Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Why is Serie C professional and not semi-professional? And what about the 3.Liga?

Outside of England, I always thought that European countries only had one or two professional leagues and the rest were semi-professional or amateure and normally, they are a national leagues (as oppose to being regional). In Spain, the Primera División and Segunda División were professional, the Segunda División B and the Tercera División were semi-professional and all leagues below the Tercera were amateure. the Italian Serie A & B were pro, Serie C1 & C2 were semi-pro, and Serie D and below were amateure. Guerin Sportivo and a few of the Italian sports papers had always called Serie C amateure. I think European countries do not have non-EU players below the professional leagues. Spain & Italy had similiar rules that clubs relegated from the 2nd level were allow to have one non-EU player for one season.

Germany were very like the Netherlands, the two Bundesligen were professional and everyone else were amateure. The creation of the modern-day Regionallegen was semi-pro, a mixure of relegated pros and promoted amateures. I think there was a rule that a Regionalliga club can only field three contract amateures or professional players (in cases where the club involved was a reserve team for professional club). In the 3.Liga, the reserve teams are supposed to be amateure. Why is this league considered pro? Raul17 (talk) 20:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

About Serie C, can you please provide these sources? Just in case you don't know, Serie C is now called Lega Pro (the name says it all), the league is now called Lega Italiana Calcio Professionistico, and was called Lega Professionisti Serie C until a couple of years ago (again, names say it all). Notably, Serie C is fully professional since October 14, 1980, as said by this source [1]. --Angelo (talk) 20:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

With regards to the German leagues, the 3rd Liga article seems to indicate that this league is fully professional and the Regionalliga below it is indeed semi-pro, but it's not entirely clear. I'll see if I can find some sources to clarify this. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 06:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Here we go. According to this source, the 3.Liga is fully professional. A number of Regionalliga clubs are also fully professional, but it seems it's mostly semi-pro. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 06:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Canadian Soccer League

According to http://www.canadiansoccerleague.ca/page.php?page_id=7741 this league is professional, but is listed here as not fully professional. What is the source for this? --Ilion2 (talk) 09:00, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

That's an odd one. Canada was added to the fully-pro list back in January, but recently removed with no sources given. I've reverted this, complete with two sources stating its fully-pro status. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 09:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

• I don't get it. This league - the fifth level of Canadian Soccer - is all part-time players who have other jobs. Sure, it's fully professional; as all players are compensated for playing. But it's a league where you'd be surprised if you have 200 people watching the game. Wives and family. Yet the much more serious Irish league is removed here as being fully professional. What gives? I'm not hugely against it being listed - but in comparision to LOI? Is there some anti-Irish bent to that one being removed? Nfitz (talk) 00:23, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
  • According to Canadian Soccer League (2006–present) this league is level 2. --Ilion2 (talk) 09:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
    • According to the opening paragraph, its the top-level league. FAO Nfitz: just because a player gets paid, it doesn't make them professional. English non-league players get a small game fee, but that doesn't make them professional. If they don't get paid a living wage and have a full time occupation outside of football, they are only part-time (semi professional) players. We have sources stating that the Canadian top flight is fully professional (and is therefore a fully professional league), and likewise we have sources which show that a fair proportion of Irish clubs are part-timers, therefore the LoI is not a fully pro league. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 09:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
      • Strange, in the infobox the Levels on pyramid is level 2. --Ilion2 (talk) 10:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
• ??? How can it be level 2 team, when one team is an [team for a Canadian MLS team], and another is a reserve team for a Canadian USL-1 team. The quality is clearly below that of USL-2. Canadian and American soccer have a single pyramid. At best they are level 4, and with several Canadian teams in USL-PDL, I's think that they are level 5. However, Wikipedia disagrees with me Canadian soccer pyramid and places them at the third level (because there are currently not Canadian teams active in the USL-2 and they place the 7 USL-PDL teams below CSL. Either way they are certainly not at the top level on the pyramid! Either way, anyone who claims that CSL should be on the list of fully-professional teams, when the LOI games aren't, clearly haven't witnessed a CSL game! Nfitz (talk) 23:45, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

