Community sports leaders’ perceptions of the risks and benefits of gambling sponsorship in community sport

Abstract

Gambling sponsorship of professional sport, particularly relating to online wagering, has been a key focus of global regulatory reform efforts to address the normalization of gambling. In Australia, gambling companies and venues (including community clubs and hotels) also sponsor and develop relationships with community (non-professional) sports teams and clubs. In-depth interviews (n = 24) were conducted with senior leaders in community sporting organizations in Australia with an aim of understanding the factors that shape decisions about accepting or refusing gambling sponsorships and partnerships. A reflexive approach to thematic analysis was used to construct three themes from the data. First, participants considered the alignment of values between the sponsor and the community sporting organization. While most stated that gambling and sport should not be aligned through sponsorship, some forms of sponsorship (for example from community clubs) were perceived as less harmful than others (such as online wagering). Second, some thought that while there were ethical ways to engage with gambling sponsors such as not promoting sponsors’ products, they were concerned about how gambling sponsorship might have an overall impact on the community. Third, was the impact of gambling sponsorships on the organization’s reputation, and balancing this with a need for financial stability. Decisions to accept (or reject) gambling sponsorship were influenced by a range of perceived risks and benefits. Addressing the acceptance of gambling sponsorships among community sporting organizations could involve several approaches to interventions, including regulation, formal policies to guide sponsorship decisions and education about the risks of accepting these sponsorships.

Contribution to Health Promotion.

• Provides insights regarding how sporting organizations recognize and assess the risks of accepting gambling sponsorship.

• Demonstrates that risks were perceived by sporting organizations in terms of their reputation, thehealth and wellbeing of their members and their financial stability.

• Indicates that not all forms of gambling were viewed as equal, with some (e.g. online wagering) viewed as more damaging to their reputation and others (e.g. gambling venues) being more aligned with community values others

• Research in the commercial determinants of health should engage communities in discussions about the factors that influence their attitutdes, opinions and approaches to corporate tactics.

BACKGROUND

Community sporting organizations as health-promoting settings

Community sporting organizations are local (or regional) level, volunteer-run sports clubs that provide access to sports for all ages and skill levels. Researchers have demonstrated that community sporting organizations are important settings that play a pivotal role in promoting health, wellbeing and equity for a range of different population groups (Corvino et al., 2023; Van Hoye et al., 2023; Sánchez-Santos et al., 2024). The Ottawa Charter defines such settings as ‘the place or social context in which people engage in daily activities in which environmental, organizational and personal factors interact to affect health and well-being’ [(World Health Organization, 1986), p. 362]. Community sports organizations can create inclusive environments that foster social cohesion and social capital (Meir and Fletcher, 2019; Jeanes et al., 2024), as well as enhancing physical health by promoting active lifestyles and supporting mental wellbeing by reducing stress and contributing to positive mental health outcomes (Darcy et al., 2014; Robertson et al., 2019; Westberg et al., 2022). Researchers argue that community sports organizations also often serve as local level ‘hubs’, offering resources and programmes that benefit players, volunteers and the wider community (Spaaij, 2019).

Importantly, leadership and power structures within community sporting organizations play a role in culturally constructing a range of positions, social dynamics and social practices within the community sporting organization—which may not always be beneficial for all members (Evans and Pfister, 2021). For example, some researchers have argued that the dominance of male leadership within sporting organizations means that the decisions that are made within these organizations  often represent dominant masculine norms and worldviews (Jeanes et al., 2021; Hanlon and Taylor, 2024). Vance et al., (2023) described that community sporting organizations often face a range of moral dilemmas and morality-based judgements in decision-making processes, particularly given the large presence of children and young people within these organizations. This is particularly important in understanding how club leaders may make decisions related to partnerships with health-harming industries.

Corporate sponsorship of community sport

As most community sporting organizations are not-for-profit, amateur and volunteer-driven entities, corporate sponsorships have become an important financial resource, particularly for sporting organizations facing growing pressure to generate funding beyond their traditional member-based revenue sources (Misener and Doherty, 2014). De Jans et al., (2024b) argued that sponsorships are a strategic relationship between two parties that have a range of perceived intangible and tangible benefits for both parties, including improved brand image for the sports sponsor, and financial and material benefits for the sporting organization. While sponsorships can provide financial benefits for sporting teams, researchers have criticized some forms of sports sponsorship, particularly those from companies and brands that are harmful to the health of the community and the planet (Buse et al., 2024). Researchers argue that these companies, including the tobacco, ultra processed food, alcohol, fossil fuel and gambling industries, use sponsorships as a public relations strategy to counter the negative perceptions associated with their products or practices (Levermore, 2010; Batty et al., 2016; Pitt et al., 2023; Simmonds and Pielke, 2024). Further, researchers argue that there is a conflict between the healthy values endorsed by sporting teams and the sponsoring companies’ unhealthy products or services (Batty et al., 2016). Sport sponsorship provides significant brand visibility and opportunities for community engagement (Nuseir, 2020), as well as aligning unhealthy brands or businesses with the positive values that sports represent (Pitt et al., 2023). Existing sponsorship research has largely focused on unhealthy commodity sponsorship audits of major sports teams (Pitt et al., 2023; Miller and Wright, 2024) and research investigating what audiences think of various sponsors (Boelsen-Robinson et al., 2022), with much less research focused on how management makes and communicates decisions about sponsorship partnerships (Cornwell and Kwon, 2020; Napoli et al., 2024). While there has been some research specifically exploring how these decisions are made in professional sports settings (which have substantial economic capital) (Ireland et al., 2024), very few studies have investigated how decisions about unhealthy commodity sponsorships are made by local level community sporting organizations (Vance et al., 2023).

