text:
User:Leigh.Sherman/Sports Sponsorship and Government Regulation

Please click on the link to the right to view my presentation on Sports Sponsorship and Government Regulation BPS 2011. Sports Sponsorship and Government Regulation BPS 2011

The issue surrounding the relationship between sporting organisations and alcohol, fast food and gambling sponsorship is a controversial topic, particularly when many Government campaigns are aimed at addressing various problems that are caused primarily by these industries. If key contributors to problems such as gambling addiction, alcohol abuse and obesity are openly promoted in a popular public forum such as the sports industry, then Government policies are fighting a losing battle. The Crawford Report issued to the Government suggests that sporting organisations have a responsibility to play a role when addressing the public and that they should promote a healthy lifestyle that includes activity, responsible alcohol consumption, a healthy diet and the practice of responsible gambling. Surely there is a conflict of interest when they are sponsored by alcohol, fast food and gambling companies.

The problem lies in the co-dependent relationship that the two have developed; each party gets large amounts of public exposure and great profitability in return. Meanwhile the Government is trying to address important issues that are fuelled by the very products sponsoring sport.

Certain recommendations in the Crawford Report explain that in some instances implementing restrictions on advertising and sponsorship in some sporting codes could seriously hinder sport development from grass roots right though to elite levels and eventually lead to their collapse all together. Despite this there is clearly a need to find a common ground in which both Government and the sports industry succeed.

Introduction
As many professional sports quickly move toward a business model with equal amounts of focus on both off and on field performance, the involvement and importance of sports sponsorship has grown. Since the Australian Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992 and the subsequent complete removal of tobacco advertisement in Australian sport in 1996, the void has been steadily filled by alcohol and more recently betting outlets. This article will look at the relationship that has developed between various sporting codes and bodies with a particular focus on the role of gambling outlets. Although the relationship is undoubtedly fiscally successful, there are various and more complex issues involved. This article will examine the contrast created between gambling sponsorship and Government initiative to curb problem gambling among communities, addressing the questions raised when considering gambling as an addiction as well as possible solutions as well as looking at the relationship that the two parties have developed and how symbiotic it is becoming.

Government and Gambling
Today, having a bet on the races or football is common practice and is considered by many as part of being Australian. It's become such common practice that it's not usually questioned and so the relationship between gambling and sport has grown from strength to strength. The first issue surrounding the relationship of sport and gambling outlets lies in the clash it creates with government campaigns and initiatives. Many government initiatives, past and present, are targeted toward curbing problem gamblers. Yet it is becoming more common to see team sponsorship by a gambling company, on ground advertising, constant bombardment though TV, radio and other social media forums. And more recently even naming rights are up for grabs, for example Centrebet Stadium is the now home for the Penrith Panthers National Rugby League Team (NRL, 2011)

At the moment the control over where gambling companies can (or can't) operate is left to State and Territory Governments rather than the Commonwealth resulting in a lack of uniform regulations across the country. This loop hole opened the flood gates in 2008 when Betfair, based in Tasmania, successfully challenged the Western Australian Government's legislation in the High Court of Australia. The High Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to stop interstate operations of gambling outlets like Betfair operating within WA (Durnan 2011). Essentially this allows outlets to base themselves in States and Territories with no opposing legislation and then expand into states where they can't gain licencing. The exploitation of this loop hole created a bombardment of advertising and sponsorships, particularly within sport, so companies could gain a strong foot hold in the market. At the moment Australian states are divided in their approach meaning that any legislation currently in place is effectively nullified by the lack of legislation elsewhere. The total value of sports betting has now been estimated to be close to $400 million annually, exploding from the estimated $230 million in the 08-09 financial year (Livingstone 2011).

The spread of gambling sponsorship on a national scale creates a platform of national exposure that opposes with government initiatives that are aimed at addressing problem gambling. The fact that Australians have the highest loss per resident figure in the world (The Economist 2011) highlights the importance and relevance of government action to try and curb the development of problem gamblers. Particularly when the recently released Gambling and Productivity Report (PC 2010) estimates that between 80,000 and 160,000 Australian adults suffer severe problems caused by their gambling habits. The report also found that an additional 230,000 to 350,000 gamblers experience lesser levels of harm, but who are at risk of developing into problem gamblers. It should be noted that sports betting isn't the prime contributor to these figures, but it is the fastest growing betting market, and thus should be strongly considered when looking at gambling addiction as a whole.

Perhaps the biggest conflict lies within the Australian Government itself. Livingstone and Adams (2010) raise an interesting point when they address the fact governments are heavily dependent of the revenue created by Australian gamblers. They showed that an average of 8.2% of state tax revenue was obtained through gambling revenue. With figures like that, what incentive is there for governments, from a financial point of view, to control the industry any more than they are currently?

The Crawford Report issued to the Australian Government by the Independent Sports Panel (ISP 2009) regarding the administration of Australian sport suggested that sporting organisations have responsibilities when interacting with the public and that they should promote a healthy lifestyle that includes physical activity, responsible alcohol consumption, a healthy diet and the practice of responsible gambling. Given the lack of consistent policy and the widespread involvement of gambling companies with sporting organisations, it could be argued that many of these organisations and the governments are happy to neglect these responsibilities, for their gain but at a cost to a portion of the public.

Video:Tasmanian Government (2009) Anti-gambling 'Prevention' 0:30min

An Addiction?
Shaffer (2011) describes addiction as being 'a relationship with an activity that has adverse biological, social, or psychological consequences for the person engaging in these behaviours'. There is a much stronger association with the word 'addiction' and alcohol and drugs rather than with gambling. But based on the definition, the classification of gambling as a possible addiction is unquestionable. It is still interesting to note that the term 'addiction' still has a stronger association with substance abuse (drugs and alcohol). Perhaps because gambling is an activity rather than a substance and also that gambling's effects are highly personal and not usually physical, making them easier to hide from others. (Shaffer 2011).

Adding to those findingsShaffer (2011) also addresses the fact that, like drugs and alcohol, gambling can produce a physical dependence and create an abstinence syndrome (withdrawal). Traditionally it was thought that this dependence was limited to drugs and the chemical effects that they create when ingested. New evidence suggests that this neuroadaptation can develop from addictive behaviours, like gambling, as well.

When looking at gambling equally as a source of addiction along with alcohol and drugs, you come back to the question over regulation, or the apparent lack of. The Evolution of Alcohol and Tobacco Sport Sponsorship Agreements (2011 n.d.) makes a valid point when they also address the lack of regulation over alcohol sponsorship. Particularly when sport, alcohol and gambling are considered favourite Australian past times which often go hand in hand, yet also have a huge potential for damage. As mentioned already, the complete ban of tobacco sponsorship and advertising in Australia was largely based on the evidence showing that nicotine addiction via smoking is a major cause of various and very serious health problems. Given the links found between alcohol consumption and heart disease, liver damage, cancers of the digestive system, increased risk of breast cancer and memory dysfunction Drug and Alcohol Services South Australia (2010) and then also considering gambling's potential effects (financial crisis, homelessness, anxiety, depression and suicide) (Brett 2009), it is probable that eventually both industries, no matter how profitable, could face similar legislation.

"It’s said that the one key difference between those who gamble for recreation and those who have a problem is that recreational gamblers expect to lose." (Brett 2009)

Education
Despite the biggest global financial crisis, from which Australia was not immune, the gambling industry continued to grow. Brett(2009) attributes this to day to day stresses, like work or finances, things which the financial crises affected most, being the promary cause for the problematic gambling. Based on this he suggests that preventative programs should not try and focus on gambling addiction on its own, rather programs should be integrated to try and help treat the causes rather than the symptom itself.

Additionally the PC(2010) also found that the implementation of programs, irrespective of their methods, have a very high success rate for the participants while in the program. Upon leaving it also states that client follow up sessions decreased the involvement of their gambling participation rates and consequent problems.

Based on these findings education and treatment can be an effective tool. The high success rate associated with most of the methods suggest that despite of the ease of access and availability of gambling, education and treatment are likely to be the most effective tools in curbing problem gambling.

Codependency
Research from Mahr et al. (2006) found that sponsorship agreements with gambling companies were the most common form of sports sponsorship attributing a total 18.8%, showing that the sponsorship of sport by gambling is extremely successful and profitable to both parties. But this strength is also the relationships weakness. The two have become so intertwined and codependent that taking one away from the other could potentially be financially catastrophic.

