Search

Dr Dan Parnell

FOOTBALL, SPORT, SOCIAL CHANGE, POLICY, MANAGEMENT

Hitting the bar: How can we promote healthy drinking in sporting settings

I am delighted to be invited to speak at Alcohol Concern Cymru’s Annual Conference 2017, Hitting the bar: How can we promote healthy drinking in sporting settings? on Tuesday, 26 September 2017, at Cardiff City Stadium.

This is a great opportunity to share insight from our understanding around healthy stadia and health promotion through sport. My presentation is on How can sport organisations promote health? The programme is outlined in full below and you can participate/get involved here.
09.30 – 10.00 Registration
10.00 – 10.10 Welcome – Andrew Misell, Director of Alcohol Concern Cymru

10.10 – 10.20 Keynote address – Rebecca Evans AM

10.20 – 10.50 Alcohol sports sponsorships and their impact on consumption – Dr Pat Kenny, Dublin Institute of Technology

10.50 – 11.20 Alcohol marketing during Euro 2016 – Dr Richard Purves, University of Stirling

11.20 – 11.40 BREAK

11.40 – 12.10 Alcohol consumption: a core part of the sporting ethos – Dr Carwyn Jones, Professor in Sport Ethics, Cardiff Metropolitan University

12.10 – 12.40 Does participating in sport mean higher consumption? A mixed methods study of British young people – Dr Britt Hallingberg, Cardiff University

12.40 – 13.30 LUNCH

13.30 – 14.00 A personal reflection – Christian Roberts (ex-professional footballer)

14.00 – 14.30 The role of sport in the development of substance addiction – Dr Camilla Knight, Swansea University

14.30 – 15.00 BREAK (with mocktails)

15.00 – 15.30 How can sport organisations promote health? – Dr Dan Parnell, Manchester Metropolitan University

15.30 – 16.00 A community mobilisation intervention to reduce alcohol consumption amongst sports players – Prof Shane Allwright, Trinity College Dublin

16:00 – 16:30 The ‘Good Sports’ project – Melanie Kingsland, Newcastle University (Australia)

16.30 CLOSE

Sport Policy and Politics: The Inequality Gap

Last week we hosted the 11th Annual conference of The Sport and Politics Study Group, as part of the Politic Studies Association. The conference: Sport Policy and Politics: The Inequality Gap was hosted by Manchester Metropolitan University and held at FC United on Thursday 16 and Friday 17 March 2017.

PSA Conference 138.JPG

The conference brought together an a breadth of sports covering grassroots to elite contexts across a number of disciplines. The keynote speakers, Damian Collins MP and Dr Geoff Pearson (University of Manchester) offered insight into sports governance and research into football hooliganism. We have also had some of the presentation details shared online via Connect Sport and The Football Collective. Any presenters can share their presentations or short blogs on these sites in the future too.

Personally, I would like to thank keynotes for their insight, time and support; the PSA Sport Politics Sub Group for the opportunity to host the conference; Routledge for their contribution, presence and continued support for sport; Dr Peter Millward for his continued guidance and support; to Professor Julia Clarke and Professor Mark James for their support; the Lorganising Team: Catherine Elliot; Anne Thompson, Dr Annabel Kiernan, Dr Sara Ward, Dr Paul Widdop, Jon Sibley, Dr Kate Themen, Dr Chris Porter & Professor Mark James – for helping make this happen; to Gary Lindsey and Katherine Roycroft from the Business School at MMU for their sterling and collegiate efforts around the conference; FC United for their hospitality; and Catherine Elliott in particularly for being a great friend and colleague.

PSA Conference 160.JPG

My final thanks goes the the PSA Sport and Politics collective, the delegates, the people who make the group what it is. I hope everyone can take some time to reflect on and be pleased with their contribution. The enthusiasm and effort will be felt by all present on the days and will no-doubt prove impactful for the new, emerging and establish scholars that make up the PSA collective. My good friend, Kitrina Douglas highlighted on Saturday that if we want to live in a world where people matter, then we have to create that world ourselves. I am pleased that we, collectively, have contributed another year to the history of the PSA conference where people come first.

