"It was jarring to me" – Netflix's Beat Luke Littler accused of 'clickbait' amateur marketing after Fallon Sherrock and Mitchell Lawrie casting

Netflix's £501,000 Beat Luke Littler challenge has already attracted criticism for including established darts stars Fallon Sherrock and Mitchell Lawrie, but the DartsNews Podcast has questioned something more fundamental: whether the streaming giant's advertising gave viewers the wrong impression of who would be competing.

The programme was promoted as an opportunity for everyday darts enthusiasts to take on the world number one for life-changing money.

Yet among the 24 contestants selected are one of the most recognisable women in darts and a 15-year-old Scottish sensation who has already reached a senior Lakeside World Championship final and is currently WDF world number one.

With the show set to air live on Friday 30 October, podcast host Kieran Wood compared the contrast between the advertising and the eventual lineup to the scrutiny media outlets face over clickbait, while DartsNews Head Editor Samuel Gill argued that Netflix had compelling commercial reasons for including experienced competitors.

For Wood, the biggest objection was not whether Sherrock or Lawrie were eligible to enter, but the expectations created by a promotional campaign built around ordinary pub players receiving their chance in the spotlight.

"The thing that stood out to me was the marketing," he said on the latest DartsNews Podcast. "It was marketed as an amateur thing. The adverts were people in the pub saying, 'I've played here for 60 years,' and there was a granny throwing darts and things like that."

He went on to draw a comparison with the responsibility news organisations have when presenting stories to their audiences. "We've had discussions in our own work about clickbait content and trying to avoid things like that, so when you see Netflix and Luke Littler and Target doing things like this. It was jarring to me, the fact it was marketed so vividly as amateurs versus Littler, getting a chance to win."

Sherrock's inclusion has been particularly contentious. The former Women's World Matchplay champion famously defeated Ted Evetts and Mensur Suljovic at the 2020 PDC World Championship, becoming the first woman to win a match at the tournament. She remains a prominent figure in the sport despite never having held a PDC Tour Card.

Lawrie, meanwhile, has established himself as one of darts' outstanding teenage prospects. The Scottish youngster reached the senior Lakeside World Championship final at just 15 and sits at the top of the WDF world rankings, making him a considerably more accomplished opponent than the average pub player.

Gill also highlighted the commercial relationships surrounding some members of the field. "Someone even put on Twitter, I can't remember who it was, that half the players have sponsored shirts on. Three-quarters of them do, and most of them are sponsored by Target, who are involved in the production. A few of them have their own darts they can sell."

Netflix's published eligibility rules, however, never excluded experienced amateur or semi-professional players. Contestants simply had to be at least 12 years old and must never have held a PDC Tour Card.

Following the backlash, a Netflix spokesperson defended the casting process in comments to City AM, insisting that all 24 finalists had queued at auditions in London or Manchester and completed a leg of 501 in 24 darts or fewer. The company maintained that the application and audition process had been the same for everybody.

Gill acknowledged why some applicants and supporters had been frustrated by the selection, particularly given the number of contestants already familiar to followers of competitive darts.

"For me, it just reads like a MODUS Super Series lineup more than anything else," he argued. "You're only really missing Neil Duff, Tommy Morris and maybe one or two others to basically have the MODUS Super Series lineup."

He compared the audition process to The X Factor, imagining the reaction if an established recording artist entered a competition intended to discover an unknown singer.

"It would be like them doing that and then bringing in someone who's already had a number-one hit record in the UK, and saying they're going through to judges' houses and the live shows. It smacks people in the face when they're waiting outside for hours thinking they've got a shot."

The selected field also included a Nando's employee and a 14-year-old from Wrexham who had responded to the advert, alongside players already established on the competitive circuit.

"You've got a mix of everything," Gill observed, before returning to the inclusion of Sherrock and Lawrie. "Having literally just those two names, it smacks people in the face."

