Globalisation and Formula One

Globalisation and regulation gondola cardinalABSTRACTIt is frequently w eachd whether labour fun is a proper athletic contest, and thus hatful be examined as much(prenominal) by researchers. In this essay, prescript hotshot, for m any(prenominal) the around important piddle of takesport, is comp atomic number 18d to established sports much(prenominal)(prenominal) as foot clunk and the prodigious Games, in footing of expression, their respective g everywherening bodies, and their geekistics. For the latter, it has been discussed whether normal whiz is a socio-cultural sport or a technical iodine, as these be identified by K. nourish. muchover, the map televison played into growing the sports popularity is examined. Fin eithery, there has been a comparison between ii important individualalities of footb every game game and commandment whizz, Dr Joao Havelange and Bernie Ecclestone respectively, in an start out to examine to what extremity individuals dismiss have an influence on a sports development. Introduction ever so since the re fundamentment of post modernity with globalisation as the predominant friendly theory (T. moth miller et al, 2001), academics of sport have taken an interest on world(prenominal) genetic mutation government bodies and their subr bring outine in an era where, (according to the hyperglobalist usage at least (D. Held et all, 1999), nation states and their institutions argon going into decline. The two roughly comm moreover mentioned (and researched) supra issue Sport Institutions are FIFA ( J. Sugden and A. Tomlinson 1999, J. Sugden and A. Tomlinson 2003), (the Inter depicted object Federation of football Associations) and the IOC (the International Olympic Committee), (M. Roche, 2000). These are the respective governing bodies of football and the Olympic Games worldwide, and subsequently responsible of staging the worlds two most popular fast events the FIFA knowledge base Cup and the Oly mpic Games. This essay lead attempt to ask in what extent does a slightly various sport, aim give the bouncenonball along (through its most popular discipline, F1 GP travel), complies with the trademarks in world sport organic law set by the aforementioned institutions. For this purpose, I have opted to compare the expression of FIFA and the FIA (Federation Internationale de l railway car), as surface as the two sports (from their federation construction detail of view mainly),. Before that, however, I have decided to portray rough of the characteristics of motor sport, which make it defer from mainstream bodily sports, as well as clarify nigh definitions and terminology that is widely employ to identify it. Moreover, I have strained to make a comparison between the two individuals that trans conventioned these two organisations into what they are right away Dr Joao Havelange and Bernie Ecclestone. The role of these individuals within the organizes of the Fedrat ions volition be examined, taking into account the existing theories concerning agency, which try to understand the role individuals female genital organ play in a social system. Specifically, the essay go out focus on the impact Havelange (as FIFA president from 1974-1998) and Ecclestone (as F1s commercial rights holder) had in what miller refers to as Televisualisation (Miller et all, op. cit. p. 4) of sport. Televisualisation, along with Commodification (ibid, p. 4), will be further discussed, as they were the underlying factors that resulted in the economic growth of both FIFA and FIA, by macrocosm the trade tools for boosting the image of football and motor racing worldwide. As a conclusion, round thoughts about the commercial future of design unrivaled will be outlined, loosely influenced by Sugden and Tomlinsons thoughts on the future of FIFA (J. Sugden and A. Tomlinson 2005). Unfortunately, due to the relative neediness of scholarly sources on motor racing, histor ical information has been gathered mostly from journalistic sources, with every attempt make to ensure these are plausible ones. The same applies to information acquired from the area Wide Web, where solitary(prenominal) established sites (such(prenominal) as the FIA official site, the Financial Times and the European Union) have been utilize. Finally, as most of the original nones for this essay had been in Greek, I have used the Oxford Greek-English Learners lexicon as a reference (D. N. Stavropoulos, 2004).The nature of Motor Sport collect to its peculiarities, motor sport is non a popular tell a subroutineicipant sport, contradictory football. Whereas football is easy to play, requiring minimum equipment such as a ball and two posts, and screwing take any drift in any open space, motor sport is centred around such a advanced equipment as a racing car, which is very expensive to purchase and run, and it is curtail to specifically intentional course tracks. Many cons ider it not to be a proper sport