BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
There is no need for compulsion

There is an old saying ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it’. In order for this proposal to be taken into consideration, a problem regarding the world of sports must be identified. Fortunately for sports, it works like a charm. In a great many sports revenues are going up, television rights are being sold for higher prices than ever before and more and more children are enrolling in sporting activities. Despite the global economic slowdown, sports revenues worldwide should grow by about 3.7 percent to $145.3 billion by 2015, according to a research report.(1) The current system works and there is no need to change it. Moreover, if we were to introduce this coercive measure, there would be numerous disadvantages without significant benefits. It would make no sense to create purposeless tensions between individuals and sporting federations. It is even more absurd considering that competitions and sporting events wouldn't benefit at all. This is because almost all top sportspeople accept the request to represent their country, and indeed see it as an honour and privilege. Therefore, it would create no advantages regarding the level of the game or increase the spectacle. (1)    Stutchbury, Greg, “Sports Industry Expected To Continue Steady Growth Despite Economic Woes: Report” , Huffington Post, 12 September 2011 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/09/sports-industry-expected-grow-2015-report_n_1138706.html
No guarantee of success

A man who performs a certain task out voluntarily is guaranteed to solve it better, faster and more efficiently than someone who is forced to do it against his will. Even if these players would come and participate in the training and matches, there is no guarantee that they will give 100%. Any sportsperson who did not want to appear at the competition is not going to be motivated no matter what it was that meant they did not want to attend. This will be even more the case if the reason was one of fitness, tiredness or form. The second reason which will add to the lack of dedication from these players is the frustration that they are forced to play against their will. If they cannot change the system, or appeal, then it can only lead to more irritation and indignation.  Not a good frame of mind for an international competition. Discord in a team can only lead to failure, as shown by France’s humiliating drop out of the 2010 world cup having not won a game despite having big international stars.(1) When performance is affected by motivation then there is little coaches or managers can do except take them off the team. They will simply perform less well than more motivated athletes so that they don’t need to take part, so fulfilling their original intent.    (1) Associated Press, ‘Humiliation now complete for France at World Cup’, ESPN, 22 June 2010, http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?id=5316645
A moral duty to play for your country

There are no grounds on which to claim that these athletes have any sort of moral duty towards the society which raised him, as the society itself benefited from its investment and a moral duty should not arise from the accident of being born into a particular country. The moral obligation, if it ever existed, is to the club and is fully fulfilled whether they stay at the club they were raised by or if they leave. If they stay, they will help the club win matches, championships and therefore money, which could in turn be used for the development for other young, talented players. If they leave, the club will receive a significant fee for the transfer, money which could again be used for the same purposes. Either way, they will bring significant advantages to the society that raised them, without having to play for the national team.
Beneficial for the player

The sole thing that one must remember when judging this problem is that individuals differ from one another. Even in the world of sports, although most of the athletes are hard-working, determined and ambitious people, they have different opinions, different personalities and different views over what success means. This is exactly why we cannot generalize the recipe for an ideal life. There is no “one size fits all”. For some players, it’s all about the competition, that thrill and excitement that you feel when playing a match, while for others the whole sporting environment is just a way of providing for their families, them not enjoying the sport per se, but rather the benefits is brings. As a result, it is of crucial importance to let people decide by their own if they want to participate in international competition. The majority will want to represent their countries, but some don’t. What should be prioritized in this instance is the happiness of the individual, and as they know best in what makes them happy, we must let the athletes chose if they want to represent their countries on a national level or not. For example, Samuel Eto’o refused to play for Cameroon in a friendly match because the Cameroonian Football Association didn’t pay his fee for previous international matches. As a result, he prioritized his personal time over exhausting himself in matches that didn’t bring him any sort of advantages. (1) His decision should be respected. (1)    Gama, Karla Villegas, “Samuel Eto'o Refuses to Play for Cameroon National Team Again “, Bleacher Reports August 27, 2012 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1313251-samuel-etoo-refuses-to-play-for-cameroon-national-team-again
Benefits to the nation

It should not be dependent on one man or one woman to carry the weight of the nation upon their shoulders. Winning the world cup should not be about just whether an individual plays or not but about the team. Even in the Olympics one individual’s performance makes little difference in most cases to the whole of the team. Good results may lift a nation but it is wrong to suggest that this should mean that everyone who is called on to represent their nation should have to answer that call. It is up to the coaches and managers to make the best use of the men and women they do have. Moreover if a country is relying on one individual then they are almost certainly putting too much pressure on them. Instead the country needs to focus on broadening the base of the team by finding more talent so that no one individual is irreplaceable. It should be remembered that individuals are far more often unable to take part in international competition as a result of injury or other reasons rather than a refusal to represent their country.
Liberty

It is true that freedom is one of the core principles of society, but it is neither an absolute value, nor one which isn’t legitimate to confine at some moments. This coercive measure isn’t very time or energy intensive. In general, international competitions are pretty scarce, once every two or four years, and they last only for a couple of weeks. Therefore, the athletes have total freedom over their career, as coming to a championship once in a while won’t affect it. In addition, the sportsmen shouldn’t be looking at this decision judging solely by their interests. The decision-making process should take more factors into consideration. In a significant number of cases, there is reason to believe that the players think only about themselves and don’t think about the help they could give to their team and therefore to the nation. For example, the Cameroonian footballers refused to appear in a friendly against Algeria just because the Federation didn't pay the corresponding bonuses and appearance fees for two games (against Morocco and Sudan).(1)  Such examples of selfish behaviour should be discouraged. They shouldn’t prioritize a small sum of money, which they would’ve eventually received, over the fans. Under this curtain of “freedom” we are allowing them to be selfish and always put their needs first. A society where players would give from their own time in order to help achieve a greater goal is a more desirable one. (1)    Gama, Karla Villegas, “Samuel Eto'o Refuses to Play for Cameroon National Team Again “, Bleacher Reports, 27 August 2012 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1313251-samuel-etoo-refuses-to-play-for-cameroon-national-team-again
There is no need for compulsion

How well the finances of sports are doing has little relevance to the international game. Indeed it creates the potential problem that as club, or domestic level competition grows more lucrative so sportspeople may feel that they have less need of taking part internationally. Even if there are currently few who reject a call up this is something that will vary from nation to nation, sport to sport, and time to time. Any national sporting association that faces a crisis that threatens to disrupt their capability of meeting international competition should have the ability to make it compulsory for their best players to represent their country. Thus when Cameroon’s players engaged in strike action it was not just one player which the team could do without but the whole team who did so.(1) Moreover, even if lower quality players can be substitutes the change would still influence the overall face of the competition and the team’s chances. Having the best possible players, even if some are there by compulsion increases competition to be selected. This puts more pressure on everyone to perform. Every player who will come to the national team can be a valuable asset for it, either if he plays or if he “warms up” the bench. (1)    Associated Press, ‘Cameroon squad go on strike in row over appearance bonuses’, theguardian.com, 15 November 2011, http://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/nov/15/cameroon-squad-strike-row-algeria
No guarantee of success

The claim according to which players would willingly play badly in order to get thrown out from the team is not only false, but completely outrageous. There are several points which indicate this. These are extremely popular and important competitions. In order to get to international level you need to have a very strong character, to value your team mates and cherish the fans. No such player would be willing to throw a match by playing badly. Doing so would hurt the team, fans and nation, and bring widespread criticism. Throwing a game is also noticeable if there is a significant difference between domestic and international form. Being selected shows good form making it difficult to claim another reason for poor results. Moreover, if they are found out, they have a lot to lose, as their reputation would be destroyed. The Pakistani cricket team scandal involving corruption and match-fixing proves the risks players face when trying to get involved in backstage games and alter the result through poor performance. (1)This damages the athlete’s career, their reputation (even if it is not corrupt) and their financial situation. No one will want someone known for unprofessional behaviour. (1)    Greenwood, Chris, “Bowlers Mohammed Asif and Mohammed Aamer received a year and six months respectively ”, Daily Mail, 4 November 2011 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056982/Pakistan-spot-fixing-players-corrupt-agent-jailed-cricket-betting-scandal.html
Justice is important

Justice is important in its own right, for the victims of the atrocities and for the development of Kenya. Victims have a right under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights[1] to have access to justice. Being elected should not be a blanket ban from being prosecuted for your crimes. In fact, the rule of law establishes the principle that leaders are subject to the same laws as all citizens. By seeing leaders being prosecuted for crimes, everyone sees the system working, allowing citizens to trust and buy further into the democratic system. As a consequence, the pursuit of justice is the most important factor above and beyond any claims of interference. [1] Article 8, Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Breaks cycles of violence

When violence is not punished, it tends to lead to more violence – such as the lack of prosecutions following the violence occurring after the 1992 and 1997 elections, to which people attribute to the air of impunity in the 2007 elections. This is firstly because people never heal from the initial violence – when justice is not seen to be done, they remain angry and partisan. Secondly however, a lack of retribution leads to increased confidence to repeat and exacerbate acts.
Kenyans wanted the investigation

It cannot be unwelcome interference in Kenya’s internal affairs when it was Kenyans who invited the ICC in. It was the Kenyan government that set up the Waki commission under Kenyan Court of Appeals Judge Philip Waki into the violence. It was then this commission that decided to pass the results of its investigation on to the ICC in order to get prosecutions due to the failure to set up a special tribunal.[1] The Kenyan government may have disliked the final outcome of its creation of such a commission but it was undoubtedly asked for by the Kenyan judiciary. Moreover until it became clear that the trial could collapse Kenyans were largely supportive with more than half the country supporting the trial.[2] [1] Justice Initiative Kenya Monitor [2] Maliti, Tom, ‘New opinion poll finds rise in support for ICC; many want Kenyatta to attend trial’, Kenya Monitor, 15 November 2013, http://www.icckenya.org/2013/11/new-opinion-poll-finds-rise-in-support-for-icc-many-want-kenyatta-to-attend-trial/
The ICC indictment undermines democracy

It would seem to undermine democracy to allow a president accused of violence during an election to continue to serve. Elections are only one part of a democracy; another is a functioning and respected rule of law. When the president has charges to answer he should stand down, at least temporarily. It is wrong to assume that someone who is elected as representative should have some form of immunity and that outside forces should not be able to investigate him; a president has a lot of power to repress minorities. That repression being supported by a democratic minority does not make it any less wrong. Moreover Kenyatta was elected with 50.07% of the vote, not an overwhelming endorsement.[1]   [1] Gatehouse, Gabriel, ‘Kenya Supreme Court upholds Uhuru Kenyatta election win’, BBC News, 30 March 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21979298
Kenya can prosecute these crimes itself

In the five years since the violence occurred, very little action has occurred from the domestic forces; there have been only two murder convictions for the 1200 deaths.[1] Furthermore, these forces are working for the people they are meant to be investigating. The case of Kenyatta has seen accusations of witness intimidation on large scales, meaning objectivity in local courts is very unlikely to occur[2]. The result of the Waki commission was to hand over alleged perpetrators to the ICC directly, showing that Kenya felt the need to rely on this international framework[3]. [1] ‘Kenya: Prosecute Perpetrators of Post-Election Violence’, Human Rights Watch, 9 December 2011, http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/12/09/kenya-prosecute-perpetrators-post-election-violence [2] ‘Perceptions and Realities:Kenya and the International Criminal Court’, Human Rights Watch, 14 November 2013, http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/11/14/perceptions-and-realities-kenya-and-international-criminal-court [3] Wachira, Muchemi, ‘Annan did not ambush Kenya says Justice minister’, Daily Nation, 13 July 2009, http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-/1056/623306/-/ukx8q9/-/index.html
A pointless trial that victimizes African leaders

Far from too much interference that the trial is on the point of collapse shows there has not been enough. The ICC has found itself unable to protect witnesses, with the result that there have been two withdrawals. Both the defence[1] and the prosecutor claim there has been witness intimidation in the trial.[2] [1] ‘Kenyatta lawyers demand trial scrapped, say witnesses intimidated’, reuters, 10 October 2013, http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/10/us-kenya-icc-defence-idUSBRE9990W820131010 [2] Sterling, Toby, ‘Kenyatta war crimes trial: Prosecutor asks for delay after witnesses withdeaw in case against Kenyan President’, The Independent, 20 December 2013, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/kenyatta-war-crimes-trial-prosecutor-asks-for-delay-after-witnesses-withdraw-in-case-against-kenyan-president-9017339.html
Justice is important

Justice can still be sought by either local courts or after Kenyatta’s term ends. Justice should be done without ICC interference in the domestic affairs of Kenya. Even so, this does not seem like the pursuit of justice by the ICC, rather a witch hunt by the ICC for African leaders[1].  [1] ‘African Union accuses ICC of ‘hunting’ Africans’, BBC News, 27 May 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22681894
Kenyans wanted the investigation

The Kenyan Parliament decided against creating a special tribunal, the court should not have then gone over the elected representatives’ head to hand the case to the ICC. The Parliament has since shown its displeasure at the ICC’s interference by voting to leave the ICC entirely.[1] [1] AP, ‘Kenya votes to leave ICC days before deputy president’s Hague trial’, The Guardian, 5 September 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/05/kenya-icc-international-criminal-court
The ICC indictment undermines democracy

Uhuru Kenyatta is a sitting president of a democratic nation. This means that he was elected by the people to serve them. By indicting a sitting leader, you undermine their ability to rule the country as they will be forced to spend long periods outside their country focusing on something that is irrelevant to the governance of their country. The ICC has demanded that Kenyatta and Ruto attend the trial in person.[1] By forcing the President and Deputy President to spend long hours away from the country involved in a trial the ICC is effectively disenfranchising the people who voted from him to be their leader. Further, Kenyatta is first and foremost accountable to the Kenyan people, who have chosen him as leader despite these claims. It is clearly unwelcome interference by the ICC for the court to take the President away from his duties. [1] Statement by ICC, ‘Kenyatta case: ICC Trial Chamber V(b) reviews decision on presence of accused at trial’, whereiskenya.com, 27 November 2013, http://whereiskenya.com/icc-judges-kenyatta-case-videolink-kenyatta-must-person-5th-february/
Having the president out of the country undermines stability

While Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto have been visiting the ICC, they should have been leading their countries. While the indictment has occurred both have remained the leaders of their countries, but have been absent while major events such as the Westgate shootings occurred. Despite the need to strong leadership in the midst of a potentially divisive event, Ruto was only granted one week away from trial.[1] Having a clear and stable leadership is important for Kenya to develop, restrict violence and ensure that policy development is able to continue, particularly given the cross-ethnic powering sharing arrangement between Kenyatta and Ruto. Absence of leadership during the fear and uncertainty surrounding this event might lead to a fresh round of violence as supporters take to the streets in protest – this election had put former enemies Kenyatta and Ruto together, easing ethnic tensions in the region[2]. [1] Ndonga, Wamubi, ‘Kenya: Ruto Can Return to Kenya For A Week Over Westgate – ICC’, allAfrica, 23 September 2013, http://allafrica.com/stories/201309230358.html [2] ‘Will Africa pull out of the ICC?’, BBC News, 11 October 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24452288
Kenya can prosecute these crimes itself

Kenya has a functioning judiciary and police force. They have successfully prosecuted some individuals for these crimes and it should be left to Kenya to deliver justice for itself. There have been several cases brought before the courts.[1] Kenyans overwhelmingly see the ICC is ‘imperialist’, and 61% want the ICC to terminate its case against Kenyatta.[2] If and when Kenya’s leaders should be tried should be left to the domestic judiciary to decide. [1] Nebehay, Stephanie, ‘UN urges Kenya to probe violence after 2007 elections’, Reuters, 26 July 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/26/ozatp-kenya-un-rights-idAFJOE86P07M20120726?sp=true [2] Wanyama, Henry, ‘Kenya: 61 Percent of Kenyans Want ICC Cases Dropped – Poll’, allAfrica, 1 February 2014, http://allafrica.com/stories/201402030215.html
A pointless trial that victimizes African leaders

While the ICC feels free to interfere with African countries it would never dare to do so in a western country; leaders such as George Bush, Tony Blair, Nicholas Sarkozy and others who have launched various armed interventions have not been put on trial. Not only is it victimization and interference the trial of Kenyatta is also likely to be pointless; it is on the point of collapse. The prosecutor Fatou Bensouda has stated “Having carefully considered my evidence and the impact of the two withdrawals, I have come to the conclusion that currently the case against Mr. Kenyatta does not satisfy the high evidentiary standards required at trial”.[1] [1] AFP, ‘'Not enough evidence for Kenyatta trial': ICC prosecutor’, Google, 19 December 2013, http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gogR-q3dBDCH4lzeEEnUnA4kfGag?docId=271e8feb-da06-4fd8-a859-9cc7c1e5a0f6
Heat will damage player's health

Qatar’s successful bid to host the World Cup marked a historic moment for the country and brought huge responsibilities to the organizing committee. Qatar will be the first Arab nation to host this event, this meaning that they are under a lot of pressure to prove to the world that they have the necessary skills and capabilities to do this job. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that they will not let anything derail this event, let alone something as easily to control as temperature. It promised revolutionary air-cooling technology to counter the summer heat in its bid; this has been reiterated in a statement that they are prepared to host the tournament at anytime.(1) Moreover, the small country’s officials guaranteed that the system, which will harness the power of the sun's rays to provide a cool environment for players and fans by converting solar energy into electricity, will be able to reduce temperatures from 45 to 25 degrees Celsius. As a result, there should be no worries regarding this aspect, as the Qataris won’t risk anything to stain the image of this event in which they will invest about $200 billion(2). Having analyzed the preparations which have been planned for this event, Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore is adamant the 2022 World Cup should go ahead in Qatar in the summer.(3) (1) Richard Conway “Qatar faces no threat to its right to host 2022 World Cup” , BBC, 3 October 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24375821 (2) Nick Schwartz ” Qatar will spend $200 billion on the 2022 World Cup” , USA Today, July 9, 2011 http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/07/qatar-will-spend-200-billion-on-the-2022-world-cup/ (3)” Qatar World Cup: Richard Scudamore wants summer event” , BBC, 15 August 2013 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/23719835