Why Gallop is right on this one

[oldmancraigy]

Couldn't agree more, why punish the people who like a have a flutter and enjoy playing them??? The country is being governed for the minority's f**k the silent majority.

Incorrect.

You've bought the fear campaign.

Under the new legislation of course you'll be able to have a flutter. You just need to expend the very minimal effort to register. If you can't manage to register, I'd suggest your 'flutters' were so infrequent that they were doing nothing for the club anyhow.

 

[hineyrulz]

Incorrect.

You've bought the fear campaign.

Under the new legislation of course you'll be able to have a flutter. You just need to expend the very minimal effort to register. If you can't manage to register, I'd suggest your 'flutters' were so infrequent that they were doing nothing for the club anyhow.

But why should we have too?? I wouldn't call myself a problem Gambler but i have more than a flutter. The thing is all this will do nothing to stop a problem gambler, most gamblers when they are down they will chase their money. If they can't bet at one place they will just go to another.

 

[Perth Red]

We don't have pokies in WA, charities, sports clubs and life saving seem to be getting by just fine without them!

 

[Loudstrat]

Why should I have to get a card? I don't want to be monitored.

Yet again this government introduces legislation that hurts the majority to help (and I use the word 'help' loosely) the minority.

Wow - getting a card must hurt. Do you need morphine to ease the pain?

Stupid sook. Did you whinge when you had to get a card to use your bank? How about the library? Do you drive a car? Or, how about joining a club? You get a card to join a club and are monitored - yet you hate getting a card to use the pokies?

So the clubs will lose millions because you sooks are suddenly to scared to get a card - even though all he other cards you have in your wallets you got willingly. Oh, and they impinge upon your civil liberties too. So what? So does the law. Gee - my civil liberties are denied me because I cant kill someone wthout the police and the justice system getting nasty with me.

What a stupid argument. Whoever is crying about loss of revinue, and then refusing to get a card is contributing to loss of revinue. Blame yourselves.

As for this head in the sand rubbish about "gamblers will just move to something else" - I never heard anyone blowing their wage of f*cking meat raffles!

Oh and Cleary -praise for you for coming clean with your story. Sorry about the morons who are trying to bag you for it.

Face it - gambling is a far bigger problem to society than Leagues clubs income - when finding teams should be done by a decent TV deal anyway.

 

[Loudstrat]

But why should we have too?? I wouldn't call myself a problem Gambler but i have more than a flutter. The thing is all this will do nothing to stop a problem gambler, most gamblers when they are down they will chase their money. If they can't bet at one place they will just go to another.

If you aint a problem gambler you shouldnt be worried. Sounds like you suspect you might be, and might have to face some demons.

Just get the f*cking card, it's not like they are asking you to hack your leg off ffs.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I love how he just puts this stuff out there, but does not provide any diatribe on the actual policy itself.

Nor does he show exactly WHY this would be bad for clubs nationally, just puts out an 'emotional rebuke'

Honestly, look at the whole issue this way:
if clubs can only provide funding because of pokies, then that's a sad indictment on the clubs themselves.

Uh huh - and those casual players bring in SOOOOO much money for the clubs don't they....

Face the facts, of the alleged 5million people who play the pokies, 60,000 (3%) are 'problem gamblers'. I'd love to see a % of how much 'gambling income' that 3% brings in for the clubs. The fact they're up in arms about the debate suggests it'd be a very large slice.

If you've never seen the way families are totally ruined by problem gambling, then you are not in a position to comment on this issue.
Any club that is dependant on sucking the life out of 60 000 families each and every year DESERVES to die. Bunch of disgraceful merkins.
Clubs that aren't dependant on predatory behaviour upon the weak will certainly survive and find new ways to thrive.

End of story.

Funny thing is, I came from a family where a parent was and still is a very addicted gambler. You would be shocked to see how tough life was for me. But you know what kept me together? playing footy. I never blamed the clubs for making my parent gamble.

Lets look at the real issue with gambling. Its the children. Children are being neglected because of it. Perhaps DOCS (and I know a fair bit about this subject) were a better funded and better run organisation, there would be less 'families' affected.

 

[JoeD]

if clubs can only provide funding because of pokies, then that's a sad indictment on the clubs themselves.

We don't have pokies in WA, charities, sports clubs and life saving seem to be getting by just fine without them!

Both those needed repeating

I dont get the argument. The new law wont stop gambliing but it will also spell ruin for all those who depend on gambling revenue? Can someone explain to me how that works?

 

[nomis88]

Gallop is absolutely wrong on this one. As a league fanatic I am embarrassed by these ads against the pokie reforms.

 

[MSIH]

Yeah, Gallop's wrong once again.

Very disappointed they're making a stand against the proposed reform.