• I'm not sure USL-1 and USL-2 should be listed as being part of the Canadian system as we have have the same situation here in Wales. According to Welsh football league system article, the Welsh Premier League is listed as the top tier, but there are a few clubs (Cardiff, Swansea, Newport, Merthyr) who compete at a higher level in the English leagues. The Welsh article is correct as there is no direct promotion / relegation between the Welsh Premier League and the English leagues, and unless the champions of the Canadian Premier League are directly promoted to the US leagues, the US leagues shouldn't be listed as part of the Canadian pyramid. However, regardless of whether the CSL is the top or the third level league in the country, I have just found a report by the Canadian FA which does confirm what Nfitz is saying by explicitly stating that there has been no professional league since 1992 and that there are only 3 pro clubs in the country (page 4, 3rd paragraph). Even though this contradicts wildly with the other two sources, this source does seem to be more reliable and therefore I'm happy to concede I was wrong on this matter. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 08:53, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

• • To be fair, I don't see that the Welsh situation is comparable. In Wales, the Football Association of Wales seems to always be in a state of quasi-war with the Welsh teams who play in the English leagues; and FAW don't let them play in the Welsh Cup. However, in Canada, the Canadian Soccer Association has been very supportive of the MLS and USL teams ... to the point where the top championship in Canada - the Canadian Championship - is run by CSA and only let's the MLS and USL teams play. CSA encourages Canadian teams to play in USL and MLS, while FAW discourages teams from playing in the English leagues. Nfitz (talk) 03:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

• We did have the FAW Premier Cup which was open to teams in the English league, but it didn't have any bearing on European qualification. Apart from that you're right, there has never been the cosy relationship here as there appears to be in Canada. But anyway, it kinda misses the question I was trying to ask - is there direct promotion/relegation between the Canadian league and the US league? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 14:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

• There's no direct promotion or relegation in any of the Canadian or US leagues we've been discussing. Nfitz (talk) 07:47, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Cypriot First Division

Cypriot First Division is listed here as not professional since this [2] edit. Even the Cypriot Second Division claims to be professional, so should be the first division. In fr:Championnat de Chypre de football this league is listed as professional league. --Ilion2 (talk) 06:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

If it's not sourced then we can't assume it's professional. We can't use other Wikipedias as proof. Spiderone (talk) 08:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I know this. That is the reason why I start the discussion instead of adding this as professional league. --Ilion2 (talk) 08:17, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

By the way, if it is not sourced how can you aasume it is not professional? --Ilion2 (talk) 08:50, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Because there is no evidence that it is professional. Spiderone (talk) 08:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

It is so easy for you? This league is listed an unprofessional, so there must be a source for this. Otherwise the status should be unknown. --Ilion2 (talk) 09:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

According to this report, Anorthosis Famagusta are part-timers, or at least they were two years ago. Something to start on, I suppose. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 10:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Is it possible that non professional leagues are listed on uefa.com [3], fifa.com [4] and their clubs (APOEL F.C.) playing in Europe's premier club football tournament 2009–10 UEFA Champions League? And why is the second division according to Cypriot Second Division still professional when the first division is here listed as not professional with no given source? It is not correct to say "I can not proof that this league is not professional, but I am right until someone proofs that I am wrong". --Ilion2 (talk) 05:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

About your first question, just look at Campionato Sammarinese di Calcio, that is an amateur league (some of its league teams also used to play in the Italian amateur tiers until a very few years ago), despite this the winning team of this league participated in the UEFA Champions League qualifying rounds too. Then, we have no proof confirming what the French Wikipedia states (and, as you probably know, Wikipedia is not a primary source), but we have a source above stating that Anorthosis Famagusta, probably the most successful Cypriot club in recent times, is not a fully professional club. That's all the evidence around, unless you can find actual evidence of the contrary from more reliable sources. --Angelo (talk) 12:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

APOEL F.C. is a professional club, Cypriot Second Division is a professional league. All according to this encyclopedia. It looks like somebody are more trying to convince me than to correct articles like Cypriot Second Division as they are sure that this league is not professional. But you should be able to proof it, otherwise the status is just unknown. According to this source [5] it looks like it is a professional league (look for "The strike was Leiwakabessy's first ever league goal in professional football."). This source is newer that above source as this player plays since 2008 for Anorthosis Famagusta. Again, it is not correct to say "I can not proof that this league is not professional, but I am right until someone proofs that I am wrong". --Ilion2 (talk) 16:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

