[chucksabr]

Gate Sharing Talks

Pursuant to the discussion of impending changes to the economics of the Football League comes calls for change in similar for the Baseball League as well. One curious difference between the two sports has been the issue of gate sharing.

In the Football League, twenty per cent of all gate receipts accrue to the visiting club to help defray expenses spent on travel and other essentials. Baseball League teams, which are run by the same clubs who field teams in the Football League, have never employed a similar gate sharing scheme, despite that the expenses tend to be greater in terms of not only train fare, but lodging and board for three day long stays in rival towns and cities. This odd circumstance is on the talking agenda for the end of season League meeting convening in Blackburn this year.

The difference between the sports came about as a result of the unique board makeup of each. The board of the Football League during the last decade were led by William McGregor of Aston Villa, a strong proponent of league stability above all. Whereas the Baseball League board were led by Sir Francis Ley of Derby County, a proponent of the “Darwinian” approach and whose philosophy carried the day in the end.

Opposition to this practice lies in an argument regarding the capitalism inherent in running a professional league of sport. As in any other business endeavour, the goal is to dominate the market and drive competitors out of business. The idea behind this thinking as it relates to the business of sport is that there will always be available clubs to replace those which wind up, which will inevitably lead to a stronger league on the books and on the pitch. After all, thousands of clubs exist In England, with hundreds playing professionally, and so there will never be a shortage of clubs to play.

Poppycock, answer gate sharing proponents. They argue that greater financial equality among League clubs will confer a necessary stability that not only will create a stronger league of clubs, but greater interest among baseball supporters who can be more certain of the ongoing viability of their own favourite clubs and their hated rivals. After all, if Darwin wins out and the rival is vanquished out of existence, what comes of the enmity that serves to fuel the club supporter's keen interest in the fortunes of his own team? If such passion is replaced with apathy, that will surely cost the League the supporter, and along with that the contents of his money purse.

While each side of the debate has defensible points in its support, it is the opinion of this paper that gate sharing is necessary for League stability, which we believe is more important than the philosophical preservation of unfettered capitalism in sport. Supporters will appreciate knowing that the clubs they have come to care about will be on the pitch the following season as well. In addition, we also believe that the system of promotion and relegation between the Divisions after the season already serves the purpose of rewarding and punishing clubs appropriately for business activities related to the operation of their clubs. Quite straight, playing at the higher level is more lucrative than playing at the lower level, and either is much better than being banished from the League entirely. What could be more important to a businessman keen on making as much money as he can from his business, even if that business is sport?

In light of this, we recommend the League implement a gate sharing scheme similar to that they already use for their football clubs, and as soon as they can possibly manage to do so.