Jump to content
IGNORED

Huddersfield charged by FA for misconduct over paddy Power publicity stunt

Lrrr

By Lrrr
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

Lrrr

Lrrr

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, TBW said:

Are friendlies governed by the FA?

No idea, i really hope they only end up with a warning, the shirts raised £30,000 for charity, I have a horrid feeling their fine will be larger than that, making it over treble what some racism fines are. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TBW

TBW

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, hodge said:

No idea, i really hope they only end up with a warning, the shirts raised £30,000 for charity, I have a horrid feeling their fine will be larger than that, making it over treble what some racism fines are. 

Didn't we play friendlies with our #MakingBristolProud piece on the shirt that was later banned?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BCFC11

BCFC11

Posted
Posted

Ridiculous imo it was a friendly ffs, Paddy Power have decided that they don’t even want their name printed on the shirt.

33 minutes ago, hodge said:

No idea, i really hope they only end up with a warning, the shirts raised £30,000 for charity, I have a horrid feeling their fine will be larger than that, making it over treble what some racism fines are. 

Not forgetting a 6 game ban for Diedhiou aswell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JoeAman08

JoeAman08

Posted
Posted

I was listening to a podcast the other day. It was a breakdown of all the prem teams transfer business and how they may fair this season. Anyway, the Rooney thing came up and one of them actually praised Derby for their shrewd business of selling their stadium to themselves and leasing it back for cheap and for putting 32 on Rooney with the 32bet sponsor. So with the casual football fan, slimy business to cheat/have a half a foot over the line is just shrewd. If say Bolton, Barnsley or even Bristol City gone down these routes I am certain those teams would be punished somehow. 

To the Huddersfield thing it is an absolute joke if they get fined for what they wore in a friendly. It is actually a betting company trying to have a positive impact on football. Meanwhile our entire league is sponsored by skybet(which is probably why it was a problem). 

Also wasn’t Everton player Yerry Mina charged for appearing in a betting advert? Meanwhile he has dafabet on the front of his shirt every week. Think it just shows the “rules” are only in place so certain people can profit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Barkhamred

Barkhamred

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, hodge said:

But teaming up with Sky bet and 32red sponsoring Rooney as a publicity stunt are apparently okay... 

Apparently the misconduct was wearing their fake kit in a friendly 

I read that nothing could be done until Rooney wore that shirt in a match

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BS2 Red

BS2 Red

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Not a fan of over-commercialism or gambling companies on shirts but this is a massive over-reaction given it was a friendly.

That’s pretty much my thought. The shirt was horrible and I’m not a fan of gambling companies.

But it’s a fuss over nothing. And the publicity is exactly why Paddy Power did it. The FA are just giving them even more advertising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LondonBristolian

LondonBristolian

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

That’s pretty much my thought. The shirt was horrible and I’m not a fan of gambling companies.

But it’s a fuss over nothing. And the publicity is exactly why Paddy Power did it. The FA are just giving them even more advertising.

Exactly. And they are creating a situation where people feel sorry for a gambling company and feel like the FA’s attempts to regulate are simply spoiling harmless fun. That has to be counter productive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Admin
phantom

phantom

Posted
  • Admin
Posted

Huddersfield Town have been fined £50,000 by the Football Association after wearing a kit in a friendly that breached advertising regulations.

The offending shirt was worn as part of a sponsorship deal with Paddy Power.

The bookmaker's name was displayed in a sash across the club's shirt in a pre-season friendly at Rochdale, with the FA charging Huddersfield last month.

The shirt was a spoof, with the deal actually seeing the club remove the sponsor from the front of their kit.

Huddersfield admitted the charge and were also warned about their future conduct by an independent regulatory commission.

The slogan on the Championship side's shirt broke FA regulation C.2(i), which states advertising should consist of one single area on the front of the shirt, not exceeding 250 square centimetres.

The bookmaker did not respond to other questions about the sponsorship.