People have shown evidence in the past that it is not professional. Your referencing of one team doesn't prove that a league is professional, especially because you have very tangential references. A references to a Champions League tie would only prove that the Champions League is fully professional. It doesn't say anything about the Cypriot League. A tie in this case will go to not fully professional, as far as I'm aware. I say this as an inclusionist, too. We've discussed the Cypriot League in the past, and this is the conclusion that we reached. If you don't have any substantial evidence to the contrary, I don't see why based on a passing mention and uncited Wikipedia statements that we should reverse it. This is why we require citation. matt91486 (talk) 17:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I think the whole paragraph in the PDF is about the Cypriot League, not the Champions League. --Ilion2 (talk) 17:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't download it, but the fact that it was a UEFA document with the abbreviation UCL led me to believe it would presumably be about the Champions League. matt91486 (talk) 22:08, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Here's another source which indicates Anorthosis are semi-pro (although this is dated 2005). Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 12:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Now this is more conclusive - this source states "APOEL is the benchmark that all clubs in Cyprus are compared against. They are one of the few clubs who have developed into professional organisations, after many years of semi-professional status. Judging by this, it seems the majority of Cypriot teams are semi-pro. Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 18:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Egyptian Premier League

Another league which claims to be professional according to Egyptian Premier League. --Ilion2 (talk) 09:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

[6] is a source that implies that its full pro, but only in passing. I'll see if I can find something more concrete. matt91486 (talk) 01:25, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

article will be perhaps most valuable in figuring it out. matt91486 (talk) 01:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Moroccan first league Botola = GNF 1

This league is professional according to fr:Championnat du Maroc de football. --Ilion2 (talk) 09:00, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia, in any language, is not per se a WP:Reliable Source; however, Wikipedia, in any language, ought to cite a WP:Reliable Source. So what is the source cited on the French wiki to prove this fully professional status? Kevin McE (talk) 09:14, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

We all should know what a reliable source is. I hope to find people who will help here. Professional status was added in 2007 with no given souce. At least it is there undoubted for 1,5 years now. --Ilion2 (talk) 09:23, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm all for adding more leagues to the list of approved ones, but it would definitely be best to proceed with something beyond an unsourced French wikipedia statement from a couple years ago. Perhaps there is a PDF of African leagues similar to the one recently found for Asian ones. matt91486 (talk) 01:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hong Kong First Division League

Sorry for starting so much parallel discussions, but there are many AfD requests for peoples from this leagues. Hong Kong First Division League is another league. This league is professional according to de:Hong Kong First Division League. Perhaps it is possible to confirm professional status by the clubs playing in this league. Convoy Sun Hei SC (Xiangxue Sun Hei) plays in this league and this club plays in the AFC Cup. Can amateur clubs play in the AFC Cup? --Ilion2 (talk) 09:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I would think so since teams from the Maldives, Vietnam, Oman etc. all play in the competition Spiderone (talk) 12:19, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Camw posted in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lau Nim Yat : This [7] PDF from www.the-afc.com contains a row "Number of players under professional contract in the top team of each club". According to this "Hong Kong" fulfilled the "Minimum Requirement for 2009" of at least 16 players under professional contract. --Ilion2 (talk) 20:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

This PDF from http://www.the-afc.com contains more informations for other countries too. According to this the following countries fulfilles this criterion of at least 16 players under professional contract in the top team of each club : JORDAN, SYRIA, SAUDI ARABIA, KUWAIT, QATAR, UAE, IR IRAN, UZBEKISTAN, INDIA, THAILAND, MALAYSIA, SINGAPORE, INDONESIA, AUSTRALIA, CHINA PR, KOREA Rep., HONG KONG and JAPAN. --Ilion2 (talk) 20:17, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

It actually doesn't say that about all of them. Anything with green in the box, you have counted as completed despite having no proof. It is purely a hypothetical that those would be, so, for example, Kuwait and Syria cannot be considered fully professional without an updated source. The most recent we have for them indicates clearly that they were not fully professional at the time. That said, while the report indicates that the Hong Kong league has 16 players under professional contract, its ratings in other areas suggest that the league is not fully professional despite player contracts. I would suggest the same about Malaysia. If they don't think the leagues are fit to participate in their international tournaments, it's a strong indication that their players aren't notable. I have used this source to add a couple leagues with overall high marks (notably Jordan) to the list of approved ones, as well as an additional source for all Asian leagues with high marks. matt91486 (talk) 00:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Austrian Football First League

