Another round of alleged harassment and sports wagering-related concern was in the news last week, perhaps enough so that lawmakers and regulators may begin to stir again, and in a way bettors are not going to like.
Where to begin? Let's go to the NBA, where Cleveland Cavaliers coach J.B. Bickerstaff told reporters that he was threatened by gamblers last year.
"They got my telephone number and were sending me crazy messages about where I live and my kids and all that stuff," Bickerstaff said, according to the Associated Press.
A day earlier, Indiana Pacers star Tyrese Haliburton said he felt like he was just a “prop” to some people. Even earlier this month, Minnesota Timberwolves center Rudy Gobert suggested all the gambling going on around the sport was hurting the game somehow.
Sports in 2014: We can't ever put a team in Las Vegas, just the idea of being *near* gambling is a bridge too far for us.
— Velodus (@velodus) March 19, 2024
Sports in 2024: Using promo code "ADDICT", you can now wager the deed to your parents' house on our games through our official league app.
The cherry on top was that last week was the one the NBA used to announce, alongside tech company Sportradar, the coming integration of point spreads, totals, and moneylines into the league's live-streaming platform, League Pass.
“Where sports betting is legal, users can opt-in to have the convenience of viewing and selecting bets directly on NBA League Pass,” the press release said. “When ready to place a bet, they are directed to FanDuel or DraftKings, the NBA’s official betting partners, through a seamlessly embedded link.”
Well, the internet had a good laugh at that one, and who can blame it? A league whose players are bristling about gambling will now put it right there for you, just click the button. It was awkward timing.
However, if you’re a congressman, state legislator, or regulator, can you look at any or all of the above and not feel a tad concerned?
Here comes the boom?
Athletes and coaches are worried about the sanctity of the game and their safety and sanity both on and off the court. Meanwhile, the leagues and teams are increasingly embedding sports betting into their product. Someone, somewhere, may finally feel compelled to do something, even if it’s ultimately not all that helpful or fun.
Lawmakers have already gotten and implemented ideas. While I’m pretty sure it’s already illegal to threaten people (although I’m not a lawyer), in Ohio, home of the Cavs, there’s also a law on the books that can get you banned from sports betting if you threaten athletes and coaches. That was at least partly prompted by the University of Dayton Flyers basketball coach suggesting sports bettors had lashed out at his players. West Virginia then passed a similar law just this month.
For most bettors, those laws aren’t a problem, because they aren’t DMing players to scream about a same-game parlay that nearly hit. Yet there are other, broader measures that lawmakers and regulators are enacting in response to alleged harassment and threats by bettors, specifically the recent bans on college player prop wagering.
Even if you are the most gentlemanly bettor who ever lived, in states such as Ohio, Maryland, and Vermont, you can no longer wager on the total number of rebounds a college basketball player will pull down, among other player props. And that is because of concerns about athletes being targeted by toxic bettors, a few rotten apples spoiling the fun for everyone.
“The NCAA has seen a significant increase in reports of student-athletes being harassed by bettors, including reports from our member institutions in Ohio,” NCAA president Charlie Baker said in a Jan. 31 letter to the executive director of the Ohio Casino Control Commission. “Specifically, in 2023 alone, the NCAA became aware of six Division I student-athletes who reported harassment related to betting activity.”
Fun time is over
Involuntary exclusion and player prop bans — perhaps for both college and professional sports — could be formally adopted and used in more and more states. After reading the news last week, it might be surprising if they aren’t increasingly considered.
Granted, it’s tougher to be sympathetic to professional athletes because of the money they make. Some of that money could even be put in their pockets by sports betting. After all, people who bet on sports tend to watch those sports, and that viewership means bigger advertising deals and more sponsorship opportunities, which can lead to higher pay for pro athletes.
Furthermore, while making threats is one thing, being a jerk is another. Carping about your bet at an athlete isn’t a crime, it’s just annoying for them and anyone else who has to hear or see that sort of thing. That can take its toll, but I’m not sure how you can regulate people who are just poor losers, or losers in general.
But lawmakers could try, and they are already beginning to pry into the business side of sports betting. Rep. Paul Tonko announced last week he plans to introduce legislation that, among other things, would reportedly ban sportsbook operators from using artificial intelligence to track a bettor's activities or to tailor betting markets for them based on those activities.
For every action ...
It’s all a bit disappointing. There are valid reasons for legalizing sports betting, but there are also side effects, such as people who don’t know how to lose. Some of that could be because people are wagering too much, and need a refresher on responsible gambling. Maybe we need to teach bankroll management and RG practices in schools now, like civics.
Rest assured, though, that if the ugly headlines keep coming, something could change.
“Politicians react to the public, not the other way around,” said Shawn Fluharty, a West Virginia lawmaker and the president of the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States, during a recent conference.
That comment was regarding the struggles in legalizing online casino gambling. However, if the public decides it has had enough of certain sports betting-connected antics, it could still apply.
