A bad bet for sports fans: the case for ending the “gamblification” of sport

ABSTRACT A “gamblification” of sport has occurred over the last 25 years. Sports betting operators are now major sponsors of sport, and gambling activities and cultures are firmly embedded into sport. This paper considers the key issues affecting harmful gambling amongst sport audiences arising from this gamblification and implications for sport management. A narrative literature review identifies seven key issues: 1) harmful sports betting and negative consequences, 2) increased access to sports betting through smartphones, 3) innovated betting options that appeal most to bettors already experiencing gambling harm, 4) how advertising exacerbates harmful betting, 5) the normalisation of sports betting amongst sports fans, 6) impacts on children and adolescents, and 7) the heightened risk of harmful betting amongst sports participants. Sports organisations play an instrumental role in the gamblification of sport and derive revenues from wagering operators that are, in large part, derived from harmful gambling by sports fans. Rising community backlash against the normalisation of sports betting, and increasing regulatory restrictions on sports betting sponsorship and advertising, suggest that gambling sponsorship of sports will increasingly become untenable. Sports organisations need to plan for a future without wagering sponsorships and use their considerable influence to reduce gambling harm amongst their fans, players and broader communities.


Introduction
A major change to professional sport over the past 25 years has been its "gamblification" (Macey & Hamari, 2022), which stems from the central role that commercial sports betting plays in sport finances.Sports betting involves placing a monetary wager on the outcome of one or more sporting events.These include bets placed at retail betting outlets, by telephone or online.While football codes attract the most sports betting, betting on numerous other sports is also popular (Polaris Market Research, 2023).Sports betting has shown enormous growth over the past 25 years, primarily due to liberalisation in laws, easier access through online and mobile platforms, prolific marketing, and the continued expansion of betting options (Russell et al., 2018).Global sports betting revenues totalled CONTACT Nerilee Hing n.hing@cqu.edu.auUS$83.7 billion in 2022, with a compound annual growth of 10.3% forecast for 2023-2030(Grand View Research, 2023).This growth has been accompanied by increased sports betting harm in the population (Armstrong & Carroll, 2017;Etuk et al., 2022;Hing, Russell;Browne et al., 2021).While a ban on sports betting may be seen as a potential solution to address this harm, the significant revenues that governments derive, the powerful influence of gambling, sport and media organisations, and easy online access to illegal sports betting operators who may lack integrity and do not generate tax revenue, indicate that prohibition is not a realistic option in existing markets (Griffiths & Killick, 2018;Holden, 2018;Humphreys, 2017;Lowell, 2017).Instead, research and advocacy have focused has on reducing the gamblification of sport as one way to reduce sports betting harm.This entrenchment of gambling in professional sport is supported by a symbiotic ecosystem that involves sports organisations, multinational wagering operators, media companies, governments and sport audiences (Hing, Smith et al., 2022;Lopez-Gonzalez & Griffiths, 2018).Sports organisations earn significant revenue from wagering operators through a variety of means.These include betting companies' sponsorship of sports leagues, teams and events in exchange for advertising space or naming rights; profitsharing agreements for bets placed on events; by selling data rights for use in setting odds and betting markets; and through licensing fees from wagering operators to use sports logos and intellectual property in advertising or on betting platforms (Hing, Vitartas & Lamont, 2014;Lamont et al., 2011;McKelvey, 2004).Sports organisations also earn substantial revenues from media companies, mainly through broadcast-rights fees.In turn, media companies sell advertising space during sports broadcasts, including to wagering operators; provide subscription services for customers to access sports content; and license their sports content to other broadcasters for a fee.Revenues for wagering operators are derived from sports betting losses, which also yield substantial tax revenue to the growing number of governments that have legalised sports betting.
Sports betting losses come from sports audiences and fans, especially young adult men (Brevers et al., 2022, Hing, Vitartas & Lamont, 2014;Seal et al., 2022).While betting can create enjoyment and excitement for sports fans, it can also lead to significant financial loss, the development of harmful patterns of gambling and gambling addiction, and harmful consequences across multiple life domains (Armstrong & Carroll, 2017;Hing et al., 2016;Hing, Thorne et al., 2023).As explained in this review, the gamblification of sport has been linked to the normalisation, encouragement and intensification of sports betting which increases the risk of experiencing gambling addiction and other harms from gambling, including to one's finances, relationships and mental health.
The integration of gambling cultures and gambling activities into non-gambling activities such as sport has been described as "gamblification" (Macey & Hamari, 2022).Gambling is now culturally embedded in sport through marketing imagery and language that seek to evoke emotional connections between the two activities.Sports betting advertising promotes notions traditionally associated with sport, including mateship, friendly rivalry, masculinity and sporting knowledge (Milner et al., 2013;Sproston et al., 2015).This advertising aims to deeply embed gambling in the relationship between a sport and its fans, where betting is a way to demonstrate their love of the team or sport, and their fan identity and loyalty (Lopez-Gonzalez et al., 2018).This association with sport culture also encourages consumers to transfer sport's healthy, harmless and skilful images to gambling, and to emulate the attitudes and behaviours that gambling-sponsored sport heroes endorse (Guillou-Landreat et al., 2021;Lamont et al., 2011).In this sense, the gamblification of sport sanitises gambling through a process akin to sportswashing, a phenomenon whereby political actors can employ the positive imagery and associations of international sporting events to enhance legitimacy and distract from social and economic problems (Fruh et al., 2022).Similarly, gambling operators can borrow the positive and healthy aura surrounding sports, which distracts from its potential for harm (McKelvey, 2004;Turk et al., 2023).
The gamblification of sport also manifests through the normalisation of sports betting as an accepted feature of sport culture.Normalisation theory originates from the ideas of Foucault about how societies employ institutions, power and prevailing discourses to justify and establish as normal the treatment of individuals considered as different or deviant (Constandt et al., 2022).Normalisation theory helps to explain the subtle and often unconscious processes through which social practices are rationalised, incorporated into social norms, habitualised and institutionalised (Parker et al., 2002).Normalisation theory has been widely applied across numerous social practices to understand how they become deeply ingrained within society.In a seminal study on adolescent recreational drug use, Parker et al. (1999) identified the key features of normalisation as easy accessibility, high rates of trial and usage, attitudes that tolerate "sensible" use, and societal accommodation.Drawing on these features, the process of normalising gambling has been defined as: "The interplay of socio-cultural, environmental, commercial and political processes which influence how different gambling activities and products are made available and accessible, encourage recent and regular use, and become an accepted part of everyday life for individuals, their families, and communities" (Thomas et al., 2018).
In one Australian survey (N = 2,030), 54% of respondents agreed that sport betting is "part of Australian culture and you're never going to change that" (Browne et al., 2021).This normalisation is most evident amongst young men who are increasingly embracing sports betting as part of their leisure lifestyles, cultural norms and friendship groups in their domestic, social and workplace settings (Gordon et al., 2015;Lamont & Hing, 2019, 2020;McGee, 2020;Raymen & Smith, 2020).Normalisation has also been advanced by ready online and mobile access to sports betting (Hing, Thorne et al., 2023), and advertising that promotes themes of peer bonding, excitement, and financial and social success (Brevers et al., 2022;Dunlop & Ballantyne, 2021;Milner et al., 2013;Sproston et al., 2015).
Gamblification has also entailed commodifying sport into a gambling product through the continued expansion of betting options that now include a vast array of contingencies.These include betting on the final outcome of a sporting event, numerous in-match contingencies, as well as micro-events as they occur in-play (Hing, Thorne et al., 2023;Newall et al., 2021).Wagering operators have also introduced options that facilitate continuous engagement and interactivity in betting as the sporting event unfolds, such as cash-out options (Killick & Griffiths, 2019, Lopez-Gonzalez & Griffiths, 2017;Torrance et al., 2023), as well as numerous inducements that incentivise betting (Hing, Sproston et al., 2017;Newall et al., 2022;Sharman et al., 2023).
For sports fans, sport is no longer just a spectator activity enjoyed from the sidelines, with valued opportunities to socialise, celebrate or commiserate.Instead, sport is now packaged and marketed as a betting product where fans are encouraged to wager, and unfortunately lose, substantial amounts of money.Moreover, betting is packaged as part of the whole entertainment experience, and thus people who do not bet may feel they are less involved than other fans who take a stake in the outcomes of their preferred players and teams.Despite this gamblification of sport, there has been little consideration in the sport management literature of its consequences for sports audiences, particularly its role in gambling harm (Constandt et al., 2022;Lamont et al., 2011;Vinberg et al., 2020Vinberg et al., , 2021)).This is despite McKelvey (2004) identifying nearly 20 years ago a growing need for research into how sport sponsorship by gambling companies affects the attitudes and behaviours of sport consumers.
In contrast, the gambling research literature has increasingly drawn attention to the harmful effects of sport gamblification, both at the community level and in sports settings.Our aim in this paper, therefore, is to draw on the gambling research literature to present insights into the key issues affecting harmful gambling amongst sport audiences arising from the gamblification of sport, and their implications for sport management.

