🎰 Eleven of the Twenty Premier League Clubs have a Gambling Sponsor

So far in my journey as a content creator I have not ventured too far into morality and ethics. However, when it comes to gambling I have a pretty clearcut stance.

I don’t like the proliferation of gambling in our sport.

It’s dangerous, harmful and quite frankly hypocritical.

The business behind it however, is fascinating. So today we explore how the Premier League has approached the topic in recent years and how their recent changes will impact our favourite clubs.

Football and gambling have always been linked, but the Premier League has taken it to another level.

Right now, 11 of the 20 clubs in the league have a front-of-shirt gambling sponsor.

The crazy thing is, not a single club from the Big 6 has one. So those eleven sponsors are “shared” amongst the remaining 14 non-Top 6.

This may not seem that surprising or that concerning but elsewhere around Europe, the picture is very different:

• 🇮🇹 Serie A banned gambling sponsors in 2019

• 🇪🇸 La Liga banned them in 2021

• 🇩🇪 Bundesliga has one club with a gambling sponsor

• 🇫🇷 Ligue 1 has just two clubs

As a reminder, the Premier League has ELEVEN.

Yes, the Premier League finally agreed to introduce a ban to gambling sponsors but there are three key differences:

1. The ban does not kick in until the beginning of the 2026/27 season

2. The ban is only for front-of-shirt gambling sponsors. Sleeve sponsors, digital billboards and training apparel are all fine

3. The Premier League announced the ban THREE-AND-A-HALF years before the ban comes into effect (all other bans in Europe had 12 months)

So… why the delay? And is it any surprise that gambling-related cases in football are rising?

Well, one of the reasons why it may have taken so long is the fact that gambling sponsors are very lucrative

• Everton get £15m per year from Stake

• Aston Villa command £20m per year from Betano

• West Ham have a £12m per year from Betway

Allowing Premier League clubs to benefit from these deals whilst other leagues in Europe face restrictions creates a competitive advantage for the Premier League over the other European footballing nations.

In addition, there is a prevalent trail of thought that argues that the Premier League do not need to do anything here. The bans in Spain and in Italy were state-imposed. The Premier League are a private institution that only has a duty to provide value to its shareholders. These companies are providing a lot of value to the league currently. Therefore this this ban is purely a moral decision that they have decided to make.

They needed to make it though, because football has a gambling problem.

• Over 1 million people in the UK have diagnosed gambling issues

• 3.6 million more are negatively impacted by someone else’s gambling

What’s worse, is that high-profile Premier League players are getting banned from football for gambling related issues.

• Ivan Toney: 10 month ban

• Sandro Tonali: 8 month ban

• Lucas Paquetá: 10 year ban

Some of these chaps were silly, and were betting on games that they were playing in themselves. But when the clubs that they play for continue to keep promoting gambling on the front-of-shirts, the sleeves of shirts, digital billboards around the stadium and on every televised football match, can you blame them?

The English Football League itself was sponsored by Sky Bet for several years for Christ’ sake!

It’s hypocritical in nature for sure.

To me, three questions arise:

1. Will Premier League clubs struggle to find new sponsors to replace the gambling companies they will “lose”?

2. If they do, will they make as much money as they do now?

3. Will gambling remain in the game and just… move to somewhere else?

The answer to question 1 is definitely not. The Premier League is the most-watched league on the planet. If it’s not a gambling company, someone will spend big to align themselves with the best PL clubs. Airlines, tech companies, banking companies. It wouldn’t surprise me if some have already agreed deals to kick in come 2026.

Question 2 however, is the real question. Some clubs, like Aston Villa and Everton, may take a financial hit. Everton for example may struggle to get £15m per year to replace the money they currently get from Stake considering their current club situation. This could be a problem for them, especially in the pursuit of PSR safety.

Question 3 is easily answered. Tezos pay Man United £20m per year to sponsor the training apparel. It feels pretty nailed on that a company will pay big bucks to sponsor the training kit instead of the front-of-a clubs shirt.

I imagine many companies will be striking deals to re-position from front-of shirt to elsewhere. Sleeve sponsors, billboards, training kits—the money will find a way.

This move from the Premier League feels… light. They made a move, but it wasn’t a big move.

I recently made a video about this which goes into much more depth. If you’d like to see that video click here:

See you next week.