FIFA Council approves the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles, incorporating the new National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations
Landmark modernisation of the regulatory framework for national dispute resolution chambers, which was unchanged for almost two decades
Revised framework to provide clarity and legal certainty
FIFA has reached a key milestone in the modernisation of the regulatory framework for national dispute resolution chambers (NDRCs) following the approval by the FIFA Council in December 2023 of the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles, which incorporate the new National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations.
The regulatory framework for NDRCs was unchanged for almost two decades, and it thus became increasingly evident that it no longer served the current needs of all football stakeholders.
This new regulatory framework for NDRCs has been thoroughly discussed with stakeholders from the professional game, whose expertise and commitment have been pivotal in the adaptation of the relevant framework.
The key objectives of the revised framework are to provide clarity and the necessary legal certainty with regard to jurisdiction, structure, applicable requirements and potential formal and permanent recognition by FIFA of existing NDRCs.
The new relevant regulatory framework consists of the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles, which establish, inter alia, the required standards for a national dispute resolution system to be recognised by FIFA and the revised National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations, which are designed to assist member associations with the establishment of procedural rules to govern the organisation, composition and functions of an NDRC.
The Basketball Arbitral Tribunal (“BAT”) hereby informs its users that a new Payment Order Procedure (“POP”) will be introduced with the new edition of the BAT Arbitration Rules (“BAT Rules”), which come into effect as of 1 February 2024.
1) What is the POP and why is it introduced?
The POP is comparable to default judgements before state courts (e.g. the European order for payment procedure) and is arguably the first of its kind in the context of international (sports) arbitration. In a nutshell, a Claimant may request the BAT to issue a payment order for a specific monetary claim against a Respondent. The BAT will issue such payment order without examining the merits of the claim if some basic requirements are fulfilled and the Respondent does not object to the issuance of the payment order.
With the POP, the BAT addresses the feedback received by the BAT user community in recent years, in particular at the BAT User Conference in November 2022. That feedback underlined the existence of a significant demand for a mechanism that provides access to the BAT for Claimants in low value disputes who do not have the financial means to afford the arbitration costs involved in a regular BAT arbitration. At the same time, the POP is a response to the fact that in a significant number of BAT proceedings, the Respondent does not participate in the arbitration.
2) Legal effects of the POP?
At the end of an uncontested POP in which all necessary requirements are fulfilled, the BAT issues the Final Payment Order (“FPO”), which shall have the effects of a final and binding arbitral award between the parties. In addition, the FPO qualifies as “decision” in the terms of Article 3-335 of the FIBA Internal Regulations. Accordingly, if the Respondent fails to honour the FPO, the Claimant may request FIBA to initiate disciplinary proceedings.
3) When does the POP apply?
A Claimant may only make use of the POP if the parties have agreed on the application of the POP to their dispute. Therefore, parties wishing to have this option for potential future financial disputes are advised to include into their contract the new alternative BAT clause provided under Article 0.3 of the BAT Rules.
In addition, the POP applies only if the claim…
- … is of a monetary nature and does not exceed a sum in dispute of EUR 15,000.00,
- … is filed by a single individual or legal entity as claimant,
- … is filed against a single legal entity as respondent, and
- … does not bundle multiple claims deriving from different legal relationships (e.g. claims by an agent against a club for agent fees payable in relation to different player transfers).
4) How does the POP work?
The new POP allows creditors to file a payment order request (“POR”) instead of initiating a regular BAT arbitration. To submit a POR, the Claimant must enter the required information on the Claimant, the Respondent and the claim into the online form available under https://bat-payment-order.martens.legal/ and upload the relevant documents.
Along with the POR, the Claimant must pay a non-reimbursable processing fee of EUR 1,000.00 into the BAT bank account. No further payments by the Claimant are required for the POP. In particular, no advance on costs will need to be paid for the POP. Thus, the costs involved in the POP are significantly lower than the costs required for a BAT arbitration.
The POR is reviewed by the BAT (Vice-)President, who issues a Provisional Payment Order (“PPO”) if the requirements mentioned in section 3) above are met, the claim does not violate public policy and the utilization of the POP is not abusive.
The PPO is delivered both to the Claimant and the Respondent and the latter is provided with the opportunity to file an objection against the PPO within 14 days after receipt of the PPO.
If no objection is filed within this time limit and/or the Respondent fails to pay the applicable handling fee of EUR 1,000.00 for the objection, the BAT (Vice-) President, upon the Claimant’s request, will issue a FPO provided that the relevant requirements are still met (e.g. no payment of the claim in the meantime).
If the Respondent objects and pays the handling fee of EUR 1,000.00 in time, the Claimant and the Respondent will be requested to each pay a share of an advance on costs fixed by the BAT Secretariat in anticipation of a regular BAT arbitration procedure. Once each party has paid its share, the Claimant is required to file a Request for Arbitration and, thereafter, the PPO will lose effect and a regular BAT arbitration shall begin.
Any questions?
The new BAT Rules including the provisions on the POP are available on www.fiba.com/bat/process, both as a clean document and as a marked-up version showing all changes compared to the 2022 edition. In addition, the BAT Secretariat is very happy to answer any questions you may have. Please do not hesitate to contact us by e-mail (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.) or telephone (+49 89 452 44 22 15).
As Reading FC supporters are only too aware, it has in recent months become increasingly clear that Mr Dai Yongge is no longer in a position - or does not have the motivation - to support the Club financially as he did following the change of control in 2017.
In November 2023, the EFL called for the disqualification of Mr Dai following the failure to fund the deposit account to cover player and staff salaries following repeated breaches of EFL Regulations. This was ultimately rejected by an Independent Disciplinary Commission and a financial sanction was imposed instead.
The EFL has now received confirmation that Mr Dai did not meet last Friday’s latest deadline to fund the deposit account as ordered, meaning he has been in default for nearly four months. As a result – and as per the terms of the 15 December decision - a further £50,000 fine has now been imposed, taking the total to £80,000.
His continued failings mean that once again the Club's hardworking staff have no reassurance as to payment of wages and demonstrates a clear disregard for his obligations as a director of the Club.
In respect of this issue, the League will now consider all available options it has under the Regulations and will have no hesitation in bringing further charges against Mr Dai.
In the meantime, and for the sake of the future of Reading FC, its staff, supporters, and local community we urge Mr Dai either to fund the Club adequately or to make immediate arrangements to sell his majority shareholding to appropriate new owners so everyone can move forward with renewed optimism.
For our part, we will work with Mr Dai, his team, and the Club plus any potential purchaser to navigate and meet the requirements of the Regulations as quickly as is physically possible and bring an end to this difficult period for all parties.
What followed the events at the end of last week were the unfortunate scenes on Saturday afternoon that led to the abandonment of the fixture versus Port Vale, and further demonstrated the impact the current situation is having on everyone associated with the Club.
However, entering the field of play is a criminal offence and puts the safety of all participants at risk. The EFL Board will discuss events at Saturday’s match during its meeting later this week as it has a responsibility to the League’s member clubs and the competition to ensure all 72 Clubs meet the requirements of the rules as previously agreed by EFL Clubs.
Finally, the League has been in regular dialogue with the Supporters Trust at Reading (STAR) in recent months and has always made – and will continue to do so – itself available to recognised supporters’ groups to discuss challenging situations and, regarding current matters involving Reading, has arranged to meet with representatives of a number of groups in the next 24 hours.
Clubs subject to registration bans prevented from registering new players
In line with its continued efforts to promote transparency and maintain full disclosure in relation to the activities of the FIFA judicial bodies, FIFA has launched a digital tool that lists the clubs subject to registration bans.
Based on FIFA’s legal framework, a registration ban is one of the potential disciplinary measures that may be imposed on clubs by the FIFA judicial bodies or by the Football Tribunal. Once a registration ban has been imposed, the club in question will be prevented from registering new players, either nationally or internationally and whether as amateurs or as professionals, for the full duration of the measure. The club will therefore only be able to register new players again after serving the ban in its entirety or in the event that the ban is lifted by the FIFA administration (usually upon the completion of one or more specific actions by the club).
The primary objective of this new tool is to provide stakeholders, including players and clubs, as well as the general public, with an overview of all clubs currently prevented from registering new players.
The digital tool, which can be accessed here and on legal.fifa.com, will be regularly updated in order to reflect the situation of the clubs subject to registration bans imposed by FIFA.
FIFA Football Agent Regulations: licensing updates and information on the Agents Chamber of the FIFA Football Tribunal
Dear Sir or Madam,
Firstly, we would like to thank you for all your efforts and hard work on the implementation of the FIFA Football Agent Regulations (FFAR), including the organisation of the first two editions of the FIFA Football Agent exam during the past year 2023 (hereinafter the “Exam”).
With these efforts, the transition phase towards the full implementation of the FFAR has been successfully completed, with more than 5,000 Football Agent licences having been granted worldwide, national football agent regulations being approved by member associations and the members of the Agents Chamber of the FIFA Football Tribunal appointed.
We wish to provide you hereinafter with some licensing updates and information on the Agents Chamber.
1. Licensing of Football Agents
In accordance with Enclosure 2 to circular no. 1827, we are providing you with additional information on the licensing of Football Agents for the year 2024.
We kindly remind you that only individuals that have been granted a Football Agent licence by FIFA pursuant to the FFAR can provide Football Agent Services, as defined in the FFAR and the applicable national football agent regulations.
Any breaches of the FFAR, including evidence of non-licensed activity of individuals or companies, can be reported on the FIFA Reporting Portal.
Exam licensing path (art. 4 of the FFAR) We kindly inform you of the dates have been set for the next exam, due to take place in 2024.
FIFA Football Agent exam Application period 9 January to 31 March 2024 Exam date 22 May 2024
We kindly remind you that all applications are to be submitted on the FIFA Agent Platform (hereinafter the “Platform”) by interested candidates and will be regularly reviewed by member associations through their user accounts registered on the Platform. For the avoidance of any doubt, all deadlines for the submission of applications on the Platform correspond to Central European Time (CET).
