Smaller codes big losers in alcohol ban
Binge-drinking footballers will cost sober basketballers, netballers and hockey players a big slice of their meagre contracts if the Federal Government accepts a taskforce recommendation to ban alcohol sponsorship of sport and advertising on television.
Non-alcohol sponsors, such as banks, soft drink companies, telcos and motor manufacturers, will simply migrate upwards from the second-tier sports to the dominant professional codes if the breweries, wine companies and distilleries can't sponsor NRL, AFL, cricket or the Wallabies.
The Olympic disciplines and mass-participation sports, such as netball, will suffer if their existing sponsors ditch them for the huge TV ratings associated with the big sports.
Wednesday night's State of Origin match generated the highest TV ratings ever for a dead rubber, with these big matches usually pulling in audiences normally associated with the deaths of Lady Di and Michael Jackson.
Advertisers lust after the eyeballs attracted to these TV spectacles, and broadcasters pay serious rights fees to the NRL, AFL and cricket to ensure they acquire the games for their networks.
Professor Michael Good, the chair of the National Health and Medical Research Council that advises the Federal Government on the implications of the latest research on health policy, has called for a ban on alcohol advertising and limits on alcohol sponsorship.
Every time a footballer binge-drinks and generates bad publicity through defecating in hotel corridors, urinating in public and being legless in shopping malls, it further justifies Good's demand that the Government act on his recommendations.
Should the NHRMC's recommendations be ratified, the footballer will suffer a cut in his salary because TV rights fees will decline, and sport will lose $300 million a year in sponsorship.
Between a quarter and a third of the $300m - $70m to $95m - is spent on big sponsorships: principally naming rights to a league (Carlton and the AFL), a series (VB and Australian cricket), a team (XXXX Queensland State of Origin) or a club (Tooheys and NSW country teams).
The four major professional sports in Australia - cricket, NRL, AFL and rugby union - each receive between $10m and $15m annually from alcohol sponsorships.
But the second-tier sports will suffer more as their sponsors move to the professional codes that generate the TV ratings.
When tobacco sponsorship was banned, sport copped a big hit because cigarette companies, excluded from advertising, paid top dollar for rugby league's Winfield Cup, cricket's Benson and Hedges series and AFL's Escort Cup.
At the time, Telstra sponsored the Australian men's and women's hockey teams. Today, Telstra sponsors the NRL, while hockey's main sponsor is the Australian Sports Commission, which, in turn, is sponsored by the Australian taxpayer. Ban alcohol sponsorship of sport and the trickle-down effect will punish the taxpayer.
Good's central argument is that the policy most closely associated with a decline in smoking was a ban on cigarette advertising, although many argue there were other more pursuasive factors in people quitting the lung-busters - education campaigns graphically illustrating the high health dangers, stiff penalties for the sale of tobacco to minors, bans on smoking in the workplace.
It's simplistic to equate smoking with alcohol consumption. There is no such thing as a safe level of smoking, whereas there are health benefits to moderate alcohol consumption, compared with abstinence. Binge-drinking is the problem.
Just as a ban on alcohol sponsorship won't severely affect a footballer's pay packet because of new sponsors filling the void, it won't stop him binge-drinking. With few exceptions, research into the impact of bans on alcohol advertising tends to indicate they have no effect on consumption or are even associated with an increase.
A study of 17 OECD countries with bans on alcohol advertising found "the empirical results do not support the notion that bans on broadcast advertising of alcoholic beverages will reduce consumption or alcohol abuse".
For example, Denmark has one of the highest intoxication rates among young people despite a broadcast ban - except for low-level alcohol drinks - as well as restrictions on print and outdoor advertising.
Surfing is the bellwether sport in Australia for alcohol bans. Years ago, the Association of Surfing Professionals, decided to reject tobacco sponsorship because it was inconsistent with its healthy image.
It accepted a sponsorship with Foster's for its worldwide tour.
Two years ago, with councils introducing bylaws banning alcohol on beaches, it became difficult for Foster's to gain leverage from its global sponsorship, and it withdrew.
Today, surfing doesn't have an umbrella sponsor and relies on the surfing-associated companies, such as Billabong, for 90 per cent of the ASP Tour costs.
Netball has just become quasi-professional, partly through a sponsorship with ANZ Bank. If the bank moved to sponsor, say, the Wallabies following the withdrawal of Test series naming-rights holder Bundaberg Rum, netball could be left with smaller sponsors, while the footballers would still be able to binge.
