What made a person a professional footballer?

[sbi5ar]

A friend is doing some research into professional footballers (arthritis research) and it has thrown up some interesting questions... Professional footballers have an average playing career of 10 years (Kuijt et al., 2012). The definition of ‘professional’ is difficult as it was never defined and the game has changed a lot over the past 50 years.

Could you football boffs help out (especially the older folk) and give your thoughts on a few points (specifically relating to pre-2004 i.e. the old divisions etc...). The main questions are...

1) What made somebody a professional footballer?
2) How was that different to a semi-professional footballer?
3) Do you have to have earned a full-time wage with a club?
4) Was the club a league level club?
5) Did you have to play football for a specific amount of time a week?
6) Did you have to play a certain number of games per seasons or competitive games over the course of your career?

For me...

1) By definition a professional is a member of a profession... is a football a profession? Based on definitions, no... but to me... someone in the pre-2004 era would be a professional footballer if they didn't need to substitute their income through an additional profession.

2) By the detail given above, a semi-professional footballer would be someone who has a job to help maintain an income.

3) Based on the above, yes.

4) League is irrelevant based on the above, i.e. if you were being paid well enough and could sustain a certain lifestyle it wouldn't matter which division you were in.

5) I would say no... injuries etc... could skew this.

6) This all links back to pay for me... If you are being paid etc... then the club would want you playing so it is kind of directly linked.




If anyone else could add their thoughts, it would be interesting to know.

 

[Azza]

A wage which means you don't have to have a secondary income to live and also you 'work' 'full time hours'. In general I've always thought that the title comes down to getting paid enough money that you don't have to work elsewhere, regardless of the the number of hours you put in as that is subjective to different empoyers, thus making it your profession.


I don't see any of the other questions needing answering really as they're too varying.

 

[Purdy]

I saw it the same as Azza, if you made enough to live of the job I'd count it as a professional footballer, if you need other jobs to live + getting paid for the football I'd have thought semi pro.

 

[MissChief]

As above. If Football is your only source of income (sponsorship etc would come from being involved in football) then IMO you're a professional footballer.

 

[Rroff]

Generally in sports and esports a "professional" is someone who is playing at the highest level of the game - someone who if you wanted the best result (to win) you would pay to get those results.

 

[drunkenmaster]

As above. If Football is your only source of income (sponsorship etc would come from being involved in football) then IMO you're a professional footballer.

I wouldn't say that simply as, lets say Zidane opened a restaurant, or a footballer had lets say a full on business empire that did clothing, fragrances, sunglasses, whatever. Was Beckham a professional footballer still while he was modelling, or selling stuff as a business. Rio had a restaurant.

I would say more loosely that anyone who could make a living on only their footballing salary would be a professional footballer. Maybe you could narrow it to a main job, maybe not. ultimately I would say anyone who puts in full time work to be a footballer would be a professional footballer if they also held a contract with any level of football club, regardless of what other work they did.

A part time footballer who say works in a bank and trains when he can, but can't put in the same amount of dedication as a full time footballer I would say call either part time or semi professional, which term would be most appropriate I don't know.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

I saw it the same as Azza, if you made enough to live of the job I'd count it as a professional footballer, if you need other jobs to live + getting paid for the football I'd have thought semi pro.

+1

Make enough money you can live off - professional footballer
Get paid money but it isn't enough to live off - semi pro
Don't get paid - amateur

 

[Jokester]

For me, it's your full time job and football activities is your primary source of income.

 

[Jokester]

Don't get paid - amateur

Amateur's quite often get paid as well, I know my local junior team pays something like £50 match fees.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Amateur's quite often get paid as well, I know my local junior team pays something like £50 match fees.

then they are semi-pro

 

[sbi5ar]

One thing I'm trying to get at... How would you discern between a professional and non professional footballer say 20 years ago? In todays age it is easier (as many people have pointed out)... Is it as simple as Azza says and if they were able to live off their football wage they were classed as professionals?

 

[Psycho Sonny]

One thing I'm trying to get at... How would you discern between a professional and non professional footballer say 20 years ago? In todays age it is easier (as many people have pointed out)... Is it as simple as Azza says and if they were able to live off their football wage they were classed as professionals?

yes.

footballers 20 years ago were still earning many thousands per week at the top level

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...s-have-changed-over-the-years-in-numbers.html


footballers have always been well paid even in "1957 a top England player would have earned a total of a year £1,677 in wages, bonuses and international match fees.
In today's money that is the equivalent of about £75,000 - the kind of salary a GP or senior manager would earn"

 

[arknor]

world cups say there's not a great deal of difference between professionals and non professionals certainly not enough difference for the silly wages

 

[Psycho Sonny]

world cups say there's not a great deal of difference between professionals and non professionals certainly not enough difference for the silly wages

huh?

everyone playing in the world cup is a pro bar some dodgy place like korea i imagine

if your saying the standard is on a similar level your greatly mistaken.

 

[arknor]

huh?

everyone playing in the world cup is a pro bar some dodgy place like korea i imagine

if your saying the standard is on a similar level your greatly mistaken.

new zealand vs italy world cup 2010
1 of the new zealand players didn't even have a club and another worked part time in a bank yet they managed 1-1 vs one of the best teams in the world
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2010/matches/match_28/default.stm
Rank outsiders New Zealand pulled off one of the biggest World Cup shocks of recent tournaments by holding defending champions Italy to a memorable draw in Nelspruit.
it still represents easily the best result in the history of a nation which still does not have a professional football league and is far better known for its daunting rugby exploits.

 

[div0]

Pro = only source of income
Semi-pro = regular income but with another regular job
Amateur = some expenses covered
The rest.

 

[mmj_uk]

Playing for a team in the Football League I would say, I don't think there are many teams outside of it that can afford to pay a living wage (perhaps a few Conference sides).

 

[Psycho Sonny]

new zealand vs italy world cup 2010
1 of the new zealand players didn't even have a club and another worked part time in a bank yet they managed 1-1 vs one of the best teams in the world
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2010/matches/match_28/default.stm
Rank outsiders New Zealand pulled off one of the biggest World Cup shocks of recent tournaments by holding defending champions Italy to a memorable draw in Nelspruit.
it still represents easily the best result in the history of a nation which still does not have a professional football league and is far better known for its daunting rugby exploits.

oh great you managed to pick the one game at a world cup that is an exception.

sometimes players have a bad game, just don't turn up, manager picks the wrong tactics. italy also had an ageing side in that world cup with no stand out striker or attacking players.

if that game was to be replayed today new zealand would get spanked.

one game doesn't prove anything. mike tyson in his prime got beaten by a bum, it doesn't prove anything.

he was still head and shoulders above everyone in his prime. he just had an off day.

no doubt new zealand were playing to draw that game and parked the bus, it's much harder to win when all the other team wants to do is defend and not push forward much.