Although the sponsorship of gambling outlets could be considered safe for the mean time considering the current legislation, the proposed poker machine reform from Tasmanian MP Andrew Wilkie poses a real threat to the financial stability of sport. Findings from the PC (2010) showed that tax revenue from gambling fell in the range of $12.1 to $15.8 billion with the cost to problem gamblers ranging from $4.7 to $8.4 billion. This means that there is a net profit of between $3.7 and $11.1, a portion of which is designated to various sporting organisations, both at the grass roots and elite level. So despite its financial success, many are questioning whether it is ethically acceptable. Adding to the problem is that the current government must try and pass this legislation or risk losing Andrew Wilkie's support and most likely their control, greatly increasing the chance of the legislation becoming a reality.

In protest to these changes the Australian Football League (AFL) and NRL launched public campaigns in an effort to draw support away from the proposed legislation. Many people within the AFL, NRL and clubs that run the pokies argue that taking away the primary contributor to sport will greatly diminish its capacity to survive, let alone grow. ISP 2009 also states that many sporting organisations derive significant levels of funding from sources like alcohol, gambling and fast food and that legislation, if not carefully implemented, could significantly affect the industry. In saying that it also says that in order for sport to continue to grow additional funding will be required and the responsibility for the most efficient allocation and sourcing of funds falls on the Australian Government. More now than ever, sport is referred to as being a 'business', and in any successful business profitability is a key success. If there is no legislation on sourcing funding from gambling and it is the most profitable and efficient, then sports organisations will continues to utilise it because there is no need for them to change.

Aside from the question over the sourcing of funding from gambling, having a sponsorship deal between a betting agency and sporting organisation leads to the possibility of corruption, the impact of which has been seen often in international cricket and recently in the NRL. Corruption diminishes the reputation of the game and also creates more questions over the legitimacy of such sponsorship agreements. Although many sports bodies defend this claim by pointing out that by having this sponsorship the sports organisation and gambling companies can work together in detecting suspicious betting, particularly by players and officials (Livingstone 2011).

K. Lyons (personal communication 29th October 2011) drew an interesting comparison when he considered the link between Kings Cross injecting rooms and the world of sports sponsorship and funding from gambling. Injecting rooms, also a very controversial topic, were introduced to help reduce the use of drugs (particularly heroin) on the streets, reduce the number of deaths due to overdose and to try and curb the incidence of diseases such as hepatitis caused from needle sharing, the centres also offered counselling support. Overall, evidence shows these to be generally successful (Donlan et al 2000). Injecting rooms worked because rather than trying to completely eradicate a drug use (an impossible task), they accepted that it was inevitable and set up measures to control it. Sports organisations argue an extremely valid point in saying that they are better off utilising their sponsorship to control corruption rather than take on the impossible task or complete eradication on their own.

Finding a Balance
The solution lies somewhere in the middle, clearly neither complete control or lack of control by government will result in the continued growth of sport as a whole. Ultimately the decision to gamble, like drinking alcohol or ingesting drugs, lies with the individual who is free to decide how they spend their money. As long as there is the opportunity for sporting organisations to source money from gambling then they will do so, the responsibility of how much is created and distributed from these sources ultimately lies with the government.

Reference List

 * Donlan, K, Kimber, J, Fry, C, Fitzgerald, J, McDonald,D & Trautmann, F 2000, 'Drug consumption facilities in Europe and the establishment of supervised injecting centres in Australia', Harm Reduction Digest, vol. 19, pp. 337-346.

 * Durnan,Z 2008, Betfair Pty Ltd & Anor -v- State of Western Australia, Lander & Rogers, Melbourne, viewed 30th October 2011,http://www.landers.com.au/Publications/Archive/Publicationdetail/tabid/338/ArticleID/211/Default.aspx
 * Economist, The 2011, ‘The biggest losers’, The Economist, viewed 30th October 2011, http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/05/gambling
 * Gambling and Productivity Report 2010, viewed 27th October 2010, http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/gambling-2009/report
 * Independent Sports Panel 2009, Future of Sport in Australia, cat. no. 5582, Commonwealth of Australia
 * Livingstone, C & Adams, P, 'Harm promotion: observations on the symbiosis between government and provate industries in Australasia for the development of highly accessible gambling markets', Addiction Journal, vol. 106, issue 1.
 * Livingstone, C 2011, 'Promotion of gambling short-changes Australian sport...and it's fans', The Conversation, viewed 29th October 2011, http://theconversation.edu.au/promotion-of-gambling-short-changes-australian-sport-and-its-fans-2013
 * Maher, A, Wilson, N, Signal, L & Thomson, G 2006, 'Patterns of sports sponsorship by gambling, alcohol and food companies: an Internet survey', BioMed Central, pp. 1-9.
 * National Rugby League 2011, Sydney, viewed 29th October 2011, http://www.nrl.com/news/news/newsarticle/tabid/10874/newsid/61142/panthers-collect-with-centrebet-stadium/default.aspx
 * Tasmanian Government 2009, Tasmanian government: gambling, viewed 28th October 2011, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isVwOOyTDhQ&feature=related
 * 'The Evolution of Alcohol and Tobacco Sport Sponsorship Agreements' n.d., Wikiversity, wiki article, viewed 30th Ocotber 2011,http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:UC3025323/The_Evolution_of_Alcohol_and_Tobacco_Sport_Sponsorship_Agreements_Essay
 * Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992 (Cwlth), viewed 28th October 2010,http://www.health.gov.au/internet/ministers/publishing.nsf/Content/88777A76EE6AD051CA2571F800281BDF/$File/pyn059.pdf


text:
User:Emmy/Sport's patriarchal hold on sport behaviour

Presentation on Youtube

Since life on earth began, gender equality has always been an issue and in more recent times it has become rather notable in sport. However, as time has progressed women have gained the rights and are gradually becoming more empowering in society and gaining positions of leadership and senior management. The United Nations recognises the use of sport to promote gender equality and empower women as the International Olympic Committee are promoting the need of women in top administrative roles and working with former top female athletes in anticipation to increase the number of women in leadership roles in sport. The ASC have also established two programs in aim to assist with addressing these concerns; Sport Leadership Grants and Scholarships for Women Programs and Women in Sport Leadership Register. There are many issues that we are faced with and will continue to arise, with the stereotypical inhospitable culture, lack of female participation, champions and role models it proves a difficult task to engage women in the first place to become active in high powering positions. Not only having women actively involved managerial positions but also engaging them in sport instead of the ‘conventional housewife’ or overcoming the clichéd illusion of pregnant women not deemed appropriate for different levels of exercise. This article will also discuss and evaluate Australia’s position with attitude towards women’s sport in Australia, looking in particular at issues that constantly surround Netball Australia and the Australian and New Zealand Netball League, The Matildas and The Opals.

Introduction
For women in Australian sport, whether they are a professional athlete, have an administrative or managerial role in sport, or simply participate in local or recreational activity, endure to a great extent hardship compared to males that are involved in same profession. For many years Australian women have constantly been faced with discrimination, lack of sponsorship and support which have ultimately lead to a number of issues that need to be addressed. This journal will seek to provide an in-depth evaluation and discuss the following major issues: It can be noted that perceptions of sports are socially constructed and by questioning the above issues and opinions, we have the opportunity to transform behaviour.
 * Women in leadership roles, such as coaching, administrative and managerial
 * The portrayal of women’s sport in the media, especially involving TV coverage, promotion and publicity of national league competitions and the financial status
 * The accessibility for women to participate in organised sport, fitness and recreational activities, carefully focusing on the number of women participating, the characteristics of those not participating (age, disability, pregnancy and Indigenous or Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) women), the effectiveness of current state and federal grants, the trends and participation in grassroots level
 * The lack of champions and role models for women compared to men and how this has an influence on the participation and involvement of women in sport

