Jonathan Parke, former head of commissioning at RGT, now director of Sophoro Ltd.
The accountable Gambling Trust (RGT), the UK’s leading problem advocacy that is gambling, has found itself in the harsh glare of the news limelight again, this time for allegations of nepotism.
The charity, that is funded by the bookmaking industry to the tune of $5 million each year to research and promote the prevention of problem gambling, has been under fire in the British press recently for apparent conflicts of great interest. Because of its ties that are close the gambling industry, concerns are asked as to whether its scientific studies are fully independent of gaming passions.
The RGT maintains that it is impartial. But the revelation this week by the united kingdom’s Independent newspaper that a firm owned by the husband associated with the charity’s Director of Commissioning, Jane Rigbye, has been awarded a lucrative research agreement, isn’t helping the reason for credibility for the outfit.
According to the Independent, Sophoro Ltd. owned by Rigbye’s husband Jonathan Parke, was offered a research that is major as part of a £750,000 initiative into the effect of online video gaming on problem gambling.
Parke was once head of commissioning at RGT himself, leading to accusations that he and their wife swapped jobs, then quickly swapped contracts.
Sophoro was awarded the contract in the first of two, but until last year the company was registered at the couple’s family home, and both Rigbye and Parke were listed as company directors december.
Furthermore, Sophoro bid for the RGT agreement just two months after Rigbye stepped down as director to take in her role that is new at.
In reaction to the news, Labour shadow gambling minister Clive Efford stated RGT ‘should be disbanded’ if its research was found to protect the ‘interests of the industry at the expense of individuals with gambling problems.’
Goulden Steps Down
RGT has for ages been accused of being too sympathetic to the industry, and in particular for its refusal to denounce fixed-odds terminals that are bettingFOBTs) in bookmaking shops.
Last month, Neil Goulden, the trust’s president, stepped criticism that is down following The Guardian newspaper that while chair of RGT, he ended up being additionally a chair associated with the industry lobby group known as the Association of British Bookmakers (ABB). The positions had been held concurrently between 2012 and mid-2014.
Goulden told the Guardian that his participation with RGT, plus the participation of the industry as whole, had been integral to researching and ultimately understanding issue gambling.
‘[Bookmakers] would not have released data or have taken the actions it continues to consume prevention of harm without my influence that is personal and,’ he stated.
RGT, which is likely to be investigated by the charity regulator throughout the Sophoro affair, told the Independent that Rigbye had no say in commissioning of research contracts.
DraftKings Appeals New York AG Lawsuit, Filing Says Empire State Should Ban Spelling Bees
New York AG Eric Schneiderman, that has been accused by DraftKings of earning mistakes in his lawsuit against DFS sites. (Image: pokerhomegames.com)
DraftKings has launched its appeal against the New York State preliminary injunction that seeks to ban daily dream sports (DFS) and place an end to its operations in the Empire State.
The DFS operator’s 67-page filing brings no punches, accusing New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman of legal misapprehensions that ‘did perhaps not come close to carrying the responsibility’ of proof that DFS is not a game of ability.
It further accuses the court of ‘abusing its discretion’ in siding with Schneiderman.
‘The court applied the wrong standard that is legal and ignored the undisputed evidence, in finding that daily fantasy sports contests are games of chance,’ the company argued in its filing.
Can be An Entry Fee A bet?
In December, Justice Manuel Mendez granted the AG’s injunction, ordering DraftKings and FanDuel to cease operations in New York State, its second-biggest market after California.
DraftKings immediately filed a motion that is expedited stay the court’s choice pending the upshot of its appeal. It was upheld by a Court of Appeals judge that same afternoon, permitting the companies to continue business temporarily in New York until the scenario is resolved.
In their December ruling, Mendez was necessary to determine whether DFS was a game of skill or of chance, and more specifically, whether setting a line-up was a process that is skill-based an ‘entry fee,’ or an out-and-out ‘wager.’ He decided it was the latter.
‘New York State law that is penal not refer to ‘wagering’ or ‘betting,’ rather it states that a person, ‘risks something of value,” he stated. ‘The re payment of an ‘entry fee’ because high as $10,600 using one or more competitions daily could be deemed risking certainly ‘something of value.’ ‘
Dog Shows and Bass Fishing
DraftKings’ appeal filing claims that if this were the case, then ‘dog shows and spelling bees, yachting tournaments and bass fishing’ should be ‘criminalized’ under Judge Mendez’s ruling. Each of these are events requiring entry fees whose result is prone to a feature of opportunity, argues the DraftKings filing.
‘Daily fantasy sports are skill-based games which are, and really should be, legal,’ DraftKings’ lawyer David Boies said in a declaration. ‘DraftKings competitions are no less legal than season-long fantasy sports, which the Attorney General has repeatedly conceded are legal.’
