Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues/Archive 12

< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football‎ | Fully professional leagues
Latest comment: 10 years ago by ArsenalFan700 in topic Afghan Premier League
Archive 5 ← Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

Dubious Fully-Pro Leagues

Latest comment: 10 years ago12 comments7 people in discussion

The following is a list of leagues listed as fully-pro already but have dubious/non-existing sources:

So, what should we do about these leagues? --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 16:03, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

For starters, we shouldn't be dealing with them as a block. What to do will vary from league to league depending on the particularities of each case. I haven't had the chance yet to look into most of these in more detail, but just a few off the top of my head: There is a discussion in /Archive 6 that deals with Albania. The source for the Danish Superliga, as I recall, was actually very clear, so its just a matter of finding an archive of the original source, or finding a new one. The link for the Ghana Premier League is simply a case of link rot. The URL does not point to the same article it did a few weeks ago; though that one was pretty ambiguous as well. I'll look into this in more detail when I get the chance. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I think the problem is that some have been fully-professional for so long that there wouldn't be many sources stating it because it's such an obvious fact. On this theme, I was rather shocked to see someone removing Colombia from the list today. Number 57 19:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
If there's a deadlink then find an archived copy. If the source is dubious then remove it per WP:BOLD or raise here. Agree with Sputnik that each league/country needs to be discussed individually. GiantSnowman 19:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
In my defense, I did not intend to make this list and then have this concern appear. I was hoping someone would discuss about separate leagues. Either way, I don't see what stops us from doing that now. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 20:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Except for Albania, I've managed to fix all the dead links, and given that the relevant portions of the now dead source concerning the Albanian leagues has been transcribed into our archives for translation purposes, I don't think its that big a deal. Sir Sputnik (talk) 06:24, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I mean, from my POV, I dont doubt the Superliga is fully-pro but I do have my doubts on the 2nd tier. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 12:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I've added England to the list as well. The source doesn't mention Premier League, Championship, or League One, and then notes that League Two isn't fully professional. Hang on, while I go prod all the Newport County players. Nfitz (talk) 18:26, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the English Football League, I found this official Football League source, which says under the heading The Football League today "72 clubs – the largest single body of fully professional clubs in world football." [1]. I would consider this a reliable source that the 72 Football League clubs are Fully Professional. JMHamo (talk) 21:24, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Here is another secondary source to say the football league is Fully Professional. "The lowest two tiers of the four-divisional make-up of the English league are known as League one and League two. While being fully professional outfits, many of these teams are of a smaller scale in comparison to the clubs in higher divisions. [2] JMHamo (talk) 21:45, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Certainly no doubt that all 4 leagues aren't fully-professional (though there's always going to be one player, isn't there ... in virtually any league). However it was not evident from the existing reference in WP:FPL which actually stated the opposite. Nfitz (talk) 18:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the Albanian leagues, I have updated the link, which is pretty much the same as before in terms of format and content. Both leagues require the players to be fully profession, i.e. not have another paying job, in order to be registered to play in either league. Oltianruci (talk) 01:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Canadian Soccer League (1987–92)

Latest comment: 10 years ago19 comments6 people in discussion

This league is listed as "fully-professional", verified by this. However the article merely mentions the league. It describes it as "professional" - which, we all know, is not the same as "fully professional" - before saying the league ended with a number of teams insolvent. I therefore have my doubts. Before I remove it, further input is welcome. GiantSnowman 18:57, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

