Football is worth £1.35b to the Scottish economy

[Monts]

"A report commissioned in 2018 by UEFA and the SFA found that football delivered a return of more than €1.35 billion to Scottish society. They further broke this figure down into €242.3 million of direct contribution to the economy, €352 million of social benefits and €792.6 million of healthcare savings as a result of participation in football."

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/4961/sfa-uefa-grow-pp-screens-mar19-web.pdf

Should the SFA be recieving more funding?

[Monts]

Surprised this has had no responses

[ancient hibee]

Meaningless stats especially the one about £800 million health care savings.

[matty_f]

Surprised this has had no responses

Just read the thread and the figures are extraordinary.

Even if they didn’t give us now funding, it would be nice if they stopped treating us like criminals.

[Monts]

Meaningless stats especially the one about £800 million health care savings.

You can't argue that football doesn't improve people's health. You may not agree with the figure the study has arrived at, but it's one that the government does agree with, so based on that, I'd say there is a legitimate basis to look at the funding of football in this country. Would you agree?

[danhibees1875]

You can't argue that football doesn't improve people's health. You may not agree with the figure the study has arrived at, but it's one that the government does agree with, so based on that, I'd say there is a legitimate basis to look at the funding of football in this country. Would you agree?

I think you have a point. What is the current level of funding? :dunno:

[cocteautwin]

Yeah, but half of that was spent on the new stand at Tynecastle.

[Bishop Hibee]

Don’t expect any politician to give money to football. If it was opera or ballet, you’d get tens of millions.

[jacomo]

Yeah, but half of that was spent on the new stand at Tynecastle.


And counting...

[Humo]

I think more government funding should come along with a complete overhaul off the SFA and the SPFL


Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

[Monts]

I think you have a point. What is the current level of funding? :dunno:

https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-budget-2019-20/

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like government fundind for all sport in Scotland is delivered through SportScotland (page 64 in the above document). The level of funding is £32m. and that covers all sports, not just football.

[Power]

Even from just a social engagement and wellbeing angle it gets 100-150k people out of their houses and interacting every week. That’s fantastic, there is plenty of initiatives that would love that number. The game is loved here.

[Monts]

https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-budget-2019-20/

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like government fundind for all sport in Scotland is delivered through SportScotland (page 64 in the above document). The level of funding is £32m. and that covers all sports, not just football.

http://www.parliament.scot/budget/explorethebudget-2019-20/node-link.html

This is a useful tool for seeing how the Scottish government budget is spent.

[Speedy]

You can't argue that football doesn't improve people's health. You may not agree with the figure the study has arrived at, but it's one that the government does agree with, so based on that, I'd say there is a legitimate basis to look at the funding of football in this country. Would you agree?

I'm it also damages people's health as well in many cases - injuries when playing, association with drinking and bad diet when watching, gambling problems.

I'm not suggesting it's all bad as it will obviously help people keep fit but it seems a very arbitrary number.

[Forza Fred]

I'm it also damages people's health as well in many cases - injuries when playing, association with drinking and bad diet when watching, gambling problems.

I'm not suggesting it's all bad as it will obviously help people keep fit but it seems a very arbitrary number.

Aye, and it doesn’t do my heart trouble any good when we are 1-0 up and desperately waiting on the final whistle to blow.

[Cataplana]

"A report commissioned in 2018 by UEFA and the SFA found that football delivered a return of more than €1.35 billion to Scottish society. They further broke this figure down into €242.3 million of direct contribution to the economy, €352 million of social benefits and €792.6 million of healthcare savings as a result of participation in football."

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/4961/sfa-uefa-grow-pp-screens-mar19-web.pdf

Should the SFA be recieving more funding?

I suppose the simple answer to your question is that if it delivers £1.35 billion, then it can fund itself.

I think the benefits to health are probably exaggerated though, and what are "social benefits"?

[Monts]

I'm it also damages people's health as well in many cases - injuries when playing, association with drinking and bad diet when watching, gambling problems.

I'm not suggesting it's all bad as it will obviously help people keep fit but it seems a very arbitrary number.

Cost of injury is already factored into the figures.

The other three things are aguably wider societal problems, that can't solely be laid at the feet of football.

[Monts]

I suppose the simple answer to your question is that if it delivers £1.35 billion, then it can fund itself.

I think the benefits to health are probably exaggerated though, and what are "social benefits"?

It generally does fund itself, but the £1.35b isn't staying within football, that's the point. The SFA are so skint they can't afford to buy the national stadium from an amateur team.


It tells you in the link what social benefits are.

"Positive social impact through an active population, e.g. reduction in crime, improved education performance etc."

[Cataplana]

It generally does fund itself, but the £1.35b isn't staying within football, that's the point. The SFA are so skint they can't afford to buy the national stadium from an amateur team.


It tells you in the link what social benefits are.

"Positive social impact through an active population, e.g. reduction in crime, improved education performance etc."

etc? They would be as well saying "and things". Apologies if that's your wording, but if it's in an official report, it shouldnt be.

Yeah, but how do you prove football is responsible for that? Is it a net figure after offsetting crime caused by football, such as sectarian behaviour.

I suspect they are saying that without football, the economy would be hit harder. In that case, why bum up football at the expense of other things like the arts, or angling?

As to the SFA being skint, that's hardly a good advert for giving them more money. They are in charge of this mega business, yet can't make ends meet.

[Monts]

etc? They would be as well saying "and things". Apologies if that's your wording, but if it's in an official report, it shouldnt be.

Yeah, but how do you prove football is responsible for that? Is it a net figure after offsetting crime caused by football, such as sectarian behaviour.

I suspect they are saying that without football, the economy would be hit harder. In that case, why bum up football at the expense of other things like the arts, or angling?

As to the SFA being skint, that's hardly a good advert for giving them more money. They are in charge of this mega business, yet can't make ends meet.

Why don't you click on the link and have a look? :dunno:

The SFA might well not be the best it could be, but you seem to be implying that they are generating the £1.35b in revenue, and not being able to manage it. That's not what is being said.


I'm not sure why there is such negativity around this from football fans. Here we have a government endorsed document explaining how beneficial football is to Scotland, and most seem to say "nah, I don't believe you, we're actually a burden on society". Seems strange to me.

[Cataplana]

Why don't you click on the link and have a look? :dunno:

The SFA might well not be the best it could be, but you seem to be implying that they are generating the £1.35b in revenue, and not being able to manage it. That's not what is being said.


I'm not sure why there is such negativity around this from football fans. Here we have a government endorsed document explaining how beneficial football is to Scotland, and most seem to say "nah, I don't believe you, we're actually a burden on society". Seems strange to me.

That would definitely be a step in the right direction! :greengrin

I'll have a look at what was actually said before criticising, but ah hae ma doots.

[Cataplana]

At the end of the day, they would say that, wouldn't they?

My stumbling block is that this information doesn't appear to have been independently verified. However, if it is true, thanks very much SFA for your contribution for society, I am sure you don't claim all the credit, and recognise that football is just one of the past times that can deliver these outcomes.

Sorry Bernz, I'm a football supporter, and I actually spend quite a lot of money on the game. I don't see any real need for society at large to fund the sport, as the report says it is Scotland's number one sport, as such it should be able to generate the income itself.

The fact that they have the begging bowl out, makes me wonder where the cash generated is actually ending up.

[jgl07]

The problem is that most of the £1.35 billion is swallowed up by policing costs after OF derby matches.

[Anthony Soprano]

Why don't you click on the link and have a look? :dunno:

The SFA might well not be the best it could be, but you seem to be implying that they are generating the £1.35b in revenue, and not being able to manage it. That's not what is being said.


I'm not sure why there is such negativity around this from football fans. Here we have a government endorsed document explaining how beneficial football is to Scotland, and most seem to say "nah, I don't believe you, we're actually a burden on society". Seems strange to me.


Exactly what I was thinking. This isn't someone's uncle on Facebook saying this, it's an official document and people can't wait to rip into it.

[superfurryhibby]

People are confusing grass roots investment with a government hand out to the SFA. Sport in general benefits from central funding, do people remember the cash cost for each Olympic medal. Success doesn't cheap, but cost and value can't always be easily measured.

[ScottB]

More funding for what, exactly?

More funding for pitches for kids and the like? Sure, why not. Government funding going to professional football clubs? No chance, nor should there be.

[Cataplana]

Exactly what I was thinking. This isn't someone's uncle on Facebook saying this, it's an official document and people can't wait to rip into it.

Club 1872 statements are official documents.

[danhibees1875]

At the end of the day, they would say that, wouldn't they?

My stumbling block is that this information doesn't appear to have been independently verified. However, if it is true, thanks very much SFA for your contribution for society, I am sure you don't claim all the credit, and recognise that football is just one of the past times that can deliver these outcomes.

Sorry Bernz, I'm a football supporter, and I actually spend quite a lot of money on the game. I don't see any real need for society at large to fund the sport, as the report says it is Scotland's number one sport, as such it should be able to generate the income itself.

The fact that they have the begging bowl out, makes me wonder where the cash generated is actually ending up.

Sorry if I'm picking you up wrong, but you seem to be mixing up "worth" with "cash generated".

They're not claiming they generate £1.35b and waste it on whatever they do. They're saying that they generate that value of impact on society, audited/believable or otherwise. Presumably they're doing this to raise awareness of the benefits sports (football in this case) has in an attempt to get more funding.

I can't think of a reason why increased funding into grassroots football would be a bad idea. Getting more kids playing and enjoying football more frequently, and targeting getting more girls involved as they're clearly underrepresented in the sport at a time where their game looks like it's about to gain a lot more traction.

Whether the numbers are correct is debatable, but I'm happy to assume that football has an overall positive impact on society and any increased funding into that sounds good to me. :aok:

[Cataplana]

Sorry if I'm picking you up wrong, but you seem to be mixing up "worth" with "cash generated".

They're not claiming they generate £1.35b and waste it on whatever they do. They're saying that they generate that value of impact on society, audited/believable or otherwise. Presumably they're doing this to raise awareness of the benefits sports (football in this case) has in an attempt to get more funding.

I can't think of a reason why increased funding into grassroots football would be a bad idea. Getting more kids playing and enjoying football more frequently, and targeting getting more girls involved as they're clearly underrepresented in the sport at a time where their game looks like it's about to gain a lot more traction.

Whether the numbers are correct is debatable, but I'm happy to assume that football has an overall positive impact on society and any increased funding into that sounds good to me. :aok:

I agree that football is good for society, I couldn't live without it. Just wanting to counsel against people with a vested interest over egging the pudding.

[Monts]

I agree that football is good for society, I couldn't live without it. Just wanting to counsel against people with a vested interest over egging the pudding.

Who do you think has a vested interest and to what end?

[Cataplana]

Who do you think has a vested interest and to what end?

The SFA has an interest in getting more funding from government. More jobs for the boys.

[where'stheslope]

The 1.35b euros, pales into significance when you are kept being told on SKY, that over £1b has been spent in this transfer window in England???
As a Nation we punch above our weight in most things, but as England holds all the cards, we get dealt from the bottom of the pack!!!!!!