First, because a drivers ability is compromised by the fight of his or her equipment, and therefore not always the most capable stand challenge for victory, if they are not well-equipped. Secondly, because mainstream sport in most aspects involves an athletic swearer physically using his/her automobile trunk to perform. A person sitting on a car is not considered as a true athlete, although in the higher disciplines, such as F1, a driver has to endure askant forces of up to 4g for approximately 1 and a half hour (the listly duration of a GP race), and at the same duration being completely concentrated in order to achieve consecutive laps with accuracy of tenths of a second. Motor Sport has various disciplines, which, un interchangeable many correct sports, are available for representatives of both genders to participate in and compete against for each one other. The motor sport discipline whose structure will be compared to football wi ll be formula unrivalled, for many the highest echelon of motor racing ( send back 1). More specifically, with Formula wholeness we refer to the Formula One military personnel Championship, which is adjust by the FIA. Racing Type Power Output (in bhp)Champ motorcar750Formula 1750F1 equivalency Formula750Indy Racing federation670 frightful Prix know650GP2580A1GP520 duck 1 (Power outputs of racing categories (F1Racing magazine 2006)DefinitionsWhat is Formula One The score Formula One was only introduced in 1947 when racing activities resumed after the second manhood War. Formula 1 was actually a code used to identify the technical regulations under which grand prix cars should be run at the races. Formula 1 racing began in 1947 therefore, although only in 1950 was a World Championship for Formula one cars organise (A. Cimarosti). However, F1 as a discipline exists in other sports as well, for spokesperson powerboating.What is a Grand Prix The first Grand Prix (grand prize ) for automobiles was organised as such for the first duration in 1906 by the AFC (Automobile Club de France) (ibid). Ever since it has become almost synonymous with big motor sport events, and with Formula One since the inception of the World Championship in 1950. The term Grand Prix though is also used in other sports, such as motorcycle racing and some IAAF meetings. Ownership of Formula One the FIAThe FIA owns the spot Formula One World Championship(www. fia.com. 2006). In their website the FIA describe themselves as a non-profit making association (www.fia.com/thefia/ plaque/organisation.html 2006) who, since its birth in 1904, (it) has been dedicated to representing the interests of motor organisations and motor car users throughout the world. It is also the governing body of motor sport worldwide (ibid). nowadays it consists of 213 national motoring organisations from 125 countries (www.fia.com/thefia/Membership/index_membershtml, 2006). We should bear in wit that unlik e for example FIFA, which only has authority over football, the FIA is responsible for all the types of car racing (rallying, racing, hill climbing etc), tho that does not imply motorcycle racing, which is the responsibility of the FIM (Federation International of Motorcycle).The digital audiotapee of its foundation suggests it was conceived during a time when, according to Miller again, it was Europes high drumhead for setting in place the global presidential term of sport. Miller points out that most of the worlds governing bodies were founded after the proclamation of the Olympic movement at the gambol of the century he also goes on to mention the establishment of equivalents for football, cricket, athletics and tennis (T. Miller et al, op. cit. p. 10 ). However, one of the peculiarities of the FIA is that it is not entirely a fast body ( line up Table 2). FIA General AssemblyFIA President alternate President FIA Senate Deputy President(Mobility and Automobile) (Sport)FIAWo rld Council for Mobility and the Automobile World Motor Sport CouncilMobility and Automobile Commissions uninfected CommissionsInternational Court of appealSecretariatTable 2. The structure of the FIA (www.fia.com, 2006 ). Instead, the FIA consists of the World council for Mobility and the Automobile, and the World Motor Sport council. The World Motor Sport Council is the world governing body of the FIA Formula One World Championship. This is the clean branch of the FIA under whose jurisdiction come all forms of worldwide motor sport involving land vehicles with four or more wheels. Of signifi plentyt richness is the existence of the FIA International Court of Appeal, which is the final appeal tribunal for multinational motor sport. ()Iit resolves disputes brought before it by any motor sports interior(a) Sporting Authorities worldwide, or by the President of the FIA. It muckle also situate non-sporting disputes brought by national motor racing organisations affiliated to th e FIA (www.fia.com/thefia/Court_of_appeal/index.html, 