After reviewing feedback received from the members of the FIFA Football Agent Working Group (“FAWG”) and from candidates, the FIFA administration hereby kindly reminds all member associations that exam fees charged by member associations to candidates for organising the Exam should be exclusively used to cover the costs of organising and holding the exam. In that regard, the FIFA administration recommends that member associations ensure that the exam fee does not exceed the amount of USD 600 (or equivalent).
Furthermore, the applicable exam rules and study materials will be published on the Platform and the FIFA website in January 2024.
Reduction of licence fee for continuous licence holders
Following consultations with the members of the FAWG, as from 1 October 2024, the licence fee paid to FIFA for all Football Agent licence renewals will be reduced to USD 300 for each subsequent licensing period. Those individuals that obtain their Football Agent licence for the first time will pay the full amount of USD 600 for the first licensing period, with subsequent yearly payments being reduced to USD 300.
By way of example, if a candidate passes the exam in May 2024, they need to pay the annual fee of USD 600 within 90 days. Then, before 1 October, that same Football Agent will pay USD 300 for each consecutive licence year.
2. FIFA Football Tribunal: Agents Chamber
Following the creation of the Agents Chamber of the FIFA Football Tribunal, FIFA informs that the current list of judges representing different stakeholders, including the recent appointment of the Chairperson and Deputy chairperson, can be found on legal.fifa.com.
Please do not hesitate to contact Luís Villas-Boas Pires (head of agents) at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. should you have any questions in this regard.
We thank you for your attention and for ensuring that your affiliated clubs and relevant stakeholders are informed accordingly.
During its meeting Wednesday, the Division I Council introduced several proposals into the legislative cycle for potential votes in June.
Among the measures, the council introduced a proposal brought forward by the Strategic Vision and Planning Committee that would remove cannabinoids from the list of substances included in drug testing at NCAA championships. The proposal follows a recommendation from the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports, which hosted a 2022 summit — including doctors, substance misuse experts and representatives from NCAA schools — that focused on cannabinoids in college athletics.
"Cannabis is not a performance-enhancing drug, and we determined that the drug testing conducted at NCAA championships should focus on substances that impact competitive outcomes," said Pat Chun, athletics director at Washington State and chair of the Strategic Vision and Planning Committee. "To be clear, this does not mean that NCAA members condone or promote use of cannabinoids. However, rather than focus on testing and subsequently penalizing student-athletes who use cannabis, NCAA efforts should focus on a harm reduction strategy, similar to substances like alcohol."
If adopted in June, the proposal would apply retroactively to any penalty associated with a previous positive test.
Additional proposals introduced for a vote in June would:
Permit noncoaching, sport-specific staff members in sports other than football and men's and women's basketball to assist in drills and other limited activities during practices.
Eliminate questionnaires sent to prospects prior to the first allowable date for recruiting communications.
Football recruiting rules
The council also heard an update from the Football Bowl Subdivision and Football Championship Division Oversight Committees, which voted to limit the number of official visits a school can provide to prospects to 70 each year, including eliminating exceptions for head coach changes and unused visits. The FBS Oversight Committee also voted to limit photo shoots for prospects and those accompanying them during unofficial visits.
Because the council took no action on these decisions by the oversight committees, the rules are adopted. The prohibition on photo shoots in bowl subdivision football will take effect March 1, and the limit of 70 official visits will take effect April 1.
Daniel Senda has been suspended from all football and football-related activity for four years following misconduct on a course in June 2023 in relation to two complainants.
The FA alleged that the coach’s words and/or behaviour towards Complainant A were improper and/or indecent and/or insulting contrary to FA Rule E3.1.
The FA also alleged that his words and/or behaviour towards Complainant B were improper and/or indecent and/or insulting contrary to FA Rule E3.1.
Daniel Senda subsequently admitted both of these charges. An independent Regulatory Commission imposed his sanction following a hearing and its written reasons can be seen below.
FA Spokesperson:“Women deserve to be involved in professional football without the fear of any form of abuse. This was a shocking case, and we investigated the very serious allegations as soon as we were made aware of them.
“We thank the victims for reporting the incidents to us, and supporting the investigation through to its conclusion, and we are deeply sorry that they endured such a terrible experience.
“The behaviour shown by Daniel Senda in June 2023 will not be tolerated. We will investigate all allegations of sexual assault in a football environment which are reported to us - usually working with the police, but in this case, the incidents happened overseas so were not within the jurisdiction of UK law enforcement.
“We hope that the very lengthy ban serves as a strong deterrent, and a clear signal that women in football will be supported and protected and offenders will be severely punished.”
FIFA Football Agent Regulations: update on implementation
Dear Sir or Madam,
On 16 December 2022 the FIFA Council approved the FIFA Football Agent Regulations (hereinafter the “FFAR”), which provide with a balanced and reasonable legal instrument to protect the integrity of football and the proper functioning of the football transfer system.
Subsequently, FIFA was subject to a coordinated litigation strategy, which involved agents and agents’ associations filing lawsuits against FIFA across Europe to challenge the legality of the FFAR and to delay their entry into force.
FIFA has so far prevailed in the vast majority of those disputes. Specifically, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), the court of supreme instance for sports-related disputes recognised under the FIFA Statutes, has confirmed the legality and proportionality of the FFAR. Courts and/or competition authorities in various countries have rejected several requests from agents to annul the FFAR, declare them invalid, or to delay their entry into force. Moreover, a procedure concerning the validity of the FFAR, in which different institutions have supported the FFAR, is pending before the European Court of Justice.
District Court of Dortmund (Landgericht Dortmund) case 8 O 1/23
On 24 May 2023, a preliminary injunction (the “Injunction”) against certain aspects of the FFAR rules was by the District Court of Dortmund in Germany in the procedure LG Dortmund, 8 O 1/23 (Kart).
The Injunction requests FIFA to suspend the application and enforcement of the certain provisions of the FFAR:
The service fee cap (article 15 paragraphs 1-4)
The rules concerning service fee payments (article 14 paragraphs 6, 8 and 11)
The client pays rule (article 14 paragraphs 2 and 10)
The rules regarding the timing of service fee payments (article 14 paragraphs 7 and 12)
The prohibition of double representation (article 12 paragraphs 8-10)
The reporting obligations (article 16 paragraphs 2 h), j), k) and 4)
The rules regarding disclosure and publication (article 19)
The submission rule (article 4 paragraph 2; article 16 paragraph 2 b); article 3 paragraphs 2 c) and d); article 20; and article 21)
The rule that service fee payments must be made via the FIFA Clearing House (article 14 paragraph 13)
This Injunction is inconsistent with previous judicial decisions in other European countries, the CAS award as well as previous decisions in Germany, including from appeals courts. FIFA has therefore initiated appeal proceedings against the Injunction and an appeal decision is expected in the first semester of 2024.
In order to comply with the Injunction, FIFA will suspend the implementation of the FFAR for any transfer which has a link to the European Union. Implementing the Injunction only for transfers linked to the European Union would create a situation of unequal legal standards within the international transfer system, in particular between Europe and the rest of the world. As the world governing body of football and a prudent and responsible regulator, FIFA has a duty to prevent such uncertainty and inequality and protect competitive balance at a worldwide level.
In light of the foregoing, on 30 December 2023 the Bureau of the Council approved the worldwide temporary suspension of the FFAR rules affected by the above-mentioned German court decision, until the European Court of Justice renders a final decision in the pending procedures concerning the FFAR,
In this light, we recommend all the member associations to temporarily suspend the equivalent provisions from their national football agent regulations, unless they conflict with mandatory provisions of the law applicable in their territory.
FIFA remains convinced that the FFAR are a necessary, proportionate and fully legal regulatory step to address systemic failures within the international transfer system. Not only all football stakeholders, but also all European political authorities have confirmed the importance of such a regulatory framework.
We thank you for your attention and for ensuring that your affiliated clubs and relevant stakeholders are informed accordingly.
FIFA is pleased to announce that the FIFA Council has approved several updates to the Beach Soccer Laws of the Game. These encompass Beach Soccer-specific adjustments while also aligning the Laws with recent modifications introduced in football.
Enclosed, you will find both an overview of the main amendments and the complete Beach Soccer Laws of the Game 2023-24. The full Beach Soccer Laws of the Game 2023-24 is also readily accessible on FIFA.com.
If you have any inquiries or require further clarification, please don't hesitate to contact Dominic Chielens, Senior Refereeing Manager, at the FIFA Refereeing Subdivision (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).
In September 2023, the Reading FC owner Mr Yongge Dai was charged with misconduct after failing to comply with the order of an independent Disciplinary Commission which required him to deposit an amount equal to 125% of the Club’s forecast monthly wage bill in a designated bank account.
The matter was referred by the League to an independent Disciplinary Commission in accordance with its Regulations and at the hearing, which took place on 23 November 2023, the EFL put forward that Mr Dai should be disqualified from all football activity, including ownership and control, for a period of 12 months.
In its submissions, the EFL also made it clear that it did not feel a sporting sanction against the Club was appropriate in this case as this was direct action being taken against the owner.
On review of all the arguments, the independent Commission were ‘unimpressed’ by Mr Dai’s failure to provide detailed evidence as to the ongoing reasons for failure to pay and as to his future intentions but felt a disqualification would not achieve the immediate objective of sourcing the required funds for the deposit account.
Therefore, the Independent Commission has determined that Mr Dai be fined £20,000 with a further £50,000 suspended and to be activated on 12 January 2024 unless the required deposit is made in full. In addition, Mr Dai is required to maintain the deposit at the levels set out previously until, at the earliest, 31 August 2024.
It is clear that the Commission are critical of his handling of matters labelling it a ‘serious case ‘and ‘deliberate misconduct.’