Follow the PSA Sport group here: @PSASportPol

PSA Conference 029

 

 

Conference overview:

We live in unprecedented times, super austerity, growing income and wealth inequality, Brexit, nationalist political agendas, a rise of the right and left political ideologies, and mass population diaspora have created a vacuum of moral panic and self-reflection. The global and national landscape of sport are not immune to these processes and in many ways prefigures the society it represents.

Traditional powerbases in sport are shifting, the global south with economic resources and political will have a growing influence over sport regionally and internationally. In amongst all of this, the current climate of political instability, scratch the surface and sport has been at the forefront of the political discourse. Perhaps this is embodied in the decision for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. Whilst elements of the country has cheered both the imminent BREXIT of the UK from the European Union, and the athletes leading success after millions invested in Olympic and Paralympic sport at Rio 2016. Other factions of society have expressed counter dismay at the potential negative impact of BREXIT on the economy, how the nation can accept the public funding of elite sport during the harsh reality of austerity measures including public sector funding cuts and cuts to the disability allowances of the most in need across our communities.

At the same time, sport is receiving unprecedented internal investment alongside foreign investment and TV rights deals seeing many of sporting social institutions under the stewardship of foreign owners of investment. This can only widen the disparity and disconnect between elite and grassroots sports and see sport mirroring public policy, where the gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ is widening. Yet sport, as many have argued could have the power to unite, to be a resource for hope, to be a source of refuge to the poor and even new migrants. Many in sport are waiting in anticipation for continued elite sport funding and the following investment in community and grassroots sport. Whilst others recognise this could only be start of one of the most damaging public policy eras of our time, with consequences both in the imminent and future decades – something that the power of sport simply cannot reverse.

Manchester is a global city that offers a creative and vibrant environment for cultural and sporting consumption. Nationally, the discourse surrounding ‘DevoManc’ or the city’s  key role in developing the Northern Powerhouse agenda – alongside Liverpool [capital of culture 2008], Hull [capital of culture 2017], Leeds, Sheffield and Newcastle – all of which make significant contributions to what many would refer to as the holy trinity of football, music and fashion.  Manchester, however, punches above its weight, particularly in cultural production. The city’s sports offer range from football teams offering a local and global profile through, from Pep Guardiola and fan ownership, through to Chinese investment. With links to the Middle-East, urban regeneration and a number of innovative sport-based public sector health partnerships. Yet, Manchester is a city of great contrasts, where cultural consumption and vast inequality meet; where significant homelessness persists in parallel with the forward march of gentrification. In sport too, the new powerhouse of English football and arguably the richest club in the World resides within one of the most deprived areas of England. Manchester is a city where sport cuts across policy and politics and where change has happened and is happening.

The Sport Policy and Politics: The Inequality Gap Conference 2017 intends to provide a wide-ranging and interdisciplinary examination of these issues and more. The conference aims to explore the inter-relationship between sport policy and politics by drawing on research from politics and political science and a variety of academic fields, including: sociology, social policy, philosophy, criminology, community and youth work, history, law, geography, and sport studies. Beyond this, we hope the conference is another chapter in the PSA Sport sub-group journey in developing critical debate in a supportive collegiate environment, and that the event creates new ideas, collaborations and research.

 

 — ENDS—

 

 

A feast for wolves China’s richest man is hunting the global sports and entertainment industry

By Simon Chadwick, Paul Widdop and Dan Parnell – originally published here.

From football to movies to Indian cricket, Wang Jianlin’s Wanda Corporation is leading a pack of business interests with the aim of building an entertainment empire stretching from China to Hollywood, Simon Chadwick, Paul Widdop and Dan Parnell write.