2006). The existence of the International Court of Appeal within the FIA structure points out to what Ken harbor refers to private justice among global sporting organisations. He fence ins that the intent is to draw a zone of private justice within the sporting vault of heaven of regulation that excludes judicial supervision or intervention with the decision-making process of planetary sporting confederacys. It denies athletes -and teams- access to national courts and leaves them dependent on the arbitrary justice of the international sporting federation themselves. Athletes can deal redress only from an arbitration panel farmd and appointed by the international sporting federation itself , (K. rear, 2005). It appears that the FIA has followed FIFAs and the IOCs example, in taking advantage of the difficulties of monitoring INGOs. Foster underlines that states are unvoluntary or incapable of challenging the power of in ternational sporting federations (ibid. p.68). In addition, he points out alternative ways of avoiding effective scrutiny by making it compulsory in their rules that disputes go only to private arbitration, and by asking athletes to sign agreements not tot take legal do against international sporting federations(ibid. p.69). Indeed, according to Allison, modern sport has developed highly autonomous international organisations () (L. Allison and T Monnington, 2005).In the same text, Foster has previously gabed on the prevalent attitude of powerful sporting bodies Historically, sport has been governed by management structures that were hierarchic and authoritarian. Their ideology, and often their legal form, was that of a private club (). The commercialisation, and the later commodification which will be discussed later on this essay of sport put pressure on their legal form. Private clubs began to exercise significant economic power over sport. (). International sporting bodies, as federations of national associations, in turn organised global sport. () the need for due process in decision-making and the need to anticipate abuses of dominant power within the sport were two important consequences of this the legal intervention (K Foster, in Allison, 2005). So far it appears that the FIA is complying with the models of regulation of FIFA and the IOC in veritable aspects, such as being an International Non-Government- Organisation (INGO). But, because of its very nature, the motor sport governing body does not entirely follow FIFAs and the IOCs patterns. For example, Sugden and Tomlinson (again), argue that drawing upon Archers classification of types of international organisations, (C. Archer, 1992), () since its foundation in 1904, FIFA has transformed itself from and INGO (International Non-Government- Organisation) into a BINGO (Business International Non-Government Organisation (), (J Sugden and A Tomlinson, 2005). They go on to gossipmonger that FIF As reason for existence has been increasingly profit-driven () and has become a leading example of the professionalisation and commercialisation of modern sport (), (Ibid. p.27). From a jacketistic point of view, one would assume that it would be normal for every organisation to seek profit. Sugden and Tomlinson, though, observe that such commercial activity coming from INGOs is illegal, and refer to Morozovs claim As Morozov states, the aims and activities of an international organisation must be in property with the universally accepted principles of international law embodied in the pursue of the United Nations and must not have a commercial character or pursue profit-making aims, ( G. Morozov, (1997). ( However, the FIA cannot be considered to belong in the category of INGOs decorous BINGOs. Like FIFA and the IOC, it has opted to locate its corresponding offices in Switzerland (www.fia.com/global/contacts .html, 2006), something which, as Sugden and Tomlinson point out, unde rlines FIFAs political and fiscal autonomy (and unaccountability), ( J Sugden and A Tomlinson, 1998) but it has not at a time benefited economically by promoting the Formula One World Championship. Although it states that part of its resources shall be derived from income arising directly or indirectly from sporting activities, including the FIA champions (www.fia.com/thefia/statutes/Files/index, 2006), hips, it cannot benefit directly from exploiting Formula Ones and other FIA deeds commercial rights. Foster, again, gives a detailed account of how the case of motor sport became a preposterous example of governmental impact into a global sporting bodys self-regulation, ( K Foster, in Allison 2005). According to a European Commission principal, a governing body of sport of necessity to separate its regulation of the sport from its commercial activities in promoting events and in tap their commercial value a governing body must not use its restrictive blend ins improperly to e xclude its commercial extend tos from the sport (Official European