Methods
This paper presents a critical narrative review of gambling research studies that are most relevant to the paper's aim.Critical narrative reviews describe and critically discuss the state of knowledge about a particular topic, but clearly involve a less methodical and documented process than systematic reviews (Rother, 2007).Instead, the current review intends to synthesise a body of gambling research in a way that is reasonably digestible for non-gambling research scholars and, in doing so, might provoke thought and consideration in the sport management field.Critical narrative reviews are often invited from, and written by, acknowledged experts in the field, but this approach can bring its own biases (Green et al., 2006).As such, we do not claim that this review is value-free, especially given that, collectively, we have been researching the harmful effects of gambling for over five decades.It has long been recognised that literature reviews, even those with rigorous procedural and statistical rules, inevitably involve judgment (Slavin, 1995).Nonetheless, the description below attempts to make our processes transparent so that readers can assess their appropriateness.

Study selection
The review employed a focused search of peer-reviewed scholarly articles and research reports sourced through Google Scholar because it captures both peer-reviewed and grey literature.Informed by our familiarity with the gambling research literature, we identified a range of relevant keywords and logic (Boolean operators) to underpin the search.These included: "problem gambling OR gambling disorder OR gambling harm AND sports betting OR wagering"; "inducements OR promotions OR incentives OR marketing OR advertis* AND sports betting OR wagering"; "smartphone OR mobile AND sports betting OR wagering"; "bet types OR in-play betting OR micro-bets OR complex bets AND sports betting OR wagering"; "normalis* AND sports betting OR wagering"; "children OR adolescents OR youth OR young people AND sports betting OR wagering"; and "athletes OR sport/s participants OR sport/s fans AND sports betting OR wagering".Reference lists of the publications reviewed were also searched to identify further relevant publications.To ensure we did not overlook articles in sports management journals, we also conducted a search for "gambling" in the abstracts of all papers in the following journals: Sport Management Review (7 articles found), European Sport Management Quarterly (1), Journal of Sport Management (0), Journal of Global Sport Management (0) and Sport Management Education Journal (0).Of the articles found, three from Sport Management Review and one from European Sport Management Quarterly were deemed relevant to the current review.
Only studies published in English were included.The selection of studies was not constrained by date, since sports betting is a relatively new form of gambling in many countries so the research base is recent but not vast.We included studies if, in our expert judgment, they provided relevant research evidence to help synthesise the current state of knowledge about current issues relating to harmful gambling amongst sport audiences arising from the gamblification of sport.As evident in the reference list, we drew on over 130 studies to inform the review.

