Abstract
This article examines fan social media responses to media-reported, alcohol-related player behavioral transgressions that occurred in Australia’s two largest professional sporting leagues, the National Rugby League (NRL) and the Australian Football League (AFL), over a 33-month period. Using netnography and content analysis, the study aimed to better understand the ways in which sport fans employed social media to voice their perceptions about alcohol-related player transgressions. The article reports on parochial fans’ commentaries about alcohol-related transgressions and uses these data to inform options for harm-reduction strategies associated with alcohol-related transgressions in sport. Sport fans expressed dissatisfaction when they observed disparity in policy responses from clubs and leagues. At the same time, the data show that fan responses reflect a desire for parity and protection more than punishment, with the former more relevant to game, club, and league reputation than the latter. We suggest that a harm-reduction policy offers one mechanism for managing reputation through a focus on parity and protection. We argue that the introduction of a harm-reduction approach would offer a more effective policy for managing player alcohol-related transgressions than the current ‘ad hoc’ approach.
Introduction
The 2009 Australian Football League (AFL) season launch coincided with a prominent player receiving a fine from his club for participating in an alcohol-related incident. Shortly thereafter, in the National Rugby League (NRL), another senior player was fined and suspended by his club for drunken behavior. Fans subsequently used social media to voice their parochial opinions about the players’ behaviors and the punishments they received. These incidents set the scene for our analysis of alcohol-related transgressions displayed by players in Australia’s two dominant professional sporting leagues, the AFL and NRL, the social media responses from fans, and the implications for policy options. Our results indicate that, first, alcohol is a major component in the majority of player behavioral transgressions, and second, fans express frustration at a perceived consistent lack of parity in club and league responses. We subsequently offer the proposition that although untested, a harm-reduction policy might yield better political and economic outcomes for clubs and leagues by instilling greater parity in responses while also protecting athletes and communities from harm. We suggest that if fans seek response parity, from a perspective where social and personal health are relevant considerations for sport policy makers, we might consider a policy alternative that delivers better parity and protection. Our proposition employs the harm-reduction perspective, which views alcohol overuse and its consequences as an inescapable public health issue (Ritter and Cameron, 2006).
In this study we began by determining the prevalence of alcohol in player transgressions, then sought to better understand how sport fans utilized social media to present their perceptions about these transgressions and the responses enacted by clubs and leagues. We have employed the results to comment on the potential for using harm-reduction policies. Specifically, our data revealed that sport fans displayed heavy objections when they observed disparity in policy responses. Volkwein (1995) suggested that only by taking into account the social and cultural framework within which sport is performed could any modification of athlete behavior be achieved. Part of this framework is reflected in the dynamic and turbulent world of social media. While social media commentators do not encompass the full spectrum of sport fans, they remain an important, self-selected constituency. Conversely, sports brands can use social media to express the logic and consistency inherent in their policy decisions. We suggest, for example, that social media traffic is driven by controversy and a clear policy eradicating disparity would reduce the impetus for speculation. At the same time, we consider whether a harm-reduction policy could reduce disparity while also better protecting the health and well-being of players and the general public.
Our position builds from Bennett (2013: 4), who observed that the United States National Football League (NFL) drugs policy includes clauses addressing the “… abusive consumption of alcohol leading to unlawful and dangerous behavior.” The NFL explicitly seeks to avoid behavior detrimental to the integrity of the public confidence in the game. In short, the NFL sets out to protect both player welfare and the league’s brand. If both goals matter, then how can a sport accommodate both? Bennett concluded that only a harm-reduction policy could attenuate the tensions arising between protecting reputation and health.
While fans might be satisfied with parity in punishment, we suggest that a harm-reduction policy could help manage both reputation—through parity—and protection, for two reasons. The first is that harm reduction focuses on protecting players and the community from alcohol-related harms rather than attempting to curtail it through arbitrary punishments. The second is that harm reduction makes policy responses equitable and transparent, thereby reducing brand damage as a result of unfavorable responses to differential punishments.
