2000Arbitration InternationalRequires access

Australian Rules Football: Disciplinary Processes

Andrew Nolan

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

SPORT IS an integral part of everyday life. The Australian Football League (AFL) rules in the southern states of Australia. But AFL is also big business. In AFL v. Carlton Football Club & Williams1 Hayne JA summarized how big the business can be:2 Australian Rules Football is a game. The Australian Football League describes it in its published Laws of Australian Football as ‘The game of the people for the people’. But football is also big business. In 1996 the Australian Football League's revenue was more than $74m; its operating surplus was nearly $39m. Clubs that participate in the AFL's competition turn over large amounts of money. In 1996, the first respondent, Carlton Football Club Ltd, had revenue relating to football operations of more than $10m. Players in the AFL competition are full-time professional sportsmen. Successful players like the second respondent, Greg Williams, are paid large sums to play AFL football. This appeal is not to be determined according to some a priori classification of football as a game, a business, or, as some would have it, a religion. It is not to be determined according to whether ‘sporting disputes’ should be played out in the courts, left on the playing field or decided ‘in club’.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

SPORT IS an integral part of everyday life. The Australian Football League (AFL) rules in the southern states of Australia. But AFL is also big business. In AFL v. Carlton Football Club & Williams1 Hayne JA summarized how big the business can be:2 Australian Rules Football is a game. The Australian Football League describes it in its published Laws of Australian Football as ‘The game of the people for the people’. But football is also big business. In 1996 the Australian Football League's revenue was more than $74m; its operating surplus was nearly $39m. Clubs that participate in the AFL's competition turn over large amounts of money. In 1996, the first respondent, Carlton Football Club Ltd, had revenue relating to football operations of more than $10m. Players in the AFL competition are full-time professional sportsmen. Successful players like the second respondent, Greg Williams, are paid large sums to play AFL football. This appeal is not to be determined according to some a priori classification of football as a game, a business, or, as some would have it, a religion. It is not to be determined according to whether ‘sporting disputes’ should be played out in the courts, left on the playing field or decided ‘in club’.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

SPORT IS an integral part of everyday life. The Australian Football League (AFL) rules in the southern states of Australia. But AFL is also big business. In AFL v. Carlton Football Club & Williams1 Hayne JA summarized how big the business can be:2 Australian Rules Football is a game. The Australian Football League describes it in its published Laws of Australian Football as ‘The game of the people for the people’. But football is also big business. In 1996 the Australian Football League's revenue was more than $74m; its operating surplus was nearly $39m. Clubs that participate in the AFL's competition turn over large amounts of money. In 1996, the first respondent, Carlton Football Club Ltd, had revenue relating to football operations of more than $10m. Players in the AFL competition are full-time professional sportsmen. Successful players like the second respondent, Greg Williams, are paid large sums to play AFL football. This appeal is not to be determined according to some a priori classification of football as a game, a business, or, as some would have it, a religion. It is not to be determined according to whether ‘sporting disputes’ should be played out in the courts, left on the playing field or decided ‘in club’.

Key concepts: Football, League, Respondent, Appeal, Competition (biology), Revenue, Big business, Club

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Australian Rules Football: Disciplinary Processes — Research Paper | ScholarLens