The general exception to how sporting organizations consider unhealthy commodity sponsorships relates to tobacco, with international regulatory requirements to prohibit tobacco sponsorship of sports at all levels (through Article 13 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control). Much less attention has been paid by regulators to the sponsorship activities of other harmful industries. This includes consideration of the challenges faced by sporting organizations in their decisions about how to assess the financial benefits of such sponsorships, and whether some sporting teams/codes are more vulnerable to accepting such sponsorship (for example, women’s sport) (Pitt et al., 2023).

The alignment of gambling companies, brands and venues with sport

The commercial gambling industry has emerged as one of the most innovative health-harming industries in recent times (Thomas et al., 2023a). Gambling is linked to numerous significant health and social issues, including financial difficulties (Marko et al., 2023), family violence (Brambilla et al., 2023), homelessness (Vandenberg et al., 2022) and suicide (Marionneau and Nikkinen, 2022). The gambling industry’s highly sophisticated products, promotions and practices, have accelerated and amplified these harms, aided by inadequate regulatory responses from governments, which are heavily lobbied by the gambling industry (Thomas et al., 2023a). Similar to the ways in which other harmful industries such as tobacco and alcohol operate (Cowlishaw and Thomas, 2018; Ulucanlar et al., 2023), the gambling industry’s products, practices and promotions, pose significant threats to public health (Thomas et al., 2023d).

The gambling industry is a major sponsor of sporting teams and codes worldwide (Jones et al., 2020). Sponsorship is one strategy from the full suite of contemporary gambling industry marketing practices that seeks to ‘promote its products, gain publicity, attract new customers, shape social and cultural attitudes, and build corporate and product image and support’ [(Thomas et al., 2023d), p. 3]. There have been particular concerns raised about the alignment between gambling industry products and sport, including how gambling industry sponsorship of sport may contribute to the normalization of gambling for children and young people (Thomas et al., 2023d). There have been some attempts to remove gambling sponsorship from sports, largely via voluntary measures and industry codes (Taylor, 2023; Thomas et al., 2023c). Some countries have attempted to introduce restrictions to prohibit gambling operators from sponsoring sporting events or broadcasts (Constandt and De Jans, 2024). In Australia, while a range of partial restrictions aim to minimize the presence of gambling marketing in sport (Australian Communications and Media Authority, 2021), these restrictions do not extend to sponsorship at either the professional or the local community levels. This leaves the Australian sporting environment open to a range of gambling companies seeking to promote their gambling brands and products via sponsorship (Pitt et al., 2023). Further, Australian sports teams (including junior sporting teams) may be co-located with community clubs, which are a provider of poker machines in Australia (Martino et al., 2021), and may receive sponsorships and grants from these venues.

The impacts and decision-making associated with gambling sponsorship of sport

Researchers have explored the impacts of gambling sponsorship in elite sport, showing that young people perceive these sponsorships, along with related promotions, as encouraging fans and supporters of the sponsored team to gamble with the advertised company (Pitt et al., 2016; Thomas et al., 2016). Parents are particularly concerned about their children’s exposure to gambling advertisements through sport sponsorships, and view gambling sponsorship as more concerning than other harmful products such as fast food and alcohol sponsorships (Boelsen-Robinson et al., 2022). What is less clear is the level of gambling sponsorship in community sport—which plays a significant role in Australian society, and particularly in the lives of young people (Frost et al., 2013).

Unlike professional leagues, which often have greater resources and economic capital (Ireland et al., 2024), community sports may be more vulnerable to the financial revenue that is available from a range of gambling companies and venues, making them susceptible to harmful industry influence (Sawyer et al., 2012; Francis and Livingstone, 2020). In the absence of sponsorship restrictions (as implemented in tobacco), or policy guidelines, community sporting organizations have been left to make their own decisions about whether or not to accept gambling sponsorships or partner with a range of different gambling companies, venues and brands. These decisions may reflect moral judgements and perceived sponsors’ altruism (Vance et al., 2023), but could also reflect financial imperatives, perceived control over managing the risks and reflexivity in responding to broader societal attitudes about gambling—including the perceived impact on the sporting organization's members, and the organization’s identity or alignment with social norms around gambling. Risk theories suggest that individuals engage in risks to achieve goals or respond to vulnerabilities, affirm control, respond to social influences and maintain or enhance their identity (Zinn, 2019). They may also reflect the socio-cultural and political views of leaders within the club, but also of the sporting organization’s members who may view gambling sponsorship as morally inappropriate (De Jans et al., 2024a). While theoretical risk concepts primarily relate to individual decision-making, they can also be applied to organizational decision-making processes, which may reflect individual views, especially when formal policies are absent.

This study aimed to fill this gap in knowledge by examining the factors that shape community sporting organizations’ decisions around accepting gambling sponsorship. It sought to address the following research questions:

1. What factors shape community sporting organizations’ perceptions of risk when considering gambling sponsorship?

2. How do sporting organizations balance perceived risks and benefits when deciding whether to accept gambling sponsorships?

