I'm interested in your rationale that commercialized sport infringes on human rights. You phrase what is commonly referred to as the "employment of players" (and by association I assume you also mean coaches, trainers, and front and back office staff) as "players being bought and sold." When an individual signs a contract, they offer their services in exchange for compensation. This compensation is often monetary, as I'm sure most people in this forum experience daily in the form of a job. There is no difference between Apple Computers paying the best engineer in the world to develop the best products and Manchester United paying the best football player in the world to score goals.

Concerning your point about the "grooming" of players, I will continue the analogy by pointing out that most major corporations offer scholarships, training camps, and other developmental programs for youth and their own employees in order to create and attract the best of the best. Would you also be opposed to Apple inviting poor children from developing nations to take part in computer programming camps and then providing them with scholarships for post-secondary education?

Finally, no-one is deprived the right to participate in sport unless their human rights have already been infringed upon by government, which has nothing to do with the commercialization of sport. For example, you or I could ball up a few pieces of paper right now and play a form of soccer, and this will not change regardless of how commercialized sport becomes. The only thing that commercialization stands to do is create more opportunities for involvement as media outlets cover sport more frequently and children experience sport education at the grass roots level.

Burton