The surveillance capacities of professional sports clubs and Leagues are directly related to their modes of governance. This paper identifies how private sports clubs enact surveillance through processes of inclusion and exclusion. Using three examples to demonstrate these processes, we argue that the surveillance mechanisms associated with sports governance at times replicate, at other times contradict, and at other times influence those associated with broader law enforcement and security developments. These examples also suggest potential increases in surveillance activities that emerge in club governance often flow from external concerns regarding allegations of crime, national security breaches and corruption. These context-specific case studies (Flyvbjerg 2001) demonstrate how surveillance and identity authentication are closely tied to the complex, multi-tiered governance structures and practices in three distinct sports. We then explore how these patterns can be interpreted as either connected to or distinct from equivalent developments involving the surveillance surge (Murakami Wood 2009) and concepts of inclusion and exclusion under the criminal law. We conclude by discussing how both internal and external regulatory forces can shape interrelated facets of surveillance, governance and exclusion in elite sports.
Field of Research
160204 Criminological Theories 160299 Criminology not elsewhere classified 180103 Administrative Law
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO.
If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact email@example.com.