An uneven playing field: a mixed methods, multiphase feasibility study of a programme to reduce gambling among at-risk men in a professional football club setting

Sports betting is a growth area for the gambling industry, with football fans a key target of advertising. Men are particularly at risk from gambling harm. The 8-week Football Fans and Betting (FFAB) intervention was designed for delivery in professional football clubs by club community coaches to reduce sports betting and other forms of gambling among men aged 18–55 with a PGSI score of < 15. This paper reports the acceptability and feasibility of delivering FFAB in England. We conducted a multiphase, mixed methods, feasibility study of the FFAB intervention, assessing feasibility through three criteria: recruitment, fidelity and acceptability. We generated quantitative process and attendance data to assess recruitment and retention, and observation, interview and focus group data to examine fidelity and acceptability. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, qualitative data using thematic analysis, before being combined using triangulation protocol to assess feasibility against the three criteria. FFAB was launched in six clubs. Despite multiple attempts to refine and improve recruitment processes, no club was able to recruit the target number of participants to the programme. Retention on the programme also faced challenges. The saturation of football’s commercial landscape by the gambling industry and stigma-related social dynamics appear to underpin these findings. Due to recruitment and retention challenges, fidelity criteria were not met. However, participants that attended the programme, and coaches that delivered it, reported that FFAB was acceptable and supported some to make changes to their gambling behaviours. Throughout the qualitative dataset, participants and coaches emphasised the necessity of intervention to prevent gambling harms among men. We found that FFAB was acceptable to the coaches who delivered it and the participants who attended. However, our model for recruitment did not work, with consequences for fidelity. We also faced difficulties with retention. More feasibility work to develop a different approach to a gambling reduction with men between 18 and 55 with a PGSI score of less than 15 is required.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Public Health
Published
2026-03-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-026-26845-z
Primary Topic
Gambling Behavior and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

An uneven playing field: a mixed methods, multiphase feasibility study of a programme to reduce gambling among at-risk men in a professional football club setting

Blair Biggar, Cindy M. Gray, Christopher Bunn, Heather Wardle et al.
BMC Public Health
Gambling Behavior and Treatments
article

An uneven playing field: a mixed methods, multiphase feasibility study of a programme to reduce gambling among at-risk men in a professional football club setting

Blair Biggar, Cindy M. Gray, Christopher Bunn, Heather Wardle, Frankie Graham, Craig Donnachie, John Rooksby, N.P. Platt, Manuela Deidda, Gerda Reith, Sally Wyke, Matthew Philpott, Kate Hunt, Nicola Greenlaw
article en

Abstract

Sports betting is a growth area for the gambling industry, with football fans a key target of advertising. Men are particularly at risk from gambling harm. The 8-week Football Fans and Betting (FFAB) intervention was designed for delivery in professional football clubs by club community coaches to reduce sports betting and other forms of gambling among men aged 18–55 with a PGSI score of < 15. This paper reports the acceptability and feasibility of delivering FFAB in England. We conducted a multiphase, mixed methods, feasibility study of the FFAB intervention, assessing feasibility through three criteria: recruitment, fidelity and acceptability. We generated quantitative process and attendance data to assess recruitment and retention, and observation, interview and focus group data to examine fidelity and acceptability. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, qualitative data using thematic analysis, before being combined using triangulation protocol to assess feasibility against the three criteria. FFAB was launched in six clubs. Despite multiple attempts to refine and improve recruitment processes, no club was able to recruit the target number of participants to the programme. Retention on the programme also faced challenges. The saturation of football’s commercial landscape by the gambling industry and stigma-related social dynamics appear to underpin these findings. Due to recruitment and retention challenges, fidelity criteria were not met. However, participants that attended the programme, and coaches that delivered it, reported that FFAB was acceptable and supported some to make changes to their gambling behaviours. Throughout the qualitative dataset, participants and coaches emphasised the necessity of intervention to prevent gambling harms among men. We found that FFAB was acceptable to the coaches who delivered it and the participants who attended. However, our model for recruitment did not work, with consequences for fidelity. We also faced difficulties with retention. More feasibility work to develop a different approach to a gambling reduction with men between 18 and 55 with a PGSI score of less than 15 is required.

BMC Public Health
University of Stirling (GB), Bangor University (GB), University of Strathclyde (GB), Northumbria University (GB), Liverpool Community Health NHS Trust (GB), More Associates (GB), Beacon Energy (United Kingdom) (GB), Public Health Scotland (GB), Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow (GB), University of Glasgow (GB)
National Institute for Health and Care Research, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Gambling Behavior and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.