Tottenham forced to change team announcements on Twitter after falling foul of Advertising Standards rules

TOTTENHAM have been forced to change the way they announce their team line-ups on social media after breaching strict gambling advertising regulations.

Spurs have been detailing their starting elevens fr matches throughout this season by picturing the players involved alongside their betting partners William Hill.

But the Premier League club were unwittingly breaching the rules about gambling adverts whenever they used an image of a player under the age of 25.

They were contacted by the Advertising Standards Agency  after they discovered a tweet on March 5 revealing the starting XI for the Champions League clash with Borussia Dortmund.

The tweet featured pictures of Davinson Sanchez, 22, and 23-year-old Harry Winks as well as a call to action for supporters to link through to the bookmaker’s website for odds on the match.

Under gambling regulation in the UK, no images of people under 25 can be used to promote betting services on the internet.

Spurs and William Hill attempted to argue that the pictures of Winks and Sanchez were only used as part of the team as a whole, and were not the “sole focus” of the ad.

ISSUED GUIDANCE

But the ASA rejected that claim and issued guidance that they needed to adapt the way they compose their team announcement posts from now on.

Spurs have since changed their style, switching from picturing all eleven starters to instead naming the team and only displaying a photo of one star over the age of 25.

The ASA said: “We understood the intention of the tweet was to inform the audience of the starting line-up.

“However, we considered that of equal measure was its aim to offer the audience an opportunity to place a bet on the match.

“In that context, while the significance of Harry Winks and Davison Sanchez was no greater than the other players in the line-up, the 11 players were the focus of the tweet, and we considered that each of them played an equally significant role in the marketing communication.

“The ad had not appeared in a place, such as William Hill’s own website, where a bet could be placed through a transactional facility, nor had the two players been used to illustrate specific betting selections where they were the subject of the bet offered.

“In light of the above, we concluded that the ad was irresponsible and therefore breached the code.”