Sports betting and corruption: How to preserve the - SportAccord

Sports betting and corruption: How to preserve the integrity of sport
The concept of sport being exploited by operators justifies close dialogue on the types of bet
authorised in different disciplines. The aggregation of macroeconomic data on the offering and the
demand in the sports betting market for different sports and competitions can make it possible to take
long-term decisions and constantly adapt the offering to the risk factors. A regulator can therefore
serve as an interface, centralising this information intended for the sports movement.
The issue of sports bodies’ property rights to events they organise
One method of establishing this concept of cooperation - adopted by France and the State of Victoria
(in Australia) - is to pass a law awarding sports bodies property rights to events they organise.
Awarding sports bodies property rights means that betting operators may offer only types of bets
agreed with the sporting organisation concerned. This therefore constitutes a right to operate governed
by agreements negotiated in advance requiring operators to pay back a proportion of the bets accepted,
or profit made, by them to the sports movement. These property rights are seen as a way of financing
the measures taken by the sports movement to combat the risk of corruption. The income from these
rights should enable the introduction of measures to both anticipate and prevent corruption in sport.
The sports movement is almost unanimous in arguing for this type of right. In this context, we should
mention the SROC (Sports Rights Owner Coalition), an informal group representing over 40 sports
organisations, which is actively committed to working for this right to be recognised at European
level 122 .
The State of Victoria pioneered this type of right with its legislation introduced in 2004. In order to
obtain authorisation from the regulator to offer bets (of the types permitted in theory by that regulator),
operators are obliged to sign contracts with the organisers of sports events. Should the protagonists not
manage to reach an agreement, the regulator plays the role of mediator and conciliator. This right
represents about 5% of the gross profit of gambling.
In France, these contracts represent 1% of bets (with rare exceptions). In one year the profits earned
from online betting (mainly on professional football), totalled 530,000, which is considered to be a
poor result. This can be explained by the fact that in France, the sporting events on which betting is
allowed only cover 15% of the total sum of bets recorded at national level.
Jean-Francois Lamour, Rapporteur on the French Act of 12 May 2010, stresses that the virtues of
sports bodies property rights lie less in the profit they can represent for sports organisers than in their
use as a tool of governance, and the way in which they enable sports operators to understand the
substance and impact of betting in their respective disciplines and competitions. Besides being a
source of finance for combating corruption in sport, sports bodies property rights provide a
management tool and and incentive to carry out surveillance of sporting events. In late November
2011, the British Minister of Sport expressed his wish to introduce this law in the United Kingdom 123 .
By giving sports bodies a certain amount of power to negotiate the authorisation of bets offered on
their competitions, these property rights at the same time serve as the raison d’etre and a resource for
this joint operation.
122 http://sroc.info/images/stories/SROC_Position_Paper_on_Betting_-_31_May_2011.pdf
123 http://www.igamingfrance.com/paris-sportifs-le-royaume-uni-va-instaurer-un-droit-au-pari-dici-2015-2016/25581
69