3. How do community attitudes and social norms impact risk perceptions related to gambling sponsorship?

METHODS

Approach

The data presented in this paper were part of a broader study, which qualitatively explored the ethical and related practical issues associated with gambling sponsorship in sport. The research used an interpretive and experiential approach, which sought to contextualize and understand participants’ ‘subjective experiences and sense-making’ [(Braun and Clarke, 2021a), p. 3] about gambling sponsorship in the context of their own sporting organizations. The study used qualitative in-depth interviews and a reflexive approach to thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2024a) to explore how community sports organizations conceptualized the risks and benefits of sponsorship relationships with gambling companies, and how they described navigating the ethical tensions associated with such sponsorships. As the approach to the study was experiential and interpretive, we aimed to understand how participants constructed meaning about gambling sponsorship decisions, and the factors that influenced these decisions. The researchers adopted a Big Q (non-positivist) approach, which acknowledges an interpretivist paradigm and embraces researcher subjectivity as a valuable resource and views knowledge as situated and partial (Braun and Clarke, 2024b).

Sample and recruitment

The study involved one-on-one interviews with senior leaders and administrators in community sporting organizations such as  presidents, chief executive officers, chief operating officers, club secretaries and general managers. Participants were recruited through the research team’s personal networks and relationships with sporting organizations, local governments and health organizations who facilitated recruitment. Emails were also sent to administrators of sporting organizations across the Australian states of Victoria and New South Wales (NSW) inviting participation in the study. The emails outlined the rationale and focus of the study. Sporting organizations who expressed interest in participating received a Plain Language Statement prior to agreeing to a time and date for the interview. Verbal consent was received at the start of each interview. To be included in the study sporting organizations did not need to have any current or prior gambling sponsors. However, the research team aimed to recruit sporting organizations with a range of gambling and non-gambling sponsors for the diversity of the sample.

Data collection

Semi-structured interviews were audio recorded and lasted approximately 45–60 minutes. They were conducted via Zoom with representatives from sporting organizations across the two largest Australian states of Victoria and NSW. One-on-one interviews were appropriate for data collection because they produce in-depth information regarding participants’ thoughts and attitudes surrounding a particular topic (DiCicco‐Bloom and Crabtree, 2006). Interviews also provided an opportunity to build rapport with participants, which can often produce more detailed information. This method of data collection allowed participants to progress through the questions at their own pace and removed some of the competing perspectives that can be found in other qualitative data collection methods such as focus groups (DiCicco‐Bloom and Crabtree, 2006). Sponsorship relationships can be a complicated decision for sporting organizations. A qualitative approach provided an opportunity for sporting organization representatives to explain some of the nuances surrounding this issue. Conducting interviews online meant that the study was highly accessible, and participants could complete the interview at a time that best suited them. This provided a wide range of rich perspectives as participants could be recruited from metropolitan, regional and rural sporting organizations across Victoria and NSW.

An interview schedule was used to guide the discussions. Participants were asked broadly about how their sporting organization made decisions about sponsors, their role in this process and whether their organization had any gambling, alcohol or junk food sponsors. Questions for this part of the interview included:

• Can you tell me about the processes that your organization goes through when deciding on whether to partner with a potential sponsor?

• What types of factors influence whether you decide to partner with a sponsor?

• Are there any processes whereby you assess whether a sponsor is suitable for your organization?

• To what extent does your organization rely on sponsorship to fund its programs and athletes?

They were also specifically asked about why sporting organizations may or may not choose to accept gambling sponsorships, whether community attitudes influenced their organizations’ decisions to partner with gambling companies, and how they would assess the costs and benefits of gambling sponsors. Questions for this part of the interview included:

• How does your organization consider whether or not to accept gambling sponsorships?

• Have there been any discussions in your organization about gambling sponsorship, and what sorts of things have you considered?

• Do you think there are any pressures or challenges in deciding whether or not to accept this type of sponsorship?

• How do community perceptions of gambling advertising influence the decisions your organization makes about sponsorships from the gambling industry?

• How do you assess the costs and benefits of accepting or not accepting gambling sponsorship?

The sample size for this study was determined based on the concept of information power (Malterud et al., 2016). Information power places emphasis on the adequacy, quality and variability of the data collected over the number of participants (Malterud et al., 2016). Therefore, the researchers concluded that sufficient information power was achieved once the data adequately addressed the study’s aims and research questions. Interviews were transcribed by a professional transcription company. A member of the research team checked the transcripts and corrected any inaccuracies and prepared the transcripts for analysis.

Data interpretation

The data were analysed using Braun and Clarke, (2021b) six steps of reflexive thematic analysis. It is important to note this analysis process is not linear—and we moved back and forth between the steps, including after peer reviewer comments had been received on the paper. SMcC, SM and ST familiarized themselves with the data by reading and rereading transcripts, and listening to audio recordings. During this familiarization stage, notes were taken to ensure engagement with the content and context of the data, and team members discussed their initial reflections on the data. Qualitative data were uploaded to Microsoft Excel for data management. The analysis involved both semantic and latent coding. Initially, a semantic approach was used to identify explicit content based on the surface-level meanings of participants’ responses. As the analysis progressed, a latent approach was adopted to explore underlying meanings, interpreting deeper constructs and social or cultural contexts embedded in the participants’ language. Following this these interpretations were refined through ongoing team discussions, to ensure that the analysis captured both the explicit and underlying aspects of the data. Codes were grouped into categories and subthemes were developed, which were further refined into broader, overarching themes. During the write-up of the paper, the themes were further refined with input from team members. After peer reviews were received, we made small adjustments to the names of the themes and shifted some of the results to make sure that they were aligned with these new thematic headings.