I've seen that the Austrian Football First League is in the list of fully professional leagues, but I don't see how it can be seeing as there is a team called Austria Wien Amateure (the clue is in the name), and also FC Red Bull Salzburg's reserves play in this division. BigDom 13:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The fact that there is a reserve team doesn't in and of itself mean that the league couldn't be fully professional: see the Spanish 2nd Division historically for a good example. I'm personally not terribly familiar with the league, though, so hopefully we can get some definitive sources on the matter. matt91486 (talk) 20:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the reserves could be professional, it was the team that has amateur in its name that I was thinking more about because I don't know much about Austrian football either. I want to know so that if the league is professional, I can set about creating articles for the players in there. BigDom 20:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Ideally it should be sourced as per most of the other entries, although presumably 'Amateure' is the traditional name of the reserves, and no longer means they are actually amateur? Eldumpo (talk) 18:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

So if I go ahead and create some articles, they won't be deleted? BigDom 21:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I think at this point, you'd be OK, but if someone were to find a source that says it wasn't fully professional, then they would be. It might be best to wait until we get a source, but it's up to you. matt91486 (talk) 01:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Iraqi Premier League

Is the league professional? I haven't managed to find evidence that it is yet. Spiderone (talk) 15:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Guideline check

I have not seen discussions in an appropriate archive or anywhere else that asserts what is necessary to define teams listed on this page as professional. I understand the need to limit poor articles and a flood of BIO articles. However, this page has been used in a discussion asserting notability and requirements need to be clearly defined.

According to Professional sports: Professional sports are those "in which athletes receive payment for their performance". This should be the backbone of what is required to be listed here. It can also be argued that a "living wage" (basically can the athlete make a living off participation in the sport alone) and fan base can come into play. Concerns over FIFA sanctions can also be considered (guys playing in the now defunct North American Soccer League were not ever going to be eligible for FIFA sanctioned tournaments). We need to clarify this since simply saying that country x is not professional is a disservice to this project and has been used as a crutch to delete bad articles.

What defines professional? Is it based on skill, league merit, fan base, FIFA requirments, paycheck, or whatever?Cptnono (talk) 09:50, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Generally in discussions here, it seems to have fallen to livable wage. That's just the criteria I see most cited by others in debates on the topic. matt91486 (talk) 16:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, we're definitely looking for more than simply "the clubs pay the players some money". Clubs in the Kent League pay a small amount of money to their players, but all are only part-timers playing in front of crowds of as few as 25 or 30 fans, so it's million miles away from being considered "fully professional"..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

So if the player's full time job is football it is professional?Cptnono (talk) 13:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the requirement is that all players in a league be full-time footballers, not part-timers who have other jobs but train in the evenings and play at weekends -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:34, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

So Owen is not a professional if you take his time at Newcastle into accouint : ) . I think my concern is certain teams in Eastern Europe and the Middle East pay their boys living wages to do nothing else but play while the lower teams in those leagues do not. I think there should be a mention that some teams are professional while others in their leagues are not. Or at the very least it would help if editors didn't use this page as a reasoning in AfDs when lack of signifigant coverage is the true concern.Cptnono (talk) 14:55, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Bulgarian A PFG

Does anyone know if this league is fully-pro. There are over 250 unreferenced BLPs about Bulgarian footballers (most of whom have only played in this league), and before I spend hours sourcing them (I did the first dozen without thinking), I want to be sure they won't all be deleted because the league is not fully-pro. Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 16:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Did anyone ever figure anything out in regard to this? There's a couple up for PROD right now. matt91486 (talk) 06:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I translated their home page...I'm inclined to go with yes. matt91486 (talk) 06:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

My guess is that most of what's left unreferenced are B PFG players - I added a reference to as many of the A PFG players as I could find. Is there somewhere we can see what's in the PROD list now? Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 13:57, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I just looked at the two that showed up on PRODSUM. One of them I removed for being in the A PFG; the other only has B experience, so I left through. This is the one that I removed the prod for, but did not yet find a source: Yordan Penev. matt91486 (talk) 15:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. According to pfl.bg, Penev has never played in the A PFG, but he did play in the Cup for a A PFG side against another A PFG side. I've added a reference to the article. Jogurney (talk) 16:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Umaglesi Liga

The level pf Georgia's top flight was called into question on an AfD of one of the players. I am fairly confident if sources asserting notability can be found that article should be fine but I wanted to get this end fixed as well. The only English on the Umaglesi Liga website ([8]) is "Georgian Professional League". I do know that some clubs from the league have had some success in Europe so there has historically been a decent level of play. Do we need more than their assertion and history to get it on the list or do we need to poke around for wages info?Cptnono (talk) 04:04, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Not really some clubs, but one club, which is FC Dinamo Tbilisi (Cup Winners Cup champions in 1981, when there was no independent Georgia state, but a USSR championship). For the rest, Wikipedia is not made by assumption, but facts: a league is fully professional league if all of its clubs are composed by professional footballers. Not only Dinamo Tbilisi but also teams like FC Gagra Tbilisi (just to mention one of the other teams in the league). --Angelo (talk) 07:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