  • The line "With players in the Canadian Soccer League making an average of just $7,500 per season" in 1992, from the CBC link, http://www.cbc.ca/archives/categories/sports/soccer/just-for-kicks-soccer-in-canada/canadian-pro-soccer-in-jeopardy.html, is quite telling. That level of income would place such a player way below the poverty line in 1993 Canada, as per the figures in this factsheet, published by the Canadian Council on Social Development using data from Statistics Canada. That's not compatible with the definition of fully professional. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict)The RSSF source just states "professional", not fully professional, and also doesn't have anything to back up its comments. Ditto the Google Books ref, the A More Splendid Life source (which isn't a RS) or the CBC source. The latter source states "With players in the Canadian Soccer League making an average of just $7,500 per season" - that's pretty much a sign of it being semi-pro. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 18:07, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
  • WP:NFOOTY says "For the purposes of this guideline, a player has appeared in a match if he or she was in the starting line-up or came on as a substitute." One 15-minute appearance in this league = automatic presumption of notability? Does anyone believe that, for _this_ league, based on sources mentioned? Of course not. If this league somehow qualifies, then NFOOTY needs to be reined in. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 02:06, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
  • @Hobbes Goodyear:, there is plenty of consensus at AFD whereby a player who technically meets NFOOTBALL, but fails GNG, has been deleted as non-notable. GiantSnowman 12:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
  • That's not the point--is using this league a good rule of thumb? No, and I don't see anyone saying otherwise. And, of course, you are right, there is consensus about how it _ought_ to work, in theory, but _in practice_ there are any number of AfD's where some nobody is kept just because a couple of mindless keep voters say "meets the [overly inclusive to begin with] sport criteria" (just barely). The "yes, but this is just a rule-of-thumb proviso" mostly gets lost, so if it as cruddy as this one, dump it, dump it, dump it. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:18, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Well no, and that's why it is unlikely this league will be classified as "fully professional." GiantSnowman 13:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Who actually decides whether or not a league is professional? Is it a national (e.g., Soccer Canada) or international (e.g., FIFA) sports?InPerpetuity (talk) 16:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
The debate on salaries is interesting but let's face it, it's night and day when comparing salaries for sports teams of today against those in their early years Example #1: NHL's player salaries were less than $2K. Example #2: In 1913, the crowd at England's FA Cup final at over 120,000 was bigger than much larger than the CSL 1987-1992 crowds, and players earned around £3 a week, about £179 (or $285) today http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/soccerhistory.html#mls InPerpetuity (talk) 16:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Who decides? Consensus based on reliable sources. Salaries are of course important when considering professionalism. GiantSnowman 12:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm still waiting to hear back from the Canadian Soccer Association.InPerpetuity (talk) 15:33, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
  • So, consensus seems to be that this league wasn't fully pro. Shouldn't it be removed then? Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
I've made one last request to CSL. If you can give them one or two more weeks, that would be appreciated. After that, I will not 'stand' in the way of your final decision. Your patience has been appreciated.InPerpetuity (talk) 17:31, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
With respect, I think the better course of action would be to remove it now, and I will do so. This has gone on long enough. There are currently no sources for it being fully professional, and several that indicate it was not. While it remains in the list unsourced and with a consensus against its remaining, editors may be misled into spending valuable time creating articles in good faith that will end up deleted because we here were unwilling to act. If a genuine reply arrives from a convincing authority that outweighs the evidence already presented from independent sources, a reply that we can all see and be convinced by, then the league can be re-listed in a moment and no-one's any worse off. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:18, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Understood. Thank you.InPerpetuity (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Afghan Premier League

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

This appears to be a fully professional league, based on [4], and the sheer number of viewers of the final also implies that it may be worth including this as a fully-professional league. It also has an official link with the English FA and English Premier League. Regardless, it is completely missing from the list right now, so it needs to go in somewhere. Any thoughts? Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I follow the league and created the 2013 Afghan Premier League article. Based on what I have seen, this is not a fully-pro league. Players are selected via a TV show, all the games take place in 1 stadium, and also the league is what, 1-2 months long? Teams play a MAX 5 games! Also none of the teams are allowed to enter the AFC Presidents Cup, the lowest of the three Asian international club cups. This is far from a fully-pro league. Hell, I doubt these players are even payed enough not to work second jobs. So ya, there you have it. If anything, if you are in this league, you are a pro from 1-2 months and then you are done or you may make the Afghan national team... that is it really. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 01:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • This Goal.com interview makes the comment "This fact will surprise many that the Afghan league’s revenue is the highest among South Asian countries", which is something to bare in mind. It may not be a traditional FPL in the strict sense, but it definitely seems to be financially viable and be drawing large crowds (which is often a marker of FPL leagues). For now, at least, I've added this league into the non-fully pro bit. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 12:50, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
That would be the most appropriate action. Even though its revenue is the highest in South Asia there is not much competition other than the I-League which does have some good revenue but it goes to out marketing partners and not the clubs. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 22:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football/Fully_professional_leagues/Archive_12&oldid=1089923569"