It is hoped this latest financial sanction, and the threat of further monetary penalties will bring a resolution to the short-term issue of funding the deposit account, which in turn should provide some re-assurance to the management, staff, and players at the Club, who continue to act as outstanding ambassadors for Reading FC, despite the challenging circumstances.
The League will have no hesitation in bringing further charges against Mr Dai if he fails to comply with the Commission’s directive and is also ready to support the Club in quickly progressing a change of control at the Club once a purchaser has been identified.
The independent Disciplinary Commission’s Written Reasons can be viewed here.
Morecambe Football Club and owner Mr Jason Whittingham have been charged under EFL Regulations for failing to adhere to the terms of an Agreed Decision, which required a financial deposit equating to 125% of the Club’s forecast monthly wage bill to be placed in a separate club account to facilitate the ongoing payment of Club wages.
In August, funds were deposited in line with the agreement for a previous failure to pay the Club’s wage bill, however on September 4, those funds were used and Whittingham failed to re-deposit the amount, despite requests from the League.
Mr Whittingham’s failure to re-deposit the funds has led to personal charges, while the Club has also been charged for failing to meet deposit account requirements.
The charges will now be considered by an independent Disciplinary Commission with the outcome to be communicated by the EFL once a decision is reached.
The terms of the original Agreed Decision can be viewed here.
In 2023, clubs paid USD 888.1 million in agent service fees, the highest-ever amount and an increase of 42.5% on 2022
For the first time, clubs in women’s professional football spend more than USD 1 million in agent service fees
English clubs were the number-one spenders by far, with a combined total of more than USD 280 million
The total spending on club agent service fees has reached unprecedented heights in 2023, with a total outlay of USD 888.1 million compared to USD 623.2 million last year according to FIFA’s Football Agents in International Transfers Report.
This represents an increase of 42.5% compared to the level of spending in 2022, and even surpasses the previous record from 2019 (USD 654.7 million) by more than one third.
By far, the largest proportion of all club agents were employed by clubs in Europe, which also account for the lion’s share (86.6%) of global spending on club agents. Similarly, European clubs employed 86.6% of all engaging-club agents and 82.6% of all releasing-club agents.
The largest amount of agent service fees were paid by clubs from England, with a combined total of more than USD 280 million. While not investing in releasing-club agents, Saudi Arabian clubs had the second-biggest spending on engaging-club agents with USD 86.0 million. Korea Republic had the greatest share of outgoing transfers with a releasing-club agent, with 31.6%.
The number of international transfers with an agent acting on behalf of the player reached a record high in 2023 with a total of 3,353 transfers. This corresponds to 15.4% of all transfers and represents an increase of 8.4% compared to 2022.
For the first time ever, clubs in women’s professional football spent more than USD 1 million for the services of club agents, with a total outlay of just under USD 1.4 million. Club agents were present in a record number of 125 transfers, an increase of more than 20% compared to 2022.
The process for obtaining a licence and becoming a football agent under the FIFA Football Agent Regulations (FFAR) opened on 9 January 2023 and all individuals could apply for such a licence. During the period covered by the report (1 January 2023 to 30 November 2023), FIFA received 19,973 licensing applications. Out of the total number of exam applicants, 9,207 took the exam on one of two dates. The first exam was held on 19 April 2023, with testing locations at 138 member associations, and the second exam took place on 20 September 2023, with testing locations at 157 member associations. Out of the 9,207 people who sat the exam, 32.6% passed.
As part of its objective to bring more transparency to the football transfer system, FIFA publishes an annual report on football agents. For the first time, due to the adoption and entering into force of the new FFAR, the report not only presents extensive analyses of football agents’ activity in international transfers, but also provides insightful information about the newly introduced licensing system.
Premier League Shareholders today agreed to amend the rule on amortisation of player registration costs to bring it in line with UEFA’s regulations.
Going forward, a five-year maximum will apply to all new or extended player contracts.
Clubs also approved a rule amendment to enable the Premier League Board, in circumstances where a Club owes a transfer debt to another Premier League or EFL Club, to stop the Club registering more players until the outstanding payment has been made.
The Board can also have the option to deduct the amount from the Club’s entitlement to the League’s central funds.
The NFL Management Council informed clubs this past week that it won't provide a projection for the 2024 salary cap at the Winter League Meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday, and the cap is unlikely to be set until after New Year's Day, according to sources.
But people familiar with the matter say surging revenue and diminishing aftershocks of the 2020 pandemic are on track to yield significant cap growth over the next several years, with a 2024 cap likely to land north of $240 million and additional revenue rolling into future caps.
As one source put it: "Business is booming, and everyone is finally out of the COVID debt."
Sources say revenue projections could support a 2024 salary cap well above the $240 million range -- another enormous increase from a record $224.8 million per club this year, up from $208.2 million in 2022.
However, the cap has been set in recent years via settlement between the NFL and NFL Players Association, and the union historically has wanted to smooth out cap growth rather than having a one-year spike so that one class of free-agent players doesn't disproportionately benefit or suffer.
The NFL Management Council's memo sent on Thursday indicated that could be the case again.
"The Management Council and NFLPA are in the process of addressing open matters that will impact the 2024 Salary Cap and therefore will not be able to project a range for the 2024 Salary Cap until those issues are resolved," the memo said. "The 2024 Salary Cap will be announced by memorandum, as has been done over the past two years, as soon as we are able to reach agreement but we do not anticipate that occurring until after the New Year."
Sources say several factors are driving the probable increase in the next several years. There are still some COVID-delayed benefits left to pay out at the NFLPA's discretion, but this is the first year it's not in large chunks. Revenue this year is exceeding projections. And the NFL expects new revenue streams next year. If it chooses, the union can effectively defer some dollars that would go toward the 2024 cap into 2025 and 2026 to even out the growth, avoiding a situation where the cap has a massive spike this year and then goes flat.
Lucrative new TV deals that kicked in this year are a significant factor in revenue growth, and, in turn, a players' share. The 2020 collective bargaining agreement includes a "media kicker" that can increase players' share of projected revenue from 48% up to as much as 48.8%. (The CBA is a revenue-sharing deal in which the cap is based on players' share, divided into salary and benefits.)
An agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA called for the union to pay out player benefits -- such as performance-based pay, Pro Bowl pay and tuition assistance -- that were suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic to help buoy the salary cap sometime after 2023. Those have now mostly been paid off.
The record 2022 salary cap of $208.2 million was the maximum agreed to by the NFL and NFLPA in May 2021 to expedite repayment of what amounted to a low-interest loan that allowed players to continue making full salaries in 2020 despite empty stadiums. The cap had been $198.2 million in 2020 before dropping to $182.5 million in 2021 as part of that process. From 2013 to 2020, the cap had been growing at a pace of $10.74 million a year. The jump to a $224.8 million cap this year marked a new high increase, and the growth in 2024 likely will be similar.
The free-agent negotiating period opens at 12 p.m. ET on Monday, March 11, and the 2024 league year at 4 p.m. ET on Wednesday, March 13.
The Executive Board (EB) of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has decided that Individual Neutral Athletes (AINs) who have qualified through the existing qualification systems of the International Federations (IFs) on the field of play will be declared eligible to compete at the Olympic Games Paris 2024 in accordance with the the conditions outlined below. Individual Neutral Athletes are athletes with a Russian or Belarusian passport. The strict eligibility conditions based on the recommendations issued by the IOC EB on 28 March 2023 for International Federations and international sports event organisers will be applied.
Like all the other athletes at the Olympic Games, the Individual Neutral Athletes will also have to comply with the rules and regulations applicable at the Olympic Games, including anti-doping.
Like all the other athletes, they will also have to sign the updated Conditions of Participation applicable for Paris 2024. This contains a commitment to respect the Olympic Charter, including “the peace mission of the Olympic Movement”. Please find an excerpt of the new form here.
The Individual Neutral Athletes will be invited by the IOC and their respective IFs. Only a very limited number of athletes will qualify through the existing qualification systems of the IFs. Among the 4,600 athletes from around the world who have qualified for Paris 2024 so far, there are only 11 Individual Neutral Athletes (eight with a Russian passport plus three with a Belarusian passport). In comparison, to date more than 60 Ukrainian athletes have qualified for Paris 2024. It is expected that the Ukrainian delegation is going to be around the same size as at the Olympic Games Tokyo 2020.
The strict eligibility conditions for Individual Neutral Athletes at Paris 2024 are the very same strict eligibility conditions under which they qualified, namely:
Qualified athletes with a Russian or Belarusian passport will be entered as, and compete as, Individual Neutral Athletes (“AINs”).
Teams of athletes with a Russian or Belarusian passport will not be considered.
Athletes who actively support the war will not be eligible to be entered or to compete. Support personnel who actively support the war will not be entered.
Athletes who are contracted to the Russian or Belarusian military or national security agencies will not be eligible to be entered or to compete. Support personnel who are contracted to the Russian or Belarusian military or national security agencies will not be entered.
Any such Individual Neutral Athlete, like all the other participating athletes, will have to meet all anti-doping requirements applicable to them in the lead-up to and at the Olympic Games Paris 2024, and particularly those set out in the anti-doping rules of the IFs.
The sanctions against those responsible for the war, the Russian and Belarusian states and governments, remain in place for the Olympic Games Paris 2024. This means, in particular, that:
No flag, anthem, colours or any other identifications whatsoever of Russia or Belarus will be displayed at the Olympic Games Paris 2024 in any official venue or any official function.
No Russian or Belarusian government or state officials will be invited to or accredited for the Olympic Games Paris 2024.
The practical application of today’s IOC EB decision can be found in the “Principles Relating to the Implementation of the Participation for Individual Neutral Athletes and their Support Personnel with a Russian or Belarusian Passport at the Olympic Games Paris 2024”, which is a separate document and can be found here. It says amongst other things that the IOC will seek an independent evaluation of the eligibility of each qualified AIN proposed by the IF, and their support personnel.
