Gambling sponsorship in Premier League 'hugely disappointing'

(Photo: Getty/iStock)

It "beggars belief" that so many Premier League teams continue to be sponsored by gambling companies, a Christian charity has said.

CARE said it was "hugely disappointing" that nearly half of the clubs in the Premier League will display gambling sponsorships on their shirts in the coming season. 

Analysis by the advocacy group found that nine out of 20 Premier League clubs have signed deals with betting companies requiring a logo on the front or sleeve of team shirts during games. 

Gambling companies are the main shirt sponsor for seven clubs - Aston Villa, Bournemouth, Brentford, Burnley, Everton, Fulham and West Ham.

Two clubs, Crystal Palace and the Wolverhampton Wanderers, have agreed to display a betting company on their shirt sleeves.

According to CARE, Chelsea, Manchester United and Newcastle have partnerships with betting companies that do not require a logo to be displayed on the shirt. 

Ross Hendry, CEO of CARE, said, "Problem gambling is a huge concern and research shows people who bet on sports are particularly vulnerable. For people struggling with addiction, constant exposure to gambling marketing is far from harmless.

"Many clubs in the Premier League have moved away from partnerships with big betting in recent years. Like tobacco advertising in sport in years gone by, gambling adverts are increasingly seen as unacceptable.

"They promote an industry that depends entirely on customer loss for its success, with a track record of putting profits before people." 

A survey carried out by Savanta on behalf of CARE in April found that most UK adults (64%) think that there are "too many" gambling adverts during televised matches and that gambling advertising in UK football "should be overseen by a regulator" (87%). 

"The public have woken up to the extent of gambling-related harm in society, and they are concerned about a bombardment of gambling advertising in the beautiful game," said Hendry.

"Given the plethora of other non-controversial sponsors available, it beggars belief that top-tier clubs are still taking money from companies that exploit vulnerable fans."