So if it comes up in an article for deletion is it OK to say "no, Dinamo is professional" or in the case of Kuwait: "No, Al Kuwait Kaifan is OK"? This looks similar to Ireland where some teams are professional and some aren't but it is hard to show notability when certain editors are saying the whole league is not professional when a few teams in said leagues are paying there guys to play ball. People point o this page when they shouldn't so is a provision going to be added that says "yes, team x in country y is professional so don't assume there is not notability to delete stubs at whim"? Cptnono (talk) 12:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

The fact Dinamo won a European competitions 28 years ago does not mean it is a fully professional club as well; as a real example, the club who won the first Coppa Italia and two past Serie A winners are now playing in the amateur divisions of Italy. And, as stated earlier notability is given by the level you play, not the club you play for. --Angelo (talk) 13:58, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

That is all fine and dandy but everything I see points to them being professional but playing in a weak league. The league's website also says the league is professional so it seems like a safe bet. Dinamo also brings in internationals and I can't imagine anyone moving across the world without a paycheck.Cptnono (talk) 14:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

"I can't imagine anyone moving across the world without a paycheck". How about the Faroese carpenter who scored a goal to Italy in the Euro 2008 qualifying tournament? Or more than one half of the Sanmarinese national team (please note the Sanmarinese league is completely amateur)? --Angelo (talk) 14:56, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

He is talking about moving home, to play permanently, not one representative match, so your counter-examples are fairly meaningless. To Cptnono, please be aware that WP:Footy wanted a policy to include all players at Pro clubs, but that was rejected: we would rather that the classification of leagues that makes up this page were un-necessary, and moaning about it here is not helpful. Kevin McE (talk) 15:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm done moaning about it ( had to get the Owen crack in there, though!) . I'm just trying to see if the Georgian League or any of its teams are professional.

To Angelo.romano: Talking about guys playing at a club not national pride and for more than a single tournament.Cptnono (talk) 10:50, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Algerian League

The Algerian League is a professional league based on the definition provided in the article. None of the players have a second job and their only job is playing football. The pay is significantly higher than the rest of the population with salaries as high as €10,000/month. There is many foreign players playing in the league, with their previous clubs receiving transfer fees for them joining Algerian clubs.

The link on the FIFA website referring to the league being semi-pro and aiming to achieve professional status in 2010 refers to the league adopting FIFA regulations on professionalism which involves a number of criterion that must be fulfilled. It does not refer to the football "profession" within the league.

I'm going to move the league to the list of professional leagues, if anyone wants to discuss it feel free to reply.TonyStarks (talk) 04:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

While I don't disagree with anything you say above, and appreciate you have done the right thing by stating your reasoning here, I am going to move the Algerian entry back where he was for now, until either consensus or evidence supports its move. To be listed under FPL I believe the criteria is to have a reliable source that actually supports the claim. The current source actually refutes the claim. Also, if and when it's status as a FPL is recognised, it should be appended with a qualifier showing from when it is a FPL. Fair to say some other leagues listed should have the same qualifier. --ClubOranje^T 09:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what kind of evidence you require. Anyone that follows the Algerian league will confirm what I'm saying in regards to the article's definition of professionalism. Just a quick example here: expats du foot français : le rêve algérien de Khaled Lemmouchia. In the article, it states that the French-born player signed his first professional contract with ES Setif worth 5,000 euros/month. Here is another example, this time a Cameroonian playing professionally in Algeria: Un Pro au terroir... Like I said, based on the Wikipedia definition, the Algerian league is a fully professional league and anyone that follows it will attest to that. The FIFA article refers to FIFA regulations on professionalism which many leagues listed as FPL in the article don't actually meet.TonyStarks (talk) 21:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I think the problem is that those two references only prove that the league is semi-pro. Our only reference for the league as a whole states that it is not yet fully pro, so we need a more recent reference to overrule it. matt91486 (talk) 00:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I can't see the content of the second link since it's down, but the first link merely states that fully professional football was a goal for 2010. It doesn't state whether or not it was achieved. I apologize for being the contrarian voice on all of these things, but just wanted to follow up on it. matt91486 (talk) 05:56, 19 August 2010 (UTC)