Sports risking alienation from fans with exorbitant costs

Columnist

By Adrian Musolino, 17 Jun 2009 Adrian Musolino is a Roar Expert

Tagged:: EPL, football, Michel Platini, Ronaldo, Sepp Blatter, UEFA, World Football

Related coverage

Manchester United's Cristiano Ronaldo, left, is challenged by Barcelona's Yaya Toure during the UEFA Champions League final soccer match between Manchester United and Barcelona in Rome, Wednesday May 27, 2009. AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia

$163 million for the services of one football player is excessive, and while the news of Ronaldo’s exorbitant transfer fee caused a ripple of amazement, there was also a feeling of disgust from many quarters. Is sport risking alienating itself from society due to the gulf in riches between them and us?

It’s a genuine concern as the business of sport further erodes the qualities that make it so appealing.

This isn’t a new phenomenon, but what is becoming clear is the scale of the money floating around the top end of sports and being paid to individuals is becoming so astronomical that it’s causing genuine disgust in society, raising questions about its worthiness and relevance.

Thankfully, there have been some voices of reason following Ronaldo’s deal.

UEFA president Michel Platini said in a statement, “These transfers represent a serious challenge to the idea of fair play and the concept of financial balance in our competitions.

“UEFA are working hard with clubs to establish a new set of rules as soon as it’s possible to clean up the system and give it a more solid and more transparent base.”

But sports are either constrained by free markets or unwilling to make concerted efforts to contain the money being spent. Self-interest will be the most difficult part of creating uniform rules to stop this, see the political bickering in Formula 1 and the damage it’s done as an example.

Considering the EPL has been most guilty of this arms race mentality, it is ironic that some of the most opinionated voices have emerged from the UK, including the following from sports minister Gerry Sutcliffe.

He told PA Sport, “These figures are simply beyond the understanding of most ordinary fans. I am worried that a small group of rich clubs are getting richer and that does affect the balance and the opportunities for the wider game.”

He has a point on both fronts.

The gulf between the haves and have-nots is growing exponentially and fans cannot comprehend such numbers. We cannot relate to our sports stars when they are commanding such astronomical cheques.

If we cannot relate to them, then the bond between us is damaged and we view sports differently.

The money and power in sport is such that those within it are becoming isolated and almost deluded by it.

Sepp Blatter, who helped propagate the Ronaldo as a ‘slave’ comments, stated, “I heard yesterday that you could buy millions of pieces of bread to give to the people for that amount, but entertainment is also food for the people.”

True but can Ronaldo not entertain unless he is paid the equivalent in a day of what your average Joe makes in a year?

This mammoth spending cannot be sustained and the bubble will burst. Clubs and leagues are already in mass debt and if it continues the very foundations of international sport could come crashing down under the weight of this debt.

This also has changed how sports and fans interact.

Fences and walls are being built between sports and fans, sports seeing fans as commercial entities rather than the lifeblood of their existence.

Access is restricted to the rich, the connected and the spoilt. The undeserving.

The increasing amount of suits and ties being worn to sporting events typifies this.

If you have experienced the lack of atmosphere at an AFL Grand Final or seen the undeserving corporate types and connected who float around the inner sanctum of sporting events you’ll appreciate how sports have sold their souls and cater solely for the dollar.

The gulf between the haves and have-nots in sport and society is being matched by the gulf between the economic mentality of the top end of sports and societies view of it.

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

The Crowd Says (24) | Page 1 of Comments

Brett McKay said | June 17th 2009 @ 9:18am | Report comment

Adrian, this to me is like the idea of capping the salaries and bonuses of company executives. Why do we have to be so appalled at what the “high-flyers” are making??

In the end, both Ronaldo and the CEO of XYZ Ltd negotiate and accept remuneration deals put to them by their current or potential employers. The employers offer what they can afford to pay, and also what they think their employee is worth to them. The employers have expectations of success, and likewise the employee wants a certain portion of the salary guaranteed, to ensure they are still well paid for their services even when success is lessened or not achieved due to things out of their control (such as injury or recession).

It’s like buying a house, where the price is determined not by the buyer or seller, but by the market. If the market says Ronaldo is worth a A$163M transfer fee, then so he is. Man Utd obviously agree he’s worth that amount, otherwise they would’ve rejected the offer. And if Real Madrid can afford to pay A$163M, then what’s the problem??

Reply
Finno said | June 17th 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment

More than actually winning games on the park it winning players and keeping the club solvent whilst remaining in the top flight. Similar to what happend at Leeds and Newcastle heaps o f good players and they still drop. I will watch with interest as Man City try to get to Europe, how long will the new owner keep throwing money at the club? He will get sick of it and eventually pull the funding club goes down.

Reply
Rich_daddy said | June 17th 2009 @ 11:48am | Report comment

Sure it might be alot of money, but large transfer fees in football are exactly new. I think it has got negative views becuase of the recent economic downturn. Everyone is thinking that communism is the way to go at the moment and anyone who seems to be earning more than average is looked upon with disgust. Ultimately I think a bit a jealousy is at work, I mean who wouldn’t accept millions of dollars if they were offered it? If Ronaldo is being offered it, why not take it?

Reply
Lazza said | June 17th 2009 @ 1:01pm | Report comment

I guess only American sports stars, Golfers, Tennis Players, brain dead celebrities and evil Executives should be earning that kind of money?

Heaven forbid that a working class boy or impoverished kid from the Third World should get paid that much? Instead of describing their wages as per week we should try per minute instead. That should get an even more emotional response.

Reply
Vicentin said | June 17th 2009 @ 3:56pm | Report comment

Not strictly on topic but this is an interesting development. Apparentely Man United have developed a policy whereby they’ll only purchase players under 26 years of age (for sizeable transfers). The thinking being that there is no net value in spending big money for a an “older” player whose value to likely to decrease significantly by the time they want to sell them on. I can see the business sense, but it is just another example of of clouding the issue over whether football is a business or a sport.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/jun/17/manchester-united-transfer-policy

break over ,,, back to work

Reply
Pippinu said | June 17th 2009 @ 4:07pm | Report comment

If the pin heads take over a club, then clearly the Man Utd policy (of buying only younger players) makes commercial sense.

It’s hard to argue with.

Better to pay $60 mill for a 22 year old, who you might have for 5 years and then be able to sell at a tidy profit (maybe even double your money), than pay $30 mill for a 32 year old, who you might have for one or two years (if they don’t break down first) and who will then be worth absolutely nothing.

Reply
Lazza said | June 17th 2009 @ 4:13pm | Report comment

It makes good business sense but will Man Utd be able to compete with the big spenders? Probably has more to do with the huge debt the Glazers have burdened the club with.

After spending big on the first galacticos experiment, Real Madrid had a massive increase in revenue as a result. Sport is a business and these huge fees and wages just reflect the enormous worldwide popularity of the sport. When that changes so will the sums being spent on players.

Reply
True Tah said | June 17th 2009 @ 4:29pm | Report comment

How much would Ronaldo be on per year, $40m – $50m?

Reply
Lazza said | June 17th 2009 @ 4:42pm | Report comment

True Tah,

I read he was on 555,000 pounds per week? Not sure if it’s accurate but would be pretty close. Football players don’t get quoted as per year, per week sounds more evil!

Reply
MVDave said | June 17th 2009 @ 4:43pm | Report comment

TT

Ronaldo’s incremental wage contract (not including bonuses/endorsements) reportedly starts at 9.5million pounds per year and by the 6th year is 27.5 million pounds per year.

Reply