Kevin Carpenter provides an update on match-fixing policy and possible reforms from Law Accord and the “Don’t Fix It” training event, part of a European Union funded initiative which was being led by FIFPro, alongside UEFA.
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?
Two incidents of foul play in football this month have had the English football fraternity, and further afield, in feverish debate. I have made known my (hopefully) balanced views on social media as both a supporter and football match official. Yet I continue to be agitated (to say the least) by the continued misunderstanding of the Laws of the Game, particularly the notion of intent. So my sports law blog this week seeks to provide some insight and inform the debate.
The summer of 2012 saw women's sport take centre stage at the London Olympic and Paralympic Games with many female athletes and events being the most celebrated. Women's sport also saw another significant milestone in the month of August with the admission of the first two female members at the Augusta National Golf Club in Georgia, former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and South Carolina financier Darla Moore.
Since October last year football worldwide has been beset by moral and legal problems: be they match-fixing, racism or violence. Football has always been my first love in terms of sports (and life some ex-girlfriends would say) but this season I have never been less passionate about the game or worried about its future.
With the 39th Ryder Cup matches almost upon us, and being a keen golfer myself, I thought it was appropriate to look at what has been described as a "complex and emotive issue" in the golfing world dividing opinion, the long putter. To prove that we are a broad and diverse church here at LawInSport at the heart of this post will be the hallowed Rules of Golf ('ROG') as a 'law in sport', which is jointly administered by the two principal governing bodies in golf the Royal & Ancient ('R&A') and the United States Golf Association ('USGA').
Chapter 5-III of the Olympic Charter , which is "the codification of the Fundamental Principles of Olympism, Rules and Bye-Laws adopted by the International Olympic Committee ('IOC') [which] governs the organisation, action and operation of the Olympic movement", splits the 'Olympic Programme' into (Rule 45.2):
• Sports – those sports governed by International Federations ('IFs');
• Disciplines – a branch of sport comprising one or several events; and
• Events – are competitions in a sport or one of its disciplines, that result in a ranking and giving rise to the award of medals and diplomas.
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...
After the Red Bull debacle at the Malaysian Grand Prix Formula 1 fans have again started to question the use of team orders. Kevin Carpenter shares his views on what this means for the integrity of the sport.
Kevin Carpenter blog piece on the International Rugby Board’s (‘IRB’) (the world governing body of rugby) Laws of the Game (Law 10) that led to three differing disciplinary action for Cian Healy (Ireland), Sergio Parisse (Itlay) and Nick De Luca (Scotland).
It has always seemed to me that doping is viewed as far more heinous than match-fixing by stakeholders in sport, these being the two principal integrity offences in sport. Yet if you look at the general trend for the sanctions metered out for the two, especially for first time offenders, those for match-fixing are far more severe. Is this fair? Does it strike a consistent balance between punishing offenders and the belief that they can redeem themselves through rehabilitation and return to their sport?
Before the London 2012 Paralympic Games ('the Games') began this summer I attended a talk by Michael Beloff QC, a leading sports law practitioner and prominent Court of Arbitration for Sport ('CAS') arbitrator, titled 'CAS and the Olympics 2012'. At the end of his review of the cases before the CAS ad hoc Division ('AHD') at the Olympics a question was asked, "Is there going to be an AHD at the Paralympics?" He replied that there wouldn't be because the International Paralympic Committee ('IPC') had not asked for one.
With the start of the London 2012 Paralympic Games less than a week away I came across a disconcerting phenomenon I had never previously been aware of: "boosting". "Boosting" involves intentionally raising one's blood pressure to stimulate the body's energy and endurance, allowing those Paralympians who practice it to artificially enhance their levels of performance. In a survey completed in 2009, funded partly by the International Paralympic Committee ('IPC') and partly by the World Anti-Doping Agency ('WADA'), it was found that nearly a fifth of the 99 Paralympic athletes surveyed had "boosted", which I am sure you would agree is a worrying proportion. Indeed the real figure is thought to be closer to a third.