Harm reduction and sport
In policy terms, harm reduction seeks to manage the risks and potential harms associated with alcohol-related behavioral transgressions. It assumes that some high-risk alcohol-fueled behavior will always be part of the sport experience, and that making it transparent will provide for better control of the potential harms. Harm reduction generally incorporates three principles. First, alcohol use is not just a sporting matter, nor is it just a criminal or legal matter, but rather constitutes a serious social issue (Marlatt, 1998). Second, harm reduction removes the need for any form of moral certitude (Wodak, 2009). Instead, it accepts that alcohol use exists in sport, and will never be completely eliminated. Third, although harm reduction does not condone the misuse of alcohol in sport, it assumes that policy makers have an obligation to develop public health measures that reduce alcohol-related harms to players and the general community (Bennett, 2013). While harm-reduction policies may incorporate punitive strategies to reduce alcohol use, they do so in a health-sensitive manner so as to avoid unwanted collateral impacts. Policies that exclusively pursue reductions through punishment do not consider the nuances of high-risk or low-risk use (Caulkins and Reuter, 2005). For example, prohibition fails to reduce alcohol consumption, while it increases illegal transactions (Jiggens, 2005). On the other hand, substantial evidence in the broader community indicates that harm-reduction policies providing education, private support, and rehabilitation can significantly lower the social costs and cultural damage associated with substance use (Eldredge, 2000; Gray, 2001; Hanson et al., 2012). Although many clubs and leagues selectively use such policies, including those within the AFL and NRL, a harm-reduction method takes an integrated, player- and community-focused approach, rather than an opportunistic or ad hoc approach.
Harm-reduction proponents in sport, including medical professionals and policy analysts—whose arguments center on player support, counseling, and treatment—have failed to gain policy traction (Caulkins et al., 2005; Kayser and Smith, 2008). However, our data suggest that implementing murky, contradictory, and uneven punishments for alcohol transgressions leads to worse outcomes for clubs and leagues in terms of harm to both body and brand. From a strictly linear policy perspective, the key question ostensibly seems to be whether it is preferable to be interested in the brand equity and credibility of elite sport, or in the health and safety of players and the community. We suggest, however, that the two objectives are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Alcohol, sport, and transgressions
The relationship between alcohol and sport in Australia reflects a model case of ‘symbiosis’ (Munro, 2000: 199). For example, in surf lifesaving, rugby union, and Australian Rules Football, club patrons drink considerably more on average than the recommended maximum (Connolly, 2006). Alcohol features in sport from sitting-room celebrations and commiserations (Snow and Munro, 2000) to the multi-billion dollar sponsorship industry (O’Brien and Kypri, 2008; Rhem and Kanteres, 2008). Hughes (2012) and Lalor (2003) showed that alcohol provides a social lubricant in community-based sport, while elite (Lawson and Evans, 1992), recreational (Black et al., 1999), and university (Nelson and Wechsler, 2003) sportspeople consistently over-indulge. Tradition, camaraderie, and peer pressure (Hughes et al., 2008) all help link sport with alcohol (Dietze et al., 2008).
Sport has become heavily commercialized, and the rewards for success have escalated commensurately (Millar, 2005). Some players believe that alcohol helps them to manage the stresses associated with maintaining peak levels of performance (Buti and Fridman, 2001; Laure et al., 2004). The commercialized sports world and its associated ideologies of competition, global expansion, and market domination align with a sport culture that focuses on a “work hard, play hard” ethos. Alcohol, violence, and the poor treatment of women can also play a role in the acting out of archetypal, masculinized heroism (Peretti-Watel et al., 2002). For example, Mewett and Toffoletti (2008) reported a complex use of gender discourses in concert with the social influence of football culture and team bonding. We see this work as directive because it offers a connection between deeply held social rituals such as drinking and off-field transgressions.