Journal, 13/06/01, Cases COMP/35.163 COMP/36.638 COMP/36.776. GTR/FIA others, 2005). It is suggested that FIA used its monopoly position by the threat of imposing sanctions to drivers, circuits, teams and tugrs who wouldnt contribute them exclusivity, thus rendering them unable to compete in rival series. Moreover, broadcasters who televised rival events were given least favourable agreements (K Foster in Allison, 2005).The result of the European Commissions intervention was the change of regulations on behalf of the FIA They insisted on a complete separation of the regulatory function of FIA, as the governing body of the sport, and its commercial function of exploiting the broadcast rights to all motor sport events under its jurisdiction. The separation is (was) designed to prevent conflicts of interest. The Commission also limited the extent to which FIA, as the regulator of the sport, can take measures to pr event rival promoters of events competing with FIAs events. The Commission wanted to separate the function of the FIA in promoting events (and thereby gaining commercial benefit) from that of licensing events as part of its regulatory function. The role of a governing body, according to the Commission, is to act fairly and create a level playing field so that all promoters of events are treated equally and carefully (Ibid. p.84). Foster justifies the Commissions decision thus The different approach by the Commission can be explained because motor sport is a globalised, kind of than an internationalised, sport. It had a commercial structure of management and offered no cultural or social justification of its anti-competitive behaviour. As such it was reduce to normal commercial criteria in its regulation, (Ibid) and goes on to comment that this example may be unusual in that there was an excessive intermingling of the regulatory and commercial functions within the governing struct ures of international motor sport. However, it indicates that regional regulation can be effective and that the fear that globalised sport can escape all regulation and be immune from legal intervention may be exaggerated (Ibid). Structure of the FIA Formula One World ChampionshipIndeed, the structure of the FIA Formula One World Championship seems very much to correspond the American (commercial) model of sport, although being originally a European concept, as described above. Foster, once again, offers the key characteristics in American and European sport. (see Table 3.)European (socio-cultural)American (Commercial)Organisational motiveSporting CompetitionProfitLeague structureOpen Pyramid. Promotion and relegationClosed league ring-fencedGoverning bodys roleVertical solidarity sport for allProfit maximisation promote elite stars as celebritiesCultural IdentityNational leagues local anaesthetic teams. foeman to relocation of teams transnational leaguesTransnational or global leagues footloose franchisesInternational CompetitionsImportant for National IdentityNon-existent or minimalStructure of governanceSingle representative federal bodyLeague or commissionerTable 3. (European model of sport vs American model of sport), (Ibid. p.74).By attempting to compare the structures of football and Formula One, we can relatively easily identify that the former belongs to the European tradition. It was indeed conceived as a sporting competition first and foremost. It is rather doubtful that there had been a plan to make profit out of football when the FA was founded in 1886. The open pyramid system is adopted, with clubs being promoted and relegated form the divisions of their national leagues, depending on their performance. Football has been conceived as a sport for all, and FIFAs initiatives such as the goal project confirm this (J Sugdan and A Tomlinson, 2003). Moreover, with the existence of events such as the FIFA World Cup which is exclusively contested for by National teams, the importance of national identity in football is displayed. Finally, the FIFA remains the only representative body for the sport. In contrast, the structure of the FIA Formula One World Championship complies in general terms with the American (commercial one), although with few noticeable exceptions. It should be noted that, before starting to analyse Formula One racing using this model, we can identify in its nature all but one of the strands that are identified by Scholte, (A. J. Scholte, 2000). The only one absent is Internationalisation, as there are no international competitions in Formula One. Instead, it is an entirely globalised sport. There are no national Formula One championships. The only Formula One championship organised today is the World Championship. relaxation behavior, universalisation and, most importantly, globalisation are all evident Liberalisation There are no cross border restrictions in Formula One, as it does not operate on a nationa l level. The races can be held in any country, provided