But Gill also believed there was a strong argument for selecting players capable of testing Littler. "Mitchell Lawrie in particular is a huge name," he said. "He is an incredible darts player."

Gill referenced Sporting Life's Chris Hammer discussing Lawrie's impressive seasonal scoring and previous encounters with Littler, during which the youngster had already demonstrated that he could compete against the world champion over individual legs. He also tipped Lawrie to become one of the leading candidates for a PDC Tour Card when he becomes eligible to attempt Q-School.

Sherrock offered a different attraction. Her historic victories at Alexandra Palace had made her recognisable far beyond darts' regular audience, and the prospect of facing Littler would provide Netflix with a contest that could appeal to casual viewers.

"She's a huge name. She's never had a Tour Card. She's someone people recognise, and the thought of Littler versus Sherrock, even now, years on from the big moment she had, is still quite a big deal."

Gill also highlighted Katie Sheldon, who has competed on the Women's Series and at the Women's World Matchplay, alongside highly rated youngster Jayden Walker.

"Jayden Walker is a prodigy," he explained. "He is a fairly big prodigy in the game alongside Mitchell Lawrie. He's someone who perhaps hasn't been spoken about as much because of Lawrie. Netflix will not want just amateur players like me, you and Kieran going on TV, throwing 50-dart legs and then losing straight away. They need some jeopardy to it. It's TV at the end of the day."

Wood challenged the assumption that experienced competitors would necessarily make the programme more entertaining. For him, there was potentially greater drama in watching genuine amateurs take repeated shots at Littler until somebody finally succeeded.

"I probably disagree with what you just said there about the amateurs. I think it would make it better if it was just the pub players," he responded. "Imagine the tension building, and Luke Littler beats everyone over two or three series in a row. Then, on the fourth series, it's the 60th guy who's gone up there and tried, and he finally beats Luke Littler. That's going to be a hell of a lot bigger moment, TV-wise, than Mitchell Lawrie getting a 12-darter."

Gill envisaged a different kind of television drama, speculating that the producers might build towards appearances from their strongest challengers rather than have them play early.

"They will put these people as lambs to the slaughter, so to speak," he suggested of the weaker contestants. "You add that jeopardy at the end of the broadcast so people keep tuning in to say, 'Mitchell Lawrie is one of the last people. We'll keep watching.'"

That was Gill's prediction of how the programme might be presented, rather than a confirmed arrangement. Netflix has since explained that the 24 finalists will compete for 20 places before being split into groups and selected randomly to face Littler.

Still, Gill maintained that the commercial attraction of putting recognisable names on television was difficult to ignore. "I'm not a big fan of it, but as someone who works in darts and knows the game, and TV as well, you want these people in," he said, comparing the calculation with broadcasters' desire to have the sport's biggest names appearing in major tournaments. "For me, it just adds eyes to it. But these people are already quite well known, so I do see both sides."

The discussion also examined what the selection meant for unsuccessful applicants who had invested considerable time and money in pursuing a place. Gill referred to an account concerning a hopeful said to have travelled from South Africa at considerable expense, only to miss out on the final lineup.

Reports of disappointment among unsuccessful entrants have added to the debate, although meeting the initial qualifying standard did not automatically guarantee anyone a place on the programme.

There have also been questions about whether established competitors were encouraged to enter. Live Darts reported that some selected players had been approached before the auditions, but the suggestion that they were effectively assured places remains a claim made by that publication, not an established fact.

Gill himself considered whether recognised names had been invited, while noting that Sherrock and others had reportedly been seen attending the auditions.

"Sherrock was supposedly in the queue. I think we even did articles on it at the time," he recalled. "Fallon Sherrock, Tommy Morris, Lee Cocks, all those sorts of people were in the queue. They didn't just get given a free, 'Here you go.' They were in the queue, so they may have got invited, but they still had to go through the process."

