SA regulator fines Sportsbet A$325,000 over unapproved bets

South Australia's gambling regulator has fined Sportsbet A$325,000 and formally reprimanded it for taking bets from South Australians on events that were not approved for betting in the state at the time. Brett Humphrey, the Liquor and Gambling Commissioner, who heads Consumer and Business Services (CBS), signed the order on 21 September 2026. InDaily reported it on 20 October.

The order covers four kinds of market: e-sports, LIV Golf, UFC/MMA and novelty events such as reality TV and award shows. Between 17 April 2023 and 15 September 2024, Sportsbet accepted 942,675 wagers from South Australian account holders on them. On the e-sports, LIV Golf and UFC/MMA bets alone, its net revenue (what it kept after paying out winning bets) was A$2,440,649.48.

How the fine breaks down

The Commissioner treated each category as a separate ground for disciplinary action. Each carries a reprimand and a fine:

A$100,000 is the most the Commissioner can impose per ground on an interstate betting operator under section 39(2)(b)(i) of the Gambling Administration Act 2019, so three of the four fines are at the cap. The novelty fine is lower because, the order says, the scale and extent of that conduct was smaller; with A$11,723.10 staked, any revenue from it was "necessarily modest". The fines are payable within 28 days of the order being served.

What an "approved contingency" is

Sportsbet is based outside South Australia and takes bets from residents online under an authorisation it has held since 2010. Under section 40A of the Authorised Betting Operations Act 2000, an operator like that may only take bets on licensed races and on "approved contingencies". In plain terms, that is a published list of sports, events and bet types the Commissioner has assessed as suitable for betting. Before adding something to the list, the Commissioner must consider things such as the event's integrity standards and how appropriate it is for betting, and the list can never include amateur sport or events where only children compete.

None of the four categories was on the list when Sportsbet took the bets. E-sports could not have been: a 2016 Ministerial Direction bars approval of any betting on computer games. LIV Golf was approved on 24 January 2025 and UFC/MMA in May 2025, both after the period covered by the order. The novelty markets included reality shows such as The Masked Singer and The Block, the ARIA Awards, the Triple J Hottest 100 and Time's Person of the Year.

What Sportsbet argued, and what the Commissioner decided

Sportsbet admitted the breaches early and apologised, the order says. It said they were not deliberate and that every one of these markets was legal in other Australian states and territories, which made switching them off for one state "a significant compliance challenge". It has since built controls to turn markets on and off by jurisdiction. For the novelty markets, it said it had checked them against the Northern Territory's novelty betting guideline, and it has stopped offering similar markets nationally "while potential technological solutions are explored".

Sportsbet also argued that the approved list "lacks clarity" because it mentions "international tournaments". The Commissioner rejected that: the entry covers gold and total medal tallies at the Olympic and Commonwealth Games, nothing more. He also rejected the argument that the breaches mattered less because the events could have been approved, or later were. "The mischief lies in the taking of the decision out of the Commissioner's hands, not in the character of the product Sportsbet chose to offer," the order says.

Sportsbet had argued that a reprimand would be a proportionate response and that, if fined, all four categories should be treated as a single course of conduct. The Commissioner rejected both, and noted that the case could arguably have been brought bet by bet, which would have put the maximum penalty "of an altogether different order". He also declined to suspend, cancel or vary Sportsbet's authorisation, because "the conduct has ceased, effective controls are in place, Sportsbet co-operated with the investigation, apologised for its conduct, and nothing before me suggests it is otherwise unsuitable to hold the Authorisation."

A Sportsbet spokesperson told InDaily the company "acknowledges and accepts the decision" and has added controls to its processes. Under the Act, an operator has 30 days from notice of the decision to ask the Licensing Court of South Australia for a review.

Why it matters

The fine is small next to the revenue involved, and the order is open about why it still matters. Operators like Sportsbet run their platforms from other states, so CBS can't easily see in real time which markets South Australians are offered. The approved-events list is the main control, and it only works if operators apply it themselves. That is why the Commissioner put weight on deterring other bookmakers, not just Sportsbet, and said a penalty must be "more than an acceptable cost of doing business".

Whether A$325,000 achieves that is the open question. Flinders University law lecturer Dr Joel Lisk told InDaily that despite the "modest" penalties, the laws were "arguably doing their job in this instance", while noting there are "always questions on whether penalties are simply a cost of doing business".

It is the latest in a run of Australian enforcement and rule changes on betting, after ACMA's BetStop penalty against Dabble, ACMA's guidance on wagering ads by notable persons and the Northern Territory's gambling harm bill.

18+. Gambling can be addictive. If you want to take a break, see our responsible gambling page.