Sport occupies an excessive place in this section? It is an opinion that we respect. Though not without trying to justify this apparent anomaly. In a single phrase: in the world without wars that the European Union has built on its territory and that it is trying, as much as possible, to contribute to its spreading, sporting activity plays an irreplaceable role.

Since the existence of social organisation, "soldiering" justified the aggressiveness of the human being. It even glorified it. In all civilisations, the "rites of passage" from adolescence to adulthood mainly consisted of a series of tests of physical courage, preparing the young to face enemies while developing at the same time the feeling of belonging to a group. For tens of thousands of years, the warrior instinct was cultivated, courage was considered as the highest virtue for a man. The education system pushed in this direction, joining with natural factors that result from the physical upheaval of puberty. At a given time in the development of a human being, the sudden rise of aggression is not a phenomenon that can be eliminated in a couple of decades (or even that it will ever go); but all civilisations, in maturing, worked to channel it. The war itself was disciplined by a series of rules often very ridged and the call to arms was often directed towards noble objectives; the knight had to protect women and orphans foremost. Europe has born the role of knight for a long time; is it necessary to quote Don Quixote? Or the nostalgic cry of Ludivico Aristo: "oh gran nonta dei cavalieri antiqui!".

In a European Union that wants to erase the squabbles of the past and the national hatreds, the only path to channel youth aggression, to direct it while allowing it expression, is sporting activities. The ancient Greek civilisation, of which many are lead to believe it having great insight into the deepest instincts of man (it is not for nothing that Sigmund Freud gave the name of a Greek myth to each of his complexes discovered in the unconscious), already interpreted sport as being a substitute for war: every four years, during the Olympic games, sport replaced wars and the athletes where glorifies as heroes.

I am conscious of the approximate nature of this shortcut, which will, without a doubt, make the specialist smile. I obviously ignore the fact the sometimes people attribute to a sporting activity (and football in particular) the responsibility for itself provoking violence and hooliganism. It is a gross error of judgement. It is not sport that provokes hooliganism; on the contrary it is the victim, football more than other sports because it is popular. The hooligans are hardly interested in sporting events. There seek confrontation, they express the rise of un-mastered and un-channelled violence, worsened by alcohol and sometimes drugs. We see in West Side Story, expressed through music and dance the same impulses: the need to gather in groups, confront a rival group, and assert oneself through force. The young who "do" sport instead of limiting themselves to looking at it and supporting their team as an outlet for their violence, rarely belong to the groups of hooligans, even if they are supporters of their elders. The rules of sport tech the meaning of effort, loyalty, in confrontation, solidarity with team-mates and the respect for adversaries. Many examples prove that sport contributes to overcoming racial prejudices and to integrating immigrants.

The most important criteria that must guide the political authorities in this area is the conformity of their decisions with the meaning that sport has for their youth. The previous pages prove, in our opinion, that this is not the through the Bosman ruling. There exists two ways to remedy the negative effects of this ruling. Either the Court of Justice modifies it itself, through new rulings, the unjustified and dangerous elements, or the EU governments introduce in the revision of the Treaty, negotiated in the IGC, a "sporting exception." In our opinion, the latter would be a bad solution, as sport must not be subservient as a whole to Community rules; on the contrary, in its economic aspects (monopolistic abuse, agreements, televised broadcasts, etc.) must it be more rigorously monitored than today: to many people turn around it with the single aim of enriching themselves financially or with even less desirable aims.

It is up to the Court of Justice to take on its responsibilities. Will she?

Ferdinando Riccardi