Not only are sport consumers subject to extensive advertising for alcohol products in sport (Zwarun, 2006), but they also receive saturating media exposure to athlete transgressions involving alcohol and sexual misbehavior, drug use, drink-driving, speeding, gambling, assault, violence, and public intoxication. A transgression, as defined by Aaker et al. (2004: 2), refers to “… a violation of the implicit or explicit rules guiding relationship performance and evaluation.” Transgressions can even lead to crises threatening organizational legitimacy (Coombs, 1995; Wilson et al., 2010). Outside of the sport-doping literature, transgressions have principally been explored within personal psychology (e.g. Kelln and Ellard, 1999) and consumer marketing encompassing service and brand relationships (Aaker et al., 2004; Dunning et al., 2004). Of the two, transgression effects have received the greatest attention in relation to how they influence brand relationships (e.g. Aaker et al., 2004; Aggarwal, 2004) and service relationships (e.g. Jones et al., 2011), with an emphasis on the connection between the consumer and brand, or between consumer, employee, and services. Unsurprisingly, the data indicate that transgressional acts can threaten the viability of a relationship and, in some cases, instigate its dissolution (Tahtinen and Havila, 2004).
Sport-related transgressions have been examined previously in the context of negative athlete behavior from the perspectives of sport clubs and sponsors (Gummesson and Mele, 2010; Westberg et al., 2011). However, most of this work prioritizes the business lens, focusing on how to mitigate damage to sponsor relationships or to brand equity. Not only has little research investigated the impact of player transgressions on fans’ perceptions, but little consideration has been given to policy interventions that respond to both brand and athlete risks.
Attention toward player transgressions has escalated through social media technologies (Coombs and Holladay, 2012), where fans can demand urgent responses from clubs and leagues. Football fan sites, just like any “social” online media, engender a sense of community through a common interest. As a result, online fan forums constitute a suitable location for collecting data about fans’ perceptions concerning players’ behavioral transgressions and subsequent penalties. While this study’s methods preclude generalization to other populations, the data suggest key variables worthy of further exploration in a larger sport fan population.
Research design
We conducted an inventory of media-reported athlete transgressions in the AFL and NRL over a 33-month period between 2009 and 2011. Using broad-based, keyword media-monitoring covering major Australian print, electronic, and online channels, all player transgressions were identified for further analysis. The researchers also monitored the commercial, mainstream media manually as a method of cross-checking. A transgression was recorded when (a) it was reported in the mainstream media as a behavioral incident and (b) the incident elicited a formal, public response by the player’s club (even if charges were later dropped or reduced), even if the act only contravened team rules (and not necessarily constitutional law). We therefore delimited our data to those incidents considered sufficiently serious to provoke a formal, public club or league announcement. As a result, our data overlook any non-reported incidents, as well as those considered too trivial for a club or league to acknowledge.
Next, three independent coders examined the transgression incidents. Once identified, transgressions were imported into a spreadsheet for coding, with reference to time and media reports. Discrepancies between coders were discussed in order to reach a consensus.
Classification proceeded on the basis of incidents, which provided the catalogue of events for the period that were matched to the responses announced by clubs and the league. This process identified 79 incidents, 50 of which were explicitly related to alcohol consumption both in media reports and by clubs and leagues in their responses. The transgressions were coded into seven event categories: (1) drunken behavior; (2) gambling; (3) assault; (4) drink-driving; (5) sexual assault; (6) drugs; and (7) inappropriate behavior. Table 1 provides an example of incidents relating to “drunken behavior.”
Example AFL athlete transgressions.
The collection of 50 incidents comprised our data set of cases for further analysis. Media reports of the 50 alcohol-related incidents were subsequently explored to examine consumer opinions of both the transgressions as well as the responses from clubs and leagues. In all, 11 prominent online forums were selected as sites for consumer response collection within four purposively sampled forum categories. The 50 cases yielded a total of 7844 comments, which formed the raw data for content analysis of responses. The forums sampled included sport-dedicated platforms as well as general outlets provided by online mainstream media. Table 2 provides a listing of the categories. Asynchronous online forums offer easily observable, accessible, and safe sites (Hsiung, 2000) that also facilitate long-term, in-depth discussions. The opportunity to access normally concealed data makes the study of online forums especially compelling (Saba and McCormick, 2001).
