Pretty inappropriate comparison, don't you think? I don't think it was that clear to him though he should have sought professional counseling help. I mean almost every football club is sponsored by a betting company, so in principle there is the same conflict of interest as with an individual player.
He can own whatever betting company he likes as long as he is not a player. However, he is still a player, is he not?
However I agree that bet companies sponsoring the clubs isn't the most sensible thing neither. If there is no problem with taking their money for the clubs, why would it be a problem for the player? If a player can rig a game, so can a club.
He is an old player, he played very well this year when he got the chance, he got injured quite frequently I have to say and Milan looked great when he played, however no matter how great he is, he is still an old player, dude is almost 40 years old.
I do not think that he would have any advantage owning a casino neither, let's assume that he bets against himself, well he can do that without owning a casino, let's assume that people on his website wagered on one side too much, let's say maybe he has to lose in order for him to win a lot of money, he could miss shots, but there are 10 other people, but let's assume he has to win, well he wants to win every game anyway. So I do not see "too much" problem here, but even if it is just too much, if he is making a lot of profit from this, he could simply retire, because he is already at that age anyway.
Rules are rules. You may not see a problem. Zlatan might be an honest player with or without being an investor of a casino. It doesn't matter. The rules say you cannot take money from the casinos as long as you are an active player.
The rules let the clubs make sponsorship deals and that sucks too but somehow they don't care.
If you think they need to make an exception for Zlatan, then they need to do it for everybody.