.