RESULTS

Sample characteristics

A total of 24 individuals participated in the study. Table 1 presents the characteristics of the sporting organizations that were represented, and the positions held by the participants. All participants were members of the Executive Committee for their sporting organization and were involved in the decision-making process regarding sponsorship. The majority of participants held voluntary positions. Over two-thirds (70.8%) of the organizations included male and female sports teams at the senior (adult) and junior (youth) levels, with three (12.5%) from junior-only organizations and seven (29.2%) consisting of only senior members. Sporting organizations involved a range of sports, including Australian football (n = 9, 37.5%), soccer (n = 5, 20.8%) and basketball (n = 4, 16.7%). The majority of participants were male (n = 18, 75.0%). About two-thirds of participants (n = 15, 62.5%) stated that their sporting organizations had an existing sponsorship relationship with a gambling venue. For this paper, a gambling venue was defined as a pub, club or hotel that contained gambling products including poker machines or a place where bets could be placed on sports or wagering (generally a TAB). While none of the individuals interviewed said their sporting organization had a sponsorship relationship with an online wagering company, one said they had been approached with a sponsorship opportunity by an online wagering company but had declined.

Table 1:

Characteristics of the sporting organizations and participants

	n = 24	%
Sporting organization characteristics
Sport
AFL	9	37.5
Soccer	5	20.8
Basketball	4	16.7
Rugby Union	3	12.5
Rugby League	1	4.2
Netball	1	4.2
Cricket	1	4.2
State
Victoria	13	54.2
New South Wales	11	45.8
Organization type
Club	19	79.2
Association	5	20.8
Age group of teams
Seniors and juniors	14	70.8
Seniors onlya	7	29.2
Juniors only	3	12.5
Participant characteristics
Position
President	16	66.7
General Manager	3	12.5
Chairperson	2	8.3
Chief Executive Officer	1	4.2
Secretary	1	4.2
Sponsorship Manager	1	4.2
Position type
Volunteer	22	91.7
Employee	2	8.3
Gender
Male	18	75.0
Female	6	25.0

^aSenior teams typically begin with aged under 19s but may include some aged 18 years and under.

Three themes were constructed from the data. Table 2 provides additional quotes associated with each of the themes and subthemes.

Table 2:

Community sports leaders’ perceptions of the risks and benefits of gambling sponsorship in community sport