In January, Schneiderman amended his lawsuit against DraftKings and FanDuel to seek the return of all buy-ins paid by New York residents paid to both businesses throughout 2015, along with a $5,000 fine per head.
With 600,000 DFS customers in the state, this would constitute a huge selection of millions of bucks in buy-ins, plus around $3 billion in fines.
Outrage Over NFL-Owned Youngsters Daily Fantasy Sports Site from Youth Advocacy Group
The NFL kids daily fantasy sports site is dealing with backlash from several outraged groups, arguing the league should not be marketing their product to children as young as six years of age. (Image: fantasy.nflrush.com)
Aimed at pre-teen kids, day-to-day fantasy activities (DFS) site NFL Rush is being expected to stop operations by the non-profit organization Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC).
The truth is that the National Football League is catering to children to participate in free DFS contests, with the chance of winning weekly prizes like an XBOX One, video games, and a grand prize of a $5,000 scholarship in a story that might seem more appropriate for satire.
Based on the NFL Rush Fantasy website, ‘US residents between 6 and 12 whom have actually parental consent are eligible.’
Though the league and its commissioner, Roger Goodell, have long publicly opposed activities gambling and betting, it evidently doesn’t have qualms when it involves children and fantasy sports. The CCFC is calling on Goodell and the NFL to stop marketing fantasy football to children in conjunction with the National Council on Problem Gambling.
‘ There is proof that playing fantasy sports, particularly with the motivation of valuable prizes as offered regarding the NFL Rush Fantasy website and app, can lead to problem gambling and addiction,’ CCFC Executive Director Josh Golin said in their letter to the league. ‘It is unconscionable that the NFL encourages children as young as six years of age to build up the habit of engaging in this adult activity.’
The NFL has always maintained that any expansion of conventional sports betting could impact the league negatively and compromise the integrity of its games. Surprisingly, it’s taken a instead different stance on daily fantasy contests.
FanDuel has contracts with 15 NFL groups, while Dallas Cowboys and New England Patriots owners Jerry Jones and Robert Kraft hold stakes in DraftKings.
DFS varies from sports gambling because of the fact that the participant isn’t simply picking a team or line, but assembling a roster of players in a process that is recognized as to be a skill-based endeavor.
Multiple attorneys general have ruled that DFS constitutes gambling, with the operators themselves, not interestingly, fighting right back. The data on whom routinely wins DFS contests seems to support the skill over luck debate.
But as it applies to children, teaching 6 to 12-year-olds how exactly to assemble a team of players to deliver the greatest likelihood of winning a video clip game console is cause for concern certainly.
‘By providing these valuable incentives, the NFL is indoctrinating kids into engaging in dream sports with a financial stake in the results,’ the CCFC noted. ‘This exposes them, and our communities, to the risks of gambling issues.’
You have to Be Carefully Taught
It ought to be noted that the NFL hasn’t just promoted an online website: it’s offered an in-classroom curriculum for teachers since well. Launched in 2014, NFL Rush Fantasy understand, Play, Score! was billed as a mathematics and language arts program based around fantasy sports. The league says that this system wrapped at the end of 2014-2015 season, but in it, kiddies were encouraged to ‘choose their ultimate fantasy team each week’ through critical thinking.
This program did employ basic math in determining just how numerous fantasy points should be allocated based on the gamer’s performance, but it also required the student to understand the guidelines of football. Critics of the scheme argued it’s the NFL’s way to engage an audience that is new as youth football participation continues to decline.
Hey, why not simply teach the value of a dollar with a ‘Let It Rain’ mathematics program since well?
No Safeguards for Guardians
In the event that you’re thinking NFL Rush features a series of protections to prevent children from enrolling on their own, you’ll be astonished to discover that registrants are merely required to produce their parent’s email address, so that the NFL can confirm their age and guardian consent.
Undoubtedly no 10-year-old would think to enter their friend’s email or develop a quick Yahoo address to self-confirm their validation, right? Of course maybe not.
From on the web poker to the emergence of daily dream sports, the primary concern for a lot of legislators is how to protect adult consumers that are best while gaming on the online, as well as the really dilemma of age verification. However, into the instance involving young ones, the most susceptible and impressionable demographic, small is being done to keep your child that is way-under-18-year-old from in daily fantasy activities.
Surprisingly, no body from the pro-RAWA contingent seems to have jumped on this site as evidence that young ones will never be exempt from gambling online. It’s precisely the type or kind of fodder that Sheldon Adelson and the bill’s other sponsors, like presidential GOP contender Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida), would want to throw in the face of everyone who supports Internet gaming.