Discussion forum types and totals.
The consumer response stage of this study utilized a temporal sample of online forum postings in an approach similar to that of Nimrod (2011). Thread selection was guided by Kozinet’s (2010) argument for samples distinguished by (a) relevance to the research question, (b) activity, (c) interactivity between participants, (d) size, (e) heterogeneity, and (f) data-richness.
Online research has yielded a form of virtual ethnographies where the online environment constitutes a cultural context in its own right (Markham, 2005). For example, DiMaggio et al. (2001) and Wilson and Peterson (2002), argued that anthropological techniques could be usefully applied to virtual communities. Our approach therefore utilized “netnography,” which adapts traditional ethnographic research methods to online communities (Kozinets, 2010). Under the netnographic paradigm, collected data take a naturalistic, contextual, and accessible form (Jayanti, 2010).
Content analysis was used to elicit themes from the online text (Hara et al., 2000) using WordStat computer software. Consistent with previous social media research (Graneheim and Lundman, 2004; Harwood and Garry, 2003), the unit of analysis comprised the content of the social network sites and the coding units were the individual posts by fans. Based on word and phrase frequencies, the WordStat analysis provided summary data about responses to incidents. An example appears in Table 3. Finally, the summary data were used to identify the major themes stimulating fan responses, which are presented and discussed in the following section.
Response to transgression WordStat data summary example.
Results and discussion
As summarized in Table 4, from January 2009 to October 2011, 43 transgressions involving players from the AFL received media coverage, 27 of which were linked to alcohol. For the NRL, the period of coverage was from March 2009 to October 2011 and included 36 media-reported transgressions, with 23 coded as alcohol-related. In total, 50 alcohol-related transgressions were identified from a total of 79 media-reported transgressions (63.3%) for both codes.
Media-reported player transgressions.
The content analysis revealed three themes illuminating fans’ responses to player transgressions. The first theme related to fan expectations about appropriate club/league reactions to transgressions. Some fans expected players to be expeditiously and severely punished because no individual player should be more important than a club and its reputation. Conversely, many fans did not accept that it is the club’s prerogative to punish players, particularly where existing legal parameters impose a due process of investigation and consequence. Moreover, the results reflected a polarization between perceptions of players as “ordinary” young men prone to commonplace mistakes and as role models with an obligation to take on higher levels of accountability.
A second theme related to fans’ observations about the variable responses to player transgressions from clubs in the same league, and responses to equivalent transgressions between leagues. The final theme related to fans’ perceptions about the tension between a league’s obligations to player health and its brand. In highlighting these themes, we provide exemplar quotations from the source data. Despite some discrepancies between fans’ responses, their primary consternation arose from issues of parity and appropriateness of club responses. Our later supposition is that a harm-reduction policy would assist clubs in assuaging fan criticism at the same time as safeguarding the health and welfare of their players and the general public.
Responses to punishments
A good example of what fans considered perception-driven punishment could be found in the case of Nathan Bock (Adelaide Crows, AFL), whose “indefinite” match ban by his club for allegedly assaulting his girlfriend after being ejected from a bar lasted one week. This case illustrated the importance fans placed upon clarity, either toward punishment or rehabilitation. The responses offered suggestive evidence that a harm-reduction approach could be valuable as a definitive policy response incorporating mandatory punishment, rehabilitation, or both. Bock was fined AUD$5,000 by his club for the transgression and asked to perform 50 hours of community service. One common interpretation was that Bock’s fine was used to “compensate” for the club’s truncated suspension. Fan comments indicated a willingness to “sacrifice” key players if found guilty of the alleged transgression: “There must be accountability for actions and no player is bigger than the club.” The following comment regarding the incident reveals one common perception associated with punishing players, and the effect this has on the game.