Theme	Subtheme	Illustrative quote
Theme 1: The misalignment between sporting organizations’ identity and gambling sponsorship	Sponsors need to align with club values	We would be open to whoever really if they’re—you know, I don’t want to say if their values align with us but I think you get the gist of what we’re saying, you know, if we think that it’s a value to us fiscally and that it’s a good image for the club then yes, we would go for it.—Participant 9 Part of that process is making sure that any of the sponsors that we do look to sign up aren’t, in some way, in competition against any of the other sponsors that we have. But then, also, how do they fit our values as a club? So, you know, that’s a big part of it. For me, being president now for just over 12 months, and being really, really clear on where our recruitment comes from, and that is the school, and then also being very, very clear on how we want to differentiate ourselves to other clubs in the area that students might be prepared to go and play for. Obviously, who sponsors us and why they sponsor us is a big part of that.—Participant 13 We have people approach us around sponsorship, and we do ask them to provide a submission as to what they can bring to the club, what they’re prepared to give to the club, what their ethics and their values are, so that we can then align those with our club values and ensure that we’ve got that lined up.—Participant 15
	Sporting organizations as promoters of health	I think it just—it’s just not healthy, and that’s one of our values as a football club. It’s not healthy for our playing group. We’ve got a lot of young, impressionable men.—Participant 13 We recognise our role as a community stakeholder as being quite important, and I think over the last few years that importance has been more of a focus of attention. Personally, I sort of see it as the way that quite a number of issues in society are shifting, these days. The importance of community based clubs is playing a more important role in the structure of society. […] I mean, they’re all competitive, don’t get me wrong; but focus from being the world’s best player to more of the social side, and the broader aspects of a club have more of a bearing.—Participant 2 Having community clubs is a critical way for people to interact and socialise. Without them people are stuck at home and especially in a place like this area where there’s lots of high rise buildings, you need avenues to get out and meet people in a completely inclusive environment. We’ve never said no to anyone who’s wanted to join.—Participant 23
	Gambling providers aligning with community values	We’ve actually got the [venue sponsor]. They’re probably one of our biggest sponsors. Obviously, they’re liquor, gaming. Got a family area, so people look at it like it’s a family atmosphere, so there’s no real issue with it.—Participant 17 I guess the only reason that I would say we feel comfortable about the clubs as a sponsor is that they do have a whole raft of rules and regulations around gambling and limitations of gambling and healthy gambling and all the stuff that they have to provide for their members and their participants and what we’re the beneficiary of is a surplus that’s created out of all of their operations, not straight from the poker machines.—Participant 5 I think there’s a big difference between pokies and sports gambling in my opinion. Pokies are—it’s not really—I mean pubs/RSLs they’re so critical and important to society as a whole you can’t just say oh well we’re not going to have our functions at pubs. It’s life. If the government allows gambling at those places there’s nothing we can do about it. There’s not a single place that I ever go to that doesn’t have a level of pokies in it and certainly not in our area. Every pub is funded by pokies. Certainly I don’t feel it’s an issue for our community and I’ve never ever seen anyone use the pokie machine when we’ve had club functions there and I don’t feel the support of an RSL or a pub would directly show our support to pokies and gambling because it’s such an embedded part of a core blank of community. Pubs are meeting points. Pubs are central places. They’re venues that you have to go to because there’s room and space to hold your functions. There’s not really any other option. It just doesn’t exist.—Participant 23
Theme 2: Managing the risks and benefits of gambling sponsors	Aligning with gambling sponsors without encouraging gambling	In a previous role that I had, and this is how we did it, the footy club owns a bistro which has gaming and we use the referee. They only wear these shirts during the senior competition, that’s who it’s targeted for. And we push, it’s the bistro, it’s sports bar, they have live bands, oh yes, and they have gaming.—Participant 4 For us, it’s about, we keep the liquor and gaming… Even though they’re our biggest sponsor and we keep them off our junior jerseys but plaster them all over the seniors, then we target our smaller sponsors for the front-and-centre pieces of our junior jerseys.—Participant 17 I think it’s like alcohol. You can’t just sit there and poo poo it. It’s legal and people are allowed to do it. It’s about having that social responsibility of saying, well if you choose to do it, then do it responsibly, moderately, and if you need help here’s a contact number.—Participants 4
	Sporting organizations receiving benefits for partnering with gambling sponsors	…our team photo nights are held in the function room there. We have meet and greets for teams held there and we’re trying to line that up with the days the club has kids eat free. So, they do it Tuesday and Thursday kids eat free at the club. We kind of try and host our kid related events on those nights so that the parents potentially can go while they’re there. The teams can have dinner together and all the kids eat for free so the parents only have to pay for themselves.—Participants 22 If you want to have a team dinner down there, they’re doing free entrees and soft drinks, and things. If senior teams want to go down there, we can have a private room with the pool table and everything, and private bar, and they give us drinks vouchers there. Because they’ve also got a show room, we also use that for the presentations.—Participant 20 We give our vouchers to the Man of the Match and they get a $20 discount when they next have a meal at [venue sponsor].—Participant 5
	Considerations for engaging with gambling sponsors	I’m not a big fan of gambling. That said, there’s elements of it that I can see as being revenue raisers for our football club, and so that makes it difficult to make those decisions.—Participant 13 The closest we came was a proposal was put forward to the committee that we run a lottery… It was discussed at committee and voted down on the basis that we are a junior club, 75 per cent of our players are juniors, and it wasn’t a good example to set.—Participant 16
Theme 3: Influence of financial factors on risk perceptions of gambling sponsorship	Community perceptions of gambling provider	You never say no. You always look and then you weigh up the benefits and the costs. The costs may not be financial costs, but the costs might be our reputation, our brand and even though we can’t sell it, it’s still worth something to us […] Our brand is something that we pride ourselves on and I don’t think a gambling base would—we wouldn’t do it, I can tell you now. You’ve made me go from my ‘not sure’ to ‘no’. It would damage our brand, for sure.—Participant 3 Well, there’s no benefit as a junior sports club; there’s zero benefit. Well, sorry; the only benefit is you get money, right. But the cost—I’d get shot. I’d get shot straight away if I accepted it. There’d be stacks of parents that would say, ‘You either take this out of the club or I’m leaving’.—Participant 6 To be perfectly honest, 99 per cent of our members wouldn’t even know if we did it and I think 99 per cent of them wouldn’t really care. I can’t say because I’ve never canvassed that question with them. They all know we have [two venue sponsors]. They all know it’s gaming and we don’t get any—we have no pushback or blowback from that at all. They all accept that. I mean, it’s a legal business and it does do good things for the community in facilities and they see the positive side of it, I guess.—Participant 3
	Accepting gambling sponsorship to ensure financial viability of the club	Is it a question of whether we can afford not to? Yeah, look I can only talk for my club and staying in business, you know, we’ve got to work really hard to stay in business. And, you know, unfortunately that means you’ve got to be pretty practical. So in terms of a club, I can’t see that, you know, our club, and to be honest most clubs, would say no.—Participant 8 It would be hard. I mean, at the end of the day, all of the sporting clubs with their volunteers, not-for-profits, you need money to make it work, to be honest, because without it, you can’t do anything. You can’t buy basketballs, you can’t resurface your floor at Christmas time and all that sort of stuff. So yeah, you need it.—Participant 3 We do okay because like I said we think we’ve got we think we do everything okay. But there’s a lot of clubs that don’t. There’s a lot of clubs that really struggle. There’s a lot of clubs that really find it hard to buy new footballs. There’s a lot of new clubs that can’t, that have a lot of financial pressure. Gambling unfortunately is just there waiting for you to make a phone call.—Participant 14
	Perception of buying success with gambling sponsorship	I think you’d get into that position if you were driven by success, and by success I mean the flag on the wall and that sort of stuff to say we won this. Whereas we tend not to be that way. For us our definition of success is how many juniors we have coming back next year.—Participant 12 It depends what you want to be. If you want to be a top club and you want to have money and you want to pay players and you want to be the best of the best, that’s what you’ll do [take gambling sponsorship]. If you’re just happy to be smaller and community-minded, then you probably won’t… We’re not quite prepared to sell our soul for gambling yet.—Participant 24

Theme 1: Misalignment between the sporting organization’s identity and gambling sponsorship

When assessing a potential sponsor, a significant consideration for sporting organizations was the alignment between the potential sponsor and the values that the sporting organization held. Many participants viewed their organization as being a key community stakeholder that was underpinned by community or family-based values. Sporting organizations were seen as embedded within and representative of the local community, with one participant stating, ‘we are the community’. Participants perceived their organizations as providing an outlet for physical activity, promoting healthy living, creating spaces for social connections, developing personal skills and teaching healthy behaviours. Therefore, participants preferred sponsors who reflected these values and could support sporting organizations in achieving their health and community-focused goals:

It’s more about if they basically fit with the overall philosophy of the community sports club. So, if it’s about the kids, if it’s about supporting kids in any way, shape or form that you can, and if - if the company is not something that simply doesn’t fit with the ethos of, you know, kids and sport and activity, living healthy.—Participant 6