Analysis
Identifying the seven issues that constitute the results was a relatively straightforward inductive process that involved identifying themes that had a central organising concept (Braun & Clarke, 2006).The vast majority of studies we reviewed focused on one main issue (e.g., normalisation, innovated betting products, gambling amongst athletes), so these studies could be readily assigned to these categories based on their abstract or executive summary.A few studies presented results that pertained to several categories, such as population surveys that examined gambling harm and the use of different gambling forms (e.g., sports betting), modes (e.g., smartphones) and betting products (e.g., in-play bets).In these instances, their findings are discussed for each relevant issue.
The first author conducted the initial analysis, as described above.To enhance trustworthiness, the second and third authors then reviewed and endorsed these themes and their findings, with no disagreement between authors.Nonetheless, it is possible that other researchers may have categorised and framed issues in different ways.Like all interpretive analyses, the final interpretation and categorisation of themes are inevitably influenced by the researchers' research values, skills, experience and training (Braun & Clarke, 2021).
The results below are arranged by the main issues identified in the analysis.These seven key issues necessarily have some overlap because all relate to the harm linked directly and indirectly to sports betting and the gamblification of sport.This overlap reflects the reality that many factors can interact to contribute to gambling harm, which is well-recognised in public health research (Hilbrecht et al., 2020;Price et al., 2021;Wardle et al., 2019).

Sports betting can lead to harmful gambling and negative consequences
The expansion of sports betting has elevated harmful gambling and its negative consequences in the community (Hing, Russell, Browne et al., 2021).At its highest level of severity, known as problem gambling or gambling disorder, harmful gambling manifests as a behavioural addiction characterised by difficulties in limiting money and/or time spent on gambling which leads to adverse consequences for the person who gambles, others, or for the community (Neal et al., 2005).Harmful gambling ranges from mild, moderate to severe, and is characterised by a pattern of excessive gambling; impaired control over gambling; significant negative consequences; and persistence despite these harmful consequences (Williams et al., 2012).Even at milder levels, harmful gambling can impair important areas of functioning and cause immediate and lasting harm, including to finances, relationships, mental and physical health, and vocational performance (Browne et al., 2016;Rockloff, Armstrong et al., 2022;Rockloff, Browne et al., 2022).
A global review concluded that sports bettors tend to have high levels of harmful gambling (Etuk et al., 2022), and this is elevated amongst highly involved sports fans (Hing, Vitartas & Lamont, 2014;Nelson et al., 2007).In Australia, a nationally representative study found that 41% of adults who bet on sports at least once a month report one or more symptoms of harmful gambling (Armstrong & Carroll, 2017).This includes 6.3% with a severe gambling problem, 17.1% with a moderate problem, and 17.3% with a milder problem.Numerous factors are consistently linked to harmful gambling amongst sports bettors.These include being male, younger, single, being high in trait impulsivity, reporting higher alcohol consumption and psychological distress, greater sports betting frequency and expenditure, greater sport watching involvement, and more positive attitudes towards sports betting marketing (Armstrong & Carroll, 2017, Hing, Vitartas & Lamont, 2014;Hing et al., 2016, Hing, Russell et al., 2017;Hing, Li et al., 2018;Lopez-Gonzalez & Estévez, 2020;Russell, Hing & Browne, 2019).
Harm from sports betting can be acute, leading to debt, bankruptcy and suicide (Financial Counselling Australia, 2015).A representative Australian survey found that sports bettors with a severe gambling problem spend nearly six times the average amount on sports betting (Armstrong & Carroll, 2017).Financial harms reported by these sports bettors include betting more than they can afford (22%), chasing their losses (27%), and living in households which cannot pay their bills (34%) or rent/mortgage (28%) on time, and where financial help has been sought from family or friends (50%).For 12% of these bettors, gambling has caused them physical or mental health problems.Gambling-related harm, for example to finances, relationships and health, can also extend to family and friends.Research indicates that each person with a gambling problem negatively affects six other people on average (Goodwin et al., 2017;Hing, Russell, Browne, Rockloff, Tulloch et al., 2022).
In summary, sports betting is disproportionately associated with elevated rates of harmful gambling and causes significant negative consequences, most commonly to young male sports fans, their family and friends.

Smartphones increase access to sports betting and can foster harmful betting
Access is a powerful driver of sports betting participation.While the introduction of online gambling in the 1990s was a major catalyst, a more recent driver is the ability to bet using smartphone betting apps.Smartphones are now the most used device for sports betting in several countries and provide easy, portable and instant access (Hing, Thorne et al., 2023;Lopez-Gonzalez & Griffiths, 2018).While bettors value this convenience, it also increases the risk of harmful betting.A longitudinal Australian study of 1,398 sports betting sessions (Hing, Russell, Browne, Rockloff, Lole et al., 2022) found three features that were significantly related to increased subsequent betting harm: 1) the ability to bet anywhere anytime, 2) privacy when betting, and 3) greater access to promotions and betting options -which are all enabled by betting on a smartphone.Most other studies on smartphone betting have been qualitative, exploratory and with modest sample sizes, but their insights, discussed below, explain how using a smartphone enhances these features and can foster potentially harmful behaviours.
Smartphone betting can facilitate more frequent gambling because bets can be placed instantly, at any time and from any location (Drakeford & Hudson-Smith, 2015, Hing, Thorne et al., 2023;Parke & Parke, 2019).Consequently, frequent sports bettors report that betting is integrated into their daily activities, such as when in bed, at work, commuting, or socialising (Drakeford & Hudson-Smith, 2015;Lopez-Gonzalez et al., 2021;McGee, 2020).People tend to always carry their smartphone and habitually engage in constant checking, which allows for an immediate response to wagering inducements and betting opportunities seen during routine phone use.Bettors report that wagering marketing received on their smartphone can trigger gambling urges and lead to unplanned, larger, and more frequent bets (Drakeford & Hudson-Smith, 2015;Hing et al., 2015, Hing, Thorne et al., 2023;Parke & Parke, 2019).A study involving seven daily surveys of 98 frequent sports bettors (Russell et al., 2018) found that receiving text messages on their betting device from wagering operators was followed by a significantly higher likelihood of betting and higher betting expenditure.
Other aspects of smartphone betting can alter betting behaviour.Bettors are more likely to place impulsive bets because their phone is nearby and placing a bet requires just one or two taps (Drakeford & Hudson-Smith, 2015;Hing, Thorne et al., 2023).They describe how using electronic money also facilitates impulsive bets, higher betting expenditure and chasing losses because electronic transactions are fast and can feel less tangible than cash (Deans et al., 2016;Hing et al., 2015;Hing, Thorne et al., 2023).Mobile devices also facilitate social betting.Sports fans, particularly young men, report that sports betting is now a shared activity with friends in physical and online settings, where they gather to watch and bet on sport using their smartphones (Gordon et al., 2015;McGee, 2020;Raymen & Smith, 2020).Although there are positive social aspects, betting in social situations can amplify betting due to friendly rivalry, shared betting tips, and other peer influences (Deans et al., 2016;Gordon et al., 2015;Lamont & Hing, 2019).With friends being more willing to share their experiences of wins rather than losses, social betting also tends to misrepresent the losses experienced.Smartphones also make it easy to increase or hide harmful betting behaviour due to a lack of scrutiny from others that might otherwise be a moderating influence (Hing et al., 2015;Hing, Thorne et al., 2023).
Overall, increased access to unlimited betting opportunities through a smartphone can intensify and escalate betting to harmful levels.Bettors who prefer to bet using a smartphone have higher rates of problem gambling (Gainsbury et al., 2016;Lopez-Gonzalez et al., 2019b).Consequently, there is a strong possibility that the increasing use and sophistication of smartphone betting apps will continue to exacerbate sports betting harm amongst sports fans.

