Two Months of LeoVegas.

[nutty nigel 7,533]

How are they replica shirts without the logo?

Just buy a t-shirt ☺

[Capt. Pants 4,230]

As others have said their logo has totally ruined what is a nice home shirt. I won''t be buying replica shirt until they sort that horrid tacky stick on logo.

The back of the shirt is equally horrendous. Yellows or OTBC nicely stitched in was far better.

[nutty nigel 7,533]

I think.the kids call it right. Replica shirts aren''t a fashion item. The whole point is to wear what the players wear. I feel sorry for them that they can''t.

[Greavsy 2,413]

But would the children want to buy a normal t shirt, that has an online gambling co logo/loan company etc on it?

No football connection / badge, I think we know the answer, that''s why they don''t exist.

[Van wink 2,994]

Duncan Edwards wrote the following post at 24/08/2017 12:53 PM:

Not sure that bookmakers have a business model based upon getting people addicted. No doubt people with a gambling problem use bookmakers but then alcoholics use pubs, smokers use newsagents and smack heads use drug dealers.

More and more people in this country are developing a gambling habit which many will be able to control, but significant numbers will move towards an addiction.

Bookmakers may not base a business model on this but the fact that it happens is going to fill their grubby pockets, as they know full well.

[Diane 500]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]I think.the kids call it right. Replica shirts aren''t a fashion item. The whole point is to wear what the players wear. I feel sorry for them that they can''t.[/quote]

This is a difficult one and has divided opinion,  you perhaps don''t mind  if your grand kids wearing a ncfc shirt with a gambling logo on it but  I do understand  why other grandparents/parents are pleased that the clubs keep the kids shirts are logo free 

Nutty - Do young kids really care  if their shirts are exactly the same as the players? as long as they are ncfc shirts in green & yellow and they can have their favourite player''s name put on the back ,would have thought most of them would be happy.

[Greavsy 2,413]

👍 Diane

Never had sponsorship on any shirts when I was a lad,

[Duncan Edwards 2,231]

You conveniently ignore the part of my post that explains these grubby bookmakers responsibilities, how they train all their staff to identify signs of problem gambling and how they are willing to take quite drastic steps for somebody''s protection.

It''s a particularly "hot" area within the industry and compliance is taken very seriously. An element of self preservation will always be involved but the notion that it''s just about the buck no matter where it comes from is way off the mark. People have preconceived ideas about betting shops, just like people who disliked smoking in pubs. I''ll wager (see what I did there) that a large percentage of people with a bee in their bonnet about betting shops would never set foot in one anyway. Just like all those non-smokers haven''t kept the pubs open with their new custom now that they aren''t all smelly.

[Duncan Edwards 2,231]

[quote user="Greavsy"]👍 Diane

Never had sponsorship on any shirts when I was a lad,[/quote]

Were you a centre half?

[Diane 500]

[quote user="Greavsy"]👍 Diane

Never had sponsorship on any shirts when I was a lad,[/quote]

Was wondering what year did shirts started having sponsorships on them so googled it and found this

[url]https://footballpink.net/2015/10/22/5475/[/url] 

[Van wink 2,994]

Duncan Edwards wrote the following post at 25/08/2017 9:44 PM:

You conveniently ignore the part of my post that explains these grubby bookmakers responsibilities, how they train all their staff to identify signs of problem gambling and how they are willing to take quite drastic steps for somebody''s protection. ''

I''m surprised that you are that easily impressed.

[Diane 500]

[quote user="Duncan Edwards"]You conveniently ignore the part of my post that explains these grubby bookmakers responsibilities, how they train all their staff to identify signs of problem gambling and how they are willing to take quite drastic steps for somebody''s protection.

It''s a particularly "hot" area within the industry and compliance is taken very seriously. An element of self preservation will always be involved but the notion that it''s just about the buck no matter where it comes from is way off the mark. People have preconceived ideas about betting shops, just like people who disliked smoking in pubs. I''ll wager (see what I did there) that a large percentage of people with a bee in their bonnet about betting shops would never set foot in one anyway. Just like all those non-smokers haven''t kept the pubs open with their new custom now that they aren''t all smelly.[/quote]

Im assuming that was addressed to me Duncan as you posted it too close to Greavsy''s post. I don''t have any problems with bookmakers or gambling myself, I like a crafty bet myself now and again lol

I was just  merely making the point that its divided fans and I can see both sides of the argument of the logo on kids shirts

[Duncan Edwards 2,231]

No, not to you Diane.