Wang Jianlin is China’s richest man, his fortune derived from his ownership of the Wanda Corporation. Wang set up the company in 1988, originally to deal in real estate. Through a process of conglomeration, the business is now also active across the hospitality, retailing, tourism, entertainment and sport industries.

This has enabled Wang to accumulate a personal fortune worth more than US$30 billion, and to build a company currently generating upwards of US$40 billion each year. This is a long way from his origins; Wang started out as a member of the People’s Liberation Army, later becoming an administrator in a local government office in the city of Dalian.

wanda-guanxi-diagram-768x570

Crucially, Dalian had its own football club, which was initially called Dalian Shipyards and later became Dalian FC (when it was taken over by the local government). In 1993, Wang acquired the club, renaming it Dalian Wanda. By the late 1990s, the football club had been sold again, although by this time Wang had already set about creating what has arguably now become the most influential business in world football.

Most people from outside China probably first became aware of Wang in early 2015, when Wanda purchased a 20 per cent stake in Atletico Madrid. At the time, the Chinese businessman talked of his intention to build a global entertainment business that would stretch from China to Hollywood. As the network visualisation below shows, Wang is following through on his intentions.

wanda-guanxi-diagram

We have followed the same procedure here as we did when creating our previous visualisation for Fosun. The outcome of this exercise reveals a network that at one level is very simple: Wanda is heavily invested into activities that can be broadly categorised as ‘cultural industries’. At another level, the network is so complex and diverse that it shows how influential Wang and Wanda have become.

Just like our Fosun analysis, the Wanda network visualisation further demonstrates the importance of guanxi – broadly defined as networks, relationships and connections – in Chinese business. In this network, the right of the diagram depicts an array of predominantly Chinese relationships that underpin Wang’s vision of a global entertainment axis. Whether it is Disney in particular or Hollywood in general, Wanda is already challenging global entertainment’s existing order. Indeed, the ebullient Chinese businessman hasrecently said of Disney that “one tiger is no match for [my] pack of wolves.”

Equally important in Wanda’s network, however, is the role played by both Atlético Madrid and Infront Sports and Media (ISM). Purchasing Atlético cost the Chinese conglomerate US$52 million, and the company has also recently agreed to take-up a naming rights deal on the Madrid club’s new stadium. In recent years, Atlético have been through something of a renaissance, twice reaching the UEFA Champions League Final. Yet the broader network in which Atlético is embedded is possibly more important to Wang’s long-term strategy of building his entertainment empire via sport.

Atlético Madrid are co-owners of Indian Super League football club Atlético de Kolkata. Together, the latter’s group of co-owners is called Kalkata Games and Sports Pvt Limited. The group consists of former India cricket captain Sourav Ganguly, businessmen Harshavardhan Neotia, Sanjiv Goenka, and Utsav Parekh, as well as Atlético Madrid itself.

Many people will recall Ganguly as being one of India’s best ever cricketers as well as one of its most notable national team captains. However, he is now a member of Indian Premier League (IPL) cricket’s governing council as well as being president of the Cricket Association of Bengal. It is worth noting too that Ganguly’s fellow Kolkata group member, Sanjiv Goenka, is also owner of the IPL’s newest team – Rising Pune Supergiants.

IPL cricket is a phenomenon, capturing the attention (and the wallets) of sports fans in one of the world’s most populous nations. Television viewing figures for a round of IPL games are heading towards two hundred million, reinforcing cricket’s position as one of India’s leading forms of entertainment (alongside Bollywood films). And through its investments, partners and connections, Wanda is therefore invested into one of 21st-century sport’s biggest commercial properties.

Wanda paid US$1.2 billion for ISM in February 2015; the Swiss-based sports marketing company manages the marketing and media rights of several of the world’s leading sports organisations. One of ISM’s biggest clients is FIFA, specifically the World Cup, for which it produces television content. This is helpful to Wanda, given its entertainment ambitions, and to the Chinese government and its vision for football. Wanda also serves as a World Cup sponsor, which gives the conglomerate unprecedented access to FIFA’s top decision-makers. This is helpful for a nation intent on one day hosting world football’s biggest tournament.