Women in high power positions
The number of women on sporting boards has always been lacking in numbers and continues to be under-represented by males in the decision making structures of sport and organisations. Reports show that the number of women on the NSO board is at a low, with women only having an average of 13 per cent involvement in executive positions. Environment, Communications, Information, Technology and the Arts Reference Committee, (2006) The ASC have identified a number of barriers for women’s leadership in the country with the main motives being the lack of past professionals and role models getting involved and embracing change and talent, the lack of female participation downstream as many women remain the minority in local sporting clubs therefore finding it harder to progress to leadership positions and the stereotypical image and culture which has always been a major issue for women resulting in them having very little participation or none at all in grass root levels, thus discouraging them of any leadership roles. While it is obvious that there are a number of concerns for females representing high powering positions, many organisations are working effortlessly towards changing the current perception and status of women in Australian sport. The ASC has identified the promotion of women in sport as one of their key priorities and have enforced this with a number of funding schemes through the Sports Leadership Grants and Scholarships for Women and with the establishment of the Women in Sport Leadership Register. The AOC is also working towards advancing female representation on their boards, along with the IOC which introduced in 2006 a 20 percent gender representation in all National Olympic Committees, which the AOC satisfied these conditions with a representation of 21 per cent. Another requirement for all State Olympic Councils is for the executive boards to have at least one member out of the possible four to five members in addition to the president, vice president and executive directors to be female. Environment, Communications, Information, Technology and the Arts Reference Committee, (2006) Currently on the AOC board, 2 out of the possible 8 positions are filled by females in the senior management roles, with a further large representative of women in the executive office, sport and operations, marketing and finance. Australian Olympic Committee,(2011) Certain NSO in Australia that have higher female participation rates in their sport have recruited gender equality on their boards. Hockey Australia is just one example in which their constitution states that no gender will contribute less than 35 per cent of the board’s membership. Environment, Communications, Information, Technology and the Arts Reference Committee, (2006) Netball Australia is another organisation that has a very dominate female board and in which some of the members, such as Sue Taylor have also represented the sport in a leadership role internationally. Netball Australia,(2011) However there are a number of NSO in Australia that perform less well in ensuring a quality gender mix including the PGA, Basketball Australia, AFL, the Paralympics committee and Cricket Australia. Environment, Communications, Information, Technology and the Arts Reference Committee, (2006) Australia has a very male-dominant sports culture which proves to be another key barrier of women’s participation. Ms Reid’s comment in the report of ‘Women in sport and recreation in Australia’ states that ‘the society we live in is a very male dominant society and in which sport becomes a reflection of this and women have the challenge of prevailing attitudes that encompass their participation in some sports and the leadership roles in organisations.’  This demonstrates the need for change in which Ms Reid goes on to further identify that ‘this doesn’t rely on individual activists or women’s sport agencies, but with national and state organisations and also local clubs.’

The portrayal of women’s sport in the media
During the past a number of comments have been made in regards to women playing professional sport in which various male perceptions have been made very clear. Journalist Greg Baum stated that “Women’s soccer is a joke. Women’s cricket is not much better. Netball is OK, sometimes, when there is nothing else on. But women’s basketball is not. Women runners, jumpers, throwers, cyclists and swimmers do their best, but it is, by definition, second-best.” Baum, (2006)

It is remarks made like these that discriminates women and their sport and makes further sexist opinions seem more acceptable to society. Whether or not comments like these are true or society agrees with them, women playing Australian sport should not be denied the privilege to play their chosen sport and represent their country, team or local community if men can do the same. Many Australian women’s sports have achieved high success and outstanding team efforts; however the media continues to deprive them of support, coverage and sponsorship that most male sports receive. A prime example of this was when the Australia Diamonds played the New Zealand Ferns in a test match just prior to the World Championships; however channel TEN didn’t screen the game until 24 hours after the match had been played and televised the game at midnight. Fans were furious with the channel, commenting on how ashamed they should feel and how disgraceful it is to see that the most popular female sport in Australia wasn’t even broadcasted at a reasonable hour. Knox, (2011) In addition to this the Netball World Championships were shown on delay,  which Australia won in a thrilling final against New Zealand, yet the recent Rugby World Cup shows live matches on a major free-to-air channel, in which the Wallabies only won bronze. This says a lot our country especially as we call ourselves ‘a sporting nation’ and how well we ‘support’ our elite athletes that are representing our country. Salaries and sponsorship is another debate that continues to be an issue for female athletes, as many still have to work full or part time to support themselves and do not receive any forms of sponsorship and more often than not pay from their own pockets to train and play the sport they love. Comparing this to some male athletes who receive phenomenal wages and this occurs not just in Australia, but worldwide. In Australia popular male sports such as AFL, Rugby League and Union are also entitled to payments of television rights and sponsorships, whilst the leading female sports Netball and Basketball have only recently stopped paying for their sport to be broadcasted, a practice that Hockey still faces. Steel, (n.d) In comparing elite athletes salaries, Netball Australia has a combined earnings of $500,000 annually that has to spread amongst 128 players which is described as a ‘mere pittance’ when compared to male athletes. Canberra capitals coach Carrie Graf comments on the salary difference for the NBL who have a salary team cap of $776,000 compared to the WNBL which is regarded to as barely professional, in which superstars such as Jackson and veteran Opals are lucky to receive $30,000-$40,000 which barely covers playing expenses. Soccer and Tennis are all in a similar state in which men are the primary focus and receive higher salary and tournament prize money despite the same effort, time and training that women endure. Environment, Communications, Information, Technology and the Arts Reference Committee, (2006)

Women’s accessibility to sport, recreation and physical activity
Australia’s history with women and sport have seen major changes since the pioneer days when women were restricted completely as it was not ‘socially etiquette’ for women to be seen playing sport. Major government moves helped open the door for many women with the induction of the 1984 Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act which forced many sporting clubs to allow female participation. Sports Commission,'' (2011) Today, women are still face with barriers however strategies to encourage greater number of participants are promoted to Australia’s young girls and female adults. According to The Senate Report-Women in Sport and Recreation in Australia a general conclusion can be made that less women participate in sport and recreation than men. The report reveals that the involvement of girls in physical activity significantly drops off in early teenage years and the need for overall physical activity for women is greater than it is for men. Age has proven to be a major influence on participation levels, with the increase in age comes declining participation rates. Motherhood and pregnancy also attract mix emotions in regards to the level of physical activity and proves as a major factor of decreased levels in sport, as well as women’s focus is generally aimed towards the social participation and enjoyment of sport rather than the competitive and physical side. Another issue that Australia continues to witness are the high levels of immigration from the Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) origins. Therefore Australia is facing rather large populations of health problems. Women from these areas have shown to be at an increased risk of chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes and poor mental health and are more likely to be less proactive towards physical activity. Caperchoine et al, (2011) Whilst it is clearly evident that there are many issues surrounding women and their levels of participation, programs have been established to attempt to overcome this situation. The Australian Womensport and Recreation Association Inc (AWRA) was incorporated in 2005 as a non-government organisation that seeks ‘A strong and healthy Australian culture that supports the active participation of women and girls in sport physical activity and recreation.’  Crosswhite, J (2011)  Working alongside many NSO the program also aims to increase leadership skills through a mentoring project. Many state governments are also specifically aiming programs towards women to increase physical activity levels and ensure that women understand the importance of perusing a healthy and active lifestyle.

Women Role Models in sport
Despite families being a major influence and role model for their children, the literature review on Sports Role Models and their Impact on Participation in Sport supports the theory that athletes provide a strong influence for children. However in Australia there is a lacking of role models for young girls which could suggest a reason to the lower participation rates compared to boys. Males have the support and positive influence of many sportsmen and from a variety of sport unlike women. Men have the strong influences of AFL superstars, champion boxers, Tennis, Rugby and Cricket, whilst women have very few sports stars that promote their sport and have an active role in engaging children in physical activity. The importance of sports role models can be reinforced through cricket’s legend Sir Donald’s Bradman’s comment ‘It is the responsibility of all those that play the game to leave the game in a better state than when they first became involved,' Human Rights Commission, (n.d) something that Australia’s women’s athletes are struggling to do. Netball Australia is one of the very few that are major activists in the promotion and recognising as being role models for young girls, as they have distinguished the dangers that result from lacking female sport role models. Netball Australia believes that the absence of media presence in female sport stars result in young girls turning to the cover girls of teen magazines or their favourite television star, which can result in poor self image and a lot of the time can represent traits and features that are not ideal for women, such as being ‘thin and skinny’. Arguments are made that if there was greater television coverage and advertisement of women’s sport it would be more likely that young girls would choose them as their role models compared to people in the entertainment business. Environment, Communications, Information, Technology and the Arts Reference Committee, (2006) This lack of promotion in women’s sport can be seen in the case of The Matilda’s, who despite being one of the best hockey teams in the world, young girls are unaware or oblivious of the players or their names.

Conclusion
This article considers many factors circulating the business and politics of women in sport and the major issues that Australia are facing. These issues will continue to challenge Australia however they all can be addressed but need the support, especially society who needs to accept and consider change to the structure of sport in Australia. Through the discussion of these main issues, it is also apparent that major sporting and governing bodies need to support and promote women as they are the major bodies and by continuing the many programs that have been established will assist in aiming towards providing equality between Aussie female and male sporting athletes.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
User:MBrown/Grass Roots Sport vs. Elite Development: Decided by Government Sports Funding

The catalyst for government involvement in sports policy and funding came in the late 1970’s, particularly after our nation’s poor performance at the 1976 Montreal Games. What followed was the creation of the Australian Institute of Sport, Australian Sports Commission and the governments obvious preference to fund elite sports development over grass roots sport.

