I guess we just have to have faith that they’ll consult some people who understand the fabric of British betting, but it’s hard not to believe that British bookmaking jumping into bed with gaming/casinos to make a quick easy buck will ultimately be the downfall of British betting https://twitter.com/oliverdowden/status/1336202019082792960

If the same blunt affordability tools are implemented on “proper betting” as on games of chance - even if soft limits which can be adjusted for those who prove affordability - it will still kill so much of the activity that’s made British betting great and unique over generations

What about the man who bets once a year, a range of bets in august on teams to be promoted, relegated, win leagues? Doesn’t bet game by game, just want to lay out £1000 in august and follow it all year. A year’s worth of entertainment. Tries to deposit his £1000 in Aug and can’t?

What about the Cheltenham portfolio builder? Between November and March wants to add lots of horses, often multiple runners per race, to try to be in a good position come Cheltenham week. It’s all deposits in the winter, no withdrawals until March. Will this become impossible?

It’ll be tragic - and I don’t use that word lightly - if there’s a lack of understanding at decision level which means the necessary and overdue protection of the vulnerable has the (surely unintended) consequence of also being the death of a most wonderful pursuit for so many.

What about the man with no real interest in betting & little desire to ever partake, but has a good knowledge of boxing & sees the odds on Mayweather to beat McGregor, being propped up by mugs backing McGregor, is fully understanding of the risks & wants a one off very large bet?

What about the fan who books a 4wks off work to watch the whole World Cup with a bet on each game for interest. They know they could lose more than they usually would if it goes badly,but it’s once every 4yrs. Start with 4 losers & left wondering if you’ll be allowed the 5th bet?

What about the person who wants to hedge against something they don’t want to happen? They thought Corbyn winning the election would see their tax bill go through the roof for five years and want 5k on him winning in case it happens, but the rules limit them to a fraction of this

What about the smart, long term 1-2% ROI winner? Decentish job, not a huge player but bets bigger than their friends as they know they have an edge mates don’t. Had plenty of accounts closed. But also knows 1-2 months a year they’ll lose more than it ‘looks’ like they can afford.

If the interests of all of these people, and tens of thousands of other examples, and not thoroughly and carefully considered it will be an absolute disgrace.

The possibility that many of those representing the betting industry in this process don’t even really understand betting is also sadly inescapable. There are so few left at the firms with sports betting in their blood. Perversely, we can’t even trust bookmakers to defend betting

The next issue is a wrestle with your consciousness to decide whether, as serious bettors who deserve some representation as part of this review, you want to make a submission of evidence outlining your concerns about both bookmakers & anti-gambling types.

On one hand, we know there will be mountains of evidence from the anti-brigade who wish to see the introduction of many measures that will endanger the interests of those who bet without harm. They often come from the angle of seeing harm first hand, their stance understandable.

While a review of the effects of harmful gambling is long overdue, their concerns are these people/groups wholly valid and (in most cases) their anger being justified, none of this by itself necessarily warrants them having the loudest voice at this table.

On the other hand, what have bookmakers done in the past decade to warrant serious punters submitting anything which, though it may well also benefit yourself, will ultimately benefit them too? What thanks would you get from firms who haven’t wanted your business for years? None.

What changes would you expect them to make to level the playing field a bit and acknowledge they’ve been heavy handed with restrictions which were once largely a way of controlling arbers but now inches ever closer to the automated blanket removal of anyone who wins or beats SP?

They won’t willingly make any because despite talking a good game, leopards don’t really change their spots. All this “we welcome the review” talk is enough to make you sick. What you mean is you understand you had a free run for long enough and knew this had to come eventually.

The short-termism & greed of fat cat bosses, sacrificing the future of betting for big online casino and FOBT profits while putting heads in the sand about harmful consequences on a minority was always going to put them in a pickle down the line. Well here’s the end of the line.

How much help do you really feel you owe them? I fully expect this comment to receive some “but you used to be one, you’ve changed your tune!” type responses. I used to be a child too, but if Mothercare acted like idiots for a decade I wouldn’t want to defend them either.

But if we don’t agree with the anti-lobby wanting to cripple betting as we know it and don’t want to lend support, wittingly or otherwise, to these big corporations, what do we do? If we don’t speak up, no one will for us. Is that a risk worth taking for the moral highground?