Greyhound racing, affordability checks, millionaires only... | My week in iGaming #12
A couple of 'I can't believe it' scenarios here in My Week #12. Read on...
Greyhound racing to be banned in Wales
“Look at their little faces, they love it.”
I was with a mate of mine, Owen, at one of the many dog tracks we've visited across the UK in the last 20-odd years. We were discussing whether or not the sport was cruel. ‘They love it,’ suggests Owen doesn’t fall into the ‘it’s cruel’ camp. Neither do I. (But before anyone accuses me of being a belligerent old gammon who eschews change at any cost, I have actually changed my views on bullfighting in the last couple of decades.)
Tracks disappearing
Despite growing up in West London I never saw greyhound racing at either Wembley or White City let alone the even closer Park Royal (it closed in 1969). However, I’ve enjoyed many a night out 'at the dogs’ up and down Britain: Crayford, Wimbledon, Romford, Swindon, Nottingham, Owlerton (Sheffield), Belle Vue (Manchester), Doncaster, Newcastle and Shawfield (Glasgow). Around half of these are no longer in operation. In its 1940s heyday there were 77 licensed tracks and 200+ independent tracks in the UK. London alone hosted 33. Now we’re down to 19, nationwide.
An evening at the dogs is an enjoyable throwback to a different, many would say better, time – a relatively cheap night out for a very largely working class clientele. Crayford and Sheffield stand out for me witnessing those in attendance having ‘a right old knees-up’ of a time. The buffet at Romford one evening not long before the first lockdown offered a range of culinary delights including the best smoked mackerel I’ve ever had anywhere.
Changing times
But times change. Greyhound racing has gone out of fashion. Generations of folks who might’ve inherited the bug are now keener on Michael McIntyre on TV on a Saturday night while their children smoke a bit of skunk on the streets outside while doing their best to avoid getting stabbed.
If fashions, societal changes, new attractions and economics are killing off greyhound racing then, I guess, so be it. There’s no point flogging a dying dog – so to speak. But to be killed off, deliberately, by Government edict is another thing.
Wales
“I want a ban to come into force as soon as practicably possible,” said Welsh Deputy First Minister with Responsibility for Climate Change and Rural Affairs, Huw Irranca-Davies. He also noted that the ban had ‘clear cross-party support’ among Welsh legislators. (How about among the public?)
Results of a petition were also cited as a reason to ban the sport. What should be noted though is that the petition received only 35,000 signatures. With well over 2 million adults in Wales 35,000 people represents less than 2% of the adult population.
It's worth noting also that there's only 1 greyhound track in Wales, the Valley Greyhound Stadium in Caerphilly. It was licensed by The Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB) only in 2023 after £2m was spent on an upgrade.
How is this happening? Woke local government, backed by a tiny proportion of the public, at a stroke, wipes out a whole industry – not to mention the direct impact on jobs and supporting industries such as catering, taxis etc.
It’s a sad state of affairs indeed when the minority killjoys have their day. But that’s kind of where we are at the moment in Britain, isn’t it?
Bets are off, surely
‘They think it's all over…’ It probably is – the race for the 2024-25 English Premier League title that is. As we hit mid-March Liverpool are 15 points clear at the top, albeit having played a game more than the far off chasing pack. With The Arse stuttering it doesn’t seem like that extra game played will hurt Liverpool much. So, probably time for Arteta and others to raise the white flag. It’s Liverpool’s, surely.
More interesting – well kind of – is the race for third place. Aside from Arsenal, currently second, but in freefall and heading for third, or lower, it looks pretty tight with Nottingham Forest on 51 points stretching down 6 places down to Newcastle on 44 points.
A more even playing field 50 years ago
Fair play to Liverpool though – the league table doesn’t lie, though what some of us would give to see a modern day repeat of 50 years ago when a fiercely competitive English First Division season ended like this (in a 2 points for a win season):
Imagine a team winning the Premier League in the 3-points-for-a-win 2020s with just 74 points having played an extra 4 games? And consider that the Champions only won 9 games more than the team that finished bottom. A far more level playing field.