Some participants suggested that accepting sponsorship from a gambling company posed risks to the organization’s reputation and image, with concerns that it could undermine their role as a promoter of healthy and community-centred activities. Aligning with a gambling sponsor, particularly online wagering companies, could compromise their integrity and the values they aligned themselves with. For example, one organization hosted their own ‘personal development programs’ with the aim of educating players about health issues including mental health, alcohol, drugs and gambling:

If we’re trying to sell that story to our playing group as being important, and then also market that story to our current school parents about, you know, this is the safest place and the most valuable place you can send your son, and hopefully daughter, I don’t think that message is nearly as clear if we’ve got sponsors that muddy the water.—Participant 13

While many participants stated that online gambling companies did not align with the values of community sport, not all gambling providers were perceived as risking the sporting organization’s values. Distinctions were made between sponsorships from online wagering companies and receiving sponsorship from community clubs (venues that operated gambling products such as poker machines). Online wagering companies were predominantly seen as gambling operators, posing a direct risk to the organization’s identity and image. In contrast, venues such as clubs, pubs and hotels were primarily viewed as being hospitality venues, with their role as gambling operators being secondary to the other services and facilities they offered. The presence of other services contributed to a few participants perceiving that gambling venues reflected the values of sporting organizations, describing venues as being ‘fairly community based’ and ‘places for social congregation’. However, for others these venues sat within a moral ‘grey’ area because they recognized these venues as being both a place to socialize but also containing gambling products:

Hospitality venue, that’s the grey one for me. Where primarily we think about it as a place to kind of socialise and build the club culture, but it also has – it’s a licenced gambling venue as well.—Participant 11

Theme 2: Managing the risks and benefits of gambling sponsorship

Sponsorship decisions were largely left to the discretion of the executive committee. No sporting organization had a formal policy specifically designed to guide decisions about unhealthy sponsors such as gambling. Some participants stated the organization’s values were formally recorded in a constitution or policy that they could refer to when making decisions. However, decisions were primarily made on a case-by-case basis, reflecting the subjective risk assessments of the current committee members. The following participant reflected on a time when they prevented their organization from accepting a sponsorship from an online wagering company, highlighting the varying perceptions of risk involved in the decision-making process:

I suppose it wasn’t so much policy driven but it was probably more my views as President that donked [hit] that [potential gambling sponsorship] on the head. And when I’m not there, when the next people are in, does that mean it might be different? Absolutely.—Participant 8

Participants generally perceived sponsorship as a form of marketing and were aware that accepting sponsorship could be seen as an endorsement of the sponsors’ products or services. Several participants expressed concern over the implicit messages that they might send to their members by promoting certain brands, particularly gambling companies. A few participants described being particularly ‘mindful’ or ‘conscious’ of what they promote through sponsorships. The following participant considered whether gambling sponsors might be viewed as an encouragement to gamble:

…the impact of the perception of a gambling club – does that mean that we’re encouraging gambling? Are people going to ask us are we encouraging gambling?—Participant 9

Some participants perceived that there were ethical ways in which sporting organizations could engage with gambling sponsors while minimizing the promotion of their products. There was particular emphasis on not exposing children to gambling promotional materials. Some participants suggested they would consider entering a sponsorship arrangement with an online wagering company on the condition that promotional materials only be directed towards their senior teams and not the junior teams. Some sporting organizations had already adopted this approach in relation to gambling venues. This included not allowing gambling venue logos on junior players’ uniforms, and requiring that other materials such as posters not be displayed while junior teams played:

When we actually took on the [venue sponsor] it was agreed that we wouldn’t – we haven’t done any posting or advertising for the [venue sponsor]. And that if they wanted anything it would only be at adults’ matches. If they wanted a flag advertising, we would only do it at our adult games. And we’d only do it to our adults, not to juniors.—Participant 19

Where some participants had concerns about promoting online wagering companies to their members, many were comfortable partnering with gambling venues. This was primarily because they promoted the venue itself and did not directly advertise the gambling products within the venue. Participants explained that any promotional materials they displayed focused on ‘different aspects’ of the venues, such as the bistro or restaurant, and made no mention of gambling products. One participant stated that ‘the gaming side is not mentioned at all’. The following quote highlights how the option to promote other aspects of the gambling venue created a perceived distinction between advertising a venue with gambling products and a company that exclusively offered gambling products:

I wouldn’t be as adverse to it as I would be to a [online wagering company], a straight out gambling organisation. It would be the hotel we’d be - we wouldn’t push the gambling component. I wouldn’t want their advertisement to show they have gambling.—Participant 16

There were a range of perceived benefits afforded to sporting organizations that chose to enter a sponsorship arrangement with gambling venues. In addition to direct financial contributions, gambling venues provided sporting organizations with in-kind support that incentivized organizations, players and their families to attend the venues. This included free or discounted access to facilities to host events such as presentation nights, and vouchers or discounts for food or drinks that were passed on to members. Vouchers were offered by some sporting organizations as ‘Player of the Day’ awards. Others had loyalty discount cards which benefited the members and the sports organization:

The players and people who have got the card can go in and they get – effectively, it’s a 20 percent discount on most of the alcohol, and on food between Monday and Thursday. For every dollar that’s spent using the card, we get 20 cents. So, yeah, so it's been used a lot.—Participant 11

However, other participants expressed an awareness that accepting sponsorships from gambling venues could still impact their community’s attitudes and behaviours regardless of whether gambling products were mentioned. For example, one participant whose club provided free dinners for their players at a gambling venue described seeing ‘a few of them disappear’ into the separate gambling room. The following participant raised concerns about awarding children with food vouchers for a venue with gambling and alcohol products:

Our football club gets some vouchers from the local hotel, food vouchers. Ultimately the food, the alcohol, everything in those venues is sponsored and a reduced price because of the pokies. Again, you’ve got to be very careful because you’re actually providing a sponsorship which allows a child to walk in to an over 18s venue with gambling, alcohol and feeling good about him or herself because they won a prize. Really dangerous starting point.—Participant 6

Theme 3: Influence of financial factors on risk perceptions of gambling sponsorship

For many participants, the assessment of gambling sponsorships ultimately relied on whether the financial benefits outweighed any reputational risks. Community sentiment influenced how sporting organizations assessed and managed gambling sponsorships. A few participants noted that they had not received any complaints or backlash in relation to their venue sponsors. However, participants anticipated that accepting money from online wagering companies would result in negative feedback from members. The following quote highlights the apparent difference in the acceptability of venue sponsors compared to online wagering companies by the community:

If it’s like a [online wagering company] I think that’s a bit more blatant and would probably create some negative connotations and attention. But if it’s a local club I don’t think people would worry at all. I just think that’s quite accepted in community sport.—Participant 21

Partnering with a gambling venue (such as a local community club that had poker machines) was generally perceived as being socially acceptable. This was not only due to the benefits sporting organizations received but also because it was perceived as being normal within community sport. One participant suggested that ‘almost every club’ in their area was sponsored by a gambling venue. Gambling venues were viewed as being so common within sport that they were integral to the financial stability—or ‘survival’—of many sporting organizations.

So, if they don’t align with a pub or a club, then they’re going to struggle…But morally, the parents don’t want a bowling club on their kid’s playing shirt. So, they’re definitely going to run out of funding sources eventually.—Participant 17

Regardless of their personal attitudes about gambling, many participants suggested that it was acceptable to receive gambling sponsorships if it meant securing the financial viability of a sporting organization. Some participants weighed up the risks and described scenarios in which they felt it would be justifiable to accept gambling sponsorships, including online wagering. They emphasized that accepting these sponsorships was permissible if rejecting them meant closing a sporting organization:

You can make decisions, either do we survive or, you know, do we die on the hill? You don’t want to die on the hill. It’s disappointing, but you know, I’m sure there would be plenty of clubs out there who wouldn’t want to take the sponsorship, but feel they have to.—Participant 13

Other participants perceived that the risks of not taking gambling sponsorship did not outweigh the benefits for clubs who were in a good financial position. They were critical of sporting organizations that accepted gambling sponsorship, particularly online wagering, when it was not necessary for the survival of the organization. This was framed as prioritizing success over the health and wellbeing of the community and its members, demonstrating the reputational risks that sporting organizations take when accepting gambling sponsorship. There was a perception that gambling sponsorships could be used to manufacture success through investments in better resources and to pay athletes, with one participant describing this as ‘buying success’. While some players or parents may be attracted to sporting organizations that prioritize success above all else, participants perceived this as a poor way to run sporting organizations, perceiving it as being driven by the wrong reasons. They believed that community members prefer to associate with organizations that are community-minded. For example, after describing their organization’s personal development initiatives, one participant explained that these initiatives were valued more highly by some members than winning:

I’m not saying we’re unique. But that can tend to lead to players and particularly parents saying “no, stay here, don’t go to that other club, they’re all about money, they’re all about buying success, that’s not really what I want”.—Participant 16

DISCUSSION

This study aimed to understand which factors shape sporting organizations’ decisions to accept or not accept gambling sponsorships. The findings raise four key points for discussion.

First, perceptions of the risks associated with accepting sponsorships from gambling companies were related to sporting organizations’ identity as being ethical and community-centric. Zinn, (2019), states that motivation and identity are key factors associated with risk-taking. Participants stated that they tried to uphold moral standards and avoid the reputational risks associated with promoting gambling due to its negative impact on the community. This was important for their identity as a sporting organization, because they viewed themselves as socially responsible entities. By avoiding gambling sponsorships, there was an attempt to position themselves as role models within the community and demonstrate responsible and ethical behaviour. Maintaining a reputation as an upstanding organization was believed not only to support their current values, but also to ensure their long-term viability and relevance within the community. This supports previous findings that, beyond providing the sport itself, community sporting organizations have broader health promotion and social responsibilities to their communities (Darcy et al., 2014; Robertson et al., 2019), and that moral values and judgements are important in the decisions that are made (Vance et al., 2023). In the absence of formal regulations that ban gambling sponsorships in sport (such as those implemented for tobacco), sporting organizations should be supported to develop formal policies and independent information to guide sponsorship decisions, particularly around companies that produce harmful products that might conflict with their values. This would help clubs navigate sponsorship decisions more objectively and transparently.

Second, while many participants viewed gambling sponsorships as misaligned with their organizations’ values, some perceived that there were significant financial benefits associated with these partnerships that could outweigh the risks. The majority of leaders interviewed for this study were male. Researchers have highlighted that male dominance in sporting leadership structures may lead to particular approaches that reflect masculine norms—which may have shaped perceptions about the ability to ‘control’ any negative impacts of engagement with the gambling industry (Vance et al., 2023). Some participants believed that there were ethical ways to engage with and manage gambling sponsors, particularly by shielding children from gambling promotions. Aligning with Zinn’s (2019) concept of control in risk-taking, some participants believed they could control the sponsorship arrangements and mitigate the associated risks. Their efforts to limit exposure to gambling promotions and products and not explicitly encourage members to gamble were perceived as sufficient to absolve them of responsibility if individuals did choose to gamble. However, it may be unrealistic to assume that junior players can be completely shielded from gambling promotions when these sponsors are embedded within the organization.

