In a move that has sent ripples across the sporting and betting industries, the United Kingdom’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has banned high-profile gambling advertisements featuring Formula 1 superstar Lewis Hamilton and the Chelsea Football Club logo. The decision, announced on October 22, 2025, underscores mounting regulatory pressure to shield minors from the influence of gambling marketing, especially when it involves icons with broad youth appeal.
The ASA’s crackdown came after a series of complaints and subsequent investigations into two separate campaigns by betting companies Kwiff and Betway. Kwiff, operated by Eaton Gate Gaming, found itself in hot water after posting a promotional image of Hamilton on X (formerly Twitter) in July. The ad, which hyped up a “huge weekend” for Hamilton at the British Grand Prix in Silverstone, featured clear age-restriction warnings, an “18+” symbol, and the BeGambleAware.org logo. Despite these precautions, the ASA ruled that the advert was likely to resonate with under-18s, largely due to Hamilton’s immense popularity among younger audiences.
The complaint that triggered the ASA’s investigation came from a University of Bristol researcher, who argued that the ad could easily attract viewers under 18. According to the ASA, “We considered Sir Lewis Hamilton was a notable star within the sport, with a significant public profile and social media following.” The authority cited figures showing Hamilton boasted 150,000 Instagram followers under the age of 18 in the UK alone, a detail that weighed heavily in their decision. Beyond social media, Hamilton’s appearances in the F1 24 video game (rated suitable for ages three and up) and as a storyteller on BBC’s CBeebies children’s programming further cemented his status as a figure of strong youth appeal.
Kwiff, for its part, defended its campaign, insisting that its internal data indicated Hamilton’s appeal skewed toward an older demographic. The company also stressed that the post in question was intended to drive traffic to an editorial blog, separate from its gambling platform. “The post was meant to drive traffic to their company blog, which was an ‘editorial commentary’ on a website separate from their gambling platform,” Kwiff told the ASA, as reported by BBC. Nevertheless, the ASA was unconvinced, emphasizing that the mere presence of a sports superstar like Hamilton was enough to draw in younger viewers regardless of the content’s intent.
In response to the ruling, Kwiff has since reviewed its entire social media presence and removed any content featuring mainstream sportspeople. The company acknowledged the ASA’s concerns and has committed to ensuring future campaigns do not feature personalities with strong appeal to minors. This marks a significant shift in strategy for betting firms, which have often relied on celebrity endorsements to boost engagement.
Betway, meanwhile, came under scrutiny for a YouTube advert aired in May 2025. The video depicted football fans clad in Chelsea FC-branded clothing—scarves, lanyards, and kits—set against a backdrop of the club’s signature blue. As Chelsea’s official European betting partner, Betway argued that it had full contractual rights to use the club’s logo and branding. The company further contended that YouTube’s ad policies included safeguards to prevent under-18s from being exposed to age-restricted content. However, the ASA countered that “it was likely that there was at least a significant number of children who had not used their real date of birth when signing up to YouTube,” making the platform unsuitable for such adverts.
The ASA’s ruling was clear: while the use of a logo in isolation might have been permissible, the immersive fan experience portrayed in Betway’s advert crossed the line into territory that would strongly resonate with young football enthusiasts. “The prominent display of Chelsea imagery on scarves, lanyards, and stadium backdrops within a fan-focused setting would strongly resonate with young football enthusiasts,” the ASA explained. The authority concluded that Betway’s campaign breached advertising codes designed to protect children from gambling promotion.
Betway warned that the ban could set a “damaging precedent for gambling sponsorships in sport,” highlighting the delicate balance between commercial interests and regulatory responsibilities. The company maintained that it has rigorous content review processes and no interest in marketing to minors, while Chelsea FC, for its part, pledged to work with all partners to ensure compliance with industry standards. “Our collaboration with Betway was no exception and both parties believed the content of this advertisement was fully compliant and adhered to all guidelines,” a Chelsea spokesperson stated.
The ASA’s decisions arrive amid growing academic and public scrutiny of gambling advertising, particularly during high-profile sporting events. University of Bristol researchers have reportedly flagged over 100 potentially problematic social media ads to the ASA, illustrating the saturation of gambling marketing during Premier League football coverage and beyond. The rulings against Kwiff and Betway are seen as a response to these mounting concerns, signaling a new era of tighter controls over how—and to whom—betting firms can advertise.
Industry observers suggest that the speed and decisiveness of the ASA’s actions have caught some by surprise, reflecting a broader societal shift in attitudes toward gambling and its potential impact on young people. The bans also underscore the challenges facing sports teams and betting companies as they navigate the complex web of commercial partnerships, regulatory obligations, and public expectations.
In the wake of the ASA’s rulings, both Kwiff and Betway have committed to implementing the authority’s recommendations. This includes removing sports personalities with strong appeal to minors from future campaigns and reassessing marketing strategies to ensure compliance with evolving standards. The decisions have also sparked debate within the industry, with some stakeholders warning of unintended consequences for sports sponsorship and others applauding the move as a necessary step to protect vulnerable audiences.
As the UK tightens its grip on gambling advertising, the cases of Lewis Hamilton and Chelsea FC serve as a high-profile reminder that fame and influence come with responsibilities—especially when the stakes involve the wellbeing of children and young people. The industry now faces the challenge of finding new ways to engage fans without crossing regulatory lines, a task that is likely to shape the future of sports marketing in Britain and beyond.