With the 2022 Winter Olympics due to be held in Beijing, and with China intent onbuilding a winter sport economy, it is helpful too that ISM also represents all seven Olympic winter sport federations, and manages media rights for the International Ski Federation’s World Cup events. This part of Wanda’s network of influence intensifies even further, as China Media Capital (CMC) and Shanghai Media Group (SMG) also have stakes in ISM. This links Wanda into the Abu Dhabi United Group, the China International Trust and Investment Corporation (CITIC), and the City Football Group (which owns a 13 per cent stake in Manchester City).

Beyond these important nodes in Wanda’s network lies a multitude of further, intriguing relationships. For example, there are links to controversial businessman Li Ruigang, who was president of SMG until 2011, a position he now holds at CMC. In another case, Wanda’s ownership of the AMC cinema chain extends the company’s network into the National Basketball Association (NBA) through an AMC board member who co-owns the Philadelphia 76ers.

If, as Wang has stated, his businesses are wolves, then he is without doubt leader of the pack. Indeed, as a voracious hunter who has accumulated massive corporate influence through his knowledge and understanding of guanxi, it seems likely that Wanda will not stop at hunting down Disney. Several of global sport’s leading properties, as well as some of Hollywood’s biggest assets (like Dick Clark Productions, which runs the Golden Globes) have already been gobbled-up. Expect the feast to continue for the foreseeable future.

Is austerity the biggest threat to sport of our time?

This article was originally published on Connect Sport here.

This is a short research note prepared by Dr Dan Parnell and Dr Peter Millward, of ConnectSport, which offers an insight into a recent special issue on sport management in an era of austerity, published in the European Sport Management Quarterly journal.

The research note is based on a special issue edited by Dr Dan Parnell, Professor Karl Spracklen and Dr Peter Millward, which can be found here: Parnell, D., Spracklen, K., & Millward, P. (2016). Special Issue Introduction: Sport management issues in an era of austerity. European Sport Management Quarterly.

What is austerity?

Following Blyth’s (2013, p.2) description, we see austerity as: ‘a form of voluntary deflation in which the economy adjusts through the reduction of wages, prices and public spending to restore competitiveness which is [supposedly] best achieved by cutting the state’s budget, debts and deficits’.

Why is this an issue for sport?

The impact of the economic crisis which has engulfed Europe since 2008 and the subsequent ‘austerity measures’ which have reduced local and national spending on many public services focused on the practices of sport management, has received only scant scholarly attention.

A previous ConnectSport article sheds some light on how austerity can impact sport. There is no doubt public, private and third sector organisations, from grassroots to elite levels have faced challenges as a result of austerity (Parnell, Widdop and King, 2015).

Reduced finances and significant changes to public funding has meant many within sport are being challenged to deliver more, with limited resources and evidence their successes. Indeed, the search (and scrutiny) for value for money is definitely on! As a result, the special issue is very timely for sport practitioners and policy-makers.

What does the special issue cover?

This special issue provides insights on the impacts of policy in an era of austerity utilising case studies from two sporting organisations in two different European countries.

The first paper, ‘Implications of austerity measures on National Sport Federations: The case of Greece’ by Chrysostomos Giannoulakis, Dimitra Papadimitriou, Konstantinos Alexandris and Shea Brgoch discusses the consequences of forced austerity measures, and the implications of having to cut jobs in order to help their heavily indebted economies.

In the second article, by Catherine Walker and John Hayton overview the situation of a third sector disability sport organisation in the United Kingdom (UK), describing how this organisation has navigated austerity by adjusting management practices.

The issues raised in these two contributions present a wide range of challenges and questions for those who research in, and on the impact of austerity in sport management.

The biggest threat of our time?