There have been numerous government sport funding policies released throughout the years, however none have managed to create a balance for funding between elite and grass roots sport. Grass roots generally ending up the loser.

Grass roots sports have been forced to branch out and find their own funding by forming partnerships with companies to compensate for a lack government funding.

Introduction
In Australia when government funding of sport is involved there are two types of sport; grass roots and elite. Grass roots is defined as people across all ages participating in sport at a local level, ‘sport for all’ (Burton 2009). Elite sport however is not for all. As its title suggests it is only for the top of the spectrum athletes, those competing at a national and international level.

Success at the grass roots level is demonstrated by high participation levels. Many elite athletes state that their motivation to participate in sport came from watching other famous athletes. So, does the government need to fund mass participation programs to motivate the community to become involved in sport (Kavetsos & Szymanski, 2009)? At the elite level, athletes could hold full time jobs to support themselves and still be elite athletes. Elite athletes are now professional and need to train full time and require support from coaches, sports scientists, trainers, administrators plus medical and clinical assistants. Is the government responsible for supplying the funding to ensure Australia’s elite athletes maintain high levels of success nationally and internationally (Green, 2007)?

In terms of funding does the government treat grass roots and elite sport equally or do they tend to place more value on one compared to the other?

This report will look into the government’s stance towards sports funding over the past 40 years, the main parliamentary inquiries, policies and commissioned reports into funding and whether government funding is necessary for the survival of grass roots sport.

1941-1960
In 1941 the low level of sport funding by the federal government was channelled into recreational sport through the National Fitness Act. In the 1950’s local governments provided minimal funding for basic recreational facilities in their communities.

Throughout the 50’s and 60’s the governments remained indifferent to sport funding policy (Embery, 2000 and Toohey, 2010). The only exceptions came with the minimal funding assistance from the government to the 1956 Melbourne Olympics, and the 1938 and 1962 British Empire Games. Athletes and teams funded trips by raffling chickens and selling lamingtons(Green, 2007 and Embery, 2000).

1970's
The 1970’s were the defining moment for Australian sport. In 1972 sport was acknowledged as a significant area for federal intervention when the Whitlam Labour government established a federal ministry of tourism and recreation. The department’s main objective was improving mass participation in sport. The development of elite athletes was considered a secondary concern as only 11% of the Department of Tourism and Recreations funding was designated to assisting elite athletes (Green, 2007).

Malcolm Fraser’s Liberal party in 1975 abolished the department of tourism and recreation. Federal sports funding was reduced from $11.4 million in 1975-76 to only $5.8 million in 1978-79 (Embery, 2000 and Green, 2007).

The downgrading of the importance of sports funding was lessened due to the following key factors: the government realised that sport was popular with voters; Australia’s poor performance at the 1976 Montreal Olympics; and Bob Elliot’s (minister for sport at the time) push for the establishment of a national elite sport institute following this poor performance (Green & Houlihan, 2005). These factors influenced the governments shift of preference for funding from grass roots sport to elite development.

1980's
The connection between money, sport and politics came to the forefront when the Liberal Government backed the Moscow Olympic games boycott. To prevent athletes and teams from going, the government funded those who did not attend with greater sums of money than had been allocated for attending the games (Embery, 2000).

In 1981 the Australian Institute of Sport(AIS) was built confirming the government’s determination to improve international sporting performances and increase focus on elite development (Green, 2007; Embery, 2000 and Green & Houlihan, 2005). The AIS was primarily funded by the Federal Government and was the primary focus of their sports policy.

In 1983 the Labour party returned to power and showed a strong committment to sport by doubling funding to $50 million. They established the Department of Sport, Recreation and Tourism and founded the Australian Sports Commission(ASC) in 1985, which managed the two main areas of sport; grass roots and elite development. At the same time 75 community leisure centres which had been promised were quietly abandoned (Embery, 2000 and Green & Houlihan, 2005).

Sport was forced to transform into a business when the stock market crashed in 1987 as the government placed restraints on sports funding. In 1989 the ASC was restructured and given greater independence but as it was federally funded its policies closely reflected federal concerns (Green and Houlihan, 2005).

1990's
The defining moment for elite sport and government funding was the decision in 1993 that Sydney would host the 2000 Olympic Games. Federal Government funding swung firmly in favour of elite development with the creation of a $418 million six year elite development program in the lead up to the 2000 games (Toohey, 2010 and Green & Houlihan, 2005).

‘Encouraging Players.... Developing Champions’ was the Liberal parties sports policy when elected in 1996. They believed that hosting the Olympic games would inspire more Australians to participate in sport and from this Australian sport and health would benefit. This however was not the case and no evidence has been found to prove that grassroots participation levels significantly or permanently increased (Embery, 2000 and Toohey, 2010).

Winning at the 1996 Atlanta Olympic games was crucial to justify to the government that funding for the elite athlete development program should be maintained. The government cut funding from non-Olympic sports focusing on sports which had low participation rates. The next round of cuts deemed ‘reallocation of funds’ targeted sports which had won an insufficient number of medals in Atlanta. Debate against funding cuts to non Olympic sports was voiced because in Australia, our major sports which have the highest participation numbers and draw major crowds plus media coverage are non Olympic sports such as netball, football, cricket, Australian rules, lawn bowls, rugby league and rugby union(Green & Houlihan, 2005).

2000's
There was uncertainty after the 2000 Olympics regarding government sports funding as the shadow minister for sport reduced the number of full time athletes at the AIS. This uncertainty did not last long as the 2001 sports policy was released and once again elite development was the priority.

ASC grant allocations during 2005-06 provided elite sport with just under $18 million compared to grass roots sport which was allocated $1.168 million. The 2006-07 funding allocations followed the trend of the year before. Grassroots received $67 million, just over half the amount received by elite sport ($125 million). In case grass roots sport didn’t already realise it was second best to elite sport, the federal government announced that its main aim was to deliver sporting excellence and to help the institute keep its position as a world leader in elite athlete development.

Sports Policies, Parliamentary Inquiries and Government Commissioned Reports into Sports Funding: 70’s- present
•	In 1973 John Bloomfield was commissioned by the government to write a report on the place of elite sport in Australia. His report claimed that greater international sporting success would result in greater grass roots participation. Nine of his twelve recommendations for financial support were aimed at elite development. Bloomfield’s main recommendation was the establishment of an institute of sport. •	Dr Allen Coles was commissioned in 1975 to investigate the viability of Australia having an institute of sport. His report backed Bloomfield’s recommendations for an institute of sport. However the government was still hesitant to fund elite sport at a federal level (Toohey, 2010 and Green & Houlihan, 2005).

•	In 1989 a parliamentary inquiry into sports funding was held. It’s report ‘Going for Gold’ focused on the elite level. ‘Going for Gold’ recommended increased funding for sport and the targeting of specific sports plus establishing talent identification programs. •	Another parliamentary inquiry into sports funding ‘Can sport be bought’ was undertaken in 1990. This inquiry asked the ASC to provide results on how it met its two objectives; elite development and grass roots participation. The report confirmed that increased funding for elite development resulted in international success and justified financial support for elite sport by the federal government. A negative for the government from this inquiry was that it failed to find adequate data on the ASC’s grass roots participation objective (Green & Houlihan, 2005). •	In 1992 the Federal Government announced its sports policy for the period of 1992-6 called ‘Maintain the momentum’, to assemble a national approach to elite development. Sport and recreation was allocated $293 million of which the ASC received $236 million. $17.5 million was allocated to approximately 100 national sporting organisations per year over the four year period (Aust. Federal Government,1992).

•	The Sport 2000 Task Force was created in 1999. Their report ‘Shaping Up’ recommended the government change its priorities to focus on health and social benefits from sport. The report acknowledged that by emphasising elite sport, grass roots participation objectives had been overshadowed.

•	 The sports policy released for 2001-05 was ‘Backing Australia's sporting ability: a more active Australia’. The centrepiece of this policy was to increase participation in sport. However funding allocations did not mirror this. Sports funding reached an all time high ($547 million) during this policy yet grass roots only received 20% of the amount designated to elite development (Green & Houlihan 2005).