 

[Loudstrat]

Both those needed repeating

I dont get the argument. The new law wont stop gambliing but it will also spell ruin for all those who depend on gambling revenue? Can someone explain to me how that works?

No.

Funny thing is, I came from a family where a parent was and still is a very addicted gambler. You would be shocked to see how tough life was for me. But you know what kept me together? playing footy. I never blamed the clubs for making my parent gamble.

Lets look at the real issue with gambling. Its the children. Children are being neglected because of it. Perhaps DOCS (and I know a fair bit about this subject) were a better funded and better run organisation, there would be less 'families' affected.

While one of the major parties actively works toward reducing government spending regardless off the ramifications, sadly this will never happen.

 

[Timmah]

The blind belief that this reform is going to fix problem-gambling in any way, shape or form is bizarre.

The fact NRL sides are in most part funded by pokie-driven leagues clubs is a secondary issue to all of this IMO. Look at the legislation for what it's worth, forget the NRL component of it.

 

[Loudstrat]

It probably wont, but it's closing the door, and any measure by which that door closes should be welcomed.

 

[oldmancraigy]

The blind belief that this reform is going to fix problem-gambling in any way, shape or form is bizarre.

The fact NRL sides are in most part funded by pokie-driven leagues clubs is a secondary issue to all of this IMO. Look at the legislation for what it's worth, forget the NRL component of it.

Whether or not it fixes problem gambling is one issue - and all we can do is speculate on the potential for it to work/ not work. Most likely it will work for some cases, but prove an ineffective obstacle in other cases.

But if it puts some controls around the gambling industry, then it's a winner.

 

[oldmancraigy]

We don't have pokies in WA, charities, sports clubs and life saving seem to be getting by just fine without them!

:thumn

 

[Jubes]

Get rid of them anyway, if a club can't survive without pokie revenue, that don't deserve to survive at it. Poker Machines have almost killed of the live music scene, they're one of the worst things to ever happen to this state.

 

[HevyDevy]

It probably wont, but it's closing the door, and any measure by which that door closes should be welcomed.

No, it doesn't and for the reasons mentioned earlier.

Now try and maintain your composure here because I know you're a bit upset and all, but as has been pointed out this will not stop problem gamblers from gambling. That's why it's referred to as a 'problem'. Amazing concept, yeah?

It will, however, stop the more casual user that doesn't really want to go through the hassle of getting a card etc. This is based on stats from the government itself, mind you, who estimate that revenue will drop by around 30%.

The argument that you don't like poker machines or that clubs used to get by without them is idiotic and pointless. They do exist and they're not going anywhere, so let's deal with the issues at hand instead.

Given that, here's the other thing. Poker machines are not evil. They're just, well, machines. It always has been and always will be up to the individual to control or look after themselves.

And that's where this policy is flawed - without any shadow of a doubt, the impact will be felt by those other than the ones it is aimed at. Problem gamblers don't let small obstacles get in their way. Completely pointless. Costly, but pointless.

 

[Perth Red]

The blind belief that this reform is going to fix problem-gambling in any way, shape or form is bizarre.

The fact NRL sides are in most part funded by pokie-driven leagues clubs is a secondary issue to all of this IMO. Look at the legislation for what it's worth, forget the NRL component of it.

Not so sure, there is extremely strong evidence that the harder you make it to do something, the less people will do it and the less people will start doing it. Will it stop every problem gambler? Nope. Will it reduce the amount of problem gamblers into the future, quite possibly.

For all those with the "nanny" state argument, the world is full of stupid people, hence the need for speed limits, seatbelts, alcohol laws, reducing the access to Heroin, crack and dope etc etc.

 

[Noa]

If organisations are going to go bust because they cant access pokies money so be it. Maybe give companies tax breaks for displaying a more philanthropic attitude too make up for it. Works in the US who put our top companies to shame with the charity work they do.

 

[Noa]

Not so sure, there is extremely strong evidence that the harder you make it to do something, the less people will do it and the less people will start doing it. Will it stop every problem gambler? Nope. Will it reduce the amount of problem gamblers into the future, quite possibly.


For all those with the "nanny" state argument, the world is full of stupid people, hence the need for speed limits, seatbelts, alcohol laws, reducing the access to Heroin, crack and dope etc etc.

Yep, were told what we can & cant do every waking minute of our lives. Which is why the nanny state argument is so f**king geniused and banal

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

i am not a problem gambler.

i dont much play pokies. not as fun as casino games/sports betting.

so this reform will likely mean i wont ever play the odd round. chuck a few coins in etc. try and turn my shrappers into notes to buy more drinks rather than go to the atm to buy more drinks... i wont be bothered getting a card.
probably save me 100 bucks a year.

this legislation will be bad for my footy team tho.

so therefor i am opposed to it.

League teams should be looking to move away from a total reliance on poker machine revenue. its 2011. need to diversify