Some might reasonably argue that austerity-driven policy measures offer the key challenge to the sport disciplinary area so far in the 21st century – and yet, thus far, a clear gap in research around the issue exists.  Our scholarly and intellectual aim in collating this special issue is to trigger ideas, debate and interest with a view to filling this space.

How do we in community sport and research move forward?

Of particular interest, a non-exhaustive list of research ideas in this area might include:

   – Further empirical research on the impacts of austerity measures on sport policy cuts: There is a shortfall of quantitative and qualitative research that explores the physical impacts of austerity cuts to sport policy budgets across Europe.  The Continent has various levels of quality data which exist on this, but in countries such as England seemingly robust data of this nature exists in the Active People Survey.  Data of this nature needs to be utilised and mined to draw up a localised picture of whether or not – or to what extent – sport policy cuts have reduced sport participation at a grassroots level.

   – The impact of sport policy cuts on ‘hard-to-reach’ populations: Some sectors of European societies are well recognised to be ‘hard to reach’ with respect to facilitating physical activity, particularly including sport participation.  The evidence base that exists about those who have suffered through austerity measures might suggest there is overlap amongst the two groups.  Some state-resourced sport and leisure facilities have closed or had opening hours reduced as a result of reduced state resource, particularly if they are ‘committee-serving’ rather than ‘profit-making’.  We hope this special issue may support future research in listening to, and analysing the narratives of those who used those sports facilities that have closed as a result of budgetary cuts, especially if those populations are part of the ‘hard-to-reach’ populations.

   – Managerial dilemmas faced by decision-makers: The processes of gaining ‘more’ (or at least the same) for less presents real challenges for senior and middle managers of state sport facilities on all geographical levels across Europe. Yet their voices – as concerns and/or challenges – have so far not been heard.  A potential research avenue which could spring from this special issue might be to empirically and theoretically understand such dilemmas.

   – Opportunities for public-private partnerships: The reduction in public spending in areas such as sport facilities is assumed to be negative.  Yet such changes in the nature of budgets may open up possibilities for new public-private partnerships, which throw up a host of new questions for sport management scholars.  We hope this special issue might spur on future research in this area.

   – Challenges for elite sport provisions and future achievements: So far, the suggestions for further research have veered toward amateur sport participation.  Yet this is but one (sizeable) part of the web of sport in Europe.  How might budgetary cuts and changes affect elite sport provisions and impact of future achievements?  The voices of coaches and athletes need to be heard to understand this complex set of management issues.

   – Increased accountability of public resources on sport/sport-related projects: The public’s awareness of austerity measures has increased media scrutiny on the use of ever-scarcer state resources spent on sport and sport-related projects.  There have been widespread calls for ‘accountability’ of how such resources are spent.  What does this mean for those in sport management positions? Are new ‘surveillance’ measures put in place, are they helpful (and to who they are helpful/unhelpful?) and how are they managed by key stakeholders in the sport management process?

   – University and Third Sector partnerships: We suggest that this period of ‘super-austerity’ (2015–2020) (Parnell et al., 2016) could provide an opportunity or the platform for sport management to heavily influence the Third Sector sport industry. Academic institutes, particularly those in higher education, are facing their own respective challenges regarding reduced research funding and heightened need for impact. As such, universities may take opportunities to develop meaningful applied research activities and partnerships with Third Sector sport organisations (Parnell et al., 2015); developing university and Third Sector partnerships may help organisations respond to the economic downturn and in turn develop research outputs and tangible impact within the industry .

Summary

Our hope for the special issue is to trigger ideas and interest for a number of potential research contexts to develop and extend our understanding. Ultimately, we feel this important debate has just started and there is much more to add.

To do this, universities have a real opportunity to develop meaningful, collaborative, research-based partnerships that have a high probability of impact in sport-based organisations which need strategic and operational support (Parnell et al., 2015).

Finally, we challenge researchers to extend this preliminary list of ideas and take up the challenge to address this gap in academic and policy understanding.

Forthcoming conference: Readers, whether researchers, policy-makers or practitioners may be interested in the forthcoming Sport and Politics Study Group Annual Conference at FC United, hosted by Manchester Metropolitan University: Sport Policy and Politics: The Inequality Gap. Sport and Politics Study Group Annual Conference, Thursday 16 and Friday 17 March 2017 at FC United. To find out more – click here.

This research note is based on the following article: Parnell, D., Spracklen, K., & Millward, P. (2016). Special Issue Introduction: Sport management issues in an era of austerity. European Sport Management Quarterly – found here (open access is here).

Dr Dan Parnell is an active researcher and senior lecturer in Business Management at Manchester Metropolitan University. His research interests cover the sport and leisure sectors within the UK and he works globally on a number of projects, in particular the social role of sport. Contactd.parnell@mmu.ac.uk or follow @parnell_daniel on Twitter or access his research here.

Dr Peter Millward is Reader in Sociology at Liverpool John Moores University.  Many of his research interests relate to sport and he has published widely in this area.  Contactp.millward@ljmu.ac.uk or follow @PeteMillward79 on Twitter or access his research here.

Opinion: Can council-funded sport survive austerity?

Please go to the full article on the Sports Management website here.
But here is my contribution:
Local authority sport and leisure services continue to be at the sharp end of funding cuts and it has never been more important to consider how organisations navigate these constrained fiscal times.

Local government is in a phase transition and operating within a period of super-austerity. Recently we explored the management strategies of non-profit sport facilities in this era of austerity.

The headline findings highlighted two major challenges – reduced local authority services (ie, funding for maintenance, repairs or parks teams) and increased site operating costs. The management strategies adopted by facility managers to successfully navigate austerity included flexible pricing strategies, strong partnership working and income diversification.

In summarising the protective management strategies utilised by organisations and facility managers to navigate austerity, three characteristics should be viewed as favourable. These are: diversifying income streams; a link-up with a larger, established community organisation to share management functions and access to participants; and being well-networked, with links across other similar local and regional organisations and community stakeholders.

Ultimately, participation in sport is based on the user experience. The challenges associated with austerity cuts are reducing the quality of these experiences. To strategically move forward, more platforms are required to allow large-, medium- and small-sized organisations and facilities to network, share, inform and support and to assist in the development of collective strategic capabilities.

“More platforms are required to enable organisations and facility managers to develop collective strategic capabilities”

A networked view of the international mobility of minors in football

Originally published on The Football Collective here.

By Alex Bond, Paul Widdop and Dan Parnell

The recent CIES Football Observatory Monthly Report investigated the international mobility of minors in football. The findings suggest a trading or mobility network of under 18yr old male athletes. However, they do not necessarily interrogate and unpick this network, which might show how it is structured globally and locally. This short blog post aims to extend their findings and explore the structure of the trade network regarding minors within football. Indeed, there are many ethical, moral, economic and, of course, legal debates to be had on the matter (the latter two can be read further in FIFA’s regulations on the transfer of players and KEA’s and CDES’ report).

There is a long history of academic research focussing on the labour market within professional association football – especially in Europe. Walters and Rossi (2009) edited series of research papers investigating the issues and challenges of Labour Market Migration in European Football – focusing on concepts such as, muscle drain, feet drain and feet exchange. On top of this, Frick (2007) empirically inspected the major European leagues’ labour market. Other research has focussed on Africa’s role within the European labour market, such as – Poli (2007) who provides specific insight into Africa’s status in the European Football Labour Market; and Darby (2000; 2007) who looks at African football labour migration to Europe and African labour migration to Portugal respectively. More recently, Bullough, Moore & Goldsmith (2016) examined UEFA’s home-grown rule and player’s migration and opportunity, and Rossi, Semens & Brocard (2016) book which explored the role of sport agents within football’s labour market. Other useful books on the topic, consist of Maguire’s (2010) Sport and Migration: Borders, Boundaries and Crossings, Elliot & Harris’ (2014) Football and Migration: Perspectives, Places, Players and Tiesler & Coelho (2008) Globalised Football: Nations and Migration, the City and the Dream.