Club asked referee to ban kit

In the FA's written reasons Martin Coy - who refereed the friendly on 17 July - said Huddersfield chairman Phil Hodgkinson had asked him to ban them from wearing the kit before the match.

"He said that my decision could then potentially be good publicity and part of the advertising campaign," Coy said in a witness statement.

"I was uncomfortable with this and felt it was not my place to ban the kit outright, but I informed them that I would recommend they followed the rules and advice from The FA."

Coy was then told Huddersfield would not wear the shirt, details of which the club's operations manager Ann Hough said were kept from the Terriers board until the day of the game.

The FA warned the club on the same day that they may take action if the shirt was worn, but Hodgkinson said the sponsor threatened legal action if they did not wear it.

"The sponsor said that it would be deemed to be a material breach of the sponsorship agreement if the team did not wear the oversized logo," he said.

"In the circumstances, when faced with the threat of serious legal action from the club's main sponsor, and with no time to seek external legal advice, we felt we had no alternative but to wear the oversized logo in the match."

'Huddersfield motives were financial'

Huddersfield said they did not think the FA's kit regulations applied to friendlies, but the commission said it was a "blatant disregard" of the rules.

"The club's motives were financial, deliberately running the risk of being 'charged'," it said.

"The decision not to wear the sash shirt was one the club should have made; it should not have tried to hide behind the referee.

"Involving the referee in that way was wrong and also not an insignificant aggravating factor. The referee displayed commendable judgment in the face of such conduct."

The FA told the panel: "The decision to enlarge the advertisement in such an overt manner was irresponsible, particularly in the current climate regarding gambling."

The one-off shirts were subsequently auctioned, raising more than £30,000 for charity.

Paddy Power have agreed similar deals to 'unsponsor' the shirts of Newport County, Motherwell, Macclesfield Town and Southend United.

'Lacking in many moral points'

Of the 44 clubs in the Premier League and Championship, 27 have gambling sponsorship on their shirts.

"This shows the hold that a gambling firm can have over a 111-year-old football club," recovering gambling addict James Grimes, who runs the charity The Big Step, told BBC Sport.

"It seems the club lost its principles over the issue and it's sad for fans."

Last month Huddersfield's Championship rivals Derby secured "a record-breaking sponsorship" deal with their shirt sponsor, online casino 32Red, "on the back of" signing former England captain Wayne Rooney as a player-coach.

While no direct link was confirmed, Rooney's squad number at Pride Park will be 32 when he joins in January.

Adam Bradford, from Safer Online Gambling Group, said: "Paddy Power have in this case duped a football club into a backfiring publicity stunt.

"It was lacking in many moral points to begin with but questions should also be asked of Paddy Power; it feels to us as if they have gotten away lightly on this one and exploited their position."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike Hunt-Hertz

Mike Hunt-Hertz

Posted
Posted
On 10/08/2019 at 09:25, JoeAman08 said:

I was listening to a podcast the other day. It was a breakdown of all the prem teams transfer business and how they may fair this season. Anyway, the Rooney thing came up and one of them actually praised Derby for their shrewd business of selling their stadium to themselves and leasing it back for cheap and for putting 32 on Rooney with the 32bet sponsor. So with the casual football fan, slimy business to cheat/have a half a foot over the line is just shrewd. If say Bolton, Barnsley or even Bristol City gone down these routes I am certain those teams would be punished somehow. 

To the Huddersfield thing it is an absolute joke if they get fined for what they wore in a friendly. It is actually a betting company trying to have a positive impact on football. Meanwhile our entire league is sponsored by skybet(which is probably why it was a problem). 

Also wasn’t Everton player Yerry Mina charged for appearing in a betting advert? Meanwhile he has dafabet on the front of his shirt every week. Think it just shows the “rules” are only in place so certain people can profit. 

Football needs a purge of the be-blazered, troughing, hypocritical cvnts, forthwith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...