Innovative betting options appeal most to sports bettors already experiencing gambling harm
The gamblification of sport has been further advanced through the global expansion of events that people can watch and bet on 24/7 (Hing, Russell, Rockloff et al., 2018;Hing, Smith et al., 2022;Lopez-Gonzalez & Griffiths, 2018).Operators have also extended the types of "bettable" sports on offer, including on esports (professional video game competitions) and daily fantasy sports (virtual teams whose performance is based on that of real players).Esports betting is predicted to be the fastest growing sports betting segment over the next several years (Grand View Research, 2023).
Wagering operators have also broadened the range of sports bets that can be placed.As well as traditional pre-match bets on which team will win, customers can now place bets before and after match commencement, and on various in-match results such as halftime scores and the number of penalties, which vastly increases the betting markets for each event (Killick & Griffiths, 2019;Newall, 2015).Being able to bet "in-play" heightens the risk of harm because it enables more bets per match, continuous betting throughout the match, and opportunities to chase gambling losses (Griffiths & Killick, 2018;Parke & Parke, 2019).In-play bettors have high problem gambling rates (Gainsbury et al., 2020;Lopez-Gonzalez, Griffiths & Estévez, 2020), particularly those who bet on micro-events that occur as a match unfolds, such as if the player will ace the next serve.One Australian study found that 78% of micro-bettors in the sample (N = 1,813) met criteria for severe problem gambling (Russell, Hing, Browne, Li et al., 2019).Another survey, of 649 sports bettors in Spain, found that in-play bettors reported higher problem gambling severity, higher sports watching involvement, consuming sport to escape from everyday preoccupations, and greater alcohol consumption, compared to sports bettors who did not bet inplay (Lopez-Gonzalez, Griffiths & Estévez, 2020).
Novel betting products, such as cash-out options, now enable consumers to change their betting decisions during a match -to obtain a smaller but guaranteed return or reduce an anticipated monetary loss (Lopez-Gonzalez & Griffiths, 2018;Torrance et al., 2023).Cashing-out is higher amongst bettors already gambling at harmful levels (Lopez-Gonzalez et al., 2017;Lopez-Gonzalez, Griffiths & Estévez, 2020;Torrance et al., 2023).Other innovative betting products, such as multi-bets, complex bets and custom sports bets, are also likely to increase gambling harm due to their less favourable odds and structural characteristics that attract vulnerable bettors (Newall, 2015;Newall et al., 2021Newall et al., , 2021Newall et al., , 2021)).These novel betting products can heighten emotional involvement in betting and the sense of skill in selecting bets, and they are particularly attractive to people already gambling at harmful levels (Hing, Smith et al., 2022).
In summary, the further gamblification of sport through an expanded array of betting options has increased the appeal of sports betting to people experiencing gambling harm.Novel betting products disproportionately extract revenues from vulnerable sports bettors and are therefore likely to exacerbate their gambling harm.