•	In 2008 the Minister for sport Kate Ellis ordered an independent inquiry into Australia’s sporting system and future challenges to the system. David Crawford and his independent panel produced the report ‘The future of sport in Australia’ ( the Crawford Report). The report looked at both grass roots and elite sport (Independent Sport Panel 2010). Community members were asked to submit reports and attend forums to express issues of concern. The primary finding from the independent sport panel was that since the government began providing support to sport, the main focus was winning and success at an international level. Therefore grass roots sport had been underfunded compared to elite, resulting in the neglect of our ground level of sport. Recommendations made included a HECS style system for sport called the Athlete Contribution Scheme, the induction of qualified physical education teachers into primary schools, and increased funding into sustainable sporting facilities for grass roots (Independent Sport Panel 2009).

Grassroots: can they go it alone?
There are numerous funding opportunities in the form of grants available for grass roots sport. However because the government tends to view grassroots sport as a means of preventing obesity and other health related issues, these grants more often than not have a heath message attached to them. This health message then has to be advertised through the sport as a condition of the organisation receiving the grant. Such health messages include Tap into water, find thirty, smoke free and sun smart initiatives (ACT Health)

Competition for these grant is fierce. Without funding the organisation can not promote their sport to ensure its growth by attracting participants, volunteers and staff. Lack of growth results in a lower level of funding.

Does grass roots really need government funding? In the UK companies are realising the benefits of investing in grassroots sports from a corporate responsibility view (Terry, M 2001). Companies are also investing in grass roots to test products on target markets. For example Milo is not a mainstream product in the UK, so Nestle invested £5,000 a year for 3 years to enable them to ‘sell’ Milo to the UK public. Examples of companies which have already initiated this in Australia include Nestle through the promotion of Milo and Schweppes through their product Cottee’s.

NESTLEsponsor the Milo children ski programs in the Australian snowfields. Milo has also formed a great partnership with Cricket Australia and sponsors its junior programs such as; Milo in2Cricket, Milo Kanga Cricket, Milo Super 8’s and the Milo Summer of Cricket (Nestle Milo, 2009).

Cottee's have formed a partnership with Football Federation Australia and now fund member federations to run school clinics or hold multiple school gala days at local sporting grounds with the message that ‘sport should be about having fun’. This enables football (soccer) member federations to advertise their sport to their grassroots target market (Cottee’s 2011).

The forming of partnerships with sports by both these companies allow cricket and football to run fun focused clinics to school aged children and further promote their sports at a community level without having to worry about government funding.

Conclusion
The government has not always played a role in funding sport. In the early years it took quite an impartial stance to sports policy, that is until Australia’s inadequate medal tally at the Montreal Olympic Games. This was the defining moment for governmental sports funding. The tide changed and government funding followed, with the creation of the AIS  and the ASC,  and the governments obvious preference to fund elite sports over grass roots sport. The government believed that putting funds into elite sport would result in an increased interest in grass roots sports and higher participation levels. However this has never been proven and, grass roots sports are forced to rely on health grants or to form partnerships with companies for funding.

Grass roots sport is the base from which elite athletes evolve. The government needs to focus more strongly on providing funds to the grass roots level to allow sports to continue to grow and create talented athletes, without increasing registration to cover the costs. Partnerships with companies are a fantastic source of money but it is the government who controls the facilities i.e. sports grounds and courts where grass roots sports take place almost every weekend of the year. The government needs to place more value on grass roots sports and look to ways in which it can sustainably improve facilities and support grass roots sport to ensure it flourishes.

Grass roots is where future elite athletes begin their sporting journey and without government funding to assist clubs to survive these athletes will not be sticking around to cross the finish line.


text:
User:RB2011/Politics of Rugby League

The presentation of the document can be viewed HERE

National Rugby League (NRL) club boards
The About Australia web page on the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (2008) website describes Australia as a sporting nation with a strong “sporting culture”. Australian sport therefore receives a great deal of media attention and rugby league is no different, particularly with the poor reputation of players in the National Rugby League (NRL) competition through ill discipline and antisocial behaviour. However, recent media attention has been placed on particular players who have spoken out against NRL club boards such as ex Penrith Panther’s captain Petero Civoniceva. Using triangulated media articles as support, this essay will discuss the politics of the NRL with a focus on club board’s influence over the operations of the football club, particularly in regards to player and coaching contracts. It will also debate whether board members remain unaccountable for club decisions. Penrith Panthers, Parramatta Eels and Manly Sea Eagles cases will be examined throughout, all of which have experienced club controversies involving board members and poor decision making.

Petero Civoniceva
Players who have actively lobbied for change have experienced mixed reactions but a great deal of media attention. For example, ex Penrith Panthers Captain Peter Civoniceva strongly criticised the Penrith board in the Panther newsletter which is distributed at club home games (Massoud 2011). Civoniceva called for fans to relieve the current board of their duties after becoming increasingly frustrated with the decision-making process at board level and lack of player consultation in terms of coaching contracts (Massoud 2011). Civoniceva and fellow team mates were incensed by the sacking of then coach Matt Elliott and again when Steve Georgallis was not selected to fill the role (Beniuk 2011).

Reaction
The comments sparked a media frenzy within rugby league journalism and attracted comments from a number of different rugby league players, ex players and management (Beniuk 2011). He received support from fellow players but strong criticism from others such as ex Panther Mark Geyer who is the brother-in-law of Penrith board member Greg Alexander. Geyer retorted on his radio show “he’s (Civoniceva) the captain of a club that underachieved. Blame yourself” (Beniuk 2011). This blind and narrow minded cynicism from ex players does in no way contribute to the overall situation let alone aid the club in resolving the issue at hand. Insidious comments such as Geyer’s should not receive any attention at all. Additionally, the board’s response or lack of action also did not do the club any favours in resolving the issue, neither has the $20 million in losses over the last two years (Massoud 2011).

The Panthers Board
The board have not been questioned or confronted about these immense losses (Massoud 2011). This case shows the tension that can arise between players and club boards as a result of poor decision making and highlights the lack of accountability that board members face even after the publication of substantiated evidence. Replacing or amending the Panthers board seems to be an extremely difficult task to achieve, whether this is due to members being considered a “protected species” remains to be seen but what is clear is that the Penrith Panthers board are very lucky to still have a seat.

CEO Paul Osborne Controversy
Boards and its members often do not take responsibility for their actions. NRL club Parramatta Eels recently experienced allegations regarding financial irregularities which have been linked to CEO Paul Osborne (Read 2011, McClymont 2011, Riccio 2011). For example, Osborne was forced to repay $35,000 in unauthorised payments made on his club credit card. It was later revealed that club chairman Roy Spagnolo loaned Osborne money, upon Osborne’s request, to repay the original debt. Pirtek, one of the Eels major sponsors, then threatened to withdraw the $2 million major sponsorship if Osborne was not sacked immediately (Read 2011, McClymont 2011, Riccio 2011). A decision regarding Osborne’s future has still not been made but chairman Spagnolo stated that Osborne’s future is still with the club (Read 2011, McClymont 2011, Riccio 2011). This emphasises a clear lack of accountability at the Eels, especially with a $2 million sponsorship deal at risk. It also highlights the notion that board members are very difficult to have removed especially if Osborne is not ultimately stood down. Perhaps individuals with personal ties to a club or individuals who have significantly contributed to the club throughout their career receive preferential and more favourable treatment when controversies or allegations arise. However, for clubs such as the Eels to move forward, individuals must be held accountable and suffer the consequences of their actions regardless of what they have previously done for the club.

Recruitment Disaster
It is easy for club boards to become a stale part of the culture and resist change when it becomes necessary. Board members become imbedded in past club culture and often prefer traditional methods over modern and proven techniques. This can be said of Parramatta in terms of recruitment policies which has been heavily criticised by players and supporters. The Eels board opted to contract older and more experienced players over developing younger talent at the club. For example, four players from other NRL clubs were contracted to the Parramatta Eels first grade side for the 2011 season. Three of the four players have now retired with no reported repercussions for the board (Read 2011, McClymont 2011). This again highlights the lack of accountability and poor decision making at the club particularly by the board members. They set and develop the club’s recruitment policies and are heavily involved in the design of contracts and player agreements (Read 2011, McClymont 2011).

Des Hasler Debacle
Manly Sea Eagles is another NRL club which has experienced indifferent actions from the board. Bob Fulton, one of Manly’s more influential figures after a significant contribution to the club questioned the decision making of the Sea Eagles board in regards to two significant choices in the past two years (Ritchie 2011). The first resulted in the sacking of recognised media manager Peter Peters and the second caused coach Des Hasler to leave the club after more than a year of stalling on a contract extension (Ritchie 2011). Hasler signed with Canterbury Bulldogs as head coach for the 2013 season after being exasperated with the Manly Sea Eagles board but is still contracted for the 2012 season (Ritchie 2011, Read 2011).