[Duncan Edwards 2,231]

VW, strangely, I''m not surprised that you don''t seem to know what you''re talking about.

[Van wink 2,994]

You''re borderline naive to be honest.

[Duncan Edwards 2,231]

Honesty? That''s a new trait.

[Greavsy 2,413]

Duncan Edwards wrote the following post at 25/08/2017 9:46 PM:

Were you a centre half?

sorry???

[Van wink 2,994]

Don''t derail the thread Duncan.

Explain why you think the bookmakers are so successful at self regulation, identifying problem gamblers, and what would be their motivation?

[hogesar 9,658]

To be fair, i dont think its the Bookmakers job to identify addicts anyway.

Do McDonalds turn away fat people?

Do newsagents stop customers returning the same day for fags and alcohol?

The shirt doesnt make anyone open up a browser on their phone, create an account and gamble your house on a football match. And if anyone did, they were going to anyway.

[Van wink 2,994]

hogesar wrote the following post at 25/08/2017 10:38 PM:

"To be fair, i dont think its the Bookmakers job to identify addicts anyway.

Do McDonalds turn away fat people? "

Absolutely Hoggy 👍

[Greavsy 2,413]

Bit selective hoggy, a decent landlord/ bar person would (and quite rightly) refuse to serve alcohol to someone who is already heavily under the influence.

The only difference I can see is the bookmakers/ bar the punter is on their premises.

The provider can''t be responsible for what happens on the customers own.

[Duncan Edwards 2,231]

It''s all there, just read it.

As for "so successful", you''re just demonstrating that you haven''t read what I''ve written. It isn''t a perfect science and I''ve already explained that some will slip through the net.

As for motivation, again, as I''ve already stated, the industry is under enormous scrutiny with particular focus on FOBT machines. The motivation stems from stories such as this:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2016/feb/29/paddy-power-encouraged-gambler-lost-home-jobs-family-gambling-commission-report

It might have taken too long but bookmakers are now actively trying to get their houses in order. I know one person that had their on line account closed with a high street bookmaker because they weren''t satisfied that the money being spent was affordable based on the information they held even though this person was adamant that there was no issue. Another was served with a trespass notice because of a series of interactions with staff that they felt indicated they were losing control of their betting.

It isn''t perfect but it is improving and the major firms certainly appear to be taking it very seriously.

They''ve also instigated the MOSES scheme, continued with self exclusion policies and I know of one firm that are installing facial recognition technology that will alert staff when a self-excluded or banned customer enters the premises.

All of which should help. If people are determined to do their nuts then there''s always another firm, a track, another online account or a casino. But they are trying.

I''m sure a cynic will say that this is all just paper exercises to appease the gambling commission but they''re investing significant capital into protection, they are monitoring it extremely closely and non-compliance by their staff will result in them likely being sacked or at least disciplined. So, frankly, that''s poppycock.

Which bit are you unsure about?

[nutty nigel 7,533]

[quote user="Greavsy"]But would the children want to buy a normal t shirt, that has an online gambling co logo/loan company etc on it?

No football connection / badge, I think we know the answer, that''s why they don''t exist.[/quote]

That''s a ridiculous statement. What is it that so many people don''t understand about the term ''replica shirt''?

[Greavsy 2,413]

Wasn''t expecting your approval NN!

The point I''m making is, why is it acceptable in your eyes, to buy a shirt for minors with a gambling/loan company on it, which is ok because it has a football badge on it.

The same shirt , but without the club badge just wouldn''t sell. That''s the point.

I think the club are missing a trick though, why not sell shirts with the u23 sponsorship on it, which was Langley school last season. That''s surely a win win?

Not sure if the shirt has sponsorship this season.

[Diane 500]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

That''s a ridiculous statement. What is it that so many people don''t understand about the term ''replica shirt''?

[/quote]

I''ve googled it lol

Replica -  In style and appearance, these soccer jerseys are very close to those seen on the field. A replica version of an official club or national team jersey often has a looser cut to provide a more comfortable fit for fans of all shapes and sizes.

