Two gambling operators chastised over bets on own goals in the Netherlands
The operators were found to breach the Dutch gambling regulator’s rules against betting on negative events.
The Netherlands.- The Dutch gambling regulator kansspelautoriteit (KSA) has revealed that it has had words with two licensed operators for offering bets on own goals in sport. Like other bets on “negative events”, such offerings are prohibited in the Netherlands owing to integrity concerns as own goals are seen as easier to manipulate.
The KSA found that Holland Casino Online and Vbet both offered bets on own goals on their sites. The regulator carried out an investigation across the market as a whole after receiving a report. It found that these two operators were the only ones that frequently offered this type of bet.
The KSA said it had addressed the operators and that both Holland Casino Online and Vbet have adjusted their offerings to remove the own-goal bets. It said that it had also taken additional control measures to prevent recurrence, leading the regulator to conclude that the matter was “sufficiently settled for the time being”.
It reminded operators to check its latest Guidelines on the integrity of sports betting published on December 22, 2025, which explain which bets are not permitted in the Netherlands. Own goals are explicitly named as a negative event deemed relatively easy to influence and therefore carrying risks of match-fixing.
Meanwhile, the KSA’s latest twice-yearly market report has raised concerns over the amount of money spent on unlicensed gambling in the Netherlands. The gross gaming result for the second half of 2025 was €602m, up just €2m from six months earlier. The number of accounts used for play per month rose from 1.29m to 1.38m.
The KSA said the increase was likely caused by the introduction of a net deposit limit in October 2024, which reduces the amount players can bet per account without having to share income details. According to the KSA’s estimates, approximately 91 per cent of Dutch gamblers did so exclusively with legal providers, making the stabilisation rate stable. However, when looking at channelling in terms of money, it’s significantly lower at 53 per cent.