Board Reaction
Several board members attempted to have Hasler removed for this season but player pressure and input from influential figures forced the board to retain him (Ritchie 2011, Read 2011). The Manly board have either lost touch with the game of rugby league and what is good for the club or are placing personal desires ahead of the club as a whole. Hasler has been an extremely successful coach for Manly winning two premierships in six years (Ritchie 2011, Read 2011). The board blamed financial restrictions for the inability to match the offer from Canterbury but Hasler confirmed that his contract at the Bulldog’s is worth less than the Manly offer (Hooper 2011). Hasler also stated that despite the larger offer, he could not remain at a club where the board had hidden agendas and continued to fight internally (Hooper 2011). It is remarkable that the board did not extend Hasler’s contract when they had the chance and that they are now trying to hide behind inaccurate information. This “debacle” can again be related to the imbedded culture of a lack of answerability of club boards in the NRL. It is consistently coaching staff or players who lose out because of board incompetence.

Methods
It is easy to criticise boards when clubs experience controversies as immediate action is required often under a great deal of pressure. But boards surely understand that the role is one based on responsibility and handling pressure where decisions need to be made in a timely manner to benefit the club as a whole, not to further hidden agendas which can be said of certain clubs in the past. Decision makers need to be held accountable to ensure the integrity of the club remains in tact, to ensure the club experiences success through effective procedures and to maintain the support of loyal fans who are arguably the most important aspect of any club. Taking care of these issues will only make it easier for players to perform to the best of their ability on the field. Off field controversies and problems negatively influence on-field performance and players should not have to worry about issues relating to coaching staff contracts, the club’s financial situation and poor decision making at board level. One problem fuelling the lack of accountability of club boards may lie in the fact that there are very few, if any, controls to evaluate or monitor these decisions. If the club CEO and Chair are involved such as the Parramatta Eels case with Paul Osborne and Roy Spagnolo who is going to oversee their actions if they are of the highest authority at the club? Are there measures in place to ensure this does not occur or how is this to be handled when issues such as this arise? Perhaps independent parties or auditors need to become more involved in clubs to ensure operations are effective, ethical and avoiding conflicts of interest. This could be one method the NRL implements to avoid controversies involving club boards and to increase the accountability of board members.

Conclusion
From the Penrith Panthers, Parramatta Eels and Manly Sea Eagles examples it can be seen that National Rugby League club boards in the recent past have not been held accountable for their poor decisions. The lack of player consultation before selecting a new coach by Panthers board members and the sacking of then coach Matt Elliott drove Representative Captain Petero Civoniceva to write a scathing report about the board in the club newsletter. Civoniceva will return to the Brisbane Broncos which will surely prove a huge loss for the Panthers next year. A $20 million loss over two years at the Panthers and no action also highlights the lack of accountability at the club. At the Parramatta Eels, a clear conflict of interest had arisen between club CEO Paul Osborne and Chairman Roy Spagnolo involving the borrowing of funds to repay a debt to the club. This situation was exacerbated when Spagnolo announced that Osborne would remain at the club despite the major sponsor threatening to withdraw its $2 million funding if Osborne was not removed from his position. Manly Sea Eagles will lose dual-premiership coach Des Hasler to the Canterbury Bulldogs in 2013 after over a year stalling with a contract negotiation. Board members tried to hide behind financial restrictions by saying the club could not match Canterbury’s offer but Hasler revealed that his contract with Canterbury was less than what the Sea Eagles had offered. The board has not experienced any repercussions. These three examples clearly highlight how poorly certain NRL club boards have acted in the past without any serious repercussions. In the future, this must be changed for clubs to be successful on the field, to be successful as a business off the field and to maintain a loyal fan base.

Reference List

 * Beniuk D 2011, Business as usual, say stung Panthers, The Roar, viewed: 27 October 2011 http://www.theroar.com.au/2011/08/25/business-as-usual-say-stung-panthers/

 * Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 2008, Australia in Brief: A Sporting Life, viewed: 29 October 2011 http://www.dfat.gov.au/aib/sport.html

 * Hooper J 2011, Sack Des Hasler now, say Canterbury Bulldogs, The Sunday Telegraph, viewed: 28 October 2011 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/sack-des-hasler-now-say-canterbury-bulldogs/story-e6frfgbo-1226161909821

 * Massoud J 2011, Penrith’s outgoing skipper Peter Civoniceva urges Panthers fans to dump the NRL’s club board, The Daily Telegraph, viewed: 28 October 2011 http://www.foxsports.com.au/league/nrl-premiership/penriths-outgoing-skipper-petero-civoniceva-urges-panthers-fans-to-dump-the-nrl-clubs-board/story-fn2mcuj6-1226120915335

 * McClymont K 2011, Crisis rocks Parramatta club as director quits, Sydney Morning Herald, viewed: 27 October 2011 http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/crisis-rocks-parramatta-club-as-director-quits-20111014-1lpac.html

 * Read B 2011, Brett Kenny leads attack against Parramatta Eels board, The Australian, viewed: 27 October 2011 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/brett-kenny-leads-attack-against-parramatta-eels-board/story-e6frg7mf-1226111940336

 * Read B 2011, Des Hasler was fed up with Manly’s internal power games, The Australian, viewed: 28 October 2011 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/des-hasler-was-fed-up-with-manlys-internal-power-games/story-e6frg7mf-1226161616786

 * Riccio D 2011, Parramatta Eels chief executive Paul Osborne could cost the club funding from their major sponsor Pirtek, Herald Sun, viewed: 27 October 2011 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/parramatta-eels-chief-execuative-paul-osbourne-could-cost-the-club-funding-from-their-major-sponsor-pirtek/story-e6frfgbo-1226173941938

 * Ritchie D 2011, Bob Fulton slams Manly Sea Eagles board, backs Toovey, Herald Sun, viewed: 28 October 2011 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/bob-fulton-slams-manly-sea-eagles-board-backs-geoff-toovey/story-e6frfgbo-1226161913941

 * Ritchie D 2011, Des Hasler enemies lose Manly Sea Eagles board boilover, Herald Sun, viewed: 28 October 2011 http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/des-hasler-enemies-lose-manly-sea-eagles-board-boilover/story-e6frfgbo-1226163411462

title: User:RB2011/Politics of Rugby League


text:
User:Daniel.Higgins/Foreign ownership and foreign players: the impact on the English Premier League and its teams

Here is a link to my presentation on the same topic as the essay. Please leave your opinions and comments on the video. Foreign Involvement in the English Premier League

Since the inception of the English Premier League (EPL) in the 1992/1993 season the percentage of English players that start matches has dropped by 47 percent (Walters et al., 2008). This essay will examine the impact of foreign team ownership of particular English Premier League football clubs and the involvement of foreign players. The basis of this essay will question the impact foreign involvement has on the EPL and English football in general (including the English national team). Arguments have shown both positive and negative impacts of foreign ownership. Foreign ownership it injects larger finances at the team’s discretion resulting in attracting better international players and tougher competition. This influx of international players may be terrific for the League, however, it may have a significantly detrimental bearing on the local players that the English national team is comprised of (Walters et al., 2008). The positives and the negatives of foreign ownership and players will be examined. This essay will encompass all aspects of foreign ownership by looking at the commodification of the EPL and that means for the league and English football. It can then be determined whether foreign involvement in the EPL is positive or negative for the English Premier League, English football and world football. After assessing foreign involvement in the EPL the comparison will be made to see how foreign involvement could benefit or hinder the A-League in Australia.

[https://www.youtube.com/embed/O265KnYu0XI Sky News - English Football: Why Aren't We Winners Anymore? (Sky News, 2008)]

Introduction
The EPL is one of the premier division football competitions in the world (EPL Website). This means there is a large amount of interest from international parties, including players, owners and managers. This has sparked arguments whether international involvement and influence results in positive or negative implications for the EPL and English football in general. This essay will analyse the politics in the EPL, in particular, the involvement of foreign players. It will also examine the business attraction of the EPL through ownership and why foreign owners are becoming more prominent in the EPL. Business in the EPL will be examined including how the EPL is changing through commodification. Throughout the essay there will be examples of how the business and politics of the EPL intersect through their influences upon each other and what it all means for English football. After the analyses of the EPL and English football, some of the key understandings will be applied locally to the relatively new A-League competition in Australia.

