A bad deal?

So there is outcry over the naming of St James' Park in Newcastle again.

Well, not quite.

This time it isn't the naming, it is the sponsorship.

The naming rights have been sold off alongside shirt sponsorship; and the new sponsor has elected not to use their own brand name on the arena but to revert back to St James' Park (it having been the Sports Direct Arenafor almost a year).

Bravo. They listened to the fans. They may even have listened to my rant

But, apparently, the fans didn't want to talk to the sponsor, really.

The new sponsor is Wonga. You know, the “pay-day loans company”. They lend small amounts on short terms, but at eye-watering levels of interest. Wonga's standard APR is 4124%.

Yes, FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY FOUR percent.

And this is what is concerning fans, players and even the general secretary of the Football Association has decided to wade in. There is even a suggestion that “star player” Demba Ba may not play in the shirt, because he is a muslim.

The Islamic faith prevents taking or paying interest on financial matters.

But Demba Ba had no problem wearing a Newcastle shirt sponsored by Virgin Money, who charge or pay interests on their loans and savings.

Curious.

The fact is that many financial service firms sponsor football clubs. In the 2011-2 Premiership alone there were:

Standard Chartered (Liverpool)

Aviva (Norwich)

Britannia (Stoke)

Aon - who whilst not directly involved with consumer financial products still supply reinsurance and other risk assurance products (Man United).

So there are financial services firms readily advertising on shirts.

Wonga themselves currently sponsor Blackpool who are playing in the Championship, having themselves previously played in the Premiership in a Wonga shirt. So that makes the comments by the general secretary of the Football Association - Alex Horne - all the more bizarre. He talks about inappropriate advertising: “If you consider it as in the category of things that are inappropriate for children like gambling and alcohol, it feels like it is in that category”.

So it should be in the same category as gambling and alcohol, despite being in a very tightly regulated consumer credit industry most definitely not aimed at children?

Well, fine.

After all, gambling firms sponsor the following 2011-2 Premiership teams:

Aston Villa (Genting Casinos)

Bolton Wanderers (118bet)

Sunderland (Tombola bingo)

Swansea (32Red)

Wigan (12bet.com)

Wolverhampton (Sportingbet)

And, of course, Budweiser is the official beer of the Premier League. So where is the inappropriate advertising?

Now, don't get me wrong - I don't like Wonga. I would never myself use Wonga, I do think their advertising strategy is poor, and they have been rapped by the OFT for their aggressive and misleading practices in debt collection.

And when you look at the interest rates, yes they are eye-watering.

But - and this is the same stance taken by the OFT and FSA - they are offering a credit facility to people who would not otherwise have that facility. The loans are low value and for a short period of time. They are not expected to be relied on regularly, and if Wonga was not around the people who use that facility would go to unregulated or illegal sources of money - loan sharks.

I see that.

I also see that if you borrow £300 over ten days the cost of that facility is around £36. That's barely an admin fee.

So no, whilst I don't endorse them, I understand why they are in existence. I don't understand the criticism levied because one club has gone with a sponsor who already sponsors football clubs.