Indefinite suspension until he is ready to resume but definitely this week. So basically he is out this week for sure coz the club would be hammered if they let him play and they’ll see if the shit storm has passed sufficiently next week before deciding if he has to miss another one to keep everyone happy. Hopefully the 50 hours at a women’s shelter will buy them 1 less week they have to sit him out. It is all BS!
Other fans noted that the media attending the Bock incident press conference raised the notion of footballers as “role models,” but insinuated that the media escalates this attribution in order to make transgressions more compelling. Another cynical version of events offered by a fan was as follows: Bock “allegedly” slaps his girlfriend; the club immediately devises a response designed to placate short-term media interest; the media latch on to the “violence against women angle” in order to generate news with little concern for the specifics of the incident; the club announces Bock’s punishment to the media in order to appease the public and to indicate that they too believe that footballers are role models within society. As one forum participant observed: No matter what happened with Bock I’d bet big money that it will be blown up ten times bigger than it is and the punishment will be whatever they think they can get away with to appease the media wolves and those club supporters who live in a make believe world and have unrealistic expectations of players.
Fans also suspected that the club had no interest in the welfare of either Bock or his alleged victim.
Other comments signaled fans’ frustration with the placatory function of club-enforced punishments given out prior to the facts of the incident being made clear and public. Fans highlighted the need to distinguish between behavior that breaks club rules and behavior that transgresses society’s laws: “The AFC (Bock’s club) should see if he broke any team rules, if not, they should wait for the legal findings before punishment.”
Perceived hypocrisy
The level of perceived hypocrisy surrounding NRL player misconduct also appeared prominently in fan comments. NRL fans engaged in two different but related kinds of discussions. One fixated on the incident itself and the other was concerned with how the incident was managed. For example, NRL fans consistently expressed disappointment with player transgressions, but reserved their most vehement commentaries for the way club and NRL officials responded. Specifically, fans became irritated when a player was punished multiple times—by the club, the NRL, and the law—for a single incident, without any thought about the player’s future behavior, given that the response involved no rehabilitative intervention beyond punishment. Just as the harm-reduction model assumes, fans noted that punishment does not causally and automatically reduce future transgressions.
NRL fans were particularly vocal about the way in which Jake Friend’s (Sydney Roosters) drunk-driving incident was handled: “That is an absolute disgrace. It is time the players challenged the legality of this rubbish”; “Friend will pay the penalty legally, he’s also paid a hefty penalty within his club. I don’t think he deserves to be punished any more than any regular Joe would be punished in a similar situation.” Most succinct was: “I find the NRL policy disgusting, hypocritical and fascist in the extreme.” On the one hand, fans did not want clubs and leagues involved in transgressions, but on the other, they criticized the clubs and leagues for inappropriate punishments. Most fans wanted “authentic” responses from clubs. However, it remained unclear what this entailed beyond fans’ desire to be convinced that if clubs and leagues become involved, they do so with transparent intentions. According to fans, clubs prioritized on-field imperatives or “brand protection” while claiming to protect players and the community.
Comments were sometimes accompanied by the opinion that players are not heroes but young, normal people, periodically making mistakes. However, “normal” people who break the law are penalized once, within the legal system. As one fan pointed out: How many times is this guy going to get punished and why on earth do the NRL have the right to do so? I for one am sick of the nanny state. These guys are dealt with via the law like everyone else. They shouldn’t be expected to be “better” people than everyone else.
Fans questioned whether punishing Jake Friend was any of the league’s business, claiming that “Rugby league should come out and wash its hands entirely of policing the morals of its workers. The Roosters had no business even fining this guy.”
Transgression tensions
In observing the uneven reactions of clubs to behavioral transgressions, fans suggested a hidden agenda that had nothing to do with player welfare, concern for alcohol promotion, the impact on transgressions’ victims, or the marginalization of fans. Rather, fans maintained that players were being used as temporary media distractions so that the leagues and clubs could protect their brands.