A replica jersey might also use different materials to keep costs lower for fans who don’t need the elite performance benefits that professional players demand. They feature the official team badges.

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

I''m with Duncan E. on this as it seems that nowadays overmuch consideration is given to the weakest in society.

I wanted to buy some stick on soles to prolong the life of my treasured cycling shoes. Timpsons could sell me the soles, but not the glue an order to protect would-be glue sniffers. It is now only available online. Hassle.

If I want to stock up with aspirin for a festive period I would need to traipse around several shops in order to get the equivalent of the normal bottle full of a few years ago. Apparently would be suicides would be made more vulnerable by the availability of the latter. Hassle.

I''ve never been a smoker but consider the pub ban too stringent in relation to the small corner pub where the landlord and most of his regulars were ardent puffers as their chosen way of life.. What was so difficult about putting a sign up in the window of such places signifying that they were smoker pubs?

All-seater football grounds when some prefer to stand. More sensitive of course because of events, but clumsy legislation non-the-less.

No more limitless free drinks on a long haul flight for all of us because the (very) few are vulnerable to causing trouble when they have too many.

All different examples, but all similar in as much as they bear the footprint of the all encompassing juggernaut of legislation

Are some now suggesting that gambling site advertising should be banned to protect the vulnerable? Or that, at least, is should not be allowed on football shirts and that online betting sites should be outlawed from the game all because it might induce some to become addicted?

It''s fair enough not to include them on youngsters shirts but what are they being protected from? Too much sheltering could lead to the "forbidden fruit" syndrome, prohibitions have often led to this after all.

Only today on the radio a young lady was being interviewed because she was "disturbed and upset" because when she went on to Facebook she was confronted by an advertisement for plastic surgery and she considered that she was (aghast) being targeted. Poor vulnerable little thing. She wanted it banned of course.

That she was given air-time is enough. Only last night the same BBC screened an item about girls much younger than her being forced into arranged marriages, the recall of which readily threw her facile preciousness into perspective and adequately commented upon the increasing need of some to wrap themselves in cotton wool in order to be able to exist comfortably.

All nonsense. Governments exist to provide order and law and a workable society and and to protect us from dangers within and without our country. They are not there to protect us from ourselves.

Ban this, ban that. Tax this, tax that.

Education, not legislation.

[nutty nigel 7,533]

[quote user="Greavsy"]Wasn''t expecting your approval NN!

The point I''m making is, why is it acceptable in your eyes, to buy a shirt for minors with a gambling/loan company on it, which is ok because it has a football badge on it.

The same shirt , but without the club badge just wouldn''t sell. That''s the point.

I think the club are missing a trick though, why not sell shirts with the u23 sponsorship on it, which was Langley school last season. That''s surely a win win?

Not sure if the shirt has sponsorship this season.[/quote]

But that''s not what the kids want. They''d rather have nothing than something different to what their heroes wear. So an U23 shirt with 9 Oliveira on the back? Tears when they open the stocking on Christmas morning.

I''m not arguing one way or the other about a gambling company being on the shirt although I will say all the kids I know wouldn''t be bothered or care what the logo was as long as it was the same as the players wear.

Your stupid argument about tshirts makes no sense. Would the kids be happy on Christmas morning to open a present with a green and yellow tshirt from Primani? Perhaps you could draw a canary on it with a felt tip...

[Greavsy 2,413]

I''m sure they would be happy with one from ACN!

[Mello Yello 2,289]

The way things are occurring at Carra it won''t be too long when we will emulate the old Brighton & Hove Albion shirt.......With ''SKINT'' emblazoned across the shirt chest.......

Parents of young NCFC fans will be descending on the club shops in their droves to purchase shirts that are more akin and to their liking - than those horrid gambling types like ''LeoVegas''......Yep, you can bet on it.....

[Van wink 2,994]

The research that leads to development of the schemes you discuss is funded by the gambling industry.

It''s like the tobacco industry being the sole funder of research into lung cancer.

Self regulation, which is what this basically is, can work in certain industries, (although it''s coming under pretty close scrutiny in terms of fire safety ATM) but in the environment where the gambling industry is so powerful it will never properly regulate itself.