it has an FIA- affiliated national sporting body, and drivers and teams can come form any country as well.Universalisation ()A global sport () needs to be simple in its structure and thus promptly understood by those who have never played the game before, (Foster, in Allison, p. 66). This is more than evident in Formula One, whereas although most people are unlikely to have driven a Formula One car in full racing trim, unless they are professional racing drivers, they can easily understand its concept, that the faster car wins the race. Globalisation/ Americanisation Rationalisation of Formula One has been achieved since its conception in 1950. Written rules were adopted and a championship was organised in order to rationally identify (Ibid), the opera hat driver, (and the best team in 1958 with the introduction of the Constructors championship). In addition, it also complies with imperialism and westernization. Foster commen ts that maturation countries are excluded because they have fewer facilities (). Sports like motor racing posit massive technical capital that excludes them (Ibid).De-Territorialisation Foster observes that we have global broadcasting of sport and global fans (Ibid. p.67), and goes on to quote Giulianotti Globalisation brings with it a disembedding of local social and political ties between club -in Formula Ones case, team and community (R. Giulianotti, 2005). This is again present in the case of Formula One. As races are not contested in the teams home grounds, but rather, in race tracks break up throughout the world, there is not much connection between their national identity (with the exception of Ferrari, who still carries some wizard of Italian-ness). Re-location for Formula One teams is usual, provided this gives them a better chance of winning. Hence, Renault are based in Enstone, UK, Toyota in Cologne, Germany, etc. Furthermore, the ease with which teams can change thei r identity overnight is unique The tartan-liveried team of former Scottish triple World Champion Jackie Stewart, founded in 1997 was turned into Jaguar in 2000, proudly painted in British Racing Green colour, and Red Bull in 2005, after the name of an Austrian-made energy drink.The globalised nature of Formula One (especially in its difference to internationalised sport) has also been identified by Houlihan Globalised sport () has rootless teams, with multi national or nationwide ambiguous teams ( B. Houlihan, 2005), for example McLaren are a British team, founded by a New Zealander (Bruce McLaren), have a German engine provider (Mercedes) and their drivers come from Finland (Kimi Raikkonen) and Colombia (Juan Pablo Montoya). These rootless, de-territorialised sports are often typified by their identification with commercial sponsors. for example Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro, and cushy Seven Benetton Renault F1 Team. Formula One teams are defined by their manufacturers, such as Ferra ri (Ibid). Going back to the American vs European model, we have already argued that although Formula One racing was conceived in Europe on the turn of the 20th century, its current management has rendered it a primarily profit-making sport. One could argue that until 1968, when cigarette advertising (and generally corporate advertising) appeared in Formula One, (http//8w.forix.com/love.html, see also http//8w.forix.com/myths.html, 2005), the sport belonged to the European tradition. Up until then, any profit made was incidental, not central. Only starting and prize money was available to the competitors. In the 1970s, with sponsorship cash and television money heavily influencing the sport (P. Menard, 2004), Formula One became a profit-making sport. The role of television coverage in that will be discussed later in the essay. As for the league structure of Formula One, it is altogether commercial. As mentioned before, there is only one Formula One contest, the World Championship. Entry to it is not based on a promotion system, but strictly on capitalistic values. In other words, only those who can afford it can enter. A recent example was that of the new overseer Aguri racing team. Although the rules state that applications to compete in the Championship may be submitted to the FIA () two eld prior to the Championship in which the applicant wishes to compet (), (www.fia.com /resources/documents/, 2006), the team applied in autumn 2005. However, the application was successful. On January 2006, FIA issued the following didactics Following receipt of the necessary financial guarantee and with the unanimous support of the competing teams, the FIA has accepted the late entry of the Super Aguri F1 Team to the 2006 Formula One World Championship, (http//www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp?ID=208865FS=F1, 2006). This incident is characteristic of an American-type closed league, as Foster describes it The entry to the league is controlled by the incumbents. There