Why make Jake the scapegoat to all the NRL’s problems? He was drinking at the Clovelly Hotel with all the Roosters players. Plenty of other players have been caught drink-driving over the years and you guys demanding to deregister him is ludicrous. Players getting caught for drink-driving is a regular occurrence. Fine him and let the kid play.
As the previous quote exemplifies, fans noted that the punishments given out by the clubs or the league had little to do with a concern for player or community welfare and more to do with how the NRL believe they should appear in order to present a clean and palatable brand for media, sponsors and consumers. According to fans, the brand-protection strategy leads to inconsistencies in punishments and other responses, with little follow-up to prevent future transgressions. A harm-reduction policy would allow for both issues to be more transparently assuaged.
In a similarly controversial incident from 2009, the AFL’s Jackson Trengove was fined AUD$2,500 by his club for drunken behavior. The following year, Paul Chapman received a court-imposed fine of $234 for “riotous behavior” related to alleged involvement in a “drunken brawl.” Both incidents clearly infringed the AFL code of conduct. Another inconsistency occurred in 2010 when several members of the Western Bulldogs were filmed allegedly drunk, blocking traffic, and jumping on cars during an end-of-season trip to Hong Kong. Not one of them was fined for this publicly visible transgression. Some fans proposed that the response discrepancy indicated that clubs punish players when it is convenient. One player represents a modest sacrifice, but removing a number of players would undermine the media value of the game. In addition, each club holds a unique view on the severity of each transgression and their role in “policing” them. Naturally, this creates confusion and frustration for fans.
A central theme in the fan responses was the desire for consistency and fairness. If players must abide by another level of rules and regulations in addition to common law, then it must be transparent and equitable. Moreover, fans observed that the punishments were not working to decrease the frequency of alcohol transgressions. They called for “forward-looking” responses. In comparing the alcohol-related offences of the NRL’s Brett Stewart and Jake Friend, one fan stated: So what galls me is this: it’s apparently not in dispute that they were both blind [severely intoxicated], but Jake Friend ALSO drove while blind … is it fair that Stewart gets a suspension and Friend only cops a fine? … That’s the kind of inconsistency and unfairness that really pisses me off.
In September 2009, the South Sydney Rabbitohs (NRL) cited sponsor relations in their decision to terminate the contracts of David Fa’alago (a player) and Jason Taylor (the team coach) after a fight at a hotel bar during end-of-season celebrations. Fans were supportive of the decision. South Sydney revealed that sponsors were “fed up” with such off-field misbehavior, although this incident was the first recorded against the Rabbitohs for 2009. Suspending players but then putting them back on the field, varying fines for similar transgressions, and favoring star players over rookies all represent clear inconsistencies that challenge fans’ sense of fairness and undermine their confidence in the leagues and clubs. According to fan commentaries, the NRL and AFL, and their associated clubs, endanger the reputation of “the game” and its brand in their very actions seeking to protect it, especially when overlooking the impact transgressions have on the community and the potential for future incidents.
… a bit of consistency would be nice. Do the clubs and the NRL even talk to each other? Surely there’s a better alternative than this. It’s shit for the image of the game and for players too because it seems totally random and unfair…You tell me how high-range drink driving is not a million times more serious than being drunk at a club function? I have no faith in the NRL whatsoever anymore.
Another incident of note involved AFL Richmond player Troy Taylor, who was charged with assault after gate-crashing a party. Taylor’s condition of bail included an undertaking that he would not consume alcohol and would work through alcohol and anger issues. Instead of the club delivering their own punishment, unusually, they waited to hear from the courts, meanwhile stating that they would support their player through rehabilitation and education while recognizing that he needed to be responsible for his actions. Fans met this harm-reduction response positively. The club signaled an interest in the welfare of its player above the need to have him available for the next game. However, such an approach is not without risk. Just as the clubs and leagues fear, non-action could be interpreted as an implicit acceptance of the behavior. Furthermore, the “hands-off” approach fails some fans’ moral tests and appears weak when a transgression invokes no legal consequences but still challenges ethical conventions. As a result, the effective responses stimulated some form of active intervention from a club, such as education, rehabilitation, or counseling.