This study also found that for communities experiencing economic pressures, the financial stability provided by gambling sponsorship could make the potential risks seem more acceptable. This is concerning as it demonstrates that those communities already experiencing inequity may be particularly vulnerable to the tactics of the gambling industry. Financial contributions from gambling sponsors were perceived as substantial, and there was a view that these sponsorships would enable sporting organizations to continue their activities, support their members, offer more comprehensive programmes, improve infrastructure and enhance the overall experience for players and their families. This is particularly concerning given that non-gambling activities associated with gambling venues can be effective in creating pathways to gambling for a range of population groups (Thomas et al., 2020; Johnson et al., 2023; McCarthy et al., 2023), including exposing young people to these environments (Thomas et al., 2023b). Volunteer-run sporting organizations often face difficult moral decisions when considering accepting sponsorships. Governments should consider prohibiting or limiting gambling sponsorships in community sports to alleviate the burden sporting organizations face in making these difficult decisions. In this context, it is important to explore the potential for governments to provide alternative funding sources for community sporting organizations. Historical precedents, such as the removal of tobacco marketing, indicate that support for banning or phasing out harmful sponsorships significantly increases when alternative funding solutions are introduced (Holman et al., 1997; VicHealth, 2005). Governmental funding for community organizations can alleviate the perceived necessity of relying on gambling sponsorships, and politicians may be more likely to be supportive of appropriate policies if alternative funding solutions are presented. However, the pervasive gambling marketing and sponsorship of elite sport (and the lobbying from elite sporting codes to retain the status quo in relation to gambling sponsorship), may have significant consequences at a local level. Importantly this extends beyond online wagering, to other forms of gambling. Policy makers must ensure that sporting organizations are not forced to compromise their values, and the health and wellbeing of their community members in order to secure financial support for their organizations.

Finally, community attitudes and social norms play an important role in shaping perceptions of the risks associated with gambling sponsorship. For some, accepting sponsorships from some gambling venues was not seen as a moral issue because the community gambling venues were considered as fundamental to the community landscape. The cultural accommodation of these venues in community settings may have contributed to the desensitization of organizations and their members to the potential risks, making gambling venue sponsorships an unchallenged and common practice. The acceptance of gambling venue sponsorship, and the uncertainty around removing this form of revenue, may be understood through the lens of the Policy Dystopia Model, which highlights how harmful industries create a dystopian narrative to resist regulatory changes (Ulucanlar et al., 2016). This involves harmful industries reframing the problem by introducing unintended consequences and exaggerating the economic costs of policy reform (Ulucanlar et al., 2016; Glantz, 2021). It is important to pre-empt this response from the gambling industry, including creating a narrative that any policy changes will cause a dysfunctional future for community sports and activities when attempting to regulate gambling sponsorship. Counter-arguments emphasizing the health and societal benefits for community sporting organizations should be prominently featured to effectively counteract industry efforts to downplay these benefits. Additionally, evidence should be highlighted showing that in other areas where harmful sponsorship has been phased out, the industry-predicted catastrophic consequences have not materialized.

Limitations

The research was conducted in the states of Victoria and NSW in Australia. As a result, the findings may not be representative of the experiences of community sporting organizations in other Australian states or territories (including Western Australia which does not have gambling venues containing poker machines outside of the casino). Most participants in this study were male, which may have also led to a gender imbalance in the perspectives and experiences reported. The study did not specifically target sporting organizations that had gambling sponsors. We did approach a number of sporting organizations with different types of gambling sponsorship (including from online wagering companies), however, few of these clubs volunteered to participate. Several clubs did have sponsorships from venues that contained gambling products. This may limit the understanding of managing sponsorships related to all types of gambling providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Community sporting organizations’ decisions to accept or not accept gambling sponsorships are shaped by a range of factors. Many organizations avoid online wagering sponsorships to maintain their community-centric values and long-term viability, but are more open to engaging in partnerships with gambling venues. Economic pressures can make gambling sponsorships seem appealing, but alternative health-promoting sponsorships and government funding can reduce this reliance. Addressing the acceptance of gambling sponsorships among community sporting organizations could entail regulation, formal policies to guide sponsorship decisions and education about the risk of accepting gambling sponsorships. Regulatory limits on gambling sponsorships in community sports could protect these organizations’ values and ensure they remain health-promoting community spaces. While there is significant research that maps the extent and nature of online gambling sponsorship in professional sport, researchers should broaden their investigations to sport at different levels, and with a range of gambling relationships. This study also highlights that research in the commercial determinants of health should not just focus on mapping activities, but should also engage communities in discussions about the factors that influence their attitudes, opinions and approaches to corporate tactics.

AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS

S.McC: data collection and analysis, drafting and critical revision of the manuscript. H.P.: conceptualization and design of the study, data collection and analysis, drafting and critical revision of the manuscript. M.R.: conceptualization and design of the study, data analysis, drafting of the paper and critical revisions. G.A.: drafting and critical revision of the manuscript. S.M.: data analysis, drafting and critical revision of the manuscript. M.D.: conceptualization and design of the study, data analysis, drafting of the paper and critical revisions. S.L.T.: senior author, conceptualization and design of the study, data analysis, drafting of the paper and critical revisions.

FUNDING

This project was funded by an ARC Discovery Grant (DP210101983).

ETHICAL APPROVAL

Ethics approval was provided by the Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee [2021-158].

DATA AVAILABILITY

Data from this study are not available to ensure the confidentiality of research participants.