The English Premier League
The English Premier League (EPL) kicked off in August 1992 after a reformation of English Football (EPL History). Toward the end of the 1980’s clubs were growing concerned with the expenses of recommendations to improve stadium facilities and the difficulties in attracting top players. By 1988 there were 10 clubs that had threatened to break away from the English First Division in an attempt to optimise television revenues. In 1992 the EPL was formed as a commercially independent competition separate from the English Football Association (EPL History). Since the first match in 1992 the EPL has grown and succeeded in becoming one of the premier football competitions in the world. Currently there is approximately 70 percent of the worlds estimated 2.08 billion football fans following the EPL, making it the most watched football league in the world (EPL News). Since the beginning of the EPL much has changed within the league. With many of the club owners, managers and players in the league coming from overseas it questions the locality of the competition. Is the EPL England’s top football league, or is the EPL the world’s top football league merely hosted in England? In 1992 there were only 11 foreign players (not British or Irish) in the entire EPL (EPL History). By 2009 the average number of foreign players per team was 13 (BBC News, 2009). In 1999 Chelsea was the first ever club to have a starting line up completely comprised of foreign players (The Guardian, 2001). Then in 2005, Arsenal was the first ever EPL club to have a 16 player match squad completely comprised of foreign players (BBC News, 2005). It is not only the players in the EPL coming from foreign nations, it is also the club owners. As recently as 2011 there was an EPL club takeover of Arsenal Football Club by Stan Kroenke. Kroenke already owned a significant stake in the club and completed a takeover by increasing his stake 62.89 percent. Since the completion of this takeover it meant that half of the teams in the EPL are owned by foreigners (The Independent, 2011). The ‘big four’ premier league teams, Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool are all owned by foreign individuals, families or companies (The Independent, 2011).

English Premier League politics of foreign involvement
Many football analysts have attributed the recent poor performance of the English national football team to the ever increasing number of foreign players in the local top division (EPL). When England failed to qualify for the Euro 2008 competition this argument was further fuelled. Taylor (2007) argued that the failure to reach the pinnacle of the Euro 2008 competition was a direct result of the lack of English footballers in English football. Further to this, Taylor (2007), also argued that the ever increasing number of foreign owners in the EPL could compound this theory of detrimental foreign influence. Taylor (2007) argued that foreign ownership could lead to foreign management methods and further amounts of foreign players entering the EPL. Politically there is debate whether the theories that foreign influences are negative on the English national team are outweighed by the economic positives for the EPL and England itself (Dobson et al., 2001). There have also been contrary arguments from influential figures in the world football scene. Vincente Del Bosque, head coach for the Spainish national football team, has voiced his opinion that foreign players and managers are not detrimental to English football, and further to this, they are beneficial to English football (Del Bosque, 2010). Because the foreign players and managers that are involved in the EPL are generally of an extremely high quality, Del Bosque believes they assist in the growth and improvement of English football (Del Bosque, 2010). Yet it seems that there is a side of caution about the number of foreign players in the EPL. In 1999 the Home Office, England’s department that controls immigration, constricted the rules for allowing foreign footballers (outside of the European Union) to gain the necessary work permits to play in England. They did this in response to concerns that English footballers were being overlooked by clubs, with foreign players being prefered (GNN, 1999). It is difficult to determine, from the arguments put forward, whether foreign influence on English football is detrimental or beneficial to English football. However, it is evident that English football is currently in a position where it has the opportunity to choose. It is hard to imagine that foreign influence should be eliminated from English football, yet for English football to succeed the amount of foreign influence (number of foreign players, owners and managers) should not eclipse the lead position that England currently holds. There will continue to be different opinions on this matter arguing for the extremes of complete foreign involvement or exclusion, yet there needs to be a balance to ensure the success of English football and its respective first division, the EPL. The EPL seems to agree with this view. In the EPL squad rules there was the introduction of the ‘home grown’ rule. This rule is a condition that of the 25 players that an EPL side is comprised of, a minimum of eight of those players must be ‘home grown’ (English Premier League Rules). “A home grown player is defined as one who, irrespective of his nationality or age, has been registered with any club affiliated to the Football Association or the Welsh Football Association for a period, continuous or not, of three entire seasons or 36 months prior to his 21st birthday (or the end of the season during which he turns 21)” (EPL News).

English Premier League business and foreign ownership
One apparent factor for the increase in foreign players in the EPL is the foreign ownership of various clubs in the English top division. However, there is more to EPL club ownership than its impact on the players involved. Of the 20 current EPL clubs, 10 of them are completely or partially (majority stake) owned by foreign individuals, families or organisations (The Independent, 2011). According to Walters et al. (2008), ownership of EPL teams can be a lucrative investment fuelled mostly by huge amounts of income from television deals. Walters et al. (2008) concern is that the foreign investors are driven solely by business and profiteering alluding to a lack of interest in the success and growth of football in England. It is hard to agree with this perspective as it seems the goals of profit by the club owners and goals of improving football in England are both achieved by good performances of the teams and the EPL. Dobson et al. (2001) argue that there are five main objectives that owners of football clubs use to assess success. They are profit, security, attendance or revenue, playing success and health of the league (Dobson et al., 2001). These goals outlined by Dobson et al. (2001) are all factors that are vital for the success of English football in general as well as the financial success of the owners.

Commodification of the English Premier League
The increase in foreign ownership can be linked to the commodification of the EPL. According to Nauright et al. (2010) the EPL is now a commercialised league in which foreign owners can focus on a number of different revenue streams. The revenue streams include television rights, premium seating options, club branding and other goods and services related. Nauright et al. (2010) also argue that there is now a contrast within the EPL between the foreign ownership methods of management/marketing and 'Americanization' of the league and the longstanding traditions that exist within English football. It is important for the EPL and its foreign owners, similarly to the issue of foreign players, to incorporate foreign influences in moderation. The increase in foreign ownership has increased the money involved in the league, the ability to attract high profiles players and the exposure of English football globally. The shared goals of English football, the EPL and the foreign owners must respect and nurture the rich history and traditions of English football. The EPL needs to remain an English football focused league with business and profiteering assisting in its success and growth.

What this means for Australia
The first A-League match in Australia kicked off in August of 2005 (A-League History). More recently, due to success and goals for growth, the A-League expanded to 10 teams (A-League History). The A-League and the EPL are very similar in many ways. They are both the premier competition in their respective countries, they both attract large amounts of media and television attention and they both have foreign involvement from players, managers and owners (A-League Team Profiles)(EPL Team Profiles). This means there is much the A-League can learn from the EPL to assist in the competitions success in the future.

Many of Australian first team (the Socceroos) playing overseas, with some in the EPL (Fourfourtwo Socceroos). Therefore the continual involvement of international players in the EPL is good for Australian football. For Australian players to be playing in arguably the top division in the world is enormously beneficial for Australian football and Socceroo performances. In addition to this, the involvement of high quality international players is good for the A-League as it will assist in raising the level of competition and the abilities of the local Australian players.

Conclusion
To investors, owners, players, managers, fans, the League and English football the most important aspect for each of them is the success of the EPL. The success of the EPL is influenced greatly by international input. The EPL arguably would not be anywhere near the level it is currently without the exceptionally high performing foreign players and its wealthy owners. However, it is important for English football to ensure the EPL remains England's premier competition, not the worlds premier competition merely hosted in England. The foreign owners in the EPL can be seen as an asset for the English football as their extremely high finance levels can attract top players which in turn will improve the level of competition and the English footballers involved. With the relatively new A-League in its infancy in Australia, the further development of the A-League can utilise growth of the EPL for guidance in its own development. Foreign involvement, both players and owners, in the EPL is essential. It is important to utilise it in moderation to ensure the league remains local while it grows and develops through a combination of foreign and local involvement.


text:
User:Downie/Limited News Involvement is the Best Thing for Rugby League

The National Rugby League looks set to establish an independent commission to run the sport on November 1. Currently co-owned by media giant News Ltd and the Australian Rugby League (ARL), there is substantial criticism over alleged poor governance of the competition. As it stands, the ARL, the New South Wales Rugby League (NSWRL), the Queensland Rugby League (QRL) and the National Rugby League (NRL) all have some say in how the sport is run, making it a complicated and time-consuming process. The independent commission looks to unify the roles and responsibilities relating to the administration of the league which will hopefully bring upon a more efficient and transparent method of decision-making.

News Ltd, in addition to their 50% stake in the game, also own over two-thirds of the Brisbane Broncos and 100% of the Melbourne Storm. This leads to many questions of fairness and a conflict of interest, which will be removed as the new administrators will be independent of the clubs. These issues, such as the Melbourne Storm salary cap drama, again point to poor management which will hopefully be addressed come November 1.