Although Richmond fans were generally satisfied with the outcome of the Taylor incident, punishments handed out by the club after the behavior of players in April 2010 elicited a different reaction. Daniel Connors, who was drunk at a hotel and subsequently fought with teammates who were apparently trying to restrain him, was banned from playing for eight weeks, while three other players present were banned for one game. The club stated that these punitive actions were to demonstrate to sponsors (and others) that they take player misbehavior seriously. It is noteworthy that the punishments did not involve any fines, only game suspensions, which arguably had more impact on everyone involved. This includes the fans, who exhibited frustration at having talented players off the field, with one fan declaring that he would not be enticed to purchase a membership for a mediocre club. We see here a good example of why most clubs remain uncertain in their approach to alcohol-related player misbehavior. Once again, no steps were taken to avoid similar transgressions in the future.
In the case of the two drink-driving events involving AFL players between 2009 and 2011, the punishments were equivalent and involved processes designed to educate and reform the behavior. Amongst the data, these two cases are noteworthy due to the positive responses from fans. These incidents revealed that fans considered the consequences of drink-driving to be extremely serious, and thus players must be educated, not merely punished. In the same manner as the Troy Taylor 2009 incident, fans responded positively when the AFL and clubs addressed irresponsible player behavior with even-handed educative processes and an authentic commitment to decreasing the risk of similar occurrences in the future; that is, an approach consistent with harm reduction.
Policy implications and harm reduction
Our data reveal that more often than not alcohol plays a role in player transgressions, and that fans exhibit frustration at a perceived lack of parity in club responses to transgressions. We ask whether an alternative policy response might be worthy of consideration—one that better (a) reduces future alcohol-related transgressions, (b) improves parity and transparency of responses, and (c) safeguards the health and well-being of players and the community. Although our data do not report on the efficacy of a harm-reduction approach in improving the above three factors, we do raise the possibility that it might yield better political and economic outcomes for clubs and leagues, as well as delivering better health outcomes for players. Our point is that if fans just want response parity, from a holistic perspective in which social and personal health are also relevant, a policy alternative that delivers better parity and protection should be under discussion.
Another lesson here is to understand the nature of social media and the pressures it can exert on clubs in formulating their responses to player behaviors. One way of navigating this minefield of diverse and fickle opinion is to make a solid commitment to a policy that takes a decisive position in protecting the health and welfare of players. While a harm-reduction philosophy would require a significant reorientation for AFL and NRL clubs and their governing leagues, our data suggest that fans in the social media domain report dissatisfaction at disparity and discontinuity in policy responses, especially concerning punishment differentials and the absence of interventions designed to reduce future alcohol-related transgressions. A harm-reduction model possesses several dimensions to aid these twin aims.
First, a harm-reduction policy seeks to build an environment where safety and effective harm management are strategic priorities. Second, in pursuing this environment, player alcohol consumption should be consistently monitored by team physicians. Third, promotional campaigns that educate players about the risks associated with various alcohol-related behaviors should be instituted. Fourth, processes must be formulated for early medical intervention where damage to a player or to others has occurred through alcohol use. Fifth, rehabilitation and counseling services that allow players to remediate their high-risk behaviors need addressing. In addition, harm-reduction strategies should include education and information, the provision of replacement activities, attitude management, promotional campaigns, and broader social welfare initiatives. A key point to remember in a harm-reduction plan is that the behavioral transgressions themselves no longer constitute the target. Instead, the real issue lies with alcohol consumption, where transgressions are one of many possible deleterious consequences to be minimalized. Penalties for transgressions can still be available to clubs, but would be used in concert with education, rehabilitation, and community service. The focus remains on decreasing irresponsible and dangerous alcohol use rather than demonstrating zero tolerance for brand damage.