The considerations of the IOC EB included, amongst others:
The call by the International Federations at the Olympic Summit on 5 December 2023 to take such a decision as soon as possible (please see here the communiqué of the Olympic Summit). The call by the IFs was supported by the Association of National Olympic Committees (ANOC), the Continental Associations of National Olympic Committees (NOCs) and the NOCs present.
The view of the overwhelming majority of athletes not to punish fellow athletes for the actions of their government.
The fact that all these calls and views were reaffirmed and further strengthened in consultation calls with the stakeholders of the Olympic Movement this week: the IOC Members, the network of athlete representatives, the International Federations and the National Olympic Committees.
Olympic Truce Resolution A/RES/78/10 by the United Nations (UN) for the Olympic and Paralympic Games Paris 2024, which supports the autonomy of sport and the political neutrality of the IOC, as enshrined in the Olympic Charter. It was approved by an overwhelming majority of 118 Member States, with only two countries abstaining (the Russian Federation and the Syrian Arabic Republic) and no votes against. (Please find more information here)
The G20 New Delhi Leaders’ Declaration, which said in September: “We also look forward to the Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2024 as a symbol of peace, dialogue amongst nations and inclusivity, with participation of all.” (Please find more information here)
The declaration by the Non-Aligned Movement, comprising 120 UN Member States, which said: “The participation of athletes from all 206 National Olympic Committees in Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games would be a strong symbol of unity of humanity.” (Please find more information here)
The concerns of two Special Rapporteurs from the UN Human Rights Council, requesting that the IOC ensure the “non-discrimination of any athlete on the basis of their nationality”.
The reassurances at the Olympic Summit by the President of the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the Chair of the International Testing Agency (ITA) that doping controls in Russia continue. This year, more than 10,500 samples from Russian athletes in and out of competition have been collected despite the extremely limited number of AINs taking part in international competitions. This means that Russia remains among the top-ten nations being tested. In addition, it was indicated that the ITA had conducted well over 400 out-of-competition tests on athletes with Russian nationality in 2023. Both blood and urine samples are transported with a strict chain of custody to multiple laboratories outside the country. Any adverse analytical findings are actioned and monitored by WADA.
The fact that the ITA’s intelligence-led Pre-Games Testing Anti-Doping Programme, which targets athletes, sports and countries with the highest risks and athletes who are likely to qualify for Paris 2024, includes Russian athletes.
Despite the suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee (ROC), the IOC EB did not change its recommendations concerning the participation of AINs under these strict conditions. The protection of the rights of individual athletes to participate in competitions despite the suspension of their NOC is a well-established practice, respecting human rights, and has been implemented across a number of suspended NOCs during past Olympic Games. The ROC had to be suspended because of its unilateral decision to include as its members the regional sports organisations under the authority of the NOC of Ukraine, which is a breach of the Olympic Charter because it violates the territorial integrity of the NOC of Ukraine.
The IOC EB also reaffirmed again the steadfast commitment of the entire Olympic Movement to help Ukrainian athletes in every way possible, in order to see a strong team from the National Olympic Committee of Ukraine at the Olympic Games Paris 2024 and the Olympic Winter Games Milano Cortina 2026. In order to achieve this, the IOC has tripled its Solidarity Fund for the NOC of Ukraine to USD 7.5 million.
At least 3,000 Ukrainian athletes and other members of the Olympic community of Ukraine have benefitted from the IOC Solidarity Fund through the NOC of Ukraine over the past 12 months, and from direct assistance from other Olympic Movement stakeholders, including the IFs and the NOCs. These efforts have taken the form of financial and logistical support, in order to ensure that Ukrainian athletes can continue to train and take part in competitions by providing travel support, training facilities, accommodation, equipment and uniforms, amongst other items.
Failure to respect settlement agreements – competence of the FIFA Disciplinary Committee
Dear Sir or Madam,
On 16 December 2022, the FIFA Council adopted the 2023 edition of the FIFA Disciplinary Code (FDC – cf. FIFA circular no. 1833).
In this respect, and in line with FIFA’s commitment to achieving (financial) justice, a number of important changes were made to article 21 of the FDC (formerly art. 15, 2019 edition).
Amongst others, one such amendment was the inclusion of article 21 paragraph 9 of the FDC in order to grant the FIFA Disciplinary Committee the competence to enforce private settlement agreements concluded in the context of disciplinary proceedings opened against a debtor with respect to a final and binding decision issued by FIFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) 1
In this context, in light of the number of settlement agreements concluded by parties in connection with financial decisions and the related volume of requests received by the FIFA administration, the purpose of this circular is to clarify the scope and/or the application of this provision.
a. Settlement agreements concluded in the context of disciplinary proceedings opened against a debtor
Prior to the entry into force of the 2023 edition of the FDC, the conclusion of a settlement agreement would lead to the termination of (or prevent the initiation of) disciplinary proceedings. Indeed, in accordance with FIFA circular no. 1628, non-compliance with the agreement had to be resolved by the Football Tribunal or the relevant competent body as chosen by the parties.
As such, with a view to avoiding this need for parties to initiate a new procedure before the Football Tribunal or the relevant competent body to enforce such a settlement agreement, the FDC was amended in order to provide the Disciplinary Committee with the competence to enforce such agreements, this being provided that the applicable settlement concluded was directly linked to a final and binding financial decision issued by FIFA or CAS.
More specifically, if, following the opening/initiation of disciplinary proceedings in relation to (non-compliance with) a financial decision passed by FIFA (the Football Tribunal) or CAS, the parties decide to settle their dispute by means of a private settlement agreement, the Disciplinary Committee is now, pursuant to article 21 paragraph 9 of the FDC, competent to enforce such an agreement without the need for a new complaint to be lodged before the Football Tribunal (or the relevant competent body as chosen by the parties).
For the sake of good order, we would like to clarify that this procedure shall exclusively apply to those agreements concluded following the entry into force of the 2023 edition of the FDC, i.e. as from 1 February 2023.
b. Settlement agreements concluded after a financial decision passed by a body, a committee, a subsidiary or an instance of FIFA or by CAS
Based on its wording, the scope of article 21 paragraph 9 of the FDC should, in principle, be limited to those agreements concluded “in the context of disciplinary proceedings opened against a debtor with respect to a final and binding financial decision issued by a body, a committee, a subsidiary or an instance of FIFA or by CAS”
Notwithstanding the foregoing and taking into account the rationale behind the implementation of such provision as explained supra., it is considered that the competence granted to the Disciplinary Committee under article 21 paragraph 9 of the FDC shall also cover agreements concluded after any decision passed by a body, a committee, a subsidiary or an instance of FIFA or by CAS.
In other words, following the notification of such decision rendered by FIFA or CAS, if the relevant parties then conclude a private settlement agreement in order to settle their dispute, the Disciplinary Committee shall also be competent to enforce such agreement in accordance with article 21 paragraph 9 of the FDC, without the need for a new complaint to be lodged before the Football Tribunal (or the relevant competent body as chosen by the parties).
Similarly, the above shall exclusively apply to those agreements concluded following the entry into force of the 2023 edition of the FDC, i.e. as from 1 February 2023.
c. Other settlement agreements
Finally, and for the sake of good order, we would like to clarify that any settlement agreement concluded outside of the framework(s) stipulated above, i.e. any settlement falling outside of the remits of sections a. or b. supra, will remain subject to the provisions of FIFA circular no. 1628.
Consequently, any claim arising from a breach of these types of agreements shall still be lodged before the Football Tribunal or before the relevant competent bodies at national or international level, as mutually agreed by the parties.
Should you have any questions, please contact Julien Deux, Head of Judicial Bodies (Adjudicatory) at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
We thank you for your kind attention to the above and for ensuring that your affiliated clubs are informed accordingly.
A Professional Game Board Sub-Committee has ordered the Emirates FA Cup First Round Proper tie between Forest Green Rovers and Scarborough Athletic to be replayed on Tuesday 12 December at 19:45.
The FA charged Forest Green Rovers for fielding an ineligible player in the Emirates FA Cup First Round Proper tie against Scarborough Athletic, which constitutes a breach of FA Cup Rule 109, and Forest Green Rovers subsequently admitted this charge.
Forest Green Rovers will now play away to Scarborough Athletic in a one-off match on Tuesday 12 December, and the winner will travel away to Blackpool for a Second Round Proper match on Tuesday 19 December.
The Government’s independent review into the future of women’s football, ‘Raising the Bar’, was written by Karen Carney OBE in July.
The FA welcomed the Review as it sought to support the continued growth of the women’s game.
The FA’s back-to-back women’s strategies, Gameplan for Growth and Inspiring Positive Change, have seen a doubling of participation in the grassroots game, a doubling of fans in the professional game and international success in winning the EUROs.
With Barclays Women’s Super League and Barclays Women’s Championship clubs having just agreed to create a new organisation (NewCo) to lead the women’s professional game into a new era, this is a pivotal moment in the development of women’s football, and we welcome the support Government can provide in the game’s continuing success.
The IIHF Council, on recommendation from its Medical Committee, has decided to mandate the use of a neck laceration protector, specifically designed for this purpose, at all levels of IIHF competitions. The neck laceration protectors are now mandatory for the senior categories in addition to the U20 and U18 categories, for which neck laceration protectors had already been enforced as per IIHF Official Rule Book.
The exact date this mandate will go into effect for the senior categories will be determined by the supply situation. The IIHF remains in close contact with its suppliers to ensure they are able to respond to the current high demand.
Until the rule officially goes into effect, the IIHF continues to strongly recommend that neck laceration protectors are worn by all players performing in an IIHF competition.
The Confédération Africaine de Football (“CAF”) has announced the launch of the CAF Research Hub that is aimed at providing support to CAF's Member Associations and their Development Projects.
The CAF Research Hub will focus on how the information is gathered and used. As research has played a significant role in the advancement of football in recent times, CAF invested in this new tool to aid its Member Associations and Zonal Unions.