Examples of why News Ltd should no longer be involved as owners of the game:
 * Melbourne Storm salary cap scandal – News Ltd owned team breaking laws of the game for several years, players signing several contracts
 * The recent Manly/Melbourne brawl – both teams fined $50k, Melbourne’s fine paid by News Ltd company to News Ltd company
 * TV broadcast deal and publishing rights – conflict of interest, not enough money going in
 * Will always be a question of fairness when the two News Ltd teams have been two of the most successful in last five years
 * Their departure will result in a more efficient administration structure

Introduction
The National Rugby League (NRL) is one of Australia's premier sporting competitions. With fifteen teams along the densely-populated east coast of Australia, as well as one in New Zealand, it constantly receives ever improving crowd figures as well as featuring strongly in both free-to-air and pay TV (where they dominated with 74 of the top 100 programs ) ratings. It celebrated its centenary in 2008 and looks set for a strong future as one of the dominant sports in Australia.

However, the NRL has a history of political troubles, with its inception being the product of a turbulent off-field war between the Australian Rugby League (ARL) and News Ltd's Super League. The end result was a unified competition with the powers shared between ARL board members and the News Limited Corporation, with each having three seats on the NRL partnership committee. The unification was only in name though as the two entities have remained at loggerheads for much of the competitions history, with several conflicts of interest (over such things as league expansion, media scheduling and payments, and the two News Ltd owned clubs) meaning the progress of the game as a business has slowed dramatically.

This is why the announcement of a new NRL Independent Commission, a not-for-profit body run by eight neutral administrators who will be charged with making decisions in the best interests of the game, has been so well received. It will see the withdrawal of News Ltd from any administration of the league as well as seeing the cessation of the ARL, with their other duties (such as junior development) to revert to the state bodies. However, at the time of writing this essay on November 1, the planned establishment date of the Independent Commission, the new body still looks no closer to taking control of the game due to the ongoing conflicts between News Ltd and the ARL.

NRL structural overview
To understand why the behind-the-scenes situation is a bureaucratic nightmare, it is important to be aware of the current administrative structure. At the top of the management chain is a Partnership Executive Committee, which consists of three representatives from News Ltd and three from the ARL, the main role of which is to govern the agreement between the two and make major financial decisions. This body in turn commissions the National Rugby League Board who administers the competition, which again has three officials from each organisation. The National Rugby League itself is another organisation with approximately forty staff members at their headquarters dealing with issues such as football operations, strategy and special projects, salary cap and registration, marketing, media and finance. Below them are the state bodies, the Queensland Rugby League (QRL) and New South Wales Rugby League (NSWRL) who run the state competitions. As it stands, junior rugby league development is handled by the ARL.

Therefore, from top to bottom there are seven boards or organisations involved in running the game of rugby league in Australia. The introduction of the Independent Commission will reduce this number to four – the Independent Commission as a neutral governing body, the National Rugby League to administer the national competition and the two main state bodies to manage state affairs and junior development. As a result the whole political system will be much more streamlined and hopefully result in less conflicts of interest and more beneficial advancements to the league.

Problems with News Ltd's role
As previously mentioned, this system has brought about several issues for the NRL, especially in relation to the goals and motives of the two organisations involved. News Ltd in particular have come under fire for their involvement in seemingly all financial aspects of the game – the overall administration of the NRL, being a major shareholder in two different clubs and their ownership of TV rights holder Foxtel, as well as publishing several major newspapers including the Daily Telegraph, the Australian, the Courier Mail and the Herald Sun, all of which run stories on the NRL and can influence consumer behaviour. All of this means that News Ltd has a substantial say in the growth of rugby league as a sport and can be seen as a reason why clubs have been getting disgruntled at the lack of money coming their way.

The current annual grant to NRL clubs is valued at $3.65 million, but the executives of all sixteen clubs have been united through their desire to almost double this. They are arguing that the current media rights deal is significantly undervalued at only $90 million a year, especially considering the fact NRL broadcasts are nationally more watched than those of the AFL (as seen in the ratings outlined in the introduction), who recently signed a $1.25 billion TV rights package. An increase in the NRL TV rights deal to a level similar to that of the AFL will allow the NRL to listen to the clubs executives and increase their annual grant, but this may only occur when News Ltd are removed from administration of the game.

This is due to the fact that as it stands, News Ltd will not find such a deal viable for them as they will not be willing to spend substantial money on something they already own and they would not accept a valued deal from competitors Channel Nine, who also have broadcast rights for some of the games.

Club ownership
This conflict of interest is also evident in News Ltd’s ownership of the Melbourne Storm (100% ownership) and the Brisbane Broncos (67%), two of the most successful teams over the last decade. The Melbourne Storm case is the most interesting, especially as the club was found to have significantly rorted the salary cap for several years with News Ltd directors apparently having no knowledge of the transgressions until they were made public. Would they have got away with it for so long (or at all) if they were not News Ltd owned?

Rugby league commentator and analyst Phil Gould also makes a good point regarding the potential signing of Greg Inglis from the Melbourne Storm to the Brisbane Broncos – one News Ltd owned team to another (though the deal then fell through after the player changed his mind). He states that it was routinely unfair on the other clubs in the competition that private talks between the two News Ltd owned teams were able to take place, and that it was a conflict of interest to allow it to happen. He argued that there should have been complete transparency of the deal, especially following the Melbourne Storm salary cap scandal.

Another point brought forward is that the Broncos have a monopoly on the Brisbane market. The population of Brisbane is just over two million, approximately half that of Sydney. Yet they are home to only one NRL team whereas Sydney have nine. This imbalance and the lack of any real push by the NRL to fix it has again raised questions over the motives of the NRL administration. By allowing the Broncos to dominate the Brisbane market it gives them greater marketing opportunities to a wider audience, which is reflected in their number of appearances in the Friday night free-to-air timeslot, the one which attracts the most viewers each week (this is seen in figure 1.1 below).

When considering the fortunes of Melbourne and Brisbane, it is important to also recognise the other side of the spectrum. Clubs such as the Cronulla Sharks, North Queensland Cowboys and South Sydney Rabbitohs have either never won a Premiership or, in Souths case, have been trophyless for the past forty years. They struggle every year to make ends meet and are given none of the advantages that the Storm or Broncos receive. How should they feel when such conflicts of interests benefit these clubs?

Until the NRL disentangles itself from News Ltd, its decision-making and ethical standing will continue to be compromised.

Positives of News Ltd involvement
With all this being said, it would be unfair not to mention the benefits News Ltd brings to the game – just not in a position of absolute authority. Without their involvement, the Melbourne Storm would almost certainly cease to exist and the NRL would lose out on a huge potential target market. Also, through their Pay TV company Foxtel, millions around Australia are able to watch live games that otherwise would not be available to them. This article is not stating News Ltd should be removed completely from the sport; far from it in fact. They still have a lot to offer the National Rugby League, they should just be well away from having any control over how the game is run.

Benefits of the Independent Commission
Apart from removing News Ltd’s influence over the management of the game, the new Independent Commission will bring its own benefits to the sport. A much more streamlined management chain, as pointed out earlier, will allow a much more effective decision making process, encompassing all areas from the national league through to the state bodies and grassroots development. This improvement in corporate governance will bring rugby league more into line with other businesses and industries, and hopefully bring its business system into the 21st Century.

To make a comparison, the Australian Football League (AFL) has had an independent commission in place since 1993, which also has eight commissioners on its board. The NRLs ideal model will follow that of the AFLs, which is completely independent from the clubs allowing it to make decisions in the best interests of the game, rather than individual stakeholders.

This will also allow the NRL to put its focus back on the game itself, rather than backroom politics. Issues regarding the sport such as determining of fixtures, the finals format, video referee and referee performance, and various rule interpretations have had inconsistencies and controversy surrounding them for several years now but have not been acted upon due to the complex and inefficient management structure. The Independent Commission will be able to see to these problems and increase the selling power of rugby league as a form of entertainment. As loyal and passionate as sporting, and rugby league in particular, fans are, the political nightmare that is hindering the games progression may most definitely lead to supporters leaving the sport if the problem is not fixed sooner rather than later.

Conclusion
The date this essay was finalised coincided with the date of the planned handing over of control of the game from the ARL and News Ltd to the Independent Commission. As it still has not yet occurred, it further highlights the issues the games current governance structure is having and why changes need to be made. Problems relating to the proposed television rights deal in particular have been blamed for delays which demonstrates again the conflict of interest of having a major media organisation co-owning the sport. The sooner rugby league is in neutral hands the earlier it will be able to make the advancements needed to move the business structure into the 21st Century.