Sports betting advertising can exacerbate harmful gambling
Over the last two decades, sports betting advertising has increased substantially.It is prolific on commercial and subscription TV during sports broadcasts and entertainment shows, and in radio, print, outdoor, digital and social media (Australian Gambling Research Centre (AGRC), 2023, Hing, Russell, Rockloff et al., 2018;Killick & Griffiths, 2021;Sproston et al., 2015;Stadder & Naraine, 2020).Betting operators are major sponsors of sport, yielding widespread brand exposure (Bunn et al., 2019;Danson, 2010;Jones et al., 2020;Lamont et al., 2011Lamont et al., , 2016;;McKelvey, 2004).This exposure is particularly noticeable during live and broadcast sporting events, where betting logos are clearly displayed on player uniforms, scoreboards, stadium tiers, perimeter fencing, signage and in matchday programs (Purves et al., 2020;Sharman et al., 2020Sharman et al., , 2023;;Sproston et al., 2015).Betting operators also send direct messages to wagering account holders through texts, in-app notifications, emails and phone calls (Hing, Russell, Li et al., 2018;Lopez-Gonzalez, Griffiths, Jimenez-Murcia et al., 2020).This push marketing most often promotes wagering inducements incentivised with bonus bets, refunds, odds boosts, cash rebates or reward points, and includes a link to the betting website and app to allow customers to immediately place the promoted bet (Hing, Sproston et al., 2017;Hing, Russell & Rawat, 2018;Rawat et al., 2020).Betting inducements are also frequently promoted in other media channels (TV, online), as well as through affiliate marketers and tipsters (Houghton et al., 2020).Studies have also found that financial inducements to bet are the most commonly promoted in gambling advertisements during major sports broadcasts (Newall et al., 2022;Sharman et al., 2023).
A recent review (Newall et al., 2019) found that 1) gambling marketing is pervasive, targeted and ubiquitous around sport, 2) the most used marketing strategies aim to increase brand awareness, promote complex financial inducements to bet, and advertise complex betting odds; 3) this targeted content influences perceptions of gambling advertising, particularly amongst vulnerable groups including children and bettors experiencing gambling harm, and 4) exposure to gambling marketing is linked to more frequent and riskier gambling behaviour.A review of sports betting advertising studies (Killick & Griffiths, 2021) also observed a positive correlation between exposure to this advertising and sports betting attitudes, intentions and behaviours, especially amongst those with a gambling problem.However, since correlational surveys cannot establish causal relationships, they cannot clarify whether individuals bet more because of betting advertising, and/or if those who bet more are those who are exposed to more betting advertising.Moreover, self-reports of how advertising influences behaviour are unreliable because advertising can have unconscious effects and exact recall of exposure is unlikely to be accurate.
A mixed methods study (Hing, Russell, Rockloff et al., 2018) addressed these limitations, employing longitudinal, experimental and psychophysiological methods to assess gambling advertising's effects on sports betting and race betting behaviour.From this study (Browne et al., 2019;Hing et al., 2019;Lole et al., 2020;Rockloff et al., 2019), the authors concluded that wagering advertisements and incentives encourage riskier betting (on bets with longer odds), they increase betting expenditure and, in higher-risk gamblers, they elicit attention, excitement and the desire to bet.However, the study also found that all gambler risk groups were influenced by betting advertisements and inducements, not just those with a severe gambling problem.A dose-response effect was observed, with increased betting expenditure linked to exposure across all nine types of wagering advertisements and 11 types of inducements examined.Direct messages were the most potent.Another longitudinal Australian study found that direct messages from wagering operators, which typically contain betting inducements, incite more, larger and riskier bets and are received almost daily by wagering account-holders (Rawat et al., 2020;Russell et al., 2018).Other research has found that wagering inducements particularly stimulate impulse in-play betting amongst more engaged sports viewers and bettors, including those at severe and moderate risk of gambling harm (Hing, Russell, Li et al., 2018;Russell, Hing, Browne, Li et al., 2019).
In summary, the gamblification of sport has led to a surge in sports betting advertising.Evidence suggests that exposure to this advertising tends to escalate potentially harmful betting behaviours, including increased betting, riskier betting, and impulsive and unplanned bets.In fact, an umbrella review of eight systematic reviews (McGrane et al., 2023) concluded that this body of research supports the presence, at both individual and population levels, of a causal relationship between exposure to gambling advertising and more favourable attitudes to gambling, and increased gambling intentions and behaviour, including a dose-response effect.These effects may be more pronounced in committed sports fans, given they are likely to have a higher predilection for sports betting compared to non-sports fans.Further, while sports betting advertising provides short-term cues that can prompt betting, it also has longer-term effects in normalising sports betting.Sports betting is now culturally embedded into sport and sport fandom.These effects are discussed below.

Sports betting has become normalised amongst sports fans
The increased access and marketing of sports betting are instrumental in its gradual normalisation, particularly amongst young male sports fans.Several qualitative studies, mainly with young adult sports bettors in Australia and the UK, highlight how their peer group cultures further maintain this normalisation.
In Australia, Gordon et al. (2015) explain how involvement in sports betting "consumption communities" is sustained by the social benefits participants derive from the group's shared values and interests; the friendly rivalry and banter that enable them to express group loyalty; and the in-group status gained by demonstrating knowledge and expertise about particular sports and betting odds.Similarly, Lamont andHing (2019, 2020) highlight the role of sports betting in reinforcing male peer group norms through creating cultural capital and social status which enhance male identity and social acceptance.This reinforcement can lead to considerable social pressure on young men to bet on sport to demonstrate "masculine virtues", such as risk-taking propensity, analytical skills and friendly competition.2017) identify four indicators of sports betting normalisation in young male peer groups: 1) sports betting is considered a common, accepted practice and a natural "add-on" to sport; 2) it is integrated into peer-group sporting rituals, such as betting clubs and online forums; 3) sports betting discourse helps to create a sense of identity within peer groups; and 4) betting on sport might be done to "fit in" with peers.This normalisation can also reduce the perceived risk that young men associate with sports betting (Nyemcsok et al., 2022).
In UK research, Raymen and Smith (2020) concluded that sports betting is now a normalised, socialised and firmly embedded lifestyle feature amongst young male football fans.Their betting identities are said to be entwined with sports fandom, masculinity and drinking culture, and with a consumer culture that promotes instant gratification, youthful identity and hedonism.While this lifestyle risks harm to their financial, personal, and relationship wellbeing, these harms themselves have become a normalised feature of their sports betting involvement.Similarly, McGee (2020) observed that betting has become a normalised and accepted aspect of sports fandom amongst young men and, for some, is vital to their enjoyment of sport.A downplaying of potential harm was also found in a study with 43 Spanish sports bettors in gambling treatment (Lopez-Gonzalez et al., 2019b).They perceived sports betting to be viewed more positively than other forms of gambling, mainly due to the absence of negative stereotypes, the small outlay required to engage in sports betting, the novelty of online sports betting, and the social construction of the "normal bettor".
Overall, these studies highlight the deep entrenchment of sports betting as an integral leisure activity in some sport audiences, facilitated by factors such as easy access, prolific marketing, and peer group dynamics.Sports betting is now a common lifestyle activity that is increasingly normalised amongst young male sports fans.Of concern is that this normalisation can intensify sports betting to harmful levels, as well as normalise and obscure its harmful consequences.

