European Union/sports dispute

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Current situation

Do not edit the version below, this is the status quo version. If you think it should be otherwise create your own version below

[edit] EU article

[edit] Culture

[edit] Sports

 This section may stray from the topic of the article into the topic of another article, Sport policies of the European Union.
Please help improve this section or discuss this issue on the talk page. (help)
The relevance of particular information in (or previously in) this article or section is disputed.
The information may have been removed or included by an editor as a result.
Please see discussion on the talk page considering whether its inclusion is warranted.(March 2008)
Spectator sports are popular in many EU member states (Camp Nou, Barcelona)
Spectator sports are popular in many EU member states (Camp Nou, Barcelona)
Further information: Sport in Europe and Sport policies of the European Union

As in other cultural issues, many of the sports policies are with the individual member states. However, policies of the EU have had an impact on sports, such as the freedom of employment which was at the core of the Bosman ruling, which prohibited national football leagues from imposing quotas on foreign players with European citizenship.[1]

However under the Reform Treaty, which has yet to be signed, sports would be given a special status which would exempt this sector from much of the EU's economic rules. This followed lobbying by governing organisations such as the International Olympic Committee and FIFA, due to objections over the applications of free market principles to sport which led to an increasing gap between rich and poor clubs.[2]

Several European sports associations are consulted in the formulation of the EU's sports policy, including FIBA, UEFA, EHF, IIHF, FIRA and CEV.[3] All EU member states and their respective national sport associations are participating in European sport organizations such as UEFA.[4]

[edit] Wrapping up sections

[edit] Sports version user:Arnoutf preference

Preferably none whatsoever
Alternatively very brief mention, I think culture would be best, like

Further information: Sport in Europe and Sport policies of the European Union

As in other cultural issues, many of the sports policies are with the individual member states. However, policies of the EU have had an impact on sports, such as the freedom of employment which was at the core of the Bosman ruling, which prohibited national football leagues from imposing quotas on foreign players with European citizenship.[1]

Under the Reform Treaty, which has yet to be signed, sports would be given a special status which would exempt this sector from much of the EU's economic rules.[2]

[edit] Sports version user:Simonclamb preference

Preferably Blank, non-existent
Alternatively, the following

As with other cultural issues, sports policy lies mainly with the individual member states. However, the impact of the limited EU sports policy to date has been significant, for example in areas such as the free movement of workers which was at the core of the Bosman ruling. Here the ECJ declared that national football leagues were to be prohibited from imposing quotas on foreign players with European citizenship.[1] Recently the EU has also been in discussion with sports associations such as UEFA over the creation of a European sport police to combat the problem of hooliganism.[2]

However under the Reform Treaty, which has yet to be signed, sports would be given a special status which would exempt this sector from much of the EU's economic rules. This followed lobbying by governing organisations such as the International Olympic Committee and FIFA, due to objections over the applications of free market principles to sport which led to an increasing gap between rich and poor clubs.[3]

Yada yada yada, sport and the EU - so irrelevant that its not even funny.

[edit] Sport version User:Sandpiper preferences

preference: prime candidate to be cut if article is too long.
placement should be as a subsection of culture, not a main section.

I hate deleting material. On the whole I don't find this section objectionable, but the article is certainly overlong by wiki official standards. If material has to be cut, this is one of the weakest and least important sections in the article. The section mentioning the bosman ruling and organisations successfully lobbying for a treaty change is an interesting illustration of EU procedure and more worthy of being kept. On the other hand, I do not find the paragraph about the EU consulting sports organisations as helping the article and should be cut. If we list everyone who has ever been consulted by the EU it would take over the whole of wiki. similarly we should not mention things unrelated to the EU simply because they took place in EU countries.

[edit] Arguments for and against

As I see it, we need to explain the issues involved in the dispute and the arguments for and against, so that uninvolved editors understand the issues and can then give an informed opinion. Unfortunately the arguments can only be understood in the light of more serious disputes.

I would propose, as a starting point, the following text, and suggest that others edit it with the aim of arriving at a succinct description of the issues and possible positions, followed by an even more succinct presentation of possible choices, that people could "subscribe to" or comment on. This initial version is only meant to start the ball rolling. I preume people will add their own arguments. The purpose is not to convince each other but to objectively present the differing points of view.--Boson (talk) 22:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dispute about the Sports section (please edit)

[edit] Background

What is the EU?

International organization vs superstate The article on the European Union is structured in many ways like articles on countries. However the European Union is not a country. It is an international organization, but most people agree that it has more characteristics in common with countries than other international organizations do. Here and elsewhere there are frequent disputes about the extent to which the EU should be treated in the same way as a country. Views on this may be coloured or reinforced by political views on what the EU should be.

European Union vs. Europe The European Union is sometimes confused with Europe. This is in some ways similar to the way in which America is equated with the USA, but this equation of the two is less established with respect to Europe. Not all European states are members of the EU, though some of those that are not are members of the EEA which shares many "rules" with the EU.

Geographic entity vs international organization Even though the EU is not a country, it can be treated as a geographical entity, inhabited by people, who form a society or societies with a culture or cultures.