We would consider the critical element of harm-reduction models to be their emphasis on prevention and early intervention. This includes the prevention of escalating patterns of alcohol use. Progression of this type is not being addressed by leagues and clubs, which rely mostly on sanctions. While the anti-transgression policies of clubs and leagues may appear to promote harm reduction by deterring alcohol consumption in the first place, they may actually encourage high-risk use, since the negative outcomes of prohibition include increased risk from unsafe, covert use. Rather than eliminating the consumption of alcohol, punitive sanctions risk sending it further underground as players search for more exotic and less detectable options for their recreational stress release. Given the complexities that characterize the alcohol-in-sport landscape, it is not surprising that polices designed to punish athletes for poor behavior have not removed alcohol from sport. In addition, there is little evidence that indicates any significant improvement in the health and well-being of players resulting from the current arrangements. Furthermore, the data collected for this study suggest that the implementation of a harm-reduction initiative will not lead to widespread social media condemnation as long as it emphasizes parity and a clear concern for the protection of players and the communities with which they engage off the field. In fact, a harm-reduction model could satisfy fans’ dual concerns for parity and for reducing future transgressions at the same time as lowering the brand damage for clubs and leagues.
Conclusion
This analysis examined AFL and NRL alcohol-related player transgressions and subsequent fan perceptions, the latter distilled from online forum comments. The data suggest that many fans become more incensed by a club or league’s response than they do by the original alcohol-related transgression. The data also highlight a series of complexities and tensions embedded within the management of alcohol-related player transgressions. Given the nature of contemporary professional sport, we need to fuse social and economic lenses. The league and club desire to protect on-field performance and brand equity does not always sit comfortably with the differing social and moral expectations directed at players and clubs. Clubs and leagues do not therefore necessarily respond cynically or hypocritically. Rather, their punitive responses reflect the tension between fan expectations for social leadership, the exigencies of brand protection, and the practical advantages of leaving punishment to the rule of civil law and order. We argue for a consideration of harm-reduction policies to both ameliorate the cause of transgressions and protect the health and “brand value” of players. We should also keep in mind that the largest contribution to social media regarding alcohol-related player transgressions is probably delivered by the most ardent sport fans. The data are therefore skewed toward the perceptions of highly involved fans. However, the inventory exposes player transgressions as consequences of complex alcohol-related issues within sport.
Sport possesses an indigenous cultural view of alcohol that asserts a heavy influence on participants. We note, like Keane (2005), that risky behavior does not occur outside the influence of culture and context. In fact, some evidence suggests that males have significantly more libertarian attitudes toward alcohol use than females (Lucidi et al., 2008). Herein lies a pivotal argument for considering harm reduction. Elite players exemplify peak physical performances, yet also promote risky alcohol consumption behaviors. Many of these players are celebrities with opinion leader status and who possess a high propensity to negatively impact key stakeholders. How sport organizations manage serious transgressions through policy and regulatory mechanisms has substantial implications for the health of participants, the welfare of sport communities, and the allocation of government and private resources. In wielding a clear harm-reduction policy, leagues and clubs can demonstrate their commitment to dealing with the problem of alcohol consumption at all levels of sport, rather than just being seen to be “tough” when the consequences become public knowledge. Clubs would also benefit from careful, predetermined social media policies to help provide consistent, well-timed responses as well as effective stakeholder and media management (Claeys and Cauberghe, 2012; DiStaso et al., 2011).
In accepting that alcohol consumption is firmly embedded in sport, sound policies for intervention need to begin with a transparent assessment of the current situation. At present, the system risks failing the players and their victims, ignores the social impacts beyond superficial declarations and fleetingly punitive impositions, sidesteps the deep cultural connections between sport and alcohol, and shies away from responsibility-driven education. On the other hand, fan assessments of player transgressions and club responses remain media favorites and seem likely to further drive the proliferation of social media and the seemingly inexorable tensions inherent in the unique collision between professional sport and social policy. A harm-reduction approach would undermine media speculation and sensationalism, meeting it with a steady emphasis on responsibility, remediation, rehabilitation, education, counseling, transparency, and parity.
Footnotes
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.