Really? Who’d have thought it would turn out like this?
The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) has pointed the finger squarely at the Gambling Commission (UKGC) over falling betting revenue in 2024.
The BHA blames the introduction of financial vulnerability checks on the 6.8% revenue drop against the previous year. They also claim many punters have moved to betting through unlicensed channels – the scale of which it’s hard to estimate, though clearly damaging however many people have taken that route.
"No doubt" that affordability checks have had an impact
BHA director of racing Richard Wayman has “no doubt” that the revenue dip was “headed by the impact of affordability checks”. Considering the checks were only introduced in August and pegged at £500 per individual it remains to be seen how 2025 will play out revenue-wise over a full 12 months. We also need to factor in that the check level went down to just £150 in late February. The industry could be looking at a significant, double digit, revenue collapse.
The UKGC, it seems, ignored the very clear red flags that were waving last year – no more so than when they tried to bury responses to their own survey. In 2023 the UKGC refused to release the results of a survey about players’ reactions to proposed financial background checks. Even after a Freedom of Information (FOI) request was filed, the UKGC wouldn’t share data: “no outstanding public interest” they said. Yeah, right. And with bloodhound-like tenacity the Racing Post was onto it.
Resistance clear
Another FOI request and another year passed before the stats were made public. The 12,000-participant survey revealed:
- 42% would refuse an operator’s requests for information around personal finances and affordability.
- 22.5% would stop gambling with that particular operator should it request as such.
- Only 14% would comply.
I don’t know about you but armed with information about resistance on that kind of level I’d think twice about pushing on with a clearly unpopular and damaging proposal. But the UKGC decided to forge ahead anyway.
This isn’t going away
A Racing Post survey, published on 26 February 2025, found that punters betting on racing in a six-month period decreased by 29.2%. And where online punters were asked to carry out financial checks more than 60% declined to provide the requested information.
It gets worse.
The Department of Trust (DoT) analysed data from 600,000+ consumers for the 2024 calendar year. The focus was on consumers who had deposited with at least one gambling operator during that time. Based on the revised monthly deposit threshold of £150 which came into force during February around 25% or 150,000 people would be required to have financial checks carried out.
So, if around 60% of 150,000 online gamblers refused to undertake financial checks that’s around 90,000 players and gamblers potentially lost. There’s not an industry in the country that could absorb that loss without significant upheaval.
This initiative was always going to be a problem. Just how many more warning flags need to be waved before the UKGC pays attention?
See also:
- Just how much Is £150? Vulnerability checks looming
- Light touch financial vulnerability checks: necessary safeguard or overreach?
- Black market gambling on the rise
Troubles in Sweden
Sweden’s gambling regulator Spelinspektionen, recently published data indicating that 14% of player traffic is going to illegal sites. It’s estimated that traffic to unlicensed sites has increased tenfold since 2019.
The Swedish government has announced a review into the industry. The Gambling Act review was announced on 20 February and must be completed by 17 September 2025. Marcus Isgren, chairman and head of the Swedish Board of Consumer Complaints, will head the review team. Watch this space.
(Very) rich people only, thank you
With fears about growing gambling addiction, legislators in Thailand are considering a novel way to manage the situation. A proposal has been put forward whereby only millionaires will be allowed into casinos.
The proposal sees only residents with more 50 million baht (£1.167 m) in the bank being allowed in. On top of that an entry fee of 5,000 baht (£115) would be charged for each visit.
If implemented it would certainly see fewer problem gamblers in the country, but would it stop problem gambling among the very rich? And if so, how? If successful it could lead to a novel way to approach any number of societal problems:
- Too many road accidents? Reduce the number of cars on the road by 95%.
- Too many people in prison? Let everyone except multiple murderers out.
Will be interesting to see how this one plays out.