In-play getting closer???

This is nuts. One minute I hear they are seriously considering banning advertising of live odds on sporting events and the next I am reading essentially the opposite in its implication.
At least quotiing Xenophon gives the article some credibility. That's exactly what that idiotic zealot would say.

There's a survey posted on the BF forum that we should take the time to complete: http://www.psych.usyd.edu.au/CFIDE/gamble/questions/en/index.cfm?CFID=24888&CFTOKEN=38509776 I've just done it and made mention of in-play where possible.

I wouldn't mind if they banned live odds during telecasts. I can monitor odds myself, just give me the game. Unfortunate that this law has to be tied in with poker and casino games.

Another year passes, and still nothing on this front...

GET INNN

the article was written before Abbott came out and said no

going to thailand for three weeks. gonna get a taste for click click live

Godspeed Poke my good man, godspeed... Where in Thailand? went to Phuket last year, horrible place to be honest, never again. Scenery on day trips were great but the rest was horrid.

I have sent the following letter to Senator Conroy.  Whether it will have any impact is uncertain; but Tony Abbot has made it unequivocally clear that he will not change the legislation regarding in play betting if he is elected - and that appears a very real possibility.  On that basis the window of opportunity for any change to the legislation is diminishing.  If large numbers of voters who bet and/or trade using the internet send Senator Conroy this letter - or something similar - it might make some difference. It's worth a try; so please contact Senator Conroy and your local Federal Member of Parliament urging them to amend the legislation.

Thank you
Knit One Purl One

Senator the Hon. Stephen Conroy
Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate
Minister Assisting the Prime Minister on Digital Productivity
Level 4, 4 Treasury Place, Melbourne Vic 3002
Email: minister@dbdce.gov.au
Dear Minister,
As a recreational pastime I trade and bet on racing and sports events using the internet.  Trading on betting prices is almost the same as trading the stock market – you lay the low price, back the higher price and then hedge the resultant profit over the entire field so that you profit no matter what the result. Unfortunately, the current legislation in Australia contains a ridiculous anomaly – I cannot trade sporting prices (for example; Test Cricket matches) in play using the internet – yet it is legal to conduct that same trade by telephone.  Moreover, I am legally able to trade racing events in play in Australia.   
The current prohibition on trading sporting events in play (that is, once the match or event has started) is ostensibly based on minimising harm to problem gamblers; yet logic defies that reasoning.  The real issue with problem gambling is centred on internet-based casino games and an increasing availability of “arcade games” – both of which rely on pure chance rather than skill.
The Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (“the Act”) regulates the providers of internet gambling services and currently restricts those providers from making in play betting or trading available to residents of Australia.  The legislation inter alia provides for the Minister to determine which in play betting forms will be prohibited or exempt from the restrictions of the Act.
Most traders and bettors who use the internet appear to be firmly opposed to allowing “micro betting” during an event.  An example of “micro betting” might be odds being offered by a provider on whether a wicket will fall during the next over in a cricket match.  The almost universal view though, clearly and vigorously supports the legalisation of betting on the final result of the event or match while the event/match is underway. An example of trading or betting in play on the final result of a cricket match (for example) would be to bet on whether Australia would win the match, New Zealand would win the match or whether there would be a draw.
It is clearly anomalous that the Act prohibits internet betting on the final result of an event or match in play yet allows that same bet to be placed by telephone!  Correcting that anomaly would also address the potential contravention of the principle of platform neutrality referred to in the various reports on the IGA.
Reading Section 8A of the Act appears instructive.  In summary, s.8A (1) excludes inter alia “sporting events” from the Act; whilst s.8A (2) then qualifies the previous exclusion by referring to the provision of in play services as follows:
“(a) the service relates to betting on the outcome of a sporting event, where the bets are placed, made, received or accepted after the beginning of the event; or

(b) the service relates to betting on a contingency that may or may not happen in the course of a sporting event, where the bets are placed, made, received or accepted after the beginning of the event.”
The Interactive Gambling Act 2001 has been the subject of several reviews – including a comprehensive review undertaken in 2011 by your own Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (DBDCE) and by the Productivity Commission in 2010.
It has become apparent from the reviews and the resultant recommendations that the following is the preferred approach:
•    Continue the prohibition on in play “spot betting” or “micro-betting” by the internet.
•    Permit in play betting on the final result of a match or sporting event by the internet subject to approval by the relevant state regulator and the national sports governing body.
Whether the Act requires Parliamentary amendment to give effect to those recommendations – or those recommendations can be implemented by the Minister declaring an exemption might simply be a machinery issue.   The Opposition Leader has indicated he is strongly opposed to any changes in this area.  Voters who bet and trade using the internet urge you to address this anomaly to allow betting on the final result of a sporting event using the internet.
In summary, there has been no evidence that the current legislation has been effective in harm minimisation to problem gamblers.  Poker machine addicts and casino/arcade gamblers will continue to gamble beyond their means – the latter with unregulated overseas based operators who offer none of the probity guarantees of a provider such as Betfair for example.

I urge you to take whatever action is required to correct this anomaly.

Yours faithfully,

Name:  ……………………………………………………………………………………………
Postal Address:  ……………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………
Date:  ………………………………………………………………………………………………
Federal Electorate:  …………………………………………………………………………

well done pearl

have to agree with the black ball, with adding one more point.

What do the owners of the big land base casino's in Australia want???

Thats a well worded letter but unfortumatle Conroy couldn't organise a sausage sanga at a backyard BBQ

Well constructed letter Knit One. Good luck with it and hope you get plenty of support and a positive response.

So nothing on this for a while now. Back when these latest posts were made I e-mailed Conroy and asked for an update and threw my 2 cents in... Finally gota response and the news is not good. After the standard rhetoric, the sentence that matters reads: 'The government has also announced it will not be pursuing the recommendations in the final report regarding a trial of online tournament poker or 'in-play' sports wagering'. At least try to do something you useless feckers

So after all that, reviews, submissions, reports, debate we are doing exactly the square root of feck all - zilch, nothing, nada. He also states he has written to the states to 'seek their commitment to develop and implement a national standard for harm minimisation and consumer protection that will cover all online gambling providers' What does this mean? No in-play at all perhaps, even over the phone? 

The final review was released March 12 this year, if you're interested - www.dbcde.gov.au/igareview

Fair play to him for replying (or/probably his staff) but really, what was the point of it all? How many dollars spent to do exactly nothing? At least the Libs say no straight out, it doesn't take them 18 months to go yeah, maybe and finally... sorry, we can't be arsed, too busy backstabbing each other to let something as trivial as running the country interrupt our day.

Long live the Nanny Nation.

Conroy was easily "Persuaded" pre hung Parliament a day ticket and apres was a fair price for most favours.

You are kidding yourself if you think Abbott and the Libs are going anywhere near in-play.

It was Dr No Abbott that said "Every computer is a casino"

Zero, Zilch, hope of in-play under a Catholic Abbott led Gov't

In fact i'd be more worried about them winding back what we have now.

it will not happen till big James P gets in the picture and wants casinos on line

Haven't you blokes worked this one out yet?

They all got shares in Telstra, they want you to make the f'ken phonecall.

You need to change legislation for a trial to take place? Doesn't make sense, would a trial not be for the purpose of evaluating whether the legislation change is warranted to begin with? Not sure about that.

the legislation would prevent the trial without it being amended to allow it