What are the European Union competences? The EU was originally an economic organization, although it always had the aim of greater economic and political integration of Europe. The EU only has authority to make regulations where rights have been conferred on it by the member states. For instance, it has no conferred authority for sport and is therefore not entitled to pass laws on sport. However, by virtue of the EU's responsibility for economic affairs, competition etc. and the prohibition of (virtually) any discrimination on the basis of nationality between EU citizens, sport can be affected. The EU has produced white papers and other documents on sport. The EU has, for a long time, had departments dealing with sport (where other competences entitle them to do so), particularly matters of health (e.g. sports injuries) and culture, as well as competition, discrimination, . . . Members of the EU Parliament have argued for doing more about sport in the EU. Conversely, sports associations such as FIFA and UEFA have encouraged the exclusion of sport from the coverage of EU rules and regulations.

[edit] Possible views on the inclusion and content of the Sports section

Based on the above background, there are different views on the inclusion and content of a Sport section.

  • There should be no sports section.
    • For The EU has no responsibility for sport and the article should deal only with those topics where the EU institutions have responsibility.
    • For Sports is relatively unimportant. The article is too long in any case.
    • Against A mention of where the EU has impacted upon sport illustrates its influence even in areas nominally excluded from its competence
  • There should be a sports section, but it should be restricted to those matters that EU institutions have dealt with
    • For If it is discussed within the EU institutions it is a valid topic, even if we are treating the EU as an international organization, rather than a country-like entity
    • Against Sports is relatively unimportant. The article is too long in any case.
  • There should be a sports section, and it should potentially include information on things like which sports are popular within the EU
    • For People looking here for information may be thinking of the EU as a geographical entity and will therefore expect information on activities carried out within that area, whether it is a country or not.
    • For As people identify more with the EU, they will compare, say, the number of Olympic medals won by athletes from the USA with the number won by athletes from the EU.
    • Against Sport is a cultural matter and there is no single culture throughout the EU
    • Against Sport is mainly organised on a national basis by different organisations within each country and should be included in country-relevant articles only
    • Against Internationally sport is dealt with by many different organizations, not the EU.
    • Against Internationally, European sport is an activity of Europe (the continent), not exclusively the EU countries.
    • Against Sport is only one of very many things which happen within the territtorial limits of the EU which have little or no direct relation to the EU. It is impossible to mention them all, and sport is no more notable than many others. The article is too long in any case.
    • Against Mentioning sport biases the article, implying it has an importance to the organisation of the EU which it does not have.

As far as For: People looking here for information may be thinking of the EU as a geographical entity and will therefore expect information on activities acrried out within that ares, whether it is a country or not. goes, I just don't buy that argument, and would point back to the whole question of then providing other such information as the most driven car in the EU, the most watched type of television programme, the preferred holiday destinations etc. Why Sport is more important than any of these can not be answered in an objective manner, and therefore the inclusion of the section is actually pretty sports-biased if anything. Can't we have a link here to the archived debate rather than have us go through all the arguments again? I don't want to go round in circles. We can't cater for everything, particularly if the article is too long as it is. There is far too much danger of mentioning how much sport is played in the EU etc and then as a result misleading the reader into thinking that the EU is involved in sport policy to any significant extent. Given the divergence of views on the EU, presenting the article on the basis that it is a geographical entity would not be presenting a neutral viewpoint I would say. --Simonski (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I, personally, don't think many of the contributors will buy it.But I don't think that is the point. If nobody buys it, nobody "votes" for it and there is no problem. It appears to me to be point of view that reasonable people could hold, but even if it is not, I don't see that it matters. I suspect that most of the contributors are based in Europe, and it may be a eurocentric POV. I regard it as possible that Americans are more likely to see the EU as a unit, much as Europeans don't think much about individual states in the USA.
I don't think we can expect people coming new to the discussion to wade through all the past arguments. Even though I had been following the discussion, I had problems trying to work out what the different views and the arguments for and against them really were.--Boson (talk) 00:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Surely we would have to be careful though of the idea of catering to the "average American". An encyclopedia after all should not be aimed at any particular audience, but simply state facts, objectively. Perhaps they would come to the sports page wanting to find out information about the EU and sport... providing them with information will only serve to suggest that there is a significant level of EU sports policy, which is misleading. I think aside from SSJ it is indeed all EU based editors on the page these days (though I suspect Lear is actually from Mars) and if anything that should give us more of a base to inform individuals what the EU actually is and what it actually does. It might still be worth linking to the previous discussion though I think, as so much was said on the matter. --Simonski (talk) 15:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

  1. ^ a b Fordyce, Tom (2007-07-11). 10 years since Bosman. BBC News. Retrieved on 2007-07-13.
  2. ^ a b IOC, FIFA presidents welcomes new EU treaty, call it breakthrough to give sports more power. International Herald Tribune (2007-10-19). Retrieved on 2007-10-21.
  3. ^ Statement of European team sports. UEFA.com (2007-10-19). Retrieved on 2007-10-21.
  4. ^ UEFA. UEFA.com (2007-10-19). Retrieved on 2007-10-21.