Violence in Sport: Saudi Arabia As Example
It appears that most communities discard violence because of
the harm it causes when it occurs. Indeed,
there are many forms of aggression, starting from what is happening between
individuals to violence involving a crowd. As the Slovenian scholar observed,
‘the obvious signals of violence are acts of crime and terror, civil unrest, and
international conflict’.[1]
Therefore, crimes must be prevented before they develop into major criminal
offenses such as robbery with violence. To curb crimes, we need to put legal boundaries
on people. Apparently, if there are no laws, aggressive conducts might culminate
into immense violence, which can cause massive destruction over a long period
of time, and the community must pay for such damage. For instance, in 2009, the
bus that was carrying the Algerian team was attacked by throwing stones on it
before the match with their host; Egypt national team. Three Algerian players were
injured because of the violent incident.[2]
Egyptian businessmen were assaulted in the quest to revenge to the previous
assault. Crowd violence culminated out of by these two small incidents, and it caused
a lot of injuries among fans.[3] As
a result, the authorities in each country should be aware of the violence that
occurs before, after, and within sport events. Generally, it appears that the
violence was triggered by sportspersons; therefore, defeating aggression must
start from the players themselves.
However, in certain aspects of life, we are forced to use violence,
but in but in very limited situations and as long as it does not physically hurt
others. In a number of sports games, the
competitors have to physically engage themselves in the game in order to get
hold of their targets and score a goal so that their specific teams can win a
match. There are, in fact, a number of rules
put in place by the relevant authorities in most countries to restrict false
actions, and to help curb occurrence of injuries as much as possible. For
instance, the referee in a soccer game has the duty to warn or punish players when
they do mischievous actions while in the field such as attempting to hurt a
rival.[4] Moreover,
disciplinary committees can take further disciplinary actions on a player who is
engaged in forbidden activities while representing the team.[5] Despite
the fact that sports organizers take further disciplinary actions on those who
cause injuries after the match ends, the sportspersons culture has, for many
years, kept what is happening in the field in there. That means that they do
not take further legal action against the false tackler who triggers violence
in the field.[6]
Nevertheless, in the modern day, this notion has changed and some countries
have regulations that govern the conduct of their players; in most occasions,
the offended player will sue the mischievous player in local courts. For example, according to Daily Mail report, use
of excessive power in tackling Terry Johnson, who lost his career because of
the defendant’s action, resulted into Mark Champan being convicted and sent to
jail.[7]
On the other hand, there are still some players who are not
aware of their right to sue an opponent who has caused them grievous bodily
harm while in the field. In a country like Saud Arabia, we have lost many
talented people, especially in the soccer game, because of mischievous actions
that other players did to them. For instance, Nawaf Al Temiyat, who was a
well-known soccer player and was nicknamed ‘the Golden Boy’ in Saudi Arabia, was
compelled to stop playing because of an injury he suffered in 2008 while in the
field.[8] Although
these players who lost their career in sport have a right to prosecute those who
caused their disabilities, none of them has attempted to do so. Moreover, sports
clubs in Saudi Arabia are unconsciously enhancing the notion of not suing mischievous
players by not encouraging those affected to file a legal claim.
It seems that in Saudi Arabia, mischievous actions while in
the field are recognized as a habit. Also, the culture of not knowing one’s
legal rights might be the main reason why those who are assaulted fail to file
legal claims. Clubs, for example, are still owned and controlled by the
government; however, there is a plan to convert those clubs into commercial
corporates. As a result, the image in soccer players’ minds in Saudi Arabia
might be that the game is for enjoyment and it is not worth to sue someone who
causes physical harm to me while in the field. In fact, as the commentator Saleh Alshehi
stressed, most people in Saudi Arabia are still unaware of their rights
sportspersons included.[9] In
most common law countries, the idea of filing a case against others is
prevalent, and this may be attributed to the Second World War where people at
that time believed that someone has to pay for the injures or losses they
caused.[10]
Consequently, teams in number of western countries turn into competent legal
bodies that acknowledge their legal rights. In other words, the culture of
prosecuting appears to have taken root long time ago as compared to the Saudi
Arabian league, which does not heed to the legal rights of its players.
Obviously, regarding to the massive media coverage of sports
events and the results that aggression in sports can cause to societies, the
law must take its duty of protecting individuals from harm and remedying those
who suffer losses. Furthermore, one of the key objectives of Federation
Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) is to promote a friendly
environment ‘in society for humanitarian objectives.’[11] Players,
therefore, must be encouraged to file a case against harsh rivals who advance enmity
into the field and out of the field by not discharging their disciplinary
duties. However, it appears right for judges to observe and decide whether the grievous
bodily harm was intentionally caused or not, and the type of remedy will be awarded.
This should be done notwithstanding that the verdict in such cases might not on
the damaged party favor, in other words, the advantages that a particular sport
might yield from bringing improbable engager to trail are significantly obvious
when it minimize injuries rate. In other words, legal suits can provide sports activities
with a shield against violence; therefore, players’ health should be protected
from intentional grievous bodily harm. The benefits of legal suits could be
observed when sportspersons bear in their mind that they could be exposed to
lawsuits when they aggressively tackle their opponents.
[2]‘Verbal War Over Egypt-Algeria Tie’ (Press Release, 17
November 2009) BBC <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8364996.stm>.
[3]Ibid.
[4] Laws of the Game
2011/2012 (FIFA) ch 5, <http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame%5f2011%5f12%5fen.pdf> .
[5] Disciplinary Code2011
(FIFA) ch 2, s1(47) <http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/administration/50/02/75/discoinhalte.pdf>.
[6] John H. Kerr, Rethinking
Aggression and Violence in Sport (Routledge, 2005) 134.
[7] James Tozer, ‘Footballer Who Broke Opponent’s Leg in Two
Places Becomes First Player Jailed For Violence Tackle’, Dailymail (online), 5 March 2010 <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1255414/Footballer-jailed-horrific-tackle-left-victim-broken-leg.html>.
[8] FIFA, Nawaf Al
Temiyat: Al Temiyat, the Pride of Arabia<http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/stories/doyouremember/news/newsid=1171825.html>.
[9] Saleh Alshehi, ‘ما حقوق الموظف السعودي؟’ [What are the
Saudi Arabian Employee Rights?], Alwatan (online), 30 Marsh 2011 <http://www.alwatan.com.sa/Articles/Detail.aspx?ArticleId=5050>.
[10] Bruce R. Hronek and J. O. Spengler, Legal Liability in Recreation and Sports (Sagamore Puplishing,
1997) xiii.
[11] FIFA Statutes2011 (FIFA) ch4, s1(a) <http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/01/48/60/05/fifastatuten2011_e.pdf>.
Comments
Post a Comment