2016 marks the 50th anniversary of the 1966 FIFA World Cup, hosted in England. Unlike previous literature, which has tended to focus activities on the field, this book brings an institutional level approach to organizing the 1966 FIFA World Cup and examines the management process in the buildup and execution of the event.
This intriguing new volume looks at the first significant UK government intervention in football and how this created a significant legacy as the government started to take a real interest in leisure facilities and stadium safety as policy areas after this competition. Foundations of Managing Sporting Events will be of considerable interest to research academics working on aspects of post war British, Imperial, and World history including sport, social, business, economic, and political history.
Table of Contents
1. What, Why, and How?
2. Origins and Background: A Brief History of English Football and the FIFA World Cup
3. Political Capital and International Diplomacy: North Korea and Beyond
4. The FA, FIFA, and the 1966 FIFA World Cup
5. The World Cup as a Temporary Show?
6. The World Cup, Minister?
7. The World Cup and the Provinces: A Tourism Boom that Never Came
8. Legacy and Impact of the Tournament
9. Discussion and Conclusions
Kevin D. Tennent is Lecturer in Management at the York Management School, University of York, UK.
Alex G. Gillett is Lecturer in Marketing at the York Management School, University of York, UK.
Featured Author Profiles
‘Although primarily an academic work, the authors have produced a book which is both readable and informative for those with an interest in the 1996 tournament. There is plenty of details here which does not feature in contemporary newspapers or specialist publications and there is enough of this previously unreported material to make it of great interest… It offers a different dimension on the history of the game and one with considerable potential’.
Ian Nannestad, Soccer History
'Tennent and Gillett have opened up a new perspective on an event with which we were in danger of becoming over-familiar. Historians and sociologists who have fed the obsession with ‘66’ should be grateful.'
Dilwyn Porter, De Montfort University