The recent CIES Football Observatory Monthly Report highlights a very controversial issue within the European Football Labour Market – namely the migration of minors. Of course, this raises moral and ethical implications, that will stir a range of opinions. Darragh McGee seems to be at the forefront of minor migration within sport, so readers are directed to his 2012 book Displacing Childhood: labour exploitation and child trafficking in sport, or his conversation article last year What the next FIFA president could do to tackle child trafficking in football. Additionally readers may find Brackenridge et al. (2013) Child Exploitation and the FIFA World Cup: A review of risks and protective interventions useful. Nevertheless, the purpose of this blog post is to further interrogate the network of minor migration presented by CIES, without providing judgement on the topic or its implications.

The CIES report that within the top 5 major European leagues (Premier League, Liga, Ligue 1, Bundesliga and Serie A), the percentage of players migrating increased from 24.1% to 55.2% from 2009 to 2015. Additionally, over the same period the average age dropped from 23.2 to 21.1 respectively, which is attributed to the increase in minor migration figures, which in 1995 was 51 and in 2015 was 184, most of which the final destination was England. The report goes further to include a section on the ‘Networks’, and provides useful information regarding the relational direction, and flow of minor’s migration in football. Within this section they include information on minor’s migration across Europe in October 2016, but they don’t locate the work in a social network analysis framework, so therefore cannot show how the network is configured. Here we use the information in the report and place it with an SNA. The below figure shows the data held in the report in network form.

networks

This is a small-scale network based on the information provided in the CIES report, relating to the movement of minors as of October 2016. So whilst it offers an insight into the migration flow, it doesn’t explain net migration and is only a snapshot in time.

Obviously, much of this network could have been deducted through Figure 7 in the CIES report. Including that England is the clear end destination. But SNA allows us to look a bit more critically at the structure.  In network terms England has the highest in-degree and betweeness values within the network – which is a characteristic of a star topology seen here – suggesting that the England node (represented as a circle) has the most connections going into it or in this case, the majority of minor migrants from other countries migrating to England. However, England has the smallest (or none to be exact) out-degree, meaning no minor football players migrate abroad. It is Belgium who has the largest out-degree value, as they have the largest number of minors migrating, primarily to The Netherlands, and secondarily France and England. Again, deductible from the report.

What is not so deductible from the report is the structure of the network, so if we look a little closer, and apply K-core (clique of countries) (this establishes a core of nodes, or countries in this case, which are interlinked – this is a relaxed clique in that not every country (node) in the core is linked symmetrically), we find a number of countries (nodes) which were fundamental to the international transfer of minors across Europe as of October 2016. Therefore, we can depict that England, Belgium, The Netherlands, France, Germany and the Republic of Ireland, are all embedded to the mobility of minor footballers within Europe. Thus, research is needed to track this network historically, and continuously to investigate net-migration of players over time – and account for the impact of huge political changes across Europe, such a Brexit and the right populist movement. Considering the centralised structure of the network, then political shifts affecting the (K-)core, such as Brexit, could have detrimental implications on the network robustness. Finally, research of this nature could aid policy decisions, by providing evidence of whether we need tighter interventions to control the movement of minors within football across Europe.

Manchester: a global centre for sport

Conference film content from our ESRC Festival of Social Science event, here are the contributions:

Making a difference off the pitch the social and community contribution of sport in Manchester

The economic and commercial contribution of sport to Manchester, the region, Britain and beyond

Introductions to The Football Collective

The Football Collective held its first conference on Wednesday 30 November. Check out some of the insight films from members of the collective who give their take on things. 

Go to our YouTube channel here.

Screen Shot 2016-12-07 at 16.21.48.png

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