Ohio Cracks Down On Threats Directed At Athletes

Ohio lawmakers recently raised the sports betting tax rate from 10% to 20%, which overshadowed another legislative change in the state’s 2024-2025 budget that addresses threats and harassment directed at athletes. 

The new language allows Ohio sports betting regulators to ban anyone threatening violence or harm toward athletes, managers, referees, and others involved in sports. 

Per HB 33:

“The general assembly specifically finds that the exclusion from sports gaming of persons who threaten violence or harm against persons who are involved in sporting events, where the threat is related to sports gaming …”

The issue itself is an important one. Athletes and others involved in sports shouldn’t be targeted, full stop. That said, it also appears to have been punishable already. 

The Impetus for the Policy

In January, when threats were made against Dayton University basketball players, Ohio Casino Control Commission chair Matthew Schuler told the Commission they have the power to ban bettors who make threats. 

"I think it's incumbent on the commission to look into that very power," Schuler said. "We obviously don't have control over people's behavior, but we do have control over what venues they can choose to participate in. This kind of behavior is not OK in any kind of venue at all." 

Further, threatening harm or violence is punishable by law. It should receive a stiffer punishment than exclusion from sports betting sites. As an example, Parlay Patz pleaded down to a sentence of 36 months probation for making such threats. 

It’s difficult to prove that online harassment has escalated to a threat, especially when the target is a public figure, so I understand the desire to have some mechanism in place to punish the offender.

You Can’t Have It Both Ways

The need to address online threats also raises an interesting question about the new era of legal sports betting. Advocates of legal, regulated online gambling (of which I count myself) have claimed that sports betting is not new to the U.S.; rather, legal sports betting is new. Whatever was happening now was happening before, just in the shadows. 

When the leagues brought up integrity concerns, supporters noted that integrity concerns should have been issues leagues addressed all along since illegal sports betting has been widely available in the U.S., both online and through neighborhood bookies. 

When players’ associations and athletes raised concerns about threats, the same argument was employed. People are already betting on games, so threats are a possibility whether sports betting is legal or illegal. Furthermore, legal betting makes it harder for harassers to stay anonymous. 

However, it appears that threats are increasing in the legal era. It can be argued that the increase in integrity issues we’ve seen is a byproduct of legalization. Meaning that these things were happening before but are now being reported, which is a good thing. That could be the case with threats directed at athletes, but one assumes legitimate and over-the-top threats and harassment would always be reported, legal betting or not.

The uptick in harassment and threats could be because of several factors:

• There are more bettors and, therefore, more threats.
• There are more new bettors who haven’t got the what-should-be-obvious message that threats are not part of betting.
• Athletes are more aware of betting and likelier to report threats and harassment. 
• Bettors are more emboldened by the legal status of betting.

It appears that legalization has created a new segment of bettors that is more likely to issue threats or change the behaviors of existing bettors.