CAF Member Associations Director Sarah Mukuna said: “The CAF Research Hub is aimed to provide data-driven insights into African football. Its mission will be to conduct research that informs action, gather evidence for theories relevant to the African context. With the CAF Research Hub we will contribute to developing and disseminating knowledge to our Member Associations and the African football stakeholders”.
Led by the CAF Member Associations Division, the Research Hub prioritizes research in Youth Football, Women's Football, Football Administration, Medical, and Football Performance.
A pilot project is being launched across all six Zonal Unions during the second edition of the CAF African Schools Programme, which is a unique opportunity to gain context-based information. This pilot project will use the data that is already available to provide insights into the experience of African youth football and the impact of the CAF African Schools Football Championship on the continent.
By the end of the first research project phase, CAF plans to transform its development structures to provide services to all Member Associations, both sporting and administrative.
Lead researcher Dr. Nonhlanhla Mkumbuzi, said: “The CAF Research Hub is a great initiative by CAF. It aims to provide member associations and research institutions on the continent with opportunities to collaborate in conducting African football research. The impact of the Research Hub will be in providing stakeholders in African football with an evidence base to allow the adoption of data driven, context driven capacity building initiative and decision making in African football at all levels of the game.”
National Dispute Resolution Chamber: new Recognition Principles and Standard Regulations
Dear Sir or Madam,
We are pleased to inform you that at its meeting on 17 December 2023, the FIFA Council approved the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles, incorporating the new National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations. In this context, the following paragraphs set out the amendments to the FIFA regulatory framework for your information.
Regulatory framework to operate national dispute resolution chambers
a. General overview
The Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players (RSTP) have long recognised that instead of submitting employment-related disputes to FIFA or seeking redress before a civil court, parties may opt to submit such disputes to a national dispute resolution system, provided that the system meets minimum and fundamental procedural requirements. A national dispute resolution system for employment-related disputes is colloquially known as a “national dispute resolution chamber” or an “NDRC”
In this context, FIFA circular no. 1010 of 20 December 2005 defined these minimal procedural requirements, and in 2007, FIFA enacted the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations to serve as guidelines for member associations when establishing a national dispute resolution system.
This regulatory framework remained unchanged for almost two decades. It therefore become increasingly evident that it had become outdated and that it no longer served the current needs of all football stakeholders.
Modernising the football regulatory framework has been one of FIFA’s key pillars since the launch of FIFA 2.0 and improving the FIFA regulations remains a key objective, being also part of the Strategic Objectives for the Global Game: 2023-2027. For this reason, over the past months, the regulatory framework for NDRCs has been modernised and revised in cooperation with all football stakeholders.
The key objectives of this revised framework, which derogates the 2005 and 2007 FIFA provisions in this field, are to provide clarity and the necessary legal certainty with regard to the jurisdiction, structure, applicable requirements and a possible formal, permanent recognition by FIFA of existing NDRCs.
The new relevant regulatory framework consists of the following:
1. National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles, which establish:
the required standards for a national dispute resolution system to be recognised by FIFA;
the recognition procedure of an NDRC at FIFA level;
the requirements FIFA applies to accept jurisdiction of an NDRC;
the process for the renewal of recognition of an NDRC;
the process for the revocation of recognition of an NDRC;
the publication of a list of the NDRCs that have obtained valid recognition, together with the period of recognition; and
disciplinary tools to ensure compliance with the proposed regulatory framework.
2. Revised National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations, which are included as an Annexe to the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles and which:
constitute a generic sample of applicable provisions, which meet the procedural requirements as per the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles;
are designed to assist member associations with the establishment of procedural rules to govern the organisation, composition and functions of an NDRC;
clarify that any procedural regulations of an NDRC must comply with the standards set out in the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations, unless a deviation has been validly agreed within a collective bargaining agreement; and
clarify in which provisions the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations give a member association scope to define the exact regulatory or procedural framework of an NDRC with flexibility.
b. Entry into force of the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles
Articles 1 to 3 and 6 to 10 of the National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles, which relate to the NDRC recognition process, will enter into force on 1 February 2024.
In order to provide a transition period until the new requirements and a possible recognition of an NDRC fully apply, the remaining provisions of the new regulatory framework will enter into force on 1 January 2025.
Member associations, which currently operate an NDRC, have until 1 June 2024 to submit a formal request for recognition of their NDRC to FIFA, should they wish that their NDRC continue operating as a formally recognised NDRC under the new regulatory framework.
Amendments to the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players
Due to the new regulatory framework for NDRCs, certain amendments and additions to the RSTP have to be introduced.
They are of a technical nature only and relate to the requirements under which FIFA may cede jurisdiction in light of an existing and recognised NDRC.
In particular, the relevant amendments concern article 22 paragraph 1 b) and c); article 26 paragraph 1 c) (new); article 26 paragraph 4; and article 29.
The amendments to the RSTP will come into force on 1 February 2024.
The National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles and its Annexe (National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations), the revised edition of the RSTP, as well as the Explanatory Notes on the New Regulatory Framework for National Dispute Resolution Chambers are available on legal.fifa.com.
Please do not hesitate to contact Jan Kleiner, Director Football Regulatory, at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. if you have any questions in this regard.
We thank you for taking note of the above and for informing your affiliated clubs accordingly.
The two clubs have each confirmed to the Premier League that they are in breach of the League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules
Everton FC and Nottingham Forest FC have each confirmed to the Premier League that they are in breach of the League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR). This is as a result of sustaining losses above the permitted thresholds for the assessment period ending Season 2022/23.
In accordance with Premier League Rules, both cases have now been referred to the chair of the Judicial Panel, who will appoint separate Commissions to determine the appropriate sanction.
Commissions are independent of the Premier League and member clubs. The proceedings are heard in private with the Commissions’ final decisions made public on the Premier League’s website. The League will make no further comment until that time.
OJM Black Country FC v Midland Football League – 1 December Appellant: Club Charge: League Rule 8.34 – Failure to fulfil a fixture Decision: 3-points deduction, £250 fine, game to be replayed Result: Appeal Allowed; sanction varied – 3-points deduction quashed, remainder of decision remains as originally imposed.
Gareth Bowers v West Riding FA – 1 December Appellant: Manager Charge: FA Rule E3.1 - acted in a manner that was improper and/or brought the game into disrepute Sanction: 3-match suspension, a £40 fine, warned as to future conduct Result: Appeal Dismissed
Lardi FC v Hampshire FA – 13 December Appellant: Club Charge: FA Rule E21 - Failed to ensure spectators and/or its supporters (and anyone purporting to be its supporters or followers) conduct themselves in an orderly fashion whilst attending any match. Sanction: a £60 fine Result: Appeal Allowed; charge and sanction quashed.
Ashley Davies v Gloucestershire FA – 13 December Appellant: Player (open age) Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct against a Match Official - (including threatening and/or abusive language/behaviour) Sanction: 126-days suspension, a £50 fine, to complete an education course and 7 Club penalty points. Result: Appeal Allowed; sanction varied – touchline and ground/venue suspension removed, remainder of sanction remains as originally imposed.
Staveley Miners Welfare FC v Northern Counties East Football League – 14 December Appellant: Club Charge: League Rule 8.43 – Failure to fulfil a fixture Sanction: a £250 fine Result: Appeal Dismissed
Wetherby Athletic Junior FC v West Riding FA – 18 December Appellant: Club Charge: FA Rule E20 - Failed to ensure directors, players, officials, employees, servants, representatives, conduct themselves in an orderly fashion whilst attending any Match Sanction: a £40 fine Result: Appeal Allowed; charge and sanction quashed.
Ciaran Gill v Hampshire FA – 19 December Appellant: Player (open age) Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct - Assault or Attempted Assault on a Match Official Sanction: 5-year suspension, to complete a face-to-face education course, 5 club penalty points Result: Appeal Dismissed.
Lee Alder v Berks & Bucks FA – 28 December Appellant: Player (open age) Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct against a Match Official (including physical contact or attempted physical contact and threatening and/or abusive language/behaviour) Sanction: 143-day suspension, a £75 fine, 8 club penalty points and to complete an online education course Result: Appeal Dismissed.
Mtown Rovers FC v Berks & Bucks FA – 28 December Appellant: Club Charge: FA Rule E21 - Failed to ensure spectators and/or its supporters (and anyone purporting to be its supporters or followers) conduct themselves in an orderly fashion whilst attending any Match Sanction: a £75 fine Result: Appeal Dismissed.
A Florida State assistant football coach violated NCAA rules when he facilitated an impermissible recruiting contact between a transfer prospect and a booster, according to an agreement released by the Division I Committee on Infractions. During that contact, the booster encouraged the prospect to enroll at Florida State and offered a name, image and likeness deal as a recruiting inducement. The assistant coach then violated ethical conduct rules when he provided false or misleading information about his involvement in the arranged meeting.
The school, assistant coach and enforcement staff agreed that the violation occurred after a prospective transfer student-athlete entered the NCAA Transfer Portal and communicated with the assistant coach to arrange an official visit to Florida State. During that visit, the assistant coach transported the prospect and his parents to and from an off-campus meeting with a booster, who at the time was the chief executive officer of an NIL collective that also was a booster. The prospect and his parents stated the assistant coach informed them that they would be meeting with the booster. The coach did not stay for the meeting.
During the meeting, the booster encouraged the prospect to enroll at Florida State and offered him an NIL opportunity with the collective worth approximately $15,000 per month during his first year at the school. After the meeting, the booster contacted the prospect and the prospect's mother via text message and/or phone call. Shortly thereafter, the prospect withdrew his name from the Transfer Portal and remained at his previous school. The prospect did not enter into an agreement with the booster or receive any related compensation.