The gamblification of sport impacts children and adolescents
The gamblification of sport, sustained by prolific sports betting advertising, acts to normalise sports betting amongst children and adolescents.In a population-weighted survey of Australian adolescents, 31% considered that betting on sport was normal, and 15% reported that knowing the odds is part of following sport and makes watching sport more exciting (Hing, Russell, King et al., 2021).In a non-representative UK sample (Djohari et al., 2019), 78% of children and teens thought that betting had become a normal part of sport.The extent of normalisation is also indicated by brand associations between gambling sponsors and sport found in qualitative research with young people, and their familiarity with sports betting products and terminology (Bestman et al., 2015;Pitt et al., 2016Pitt et al., , 2017;;Sproston et al., 2015).In an Australian sample, 42% of teenagers could recall, unprompted, at least one gambling brand from watching televised sport, mostly sports betting brands (Hing, Vitartas, Lamont & Fink, 2014).A UK study found a similar level of recall (46%; Djohari et al., 2019), and this recall was significantly higher amongst boys and "superfans" who watch a lot of televised football.Brand association between sports betting sponsors and sporting teams/codes is high amongst youth recruited from junior sporting competitions and community sports settings (Bestman et al., 2015;Thomas et al., 2016), suggesting that young players and sports fans may have particularly absorbed these marketing connections.
Qualitative Australian studies describe how sports betting marketing can foster links between sport and gambling for young people (Nyemcsok et al., 2021;Pitt et al., 2016).These studies observe that sport is a platform for gambling advertising which aligns gambling operators with sport; advertising aims to create the impression that gambling is an essential part of the overall sporting experience that greatly enhances spectator enjoyment; and further that gambling marketing impacts sports-related discourses amongst adolescents who often discuss betting and betting odds around matches.Young sports fans may be particularly susceptible to the effects of sports betting advertising because they have greater exposure, especially when watching sports broadcasts, and may find the advertising messages more salient to their sports interests.This is consistent with an experimental study with Australian adolescents (N = 848) that observed an implicit association between sport and gambling linked to their quantity of sports viewing, but only amongst participants with positive attitudes to gambling (Li et al., 2018).Surveys of Australian teenagers have also revealed that higher exposure and more favourable attitudes to sports betting advertising are positively associated with sports betting intentions and harmful gambling (Hing, Vitartas, Lamont & Fink, 2014;Hing, Russell, King et al., 2021;Sproston et al., 2015).
Significant others, especially family members and peer groups, are a further influence that can normalise sports betting in young people, particularly if these significant others are engaged in betting themselves.Young people with family and friends who gamble tend to gamble more often (Freund et al., 2022;Hing, Russell;Browne et al., 2021;Sarti & Triventi, 2017).Demonstrating links between parental attitudes and children's exposure to gambling influences, an Australian community survey (N = 2030) found that sports bettors had more lenient attitudes than non-sports bettors to children's exposure to sports betting advertising and to parental sports betting, with the most lenient attitudes found in adults experiencing a gambling problem (Browne et al., 2021).A qualitative study of youth gambling experiences highlighted normalising influences over time (Hing, Lole et al., 2023).Many teens reported they had progressed from watching and following sports as children, to then discussing sports betting with family and friends, honing their knowledge of betting and betting odds, engaging in football tipping competitions, and then making private sports bets with family and friends.This progression attracted some participants to the prospect of betting with wagering operators.In contrast, most nongamblers in the study reported little interest in professional sport, and thought this helped to protect them from frequent exposure to sports betting influences and activities.
The current generation of young people is the first to be exposed from childhood to numerous normalising influences around sports betting, including from advertising, parents and peers.While only a small proportion of minors report betting with commercial sports betting operators, the effects of this normalisation on their future gambling is unknown.Young people growing up in households that follow sport are more likely than other adolescents to be negatively influenced by the gamblification and normalisation of sports betting.

Sports participants are at particular risk of gambling and harmful gambling
A further link between sport and gambling is that both recreational and elite sports participants have elevated rates of gambling and gambling problems (Duggan & Mohan, 2023;Håkansson et al., 2018;Turk et al., 2023).Nelson et al. (2007) found that sports participants, as well as sports fans, tend to gamble more frequently than non-participants and non-fans.Male athletes in particular tend to gamble more frequently and are more likely to have gambling problems compared to non-athletes (Håkansson et al., 2021;Huang et al., 2007;Martin et al., 2016;Turk et al., 2023;Vinberg et al., 2020).
Gambling participation and gambling problems also vary by the type of sport, and are highest amongst men in high profile, team, and organised competitive sports such as football and basketball (Ellenbogen et al., 2008).Amongst high school students in Israel (N = 316), both boys and girls who participate in organised competitive sports tend to gamble more frequently than those engaged in non-competitive sports, but a link with gambling problems was observed only for boys (Gavriel-Fried et al., 2015).In a representative longitudinal study of more than 4,500 young people in Ireland (Duggan & Mohan, 2023), playing team sports since age 17-18 years was significantly associated with increased gambling participation by age 20, even when accounting for other risk factors.A dose-response effect was observed, where the longer young men participate in team sports, the more likely they are to gamble.
Several reasons might explain the link between sports participation, gambling, and harmful gambling, amongst males.These include greater exposure to gambling advertising associated with sport, heightened competitiveness and risk-taking propensity amongst athletes that might attract them to gambling, and the dissemination of positive social norms around gambling amongst young men engaged in team sports (Duggan & Mohan, 2023).In Belgium, a survey of 817 "sports club actors" (mostly athletes, but also board members, coaches and volunteers) found that being male, being aged 26-35 years old, and being involved in soccer increased the risk of gambling problems (Constandt et al., 2022).The study also found evidence that sports betting was normalised in sports clubs, including sports betting being available and accessible in their club, their sports club offering sports betting activities, respondents' overestimation of the prevalence of sports betting amongst their friends, discussions of sports betting as part of the game, perceived peer approval of sports betting, and perceptions that systems and skill could be applied to limit gambling losses.Nearly all respondents acknowledged that their club had no rules or educational initiatives on gambling in their club.
In elite sport, a qualitative study with 30 male athletes, coaches and managers in four sports in Sweden (Vinberg et al., 2021) highlighted how gambling was normalised and underpinned by attitudes to money and performance.Attitudes to money included that it is important to win money, gambling because of having too much or too little gambling, money affecting an athlete's status, and the importance of sponsorship money from gambling companies.Attitudes to performance included that gambling performance provides thrill and rewards, everyday sporting life emphasises performance in training and matches, and athletes are seen as weak if they do not perform successfully.Gambling was further normalised in these settings by team environments where gambling is an everyday and easily accessible activity, and by sports sponsorship by gambling companies which positions them as seemingly positive and socially responsible collaborators.
A systematic literature review identified elevated rates of gambling disorder amongst elite athletes, particularly amongst men, in most of the eight studies reviewed (Håkansson et al., 2021).A narrative review reported that this may be due to the over-representation of young men in elite sport, their high levels of competitiveness, sensation-seeking, impulsivity and risk-taking behaviours, and their perceived knowledge about sport (Derevensky et al., 2019).Insights into sports-team related risk factors for gambling disorder were highlighted by a Swedish study of elite athletes (N = 1438).These include talking about gambling during training, coaches' positive attitude towards gambling, gambling on their own game, and alcohol consumption amongst athletes (Vinberg et al., 2020).High salaries, spare time, their own role in marketing gambling through sport sponsorships, gambling as a shared leisure activity, job insecurity, and having a demanding occupation are additional factors that are thought to facilitate harmful gambling in elite athletes (Lim et al., 2016;Vinberg et al., 2020).

Discussion: implications for sport management
As noted earlier, a prohibition of sports betting is considered an unachievable expectation in jurisdictions where it is already legalised, so there has been little public debate on this option for several years.There is, however, a growing community backlash to the gamblification of sport, the proliferation of sports betting advertising, and its normalising effects on children because of the harm that sports betting causes.As predicted by McKelvey (2004) nearly 20 years ago, opposition to sponsorship of sport by gambling companies has grown.Population polls reveal that most adults in the UK (52%) and Germany (68%) favour a ban on all gambling sponsorship and advertising (Lindenberg, 2023;Ungoed-Thomas, 2023), and 71% of US citizens believe that sports organisations should not partner with sports betting companies (Skiera, 2022).This sentiment is high amongst sports fans.In the UK, 77% of football fans consider that betting companies are inappropriate sponsors for football teams, and even less appropriate than alcohol or crypto sponsors (Lindenberg, 2023).There is also widespread concern about the exposure of children to sports betting advertising.For example, in an Australia community survey (Browne et al., 2021), a large majority of respondents were concerned by how much sports betting advertising children are exposed to (78%), that it makes kids think that gambling on sport is normal (84%), and encourages children to want to gamble on sports (77%).This survey also found that most adults thought there is too much sports betting (78%), that it increases gambling problems (82%), and that governments should more tightly restrict sports betting (81%).
These negative community sentiments present serious reputational issues for sport management organisations.Just as the gamblification of sport acts to sanitise betting through its alignment with sport, this alignment also taints sport with the harm caused by betting, and damages the family-friendly and healthy image that sports organisations promote (Lamont et al., 2011).Professional sport has been accused of being complicit in increasing gambling harm in the community and of profiting from the excessive or addictive consumption of gambling (Jones et al., 2020).In response to community and fan concerns, some sports teams are working to reduce the link between gambling and sport.In Australia, gambling sponsorship of sports teams has reportedly declined in the last few years (Snape, 2023), and public health initiatives are encouraging this move.As just one of many examples, in the Love the game not the odds program (Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation VRGF, 2023), over 700 community and elite sports clubs have agreed to refuse gambling sponsorship and reduce the exposure of young people to gambling promotions and activities related to their club.Nonetheless, sports betting sponsorship and advertising remain prolific, highly visible and controversial in many countries.
The gamblification of sport, along with more vocal community backlash, is also attracting increased regulatory attention.Some countries, including Italy and Belgium, have already banned all forms of gambling advertising, and the Netherlands and Spain have imposed partial bans, including on gambling sponsorship and partnerships with sport (Menmuir, 2020;Rossi et al., 2023).In Australia, the 2023 Inquiry into online gambling and its impacts on those experiencing gambling harm has recommended a three-year phase-out of all online sports betting advertising, inducements and sponsorship (House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, 2023).In the UK, the regulatory proposal to ban gambling logos on the front of Premier League footballers' shirts (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2023) is widely supported, but many UK citizens feel the ban should extend to all player uniforms and stadium fixtures (Lindenberg, 2023).The UK Government's recent white paper also proposes a cross-sport gambling sponsorship code with rules to ensure that all sponsorship deals are socially responsible (Department for Culture, Media and Sport, 2023).While the UK Government has stopped short of banning gambling sponsorship of sport and the associated advertising, current trends in countries with large sports betting markets signal greater restrictions on these activities.Because sport sponsorship is driven by the advertising opportunities it provides, advertising restrictions reduce the appeal of sponsorship for wagering operators.Subsequent reductions in this sponsorship would remove a substantial source of revenue for sports organisations.Like the challenges that sports organisations faced with bans on tobacco and alcohol sponsorships, sports organisations will need to adapt their business models and find new sources of revenue.
In addition to reacting to community and regulatory challenges, sports organisations can be proactive in helping to reduce gambling harm and the considerable burden it imposes, not just on individuals who gamble but also on their families, communities and societies (Browne et al., 2016).Public health principles recognise that gambling harm is shaped by a broad range of environmental factors, including the commercial determinants of health (Hilbrecht et al., 2020;McGee, 2020;van Schalkwyk et al., 2019van Schalkwyk et al., , 2021;;Wardle et al., 2019).Preventing and reducing this harm requires its reframing as a public health issue, including tackling the commercial contributors to gambling harm in sports settings, not just measures aimed at people with a gambling addiction (McGee, 2020;van Schalkwyk et al., 2019van Schalkwyk et al., , 2021)).A wide range of stakeholders can, and should, play a role in implementing policies and practices that aim to prevent gambling harm, to promote healthy attitudes and behaviours towards gambling, and to protect vulnerable groups (Korn et al., 2003).In sport, several researchers have called for greater accountability of key stakeholders, including clubs, leagues, athletes and event organisers who benefit from gambling revenues while largely ignoring the public health impacts on sport audiences (Constandt et al., 2022;Lamont et al., 2011;McGee, 2020).In alignment with public health objectives to embed health promotion at the policy, environmental, community, individual and services levels (World Health Organization WHO, 1987), there are several actions that sports organisations could take.
At the policy level, sports leagues and teams can set an "ethical precedent" (McGee, 2020) and choose to refuse gambling sponsorship and break their "addiction" to gambling revenue.This can convey to their communities that they reject the continued gamblification of sport, its exploitation of sport audiences, its subsequent harms, and the sponsorship revenue that is ultimately derived from gambling losses by their fan base.This can then provide a broader platform for sports organisations to create a healthier environment that minimises sports betting advertising and other gambling influences for players and fans, and that helps to build a culture that counters the normalising influences linking gambling and sport.
Leagues, teams and individual players can also play an educative role within their communities to promote a better understanding of gambling harm, preventative actions, early identification of harmful gambling, and how those affected can seek support (Constandt et al., 2022;McGee, 2020).Further, sports organisations, teams and identities have a powerful influence, both in their local communities and in broader society, which can be harnessed to reduce the harm that has been fostered by sports betting's alignment with sport.These efforts could, for example, engage the celebrity power of high-profile athletes to boost the resonance of community education aimed at sports fans in order to promote healthier gambling choices.These types of programs would most usefully target young men, given they are the most at-risk group for sports betting harm, and children and adolescents who have grown up with the normalisation of sports betting.Many fans will have a somewhat inflexible budget for expenditure on sports entertainment, and arguably these funds might be better directed to the sport itself and ancillary products, such as memorabilia, rather than redirected to the gambling industry.Within teams and leagues, sport managers, coaches, captains and role models can help to build a culture that discourages the endorsement of positive messages about gambling that can be conveyed to players and fans, such as during training, club social events, match celebrations and sports advertising (Constandt et al., 2022).These activities would also help in discouraging gambling amongst players, which can be an effective means of demonstrating a duty of care to the people who make sporting events a vibrant and health-promoting form of community entertainment.
At the individual level, there is also a direct responsibility of management to sports players, who are often young men with disposable income that puts them at risk for gambling involvement.Gambling involvement by players can create additional unique risks for corruption, where desperate financial circumstances cause players to engage in match-fixing.Sports organisations often provide programs for players on healthy choices in areas such as alcohol, drugs and respectful relationships.Gambling is another area where sports organisations can step up to help ensure their players have the knowledge and tools to make informed decisions about safer gambling.This is especially needed in contexts where players are at-risk of adopting the pro-gambling sentiments conveyed by their league's or club's endorsement of gambling through sports betting sponsorship.Sports organisations can also assist players, club members and their families to seek support to address harmful gambling, by providing in-house services or by being able to link them to external help services.
Sports organisations play an integral role in the gamblification of sport, deriving revenues from wagering operators that are, in large part, derived from harmful gambling by sports fans.Rising community backlash against the normalisation of sports betting amongst adults and children, and increasing regulatory restrictions on sports betting sponsorship and advertising, suggest that this sponsorship will increasingly become untenable.Already, some sports organisations are resisting or withdrawing from these partnerships, showing it is possible to sustain their operations without gambling revenue.Sports organisations need to plan for a future without wagering sponsorships and use their considerable influence to help reduce gambling harm amongst their fans, players and broader communities.

Limitations and future research
This narrative review has provided a comprehensive coverage of the literature on the gamblification of sport and mechanisms by which it can contribute to gambling harm.Our review relied on an inductive analysis of themes, but also our judgement and lengthy experience in gambling research, to identify and interpret key issues affecting harmful gambling amongst sport audiences linked to the gamblification of sport.As discussed earlier, this interpretive approach is necessarily subjective, and other researchers may identify and frame issues in different ways.A systematic review is needed to ensure that all relevant literature is sourced using objective and systematic inclusion and exclusion criteria, and to assess the robustness of our findings in terms of any confirmation bias in our selection and interpretation of the literature.
It is hoped that this review has drawn attention to the many ways that the infiltration of sport by gambling influences can impact sports audiences and athletes.Evidently, however, this research area is in its infancy.Further research is needed to better understand the relationship between the gamblification of sport, harmful sports betting and its negative consequences amongst sports actors, including fans, players, coaches, volunteers, management and the broader sports community.While the current body of literature supports the possibility of a causal relationship between the gamblification of sport and gambling harm, this causality has not yet been established, in part due to the difficulties of examining this relationship in real-world settings.
In alignment with a public health reframing of responsibility for gambling harm, research is needed to provide further insights into how gambling sponsorship of sports clubs, leagues and athletes impacts on gambling harm in sports environments.Comparative studies could examine differences in gambling harm and the commercial determinants of gambling harm between clubs and leagues with and without gambling sponsorship, between jurisdictions with different restrictions on sports betting sponsorship and advertising, and before and after such restrictions are introduced.
To inform gambling harm prevention efforts, a greater understanding is needed of the social processes by which gambling can become normalised in sports settings, including the role of clubs, leagues and other sports actors.Importantly, research is needed into initiatives that leagues and clubs can implement to best protect their players, fans and communities from gambling harm, including policies, educational programs and services.
Further research should also consider how the gamblification of sport relates to corruption in sport, such as match-fixing and point-shaving, and any links with harmful gambling amongst sport audiences and athletes.This review focused on the gamblification of sport as a potential contributor to gambling harm, whereas the literature on match-fixing has identified gambling as a potential catalyst for cheating where gamblers and athletes seek money to finance their gambling.Athletes may be more vulnerable to match-fixing due to the normalisation of gambling in their sports settings, and where clubs that are sponsored by gambling companies may be reluctant to publicise any problems (Huggins, 2018;Tak et al., 2018).

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).