The geopolitics of the European super league: A historiographical approach and a media analysis of the failed project in 2021.

IF 2.6 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES Frontiers in Sports and Active Living Pub Date : 2023-03-07 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fspor.2023.1148624
Xavier Ginesta, Carles Viñas
{"title":"The geopolitics of the European super league: A historiographical approach and a media analysis of the failed project in 2021.","authors":"Xavier Ginesta, Carles Viñas","doi":"10.3389/fspor.2023.1148624","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The main objective of this article is to analyse the reasons why the 2021 European Super League project failed. The authors ask whether, in addition to the popular clamour against a semi-closed competition, it was the combination of geopolitical interests of the different actors currently involved in European elite football that prevented the project from going ahead.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The main methodological framework is based on a case study, which follows an Stakian approach. To do so, on the one hand, a historiographical analysis of the case has been done; on the other hand, authors have complemented this case study with an analysis of 23 pieces of news published on the website of five mainstream newspapers (from April to June 2021) from those countries with the most significant European football leagues: The United Kingdom (The Guardian), Spain (El País), France (Le Monde), Italy (La Repubblica) and Germany (Der Spiegel). To supplement the analysis of this phenomenon, authors have also considered other relevant news published in other mainstream press or news agencies (such as The New York Times, Politico, The Yorkshire Post, The Times, Marca, Bloomberg and Reuters).</p><p><strong>Results and discussion: </strong>The authors conclude that, while financially the Super League debate has not been closed, in defending the current business and competition model of European football, UEFA has had the complicity of owners and shareholders of the founding clubs outside of their traditional historical roots, as well as governments that have made football an asset because of their geopolitical positioning, such as Qatar and the UK post-Brexit.</p>","PeriodicalId":12716,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","volume":"5 ","pages":"1148624"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10030056/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2023.1148624","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The main objective of this article is to analyse the reasons why the 2021 European Super League project failed. The authors ask whether, in addition to the popular clamour against a semi-closed competition, it was the combination of geopolitical interests of the different actors currently involved in European elite football that prevented the project from going ahead.

Methods: The main methodological framework is based on a case study, which follows an Stakian approach. To do so, on the one hand, a historiographical analysis of the case has been done; on the other hand, authors have complemented this case study with an analysis of 23 pieces of news published on the website of five mainstream newspapers (from April to June 2021) from those countries with the most significant European football leagues: The United Kingdom (The Guardian), Spain (El País), France (Le Monde), Italy (La Repubblica) and Germany (Der Spiegel). To supplement the analysis of this phenomenon, authors have also considered other relevant news published in other mainstream press or news agencies (such as The New York Times, Politico, The Yorkshire Post, The Times, Marca, Bloomberg and Reuters).

Results and discussion: The authors conclude that, while financially the Super League debate has not been closed, in defending the current business and competition model of European football, UEFA has had the complicity of owners and shareholders of the founding clubs outside of their traditional historical roots, as well as governments that have made football an asset because of their geopolitical positioning, such as Qatar and the UK post-Brexit.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧洲超级联赛的地缘政治:对 2021 年失败项目的历史学方法和媒体分析。
导言:本文的主要目的是分析 2021 年欧洲超级联赛项目失败的原因。作者提出的问题是,除了民众反对半封闭式比赛的呼声外,是否是目前参与欧洲精英足球的不同参与者的地缘政治利益组合阻碍了该项目的进行:主要方法框架以案例研究为基础,采用斯塔克方法。为此,一方面,作者对案例进行了史学分析;另一方面,作者对五家主流报纸网站上发布的 23 篇新闻(2021 年 4 月至 6 月)进行了分析,这些报纸来自拥有最重要欧洲足球联赛的国家:英国(《卫报》)、西班牙(《国家报》)、法国(《世界报》)、意大利(《共和国报》)和德国(《明镜周刊》)。为补充对这一现象的分析,作者还考虑了其他主流媒体或通讯社(如《纽约时报》、《政治报》、《约克郡邮报》、《泰晤士报》、《马卡报》、彭博社和路透社)发表的其他相关新闻:结果与讨论:作者得出结论认为,虽然在经济上超级联赛的争论尚未结束,但欧足联在捍卫欧洲足球目前的商业和竞争模式时,与传统历史根源之外的创始俱乐部的所有者和股东,以及因其地缘政治定位而将足球作为资产的政府(如卡塔尔和英国脱欧后的政府)串通一气。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
459
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Correction: Reasons why selected young female and male football players drop out on their path to the elite senior level. Case Report: Xsens motion analysis and virtual reality-based rehabilitation in a national-level badminton player following MPFL reinjury leading to postoperative patellar fracture. Commentary: The effects of complex training on performance variables in basketball players: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Is knee extension strength a key factor in badminton-specific agility among elite players? The association of Tai Chi exercise with the methylation levels of the IL20 promoter.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1