SkyCity Casino Shutdown: Lessons from a Vulnerable Player's $1 Million Loss and the Parallels with Rugby's Duty of Care

Today at 09:58 AM

The gambling industry was rocked when SkyCity Casino in Auckland, New Zealand, was forced to close when a gambler’s vulnerability put him in the position of losing $1 million. After the government of New Zealand investigated a case which stated a casino failed to prevent a high-risk gambler commit financial suicide, the action of shutting down the gambling venue came upon instruction. While this incident shone a spotlight on the shortcomings of that casino’s responsible gambling policy, it also helped to ignite a broader conversation around whether and how much duty of care industries owe to their clients — a level of care that in some quarters is as high as player welfare in rugby.

A Tragic Loss and a Systemic Failure

The object of the SkyCity scandal was a compulsive gambler who gave clear indications of vulnerability, yet was not restrained. Within just three months, the gambler lost an incredible $1 million, which prompted the temporary suspension of SkyCity’s license. The casino has since conceded to committing serious mistakes in its observation and monitoring processes and also acknowledged that its intervention came much too late.

But the broader issue goes far beyond this case. When an industry screams promotions to attract new players, casinos are walking a tightrope between encouraging responsible gaming and not making sure that vulnerable people do not develop hazardous behaviours. While small rewards can be relied on as not harmful, innocent spending, sometimes this can serve as an open doorway for consumers to overspend, especially when they are already at risk of problem gambling. It evokes rugby, where the initiative of player welfare has been implemented to prevent injuries in the long term but often struggles to balance the sport’s physical risks with entertainment.

The Role of Promotions in Encouraging Responsible Gambling

Casinos often present special offers such as “$5 NZD bonuses” for motivating new gamblers and retaining existing ones. The problem here is that while minor rewards make players take part in a game with some limited risk, the question remains concerning how these types of promotions may affect vulnerable people. About SkyCity, it is observed that even low-value bonuses have the potential to make at-risk gamblers lose increased amounts of more money than they can afford, increasing their betting consequential to this. What for some starts as harmless fun, perhaps accompanied by a small bonus, can sometimes rapidly develop into deeper financial exposure, especially should the casino’s responsible gambling measures fail in their early-stage intervention. That again brings into view the need to consider how to balance attractive promotions with protecting players who may be at risk.

The Role of Casinos in Responsible Gambling

Like sports bodies, casinos should take care to ensure that their operatives or participants are kept safe. All gambling operators need, under the law in New Zealand, for example, to have adequate mechanisms to eliminate problem gambling; the most common call has been for real-time monitoring of player behaviour and for early intervention when risky patterns are detected. Similarly, the welfare of rugby players is looked after through strict medical clearance, rest periods and on-field examinations of injuries.

SkyCity’s inability to intervene in this gambler’s case does raise questions about how well such regulations are enforced. Rugby, too, has gone under fire for not acting fast enough, at times, to pull players out to preserve them from head injuries or overexertion that could affect their health in the long term. It follows from this that both industries need to balance entertainment with responsibility to ensure that the most vulnerable of their participants are taken care of.

Government Investigation and Aftermath

The DIA launched an inquiry into the SkyCity casino’s handling of vulnerable players after complaints were filed. Investigations found it had failed to take action when red flags did arise, resulting in the player suffering catastrophic financial losses. The DIA report outlined in detail the critical failures in SkyCity’s responsible gambling practice, including the lack of proper monitoring by personnel and poorly trained staff in recognizing at-risk contacts.

This incident does have, in many ways, a parallel with the due care expected in rugby. Rugby teams are increasingly under scrutiny to safeguard their athletes from long-term damage, concussions in particular, which have devastating effects if not checked. Just as the health of a player is watched both on and off the field, so too must casino operators accept responsibility for a continuing assessment of the customer’s well-being. Failure to do so in either arena can have dire consequences.

A Tipping Point for the Gaming and Sports Worlds?

This has shone a light on the need for greater protection in the industry after the SkyCity Casino was forced to shut down following the loss of a vulnerable player who gambled $1 million. But the application to the world of rugby is obvious: both industries struggle with how to best protect participants from financial or physical harm.

How successfully these are addressed will determine the future of both sectors. Much as rugby has had to adapt and change in light of concerns about player safety, gambling has to do the same, taking great care in protecting vulnerable people from the risks associated with its business. Only thus can proactive steps in giving protection to their participants, have any expectation of both continued success and the confidence and safety of those they serve.

It comes about whether one is talking about protecting the vulnerable gambler in the casino or protecting a rugby player from injury on the field. People should be protected from harm and any system designed to do that must be robust, transparent and consistently applied.

The post SkyCity Casino Shutdown: Lessons from a Vulnerable Player's $1 Million Loss and the Parallels with Rugby’s Duty of Care appeared first on Ruck.