Another question was whether the £501,000 prize represented the same opportunity for a famous competitor as it would for somebody with no established career in the sport.

Discussing Sherrock, Gill suggested the money would naturally be significant, but that her existing earnings and profile made her circumstances different from those of an ordinary entrant. "Sure, £500,000, given she's earned a load of money already, will change her life, but it won't at the same time," he said. "She's playing by the rules."

Whatever the disagreement surrounding the contestants, the programme ultimately depends on whether anyone can produce one exceptional leg against Littler.

The 24 selected players will compete for 20 places in Friday's live event at Manchester Central. Each challenger will then have the opportunity to face the two-time world champion in a single leg of 501, with the first to defeat him winning £501,000 and bringing the contest to an end.

Gill was unconvinced that anybody would succeed, despite the calibre of some of the entrants. "I think he'll win all those," he predicted. "I think it will be a massive anticlimax and he will win, and it will show him as this imperious person in the world of darts."

He also questioned how many contestants would be able to cope with the pressure of playing live on television, particularly against somebody who has already performed on the sport's biggest stages. Competitors with MODUS Super Series experience might be better equipped for that environment, but Gill still expected Littler's quality to prevail.

For Gayer, only one name stood out as a realistic threat. "When I checked that list of 24 names, I only see one name that could potentially threaten Littler, and that is Mitchell Lawrie, in my opinion," he explained.

"Not only because of the quality he has on the board, but also because of the story and the potential pressure it could bring with it. Those two are already framed like the upcoming Barney and Taylor, something like that. I think that's the only game with an actual storyline, and the only leg where Littler could also lose something."

Gill agreed that Lawrie's temperament was another reason not to dismiss his chances. "He's got no fear," he said. "Watching him at Lakeside, he doesn't care. He's the kind of player who will go into that environment and won't be frightened."

Sherrock was the other contestant Gill considered capable of troubling Littler, although he acknowledged that her recent competitive results had not consistently matched her historic achievements.

Beau Greaves' dominance of the Women's Series had made qualifying for major events increasingly difficult for her rivals, while Sherrock had found it harder to maintain a regular presence at the World Championship.

Nevertheless, Gill believed her experience under television lights could still be valuable in a contest decided over a single leg. "She's shown enough form in recent times. I think she won an ADC event over the weekend, so she's playing and she's in form. But can she do it against him? Maybe not. She's perhaps the only other one I'd say has probably a 30% chance of doing it."

That figure was Gill's personal estimate, rather than a statistical assessment of Sherrock's chances. He pointed to her previous victories over male opponents and ability to produce big checkouts on major stages. "She's played men and beaten them, and hit massive checkouts against them at the Worlds, of course, so that's a good storyline."

"She's massively known by the public," Gill said. "Is that conducive to an amateur tournament? Maybe not. But she still plays in the amateur system, so she can qualify for Lakeside."

For Netflix, the potential outcomes present an unusual dilemma. Littler winning every leg would reinforce his status as the outstanding player in the sport, but might also produce exactly the predictable contest Gill fears.

A defeat, particularly against Lawrie or Sherrock, would generate a very different reaction. "If Luke Littler loses, all the headlines are going to be 'Luke Littler loses to Mitchell Lawrie,'" Gill suggested. "You get sensationalist clickbait going on in the media, which is what Netflix want to push their products out. What's better for Netflix: Littler winning or losing?"

Gill ultimately suspected that the attention surrounding the programme, including the criticism of its casting, would work in Netflix's favour. "Any publicity is good publicity, in my view. People talking about it, people talking about Mitchell Lawrie, people talking about Fallon Sherrock, it helps them."

Friday's broadcast will provide the first indication of whether Netflix's gamble has paid off. Littler winning every leg would reinforce his dominance but risk the anticlimax Gill fears. A defeat to Sherrock or Lawrie, meanwhile, would give the programme a headline-making moment involving precisely the kind of established competitor whose inclusion has caused so much debate.