A Racing Post plonker disagrees with MP's...

all vices in life are public health issues, health and welfare safety nets to help those suffering is good, but you shouldn't legislate for the majority to save a few.

The plonker talks about gambling (fobt) like some anti-Covid believers about the many who perished in the pandemic. But, the most nauseating is this plonker is paid, and has a platform to do so courtesy of a mouthpiece sponsored by bookies. A high-profile and successful trainer Mr Gosden has categorically stated "the casinos" in smart phones is a major cause of problem gambling.

Mr Gosden is not bookie related, and neither were Sir Stoute and Mr Cumani. Even his daughter Francesca is not aligned to any bookie unlike the money-grabbing Mr McCoy and Mr Chamberlin.

there's nee health safety net, 7 million languishing...

The plonker talks about gambling (fobt)...

impossible123, would you be kind enough to post exactly what was said about fobts, assuming that is that you've actually read the article.

Or how about, instead of calling him names like 'plonker' and 'stooge', as you are referring to someone in the real world and not someone hiding behind a username on here, you copy and paste whatever he has said that has got you making comparisons to "anti-covid believers", and respond in an adult and respectful manner?

The plonker describes the assertions and statements of some MPs as "ignorant, insulting and condescending" and painting gambling as a public health issue. I can vouch for friends and acquaintances the ramifications of problem gambling (fobt) on the NHS, judiciary, police, social services and workers, families, etc. As such, I do not need to read the entire article if it means forking out the equivalent cost of a roast chicken for that carp the bookies are sponsoring daily.

This is the same plonker who'd not accept his paymasters had been restricting and closing betting accounts of recreational punters like yours truly and many others here until very recently. This behaviour of his paymasters is the main reason why the horseracing turnover and levy contribution are much lesser annually. But, no worries the numbers from fobt are as strong as ever.

You are right Impossible. Unfortunately the plonker that you're talking about does not differentiate between racing and gambling in fact he deliberately (because he is paid to) talks about the two things as the same thing every chance he gets. If racing can't separate itself from gambling and the bookmakers in the public eye it may well end up being crucified by this government.

So you hadn't even read the article.

The plonker describes the assertions and statements of some MPs as "ignorant, insulting and condescending"

He's doing what we should expect any proper journalist to do and that is to hold those in power to account.

Or as one sage once put it:

The proper relationship between journalist and politician should be like that between a dog and a lamp-post

It would appear that the anti-gambling agenda has become a lucrative business for some, for example, Andrew Rhodes had his salary hugely increased, ex-sportsmen writing books and becoming poster boys for the anti-gambling lobby.

And actually if anyone is looking to get some money, why don't you try setting up an anti-gambling organisation / charity and apply to the government for funding? I'd fancy your chances of being successful.

Well he is meant to be a racing journalist and should be looking out for racing. Clearly he is not.

At one time a position in Bitcoin was accepted by one's banks. Then with its daily wild fluctuations credit card providers refrained from funding it even though they were still funding stocks and shares, gilts, etc. Why? Bitcoin was deemed nothing but a pure gamble eg not backed by any tangible asset, etc.

Fobt should be deemed the same too; fobt is purely a game of chance - no kill needed. It's also repetitive in a very short period. Thus, horseracing should never be spoken, taken, attached or accepted as horseracing "gambling".

Fobt needs to be licensed differently, and not under the horseracing umbrella. Fobt is toxic, hence generally accepted and commonly known as the "crack cocaine" of gambling. However, this toxic product can be accessed by anyone with a mobile, laptop and a smart terrestrial tv.

Can any sane individual (not a moron or paid employee of bookies) think the present betting licence governing fobt is judicious and no change is necessary?

'George B', I'm a semi-retired pensioner (just) now. I think you may have given me an idea. I'll do some research; you may see me at racecourses batting for horseracing, but denigrating and exposing the evilness of fobt using horseracing as a shield.

A commoner like myself could do more for horseracing than those "professionals" hiding behind bookies, or anti-gambling entities funded by a governmental agency.