The school and enforcement staff agreed that the meeting with the booster violated several recruiting rules. Specifically, the meeting constituted an impermissible recruiting contact because boosters are not authorized recruiters and generally cannot have in-person, off-campus contact with prospects. The booster also violated recruiting rules when he initiated telephonic communication with the prospect and his mother. Additionally, the booster's proposed NIL opportunity constituted an impermissible recruiting inducement.
The school, enforcement staff and assistant coach also agreed that during the enforcement staff's investigation, the assistant coach violated unethical conduct rules when he knowingly provided false or misleading information about his knowledge of and involvement in the violations. Specifically, on two occasions, he denied facilitating the meeting between the booster, prospect and prospect's family. However, the assistant coach was truthful about aspects of the violations, including acknowledging his role in transporting the prospect and his parents to the location where they met with the booster. Although providing false and misleading information historically supports a Level I violation, the unique facts and circumstances of this case supported a Level II violation.
This case was processed through the negotiated resolution process. The process was used instead of a formal hearing or summary disposition because the university, enforcement staff and assistant coach agreed on the violations and the penalties. The Division I Committee on Infractions panel reviewed the case to determine whether the resolution was in the best interests of the Association and whether the agreed-upon penalties were reasonable. Negotiated resolutions may not be appealed and do not set case precedent for other infractions cases.
The university, enforcement staff and assistant coach used ranges identified by the Division I membership-approved infractions penalty guidelines to agree upon Level II-standard penalties for the university and Level II-aggravated penalties for the assistant coach. The decision contains the full list of penalties as approved by the Committee on Infractions, including:
Two years of probation.
A two-year show cause order for the assistant coach, including a suspension from the next three regular-season games, a two-week restriction on recruiting communication, and required attendance at a NCAA Regional Rules Seminar attendance.
A restriction from off-campus recruiting during fall 2023 for the assistant coach.
A three-year disassociation from the booster.
A one-year disassociation from the collective.
A $5,000 fine plus 1% of the football budget.
A 5% reduction in football scholarships over the two-year probationary period, amounting to a total reduction of five scholarships.
A reduction in official (paid) visits in the football program in the 2023-24 academic year by seven. The school also will not roll over six unused official visits from the 2022-23 academic year.
A reduction in football recruiting communications for a total of six weeks during the 2023-24 and 2024-25 academic years.
A reduction in the number of in-person recruiting days during the 2023-24 academic year by six evaluation days during fall 2023 and 18 during spring 2024.
Members of the Committee on Infractions are drawn from the NCAA membership and members of the public. The members of the panel who reviewed this case are Tricia Turley Brandenburg, chief hearing officer for the panel and executive associate athletics director and senior woman administrator at Army West Point; Stephen Madva, attorney in private practice; and Vince Nicastro, deputy commissioner and chief operating officer of the Big East Conference.
Danny Macklin has been suspended from all football and football-related activity up to and including 25 March 2024, and he has also been ordered to complete an education course.
The FA alleged that Danny Macklin breached FA Rule E3.1 by using abusive and/or insulting and/or threatening language in reference to a female member of AFC Wimbledon’s staff while he was employed as their Managing Director.
It was further alleged that this constitutes an ‘aggravated breach’, which is defined in FA Rule E3.2, as his language included a reference - whether express or implied - to gender.
Danny Macklin subsequently admitted this charge. An independent Regulatory Commission imposed his sanctions following a hearing and its written reasons can be read here.
The List is one of the eight International Standards that are mandatory for all Signatories of the World Anti-Doping Code (Code). It designates what substances and methods are prohibited both in- and out-of-competition and which substances are banned in particular sports.
On 23 September 2022, the ExCo endorsed the recommendation by WADA’s List Expert Advisory Group (EAG) to prohibit the narcotic tramadol in competition, effective 1 January 2024. The delay in implementation was to ensure stakeholders had enough time to learn and adapt to this change, especially as it pertained to the education of athletes, their entourage, and medical personnel.
Tramadol has been on WADA’s Monitoring Program and data gathered through that program have indicated significant use in sports. Tramadol abuse, with its risk of physical dependence, opiate use disorder and overdoses, is of concern worldwide and has led to it being a controlled drug in many countries. Research studies funded by WADA, as referenced in the Explanatory Note, have also confirmed the potential for tramadol to enhance sports performance.
Annual List Review Process
WADA leads an annual revision process concerning the List, beginning with an initial meeting in January and concluding with the publication of the List by 1 October. This is an extensive consultation process that includes WADA’s List EAG gathering information, including the latest scientific and medical research, trends, and intelligence gathered from law enforcement and pharmaceutical companies; circulating a draft List among stakeholders; and, taking their submissions into consideration to revise the draft, followed by review by the Agency’s Health, Medical and Research (HMR) Committee. The HMR Committee then makes its recommendations to WADA’s ExCo, which approves the List during its September meeting.
For a substance or method to be added to the List, it must be determined that it meets at least two of the following three criteria:
It has the potential to enhance or enhances sport performance
It represents an actual or potential health risk to athletes
It violates the spirit of sport
The full 2024 List was published on 28 September 2023, giving more than three months’ notice to athletes, their entourage, and other stakeholders, enabling them to acquaint themselves with any modifications. Ultimately, athletes are responsible for prohibited substances found in their bodies and prohibited methods found to have been used. Athletes’ entourages are also liable for Anti-Doping Rule Violations if determined to be complicit. Consequently, if there is any doubt as to the status of a substance or method, it is important that they contact their respective Anti-Doping Organizations (International Federation or National Anti-Doping Organization) for advice.
Therapeutic Use Exemption Program
It should be noted that for athletes who have a legitimate medical reason for using a prohibited substance or method that is on the List, they can apply for a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) to determine whether they meet the criteria outlined in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions (ISTUE). The TUE Program is a rigorous and necessary part of elite sport which has overwhelming acceptance from athletes, physicians, and anti-doping stakeholders.
Athlete and Athlete Support Personnel (ASP) Factsheet on tramadol (available now)
Medical Professionals Factsheet on tramadol (available now)
Athlete and ASP Guide to the 2024 List (to be available in January 2024)
Languages and Formats
The 2024 List, the 2024 Summary of Modifications and Explanatory Notes, and the 2024 Monitoring Program are available for download on WADA’s website in English, French, and Spanish. The list is also available in Arabic, German, Greek, Portuguese, and Turkish.
Stakeholders wishing to translate the List into other languages are kindly asked to signal their interest to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. WADA will then provide the necessary files and, once the translation is finalized, will make the translated List available on the Agency’s website.
IBIA welcomes the adoption of the sports betting law by the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies. The law introduces an effective regulatory and licensing system for operators in Brazil for both sports betting and online casinos. It also includes a range of integrity measures to strengthen the fight against sports betting related match-fixing.
The law includes a requirement that sports betting operators are part of an international monitoring body; a provision that will help to ensure proper mechanisms are put in place to help protect operators, their customers, as well as sports, from potential fraud and manipulation. In addition, the ability for betting operators to suspend payments of bets for matches that are under investigation for potential corruption is important in protecting operators and deterring sports betting related fraud.
Khalid Ali, CEO of IBIA, said: ‘This is an historic moment for sports betting in Brazil and is a major step forward in the fight against match-fixing. IBIA welcomes the adoption of specific betting integrity provisions in the law, which the association has been campaigning for since discussions on regulating sports betting began in 2018. A number of Brazilian market focused operators have already joined IBIA, and we look forward to engaging with other operators intent on offering well-protected sports betting products to Brazilian consumers via IBIA’s world leading integrity network.’
IBIA is run by operators for operators, with its monitoring and alert network harnessing the collective resources and expertise of many of the world’s largest regulated sports betting companies. It monitors approximately US$150bn in betting transactions on approximately 650,000 competitive sporting events globally, making it the largest monitor of its type in the world. According to H2 Gambling Capital – the leading independent authority on global gambling market data – IBIA members already account for over 60% of the remote gambling market in Brazil.
IBIA’s international monitoring and alert network will provide accurate and detailed intelligence on suspicious betting activity on Brazilian sport to betting regulators, law enforcement and sports governing bodies.
Khalid Ali stated: “Although the new law is a very important milestone in the fight against match-fixing, there is no room for complacency. We are committed to working more closely and sharing our expertise with the Brazilian regulatory authorities on the implementing regulation on integrity, as well as with sports and law enforcement to ensure we more effectively detect, deter and sanction sports betting related match-fixing and fraud.”
Opening markets to licensed sports betting operators is key to protecting consumers and the integrity of sporting competitions from sports betting related match-fixing. Regulated sports betting markets channel consumers away from the unregulated markets where most of the issues with match-fixing and corruption arise.
Khalid Ali continued: “By opening-up the market to licensed sports betting operators Brazil is sending a very important message to other markets in Latin America that a dynamic and competitive regulated sports betting framework with strong integrity provisions is essential to the fight against sports betting related match-fixing.”
Sports betting exists within a highly competitive international market and an overly burdensome framework of regulation and taxation will have the counterproductive, and unintended, consequence of driving sports betting customers into unregulated markets, reducing tax revenues and increasing the risk of corruption and match fixing.
Therefore, whilst IBIA welcomes the fact that the Chamber of Deputies has resisted the temptation to impose higher levels of gambling taxation, the impact of the overall tax burden and the substantial cost of the licencing fee, which remains BRL30m, may deter investments in Brazil.
EU Athletes is pleased with today’s decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered in Case C-124/21 P International Skating Union v Commission which dismisses the appeal filed by the ISU and upholds the cross-appeal from Mark Tuitert, Niels Kerstholt and EU Athletes.
The Court of Justice affirmed that the eligibility rules of the International Skating Union (ISU), granting its authority to approve international skating events and penalise athletes participating in unauthorised competitions, violate EU law. Such regulations provide the ISU with an unfair advantage over its competitors and result in adverse outcomes for athletes.
Importantly, the Court of Justice maintains that the Commission was accurate in challenging the arbitration rules that limit skaters’ access to court proceedings.
This case holds immense significance for every athlete and player as central to its essence lies athletes’ rights to engage in competition and leverage their commercial opportunities. It also addresses athletes’ access to justice and their entitlement to protection under EU laws as citizens and workers.
EU Athletes has been supporting Dutch speed skaters Mark Tuitert and Niels Kerstholt since their initial complaint in 2014, through the #ChanceToCompete campaign and as the interveners throughout the procedure. We extend our congratulations to Mark and Niels for embarking on this challenging journey and for making an immense contribution to enhancing the situation of athletes.
We would like to express gratitude to the legal experts: Ben van Rompuy and Antoine Duval as well as to Bas Braeken, Jade Versteeg and Timo Hieselaar from Bureau Brandeis.
Natalia Orive, the President of EU Athletes, said: “I am proud of our involvement in this landmark case as it contributes to EU Athletes mission of protecting and advancing the rights and interests of the players. It is important to reiterate that the sport organisations cannot abuse their position at the expense of athletes.”
Paulina Tomczyk, the General Secretary of EU Athletes, added: “Today’s decision is a great win for Mark and Niels, but also for the player association movement that has been actively supporting their fight for almost a decade. I believe it is a step in the right direction to ensure good governance and respect of athlete’s rights in sport.”
FIFA is pleased to announce that the FIFA Council has approved several updates to the Futsal Laws of the Game. These encompass futsal-specific adjustments while also aligning the Laws with recent modifications introduced in football.
Enclosed, you will find both an overview of the main amendments and the complete Futsal Laws of the Game 2023-24. The full Futsal Laws of the Game 2023-24 is also readily accessible on FIFA.com for your convenience.
If you have any inquiries or require further clarification, please don't hesitate to reach out to Dominic Chielens, Senior Refereeing Manager, at the FIFA Refereeing Subdivision (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).
The FA Rule K arbitration award has been published today following the proceedings by football agencies to challenge National Football Agent Regulations [NFAR] implementation.
At the start of the 2023/24 season, the English football authorities introduced a new Participant Behaviour Charter as part of the ‘Love Football. Protect the Game’football-wide campaign that focuses on addressing unacceptable conduct on the pitch, on the sidelines and in the stands.
The new Charter detailed stronger measures for players, managers, coaches, support staff and club officials to adhere to on a matchday and is in place across the Premier League, EFL, National League System (Steps 1-4), Barclays Women’s Super League, and Barclays Women’s Championship.
As a result, the first five months of the 2023/24 season has seen a significant decrease in both incidents of players surrounding match officials and charges of mass confrontations.
Under the new approach, match officials have been empowered by the game to take stronger action, alongside a consistent application of the existing measures, when participant behaviour falls below expected standards. This has seen a significant rise in cautions for dissent for players.
Misconduct Cases
37% decrease in charges for surrounding of a match official (from 19 to 12 charges)
43% decrease in charges for mass confrontations (from 61 to 35 charges)
10% decrease in charges for technical area misconduct (from 70 to 63 charges)
Match Discipline
88% increase in dissent cautions for players (from 966 to 1,813 cautions)
Mark Bullingham, FA CEO said: “This season, English football came together to take a collective stance against unacceptable behaviour in our game. It’s great to see that the new approach has made a positive impact on the season so far. We have seen a decrease in charges for surrounding of a match official, mass confrontations, technical area misconduct, and an increase in the number of cautions for dissent. This shows that our new approach is making an impact at the top of the pyramid, and we need to maintain this and ensure that these positive changes are carried through to the whole game.”
Howard Webb, Chief Refereeing Officer at PGMOL, said: “We were empowered and supported by the game to be more robust with our actions to address declining behaviour. A culture change won’t happen overnight and it is early days, but we are moving in the right direction and our officials are successfully delivering on our part of the collective football effort to reset behaviours, protect the reputation and promote the positive image of the game for the next generations. It has been encouraging to see improvements in some behaviours already and the aim is that cautions for dissent decrease significantly to a much lower level in time as this culture change takes effect. That is the real indication of the progress, and with the power of example being so strong, we all have a continued duty to hold firm for the benefit of the game’s future.
Global Athlete and Gymnasts for Change Canada acknowledges today’s announcement by the Minister of Sport to establish a ‘Future of Sport in Canada Commission’ to review the Canadian sport system.
We are disappointed the Minister did not support survivors’ and advocates' calls for a National Inquiry that meets judicial standards with the power to compel documents, and subpoena testimony from organizations. We are concerned that these are critical shortcomings in this review that may prevent robust and meaningful outcomes.
Today’s announcement however does send a clear message to all people in sport that the government has recognized that the Canadian sport system is broken and needs repair. This announcement is a direct result of the public pressure applied by courageous survivors, advocates, scholars, and media who are committed to exposing the truth. Their input now, and moving forward, is crucial for the support and success of this review mechanism.
We intend to continue advocating to ensure this newly announced review is robust, completely independent from sport actors, who created the current failing system, and scrutinizes leading sport organizations and funding bodies.
For almost two years, we have called for a national inquiry into the Canadian sport system. While child abuse and violations of athletes’ human rights underpin our calls, we recognize that abuse and limited justice are symptoms of a larger systemic problem that must be addressed through this review.
Last week, we met with the Minister of Sport at the United Nations in Geneva for the Sporting Chance Forum. Both the Minister and our organizations agreed that any mechanism for reviewing the system must extend to every corner of the sporting landscape to create robust systemic and cultural change.
While it is unclear whether this review has the breadth and depth to address the entire system, engaging with athletes and advocates to further shape the terms of reference will be critical to getting it right. If there is a refusal to meaningfully engage with those most affected and those who have advocated to bring this review to fruition, there will be skepticism and a cloud of suspicion that it is constructed with pre-determined outcomes.
The power of engaging with those most affected and most silenced was demonstrated recently at the Canadian Safe Sport Think Tank. Global Athlete and Gymnastics for Change Canada brought together advocates, survivors, former Provincial, National and Olympic-level athletes, coaches, sports administrators, and scholars to engage in a comprehensive examination of the Canadian sport system. The results of this safe and confidential space allowed for open and honest dialogue in order to uncover the true breadth and depth of the problems.
If this ‘Future of Sport in Canada Commission’ review is to succeed with radical reform of the Canadian sport system and justify its ask for those most affected by violence in sport to participate, it must be trustworthy, athlete and survivor-centric, and include mechanisms for enforcing recommendations to all government-funded organizations. This announcement is but a first step towards a safe, accessible, and equitable sport experience for participants, at every level and within every community. The work has only just begun.
The independent Board of the Rugby Football League have accepted 44 recommendations from the sport's Brain Health and Clinical Advisory Group Sub-Committees, as the latest and most wide-ranging phase of the drive to make the sport safer and more accessible at all levels.
The recommendations - which are detailed on the RFL website - include changes for the 2024 season to the Laws, the Operational Rules, to Medical / First-Aid standards, and Coaching / Performance interventions. This will affect all levels of the sport, from the Betfred Super Leagues (Men and Women) to Under-6s at community clubs, in different ways.
Since 2021, the RFL have been working with Leeds Beckett University on the TaCKLE Project (Tackle and Contact Kinematics, Loads and Exposure), led by Ben Jones, a Professor at LBU who is the RFL’s Strategic Lead for Performance and Research.
The use of Instrumented Mouthguards since 2021 has allowed detailed studies of head acceleration exposures, which permitted a number of research projects and Laws Trials, leading to the latest recommendations. These studies have been used alongside injury surveillance studies, which have been ongoing for the last 10 years.
The recommendation include mandated use of the latest models of Instrumented Mouthguards for players in Men's and Women's Super League through Rugby League's partnership with Prevent Biometrics.
Other recommendations which will apply in professional Rugby League from 2024 include a mandated minimum off-season of four weeks, followed by an additional minimum two-week pre-season period without contact training, to reduce cumulative player load.
In addition, match limits over a 12-month period will be introduced, with different figures for forwards and backs to reflect their differing levels of contact exposure based on the last three years of research by Leeds Beckett University.
Independent concussion spotters will be introduced on a trial basis in 2024, following on from the success during last year’s Rugby League World Cup. Recent changes to on-field and off-field sanctions relating to head contact, and to the use of 18th player interchanges following Head Injury Assessments (HIAs), have been updated. This will include the introduction of the Head Contact Sanctioning Framework.
Community Rugby League (including Junior / Student) and Age Grade Rugby League (professional clubs)
These are the areas of Rugby League in which the most fundamental changes will be introduced immediately - for introduction in the 2024 season.
Tackle Height
At all levels of Community Rugby League, and at Age Grade at professional clubs (including Reserve Grade), the legal limit for any contact is to be lowered – from shoulder height (ie below the neck) to arm pit height (ie below the shoulder).
Any contact above the arm pit will therefore be penalised.
It is further recommended that this Laws change should be applied at all levels of professional Rugby League from the 2025 season.
Junior Rugby League
Twelve of the 44 recommendations relate to specific age groups.
Three Laws changes will see contact Rugby League replaced by touch / tag in a stepped approach, starting with Under 6s and 7s in the 2024 season, and continuing with that age group to Under 8s from 2025, and Under 9s from 2026.
This is consistent with the sport's existing Safe Play Code, developed following the Whole Game Review, carried out in 2019.
This will now be enforced as mandatory from 2024 at all age groups, meaning that Under 10s fixtures will be a maximum of nine players per team with a 5-metre retreat by the defensive line; and Under 11s will be a maximum of 11 players per team, again with a 5-metre retreat by the defensive line.
From Under 12s to Under 18s, a trial will be held in at least one member league in 2024 to reduce the retreat by the defensive line to 7 metres, and to minimise knockout cup fixtures – with a view to more widespread introduction from 2025.
Winter Break
One further recommendation which will apply across Community Rugby League from 2024 is that no Rugby League should be played in the month of December unless played as part of an existing winter offering – the latter including schools, colleges and student Rugby League.
For all other competitions, no contact Rugby League activity will take place after the third weekend in November until the following January when a graduated return to contact will be in place.
“Opportunities to increase the appeal and accessibility of Rugby League, especially at junior and community levels”
Tony Sutton, the RFL’s Chief Executive who also chairs the Brain Health Sub-Committee, hosted a media conference at which the recommendations were outlined at Rugby League’s Etihad headquarters on Thursday December 7.
He was joined by a number of other members of the Brain Health Sub-Committee, including the RFL’s Chief Medical Officer Dr Chris Brookes, and other influential voices from the sport.
Tony Sutton: “In stressing the significance of these recommendations which have now been ratified by the RFL’s independent Board of Directors, we acknowledge the challenges they will pose for those at all levels of the sport.
“We believe they are essential, as Rugby League must respond to developments in medical and scientific knowledge to prioritise the safety of those that play; and also that they offer exciting opportunities to increase the appeal and accessibility of Rugby League, especially at junior and community levels.
“Rugby League will remain a tough, gladiatorial and character-building team sport. But we believe the mandating of tag/touch at the introductory levels - initially Under-6s rising to Under-8s from 2026 – and the reduction in the legal tackle height at all levels from 2025 will place a new emphasis on skill and attacking play, further increasing the appeal of Rugby League both to parents, and to open-age community players.
“On behalf of the RFL, and the sport as a whole, I thank all who have been involved in developing these recommendations, especially Professor Ben Jones and his team at Leeds Beckett University, and my colleagues on the Brain Health Committee.
“We have recognised throughout this process the importance of communication in making such fundamental changes. Stakeholders have been kept informed throughout of the direction of travel, and a number of recent meetings have been held, including with professional coaches and the Community Board.
“Those discussions and explanations will continue throughout the winter ahead of the start of the 2024 season. My plea to all involved in the sport would be to recognise the fundamental importance of our match officials in introducing these changes. That was reinforced by the challenges faced by the group who were involved in the Academy Laws Trials last summer, to which they responded admirably. Next year more than ever, they will all need and deserve our support.”
An international expert panel gathered by the FEI Medical Committee has put forward a set of key proposals to strengthen the current testing standards for equestrian helmets as a means to enhance the safety of athletes in equestrian sport.
Tasked with reviewing current equestrian helmet testing standards and related scientific literature, the FEI Helmet Working Group was established in April 2023 and is made up of a panel of international experts including engineers, standards experts, medical doctors, helmet manufacturers, athletes and representatives from horse racing.
“While the FEI continues to work on reducing horse and rider falls, measures are needed in parallel to reduce the risk of significant injury when falls do occur. The FEI Helmet Working Group focused on how helmets could be even more effective at reducing the risk of serious head injuries,” FEI Medical Committee Chair Dr. Mark Hart explained.
“There are currently different testing standards around the world for equestrian helmets, with different criteria. Moreover, some of the protocols currently used for testing helmets may not reflect the research and technological advancements that have been made over the past several years.
“Helmet requirements are very sport specific. And, as the International Federation for equestrian sport, we believe that it is our duty to take the lead on assisting manufacturers with creating helmets that specifically cater to the demands of our sport and better protect our athletes’ heads.
“The Working Group has diligently reviewed the existing testing standards as well as the relevant scientific literature, and we are confident that their conclusions will provide a clearer and more robust framework for manufacturers producing helmets in the equestrian industry.”
Following an initial in-person meeting and frequent online discussions, the FEI Helmet Working Group arrived at the following key conclusions:
Scientific testing criteria needs to be improved through new computer modelling and simulations which better reflect real life accidents. This will allow for a change in helmet standards that offer athletes better protection from head injuries.
Additional testing measures and updated brain energy transmission thresholds must be incorporated into the current testing protocols to better account for the varied forces that occur in equestrian falls. The FEI Helmet Working Group recommends that these new testing protocols are introduced as a requirement by the FEI around 2027 in order to allow manufacturers the time to make the necessary adjustments to their production lines.
A new and improved injury reporting system should be established in order to track head injuries, and measure and evaluate the effectiveness of changes to the testing procedures.
The FEI Helmet Working Group’s technical recommendations, which are published on the FEI’s website, will now be shared with the helmet manufacturing and testing industries for feedback. The FEI intends to work collaboratively with manufacturers and helmet standard bodies to achieve these goals, which should be viewed as a new, quickly achievable step forward in allowing helmets to further reduce the transmitted energy to the brain when a fall occurs. Meanwhile, the FEI Helmet Working Group will continue their efforts to improve helmet effectiveness as new research and technology become available.
"The progress made by the Working Group represents a significant leap forward not only for athletes in our sport, but also for the entire equestrian industry”, FEI President Ingmar De Vos said.
“Our vision is that the FEI Helmet Safety Working Group’s conclusions marks the start of a journey that will see the international sport governing body contributing to the elaboration of increasingly safer helmet testing standards meeting both the athletes’ needs and the interests of the manufacturers.”
A former Florida International University softball head coach committed recruiting violations when she had impermissible recruiting contacts with three prospects during the COVID-19 dead period. Because of her personal involvement in the violations, she violated head coach responsibility rules. She also violated ethical conduct rules when she instructed a student-athlete to provide false and misleading information and was not truthful when she was interviewed during the investigation. In June, the school and women’s soccer head coach reached an agreement with the enforcement staff about violations and penalties. The Division I Committee on Infractions publicly acknowledged the infractions case so the school and soccer coach could immediately begin serving penalties while awaiting the committee’s final decision.
Softball
I
Involved Penalties:
Television: 0 yrs
Reduction in Financial Aid: No
Postseason: 0 yrs
Recruiting: No
Probation: 2 yrs
Show Cause Penalty: Yes
Vacation of Record: No
The full FIU Public Decision can be accessed here.
Recently, a cross-section of Canadian sports people gathered for the Canadian Safe Sport Think Tank hosted by Global Athlete and Gymnasts for Change Canada to collectively address the country’s sporting crisis. Olympic and National Team athletes, advocates, survivors, sports administrators, coaches, and scholars engaged in a comprehensive examination of the Canadian sport system and collaborated to identify a pathway for its recovery and reconstruction.
For the last two years, the culture and operations of sport in Canada have been under the spotlight for its failures to adequately serve and protect all Canadians who participate in sport. Despite the heightened scrutiny from the parliamentary hearings conducted by Canadian Heritage and the Standing Committee on Status of Women, there has been limited action from both the Government of Canada and national sport leaders to acknowledge and act upon the national crisis to ensure sport in Canada becomes a safe, healthy, and equitable environment for all.
Recognising the lack of inaction, the Think Tank welcomed participants over two days and provided a safe space to offer open and honest feedback and perspectives on the Canadian sport system. Through multiple comprehensive roundtables, four pivotal themes emerged as playing a role in the shortcomings of Canada’s sport system:
Collusion and Conflicts of Interest: The Canadian sport system was discerned to be duplicitous by design, with a high level of collusion, where conflicts of interest and hidden affiliations protect the status quo and serve nationalist goals driven by the capitalization of sport and commercial exploitation of athletes. Power is limited to a few organizations such as Own the Podium (OTP) and the Canadian Olympic Committee (COC), leaving National Sport Organizations (NSOs) in a vulnerable position, where fear of losing funding dictates the operation of their sports.
Nationalist Goals of Sport within the Global System: With sport placed under Heritage Canada, the Canadian sport system has been set up to utilize 1% of sport population, the elite athletes, to promote Canada’s identity, culture, values, and legacy on global scale. This approach does not serve 99% of the sporting population who play sport for fun, health and socialization.
The Exploitation of Athletes: There is little to no protection of athletes in Canada. Established safe sport systems are failing the 1% population of elite athletes and neglecting the 99% of the sporting population. This is leaving athletes powerless, with almost no representation and little bargaining power. Sport has purposely self-regulated, with minimal oversight, to deny access to justice and remedy to athletes who are maltreated – facilitating and exacerbating the denial of their basic human rights.
National Inquiry: The Canadian sport system is failing the masses while simultaneously eroding high-performance sport. A national inquiry is necessary to understand what all Canadians need and want from sport and how sport can best become a tool for health, community, and development, instead of a propaganda tool for nationalist goals.
If the Canadian sport system continues to operate in this manner, the ability to create, serve, and maintain a healthy population and a healthy and successful sporting culture will be eroded.
These findings are further detailed in the report - click here to read.
The TDSSA is a mandatory Level 2 document that must be implemented by all Anti-Doping Organizations (ADOs) that are signatories to the World Anti-Doping Code. The TDSSA is intended to ensure that the Prohibited Substances and/or Prohibited Methods within the scope of the TDSSA are subject to an appropriate and consistent minimum level of analysis (MLA) by all ADOs that conduct testing in those sports or disciplines deemed at risk.
WADA conducts an annual update of the TDSSA to ensure it remains fit for purpose. In 2023, a sub-working group consisting of five members from the Strategic Testing Expert Advisory Group (STEAG) and WADA staff conducted a detailed review of the TDSSA, which included analyzing the current text of the document as well as 2015-2022 ADAMS data. The sub-working group provided its recommendations to the STEAG during its in-person meeting on 30 and 31 August 2023.
Modifications to TDSSA version 8.0
A summary of modifications to the TDSSA version 8.0 can be found here and the redlined version of the TDSSA version 9.0 can be found here.
The amendments to the TDSSA will enter into force on 1 January 2024 with the exception to changes made to the MLAs for erythropoietin receptor agonists (ERAs) for four sports/disciplines which was increased from 15% to 30%. The changes to these MLAs will come into force on 1 January 2025, allowing ADOs sufficient time to incorporate these changes into their Test Distribution Plans. The four sports/disciplines are: Athletics – Combined Events, Canoe/Kayak – Ocean Racing, Orienteering and Para-Athletics, Running Middle Distance 800m - