Stuart MacGill - Aussie cricketers shouldn't do KFC ad

[ManWithNoName]

Some interesting comments from Magilla

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/08/just-chew-it-dont-sell-kfc-macgill-tells-his-cricketing-mates/

Former Test spinner Stuart MacGill is adamant sports and sports stars should not accept money to promote food brands like KFC and McDonald’s. “I don’t think you can have any of us advertising junk food to be honest,”

For the last eight years, KFC has been a “gold partner” of Cricket Australia, spending up to $8 million a year on marketing and promotion linked to the sport. For this it gets TV ads, endorsements from the Australian team and Channel Nine commentators, a KFC Classic Catches competition and billboards at the games. KFC also gets naming rights to the Big Bash Twenty20 competition, televised by Fox Sports, and the title of Australian cricket’s official fast food restaurant. All up, it probably pays Cricket Australia between $1 million and $2 million a year.

“The problem for me is that KFC and Cricket Australia are hitting parents where they’re vulnerable,” said MacGill, who has two young children. “Parents are already under a lot of pressure from kids to buy this stuff and when you get the Australian cricket team endorsing it you just increase that pressure. It’s just wrong in so many ways.

Particularly interesting:

Just before he retired, MacGill refused Cricket Australia’s instruction to take part in a TV ad for KFC. “They had just accused me publicly of being unfit and told me I would have to lose weight if I wanted to play again. And I just hit the roof. I said: “you’re telling me I’m fat and you want me to do a KFC ad? Well, you’ve got to be crazy. I’m not going to do it.’”

Australia’s elite cricketers are required to do KFC ads for free as part of their contract with Cricket Australia, and MacGill had no right to refuse. But Cricket Australia did not force the issue. “They backed off pretty quickly,” he said. “They could see that the press might say something, and if the press didn’t I would.”

He also has a go at Milo Cricket, saying it's not about the cricket just "a branding exercise" and that Milo wouldn't exist anymore if not for Milo Cricket.

Thoughts?

 

[FRUMPY]

interesting from a bloke who did commercials for wolf blass wines and had his own wine show on cable tv. Dont see any difference there.

 

[ManWithNoName]

interesting from a bloke who did commercials for wolf blass wines and had his own wine show on cable tv. Dont see any difference there.

His problem with KFC is that it causes child obesity. Can't compare wine to that.

 

[BarneyBent]

interesting from a bloke who did commercials for wolf blass wines and had his own wine show on cable tv. Dont see any difference there.

I don't see the similarity at all.

 

[placebo]

I'd rather encourage parents to be responsible.

Huge cop-out Stuey.

 

[BarneyBent]

I'd rather encourage parents to be responsible.

Huge cop-out Stuey.

And doing ads for KFC encourages parents to be irresponsible. At least that's the argument.

 

[PTizzle]

interesting from a bloke who did commercials for wolf blass wines and had his own wine show on cable tv. Dont see any difference there.

Children are obviously bugging their parents to buy them wine on a regular basis, you're totally right

 

[placebo]

And doing ads for KFC encourages parents to be irresponsible. At least that's the argument.

I get the argument. I just think it's a cop out for parents who want to abstain from taking responsibility of their children.

 

[dumb]

they can get aussie cricketers doing ads but they can't do home delivery

 

[Tyberious Funk]

Sure, parents have to take responsibility for their own children. But it doesn't make KFC's practices any less subversive. They are trying to shake off the tag that their product is unhealthy by aligning it was sportsmen. They're trying to create an image, and it's completely false. And Cricket Australia just take the money and run.

I'm actually really impressed by Macgill having the fortitude to stand up to CA on moral grounds. Probably explains why he had a reputation for being "difficult".

 

[ManWithNoName]

KFC's response. This really makes me angry:

KFC defends its use of cricket to sell its wares. “We’re proud of our sponsorship of cricket in Australia which, aside from promoting KFC, also funds a large number of community programs across the country to encourage children to play the game and be active,” a spokesperson said. “It is a positive initiative and we are delighted to be involved.”

It also defends its high-fat, high-energy meals, telling people to think of KFC as “something which should be enjoyed as an occasional treat and as part of a balanced diet that includes exercise”.

 

[jackster83]

they can get aussie cricketers doing ads but they can't do home delivery

Post of the year.

 

[Tyberious Funk]

KFC have absolutely zero interest in contributing to the community. They sponsor the cricket and they get involved in community programs because they want consumers to associate their product with healthy activities (like sport). The benefit of community sporting programs is that they can get their hooks into the kids when they are young, and create a customer for life.

They're trying to create a generation of consumers that genuinely believe that KFC can be part of a healthy lifestyle. Trouble is, ask any nutritionalist and they'll tell you to never eat KFC... ever. Not as an occasional treat... not even on a one-off. Just... never.

 

[FRUMPY]

Children are obviously bugging their parents to buy them wine on a regular basis, you're totally right

So a 15 year old kid goes out and gets blasted on wine, same thing as a 15 yr old kid going out and eating KFC.

Doesnt matter if one or a million are doing it, same principle.

There is nothing wrong with kids going out and eating a meal at KFC, same as eating at Maccas, fish and chip shop, getting a pizza. Its good advertisement on behalf of KFC. It is then upto the individual on how much they eat.

If you are worried about the kids, then let the parents have a say in what they eat and how often. Some of you sound like the fat people in america who try and sue fast food companies becuase they end up obese. People have to take responsibilty for thier actions.

 

[FRUMPY]

KFC have absolutely zero interest in contributing to the community. They sponsor the cricket and they get involved in community programs because they want consumers to associate their product with healthy activities (like sport). The benefit of community sporting programs is that they can get their hooks into the kids when they are young, and create a customer for life.

They're trying to create a generation of consumers that genuinely believe that KFC can be part of a healthy lifestyle. Trouble is, ask any nutritionalist and they'll tell you to never eat KFC... ever. Not as an occasional treat... not even on a one-off. Just... never.

Milo cricket the same? Milo is very unhealthy for you if you eat lots of it, high in sugar and energy. I guess they have no interest in the community either.

 

[Drummer_19]

they can get aussie cricketers doing ads but they can't do home delivery

Believe me you don't want it home delivered. I lived in Malta for 3 months last year and they do delivery there and its awwwwful.

 

[rickyp]

KFC have absolutely zero interest in contributing to the community. They sponsor the cricket and they get involved in community programs because they want consumers to associate their product with healthy activities (like sport). The benefit of community sporting programs is that they can get their hooks into the kids when they are young, and create a customer for life.

They're trying to create a generation of consumers that genuinely believe that KFC can be part of a healthy lifestyle. Trouble is, ask any nutritionalist and they'll tell you to never eat KFC... ever. Not as an occasional treat... not even on a one-off. Just... never.

RE: bolded

Spot on, this is where it lies and its truly disgusting.

 

[John Dorian]

I couldn't care less. In the end, if people want to eat KFC they will and if a parent does not want their kids eating it, they simply have to say no.

 

[BarneyBent]

I get the argument. I just think it's a cop out for parents who want to abstain from taking responsibility of their children.

But Stuey MacGill isn't those parents. He just knows that parents won't take responsibility. If it was the parents who were complaining about the cricketers, then I'd absolutely agree with you, but they're not. MacGill's complaint is just as much about the parents as the KFC ads, he's just taking it as assumed that there will be plenty of parents who will buckle to the pressure that these KFC ads put on them.

 

[Sman-21]

wonder what the little kids playing cricket are gonna feel like having after a game of cricket on the weekend.
Maybe the same stuff they see all their heroes eating an advertising?
Long day for parents watching, kid happy an excited after game or upset....... yep good luck to the parent arguing an trying to explain why its a bad idea.

Well done macgilla.
My respect for u just went up.
I had no idea its part of their contract payments thats totally wrong.
More proof cricket australia will sell theirs an everyones elses soul for a buck.

 

[Brad Goodman]

A bigger travesty is associating themselves with the company with the worst mobile coverage in the country.

I agree with SCG MacGill on this by the way - it's irresponsible for Australia's most popular national team to be heavily associated with junk as bad as KFC.

 

[beatnik]

I'd rather encourage parents to be responsible.

Huge cop-out Stuey.

I get the argument. I just think it's a cop out for parents who want to abstain from taking responsibility of their children.

Wrong. I actually think comments like yours are the cop out.

Research shows that parents are more likely to buy junk food if it involves an elite athlete so they are actually deceived by the association, not simply copping out.

I couldn't care less. In the end, if people want to eat KFC they will and if a parent does not want their kids eating it, they simply have to say no.

* sighs *

Let's be very clear: diabetes, obesity and higher taxes are all side effects of junk food!

Which begs the questions:

1) Why are these companies not responsible for the damage they do by deceiving the great majority of people who are too stupid to critically analyse the junk food advertising they digest?

2) Why should I as a taxpayer foot the health bills caused by this sort of food while they take the (massive) profits overseas?

3) Why should I subsidise your inability to see that?

 

[whats_at_stake]

A bigger travesty is associating themselves with the company with the worst mobile coverage in the country.

I agree with SCG MacGill on this by the way - it's irresponsible for Australia's most popular national team to be heavily associated with junk as bad as KFC.

This is not just a KFC-cricket issue but a overall sporting issue. Is it okay for Collingwood to be associated with McDonalds? Why is it okay for Hungry Jacks to be associated with the AFL.

Ultimately the sports care about money. Advertising revenue primarily comes from betting companies, beer companies and fast food outlets. You get rid of this and the overall money received is very low.

If anyone has an issue with this then you should be in support of a blanket ban across all fast foods involvement in sport.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

RE: bolded

Spot on, this is where it lies and its truly disgusting.

I think you'll find that any company that sponsors any event, team or product is doing so to boost its own profits, not for altruistic purposes.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

Stuart MacGill is correct.