i s a fixed number of teams in the league in Formula Ones case, the highest number of cars that can take part in the Championship is 24 with no relegation. New teams cannot break into the closed shop unless the league decides that its overall economic wealth will be improved by expansion franchises. The economic risks of sporting failure are reduced and this makes capital investment in a team franchise more magnetic (K. Foster, in Allison (2005), p. 75).In terms of the Governing bodys role, it is also an occasion where F1 follows the American model. Vertical solidarity is non-existent, as there are no lower Formula One leagues. Even for motor sport in general, Formula One revenues are not redistributed to lower formulae, and there is no feat to make motor racing a sport for all. Only whoever can afford motor racing can enter it. Formula One seeks to maximise its profits by commodificating itself. Elite stars are promoted as celebrities. For example, an attempt to present Jenson Butt on as a star has taken place in Britain, while in the case of Germany, Lincoln Allison and Terry Monnington comment (Lotthar Matthaus), Michael Schumacher, (and Bernhard Langer) have been more importantly formative of young peoples images of Germany in the stopping point generation that have Fichte, Hegel and Bismark, (L. Allison and T. Monningtonin, 2005). The American model seems to suit Formula One best again when questions about its relation to national identity arise. What Foster observes as a characteristic of the American model, is that there is little sense of national identity (). The leagues identification of its supporters is one of commercial customers rather than fans. The business sector can and will be moved whenever commercial considerations dictate, more like a supermarket chain than a sports team, (Foster, in Allison p. 75). This is partly true for Formula One and relevant to de-territorilisation. Most teams can relocate, as mentioned, and race venues can be chan ged, as was the case in recent years, with conventional European races (like the Austrian GP) being dropped from the calendar in favour of new venues in Asia (Bahrain, Malaysia, Turkey, China). However, when the sport was conceived, (prior to advertising) the racing cars would be usually painted in their national colours (green for Britain, blue for France, silver for Germany, Red for Italy etc). Today only Ferrari maintains some sense of national identity, being the only team remaining of those who took part in the inaugural 1950 World Championship and they are still carrying the traditional racing colours (Rosso Corse). It is the only team that has fans (usually fans support drivers, not teams), the tifosi, and the race tracks of Imola and Monza are considered their home. In a lesser extent, that could apply to British teams and the Silverstone circuit. few customs that refer to the presence of nationalism in past years still remain. One such example is the playing of the nationa l anthem for both winning driver and constructor during the award-giving ceremony. At the same time, the hoisting of the flags in honour of the first, second and third drivers takes place. Another is the existence of a lessened flag next to the name of the driver, to indicate his or her nationality, on their racing overalls and on the sides of the cars cockpit. Finally, there are no national teams competitions in Formula One, (In 2006, a rival series to F1, A1GP appeared), and, as mentioned before, the FIA is the only regulating sporting body. TelevisualisationHowever, we have seen that in practice, because of the aforementioned intervention of the European Commission in the governing of Formula One, many key decisions about the sport are taken by the person who administrates its commercial rights and not the governing body. This person could be considered the equivalent of a commissioner in a commercial model. In the case of Formula One, he is Bernie Ecclestone, through his FOM c ompany. FOA/FOM, companies controlled by () Ecclestone, are assiduous in the promotion of the FIA Formula One Championship. The 1998 Concorde Agreement provides that FOA is the Commercial Rights carrier to the FIA Formula One Championship. FOA is thus responsible for televising and generally commercializing the Championship. On 28 May 1999, FOA changed its name to Formula One Management Limited (FOM) which manages the rights. The commercial rights themselves were taken over by an associated company, now also named FOA, (http//europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/c_169/c_16920010613en00050011.pdf).Miller underlines the importance of televisualisation in sport Television was the prime motor in the development of post-war sport() helping to constitute a sports/media complex or media-sports-culture complex of sports organisation, media/marketing organisations, and media personnel (broadcasters and journalists). Dependency of sports organi