Recently I was fortunate enough to be the external examiner for a sports law masters student. In reading his thesis there was a good analysis of the much-debated existence of a "sports law" and consequently the development of a "lex sportiva" (remarkably a relatively new term that has managed to fly in the face of the plain English/anti-Latin movement in the legal profession).
The prohibitions of sports betting in the majority of US states encourages illegal gambling, driving it underground in to the black markets. Rather than ignore the reality, the regulation of sports betting would be far better for the integrity of US sport. This is the view of Kevin Carpenter. In this blog Kevin explains his views on US sports betting policy.
Over the past two weeks I have been fortunate to have been involved with three prestigious sports law conferences in different parts of the world. All of which focussed solely on or covered the hot topic of match-fixing. This two-part blog is a reflection on the themes and issues which arose out of the three conferences.
Although in my sports legal career to-date I have focussed primarily on match-fixing, I also research and lecture on sports integrity and anti-corruption more widely. Therefore I could not sit on my hands when the Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Association Football (‘CONCACAF’) Integrity Committee’s ‘Report of Investigation’ (‘Report’) (the executive summary and full report of which can be found here) was presented to the CONCACAF Congress on Friday 19 April 2013 and felt a blog coming on...
Despite match-fixing finally approaching the summit of the sporting agenda I believe there is still some misunderstanding between sports governing bodies (‘SGBs’) and law enforcement about the responsibilities for preventing and combating the threat. This is no better exemplified than through the issue of spot-fixing.
During the past three years the Pakistan cricketers Salman Butt, Mohammed Asif and Mohammed Amir have become three of the most famous (or infamous depending on your view) sports people on the planet for all the wrong reasons. Having served time at Her Majesty’s pleasure in a UK prison, two of the three, Butt and Asif, recently had their final appeals heard by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (‘the CAS’). These were in response to decisions handed down by an International Cricket Council (ICC) Tribunal in February 2011. Both of them had their appeals dismissed in their entirety (Mr Butt’s full decision; Mr Asif’s full decision). However some interesting issues arose which reveals more about the CAS’s approach to match-fixing cases.
There are few more contentious subjects in world football and sports law than third party interests. This has become subject to further scrutiny in light of the attempts of UEFA, and various national football associations and leagues, to introduce and impose financial fair play regulations in one guise or another.
As part of full and frank disclosure I should say at the outset of this blog that I gamble on sports (not well I hasten to add) and like doing so. Part of the reason for this being that I live in Great Britain (comprising England, Wales and Scotland), a jurisdiction I often laud for having one of the most liberal yet well regulated sports gambling sectors in the world. This reputation has been greatly enhanced since the Gambling Act 2005 came into force on 1 September 2007.
Earlier this year on Tuesday 29 January, 5 days before Super Bowl XLVII, Sports Illustrated (‘SI’) (the esteemed sports magazine in the United States) ran a story that gave All-Pro future Hall of Famer and NFL legend Ray Lewis a further distraction in the already manic lead up to the biggest single sports show on Earth, which was also to be his final game. SI claimed that Lewis had obtained deer antler spray from controversial supplement company Sports with Alternatives to Steroids (‘SWATS’) and used it to aid his comeback from a torn tricep injury earlier in the season. What of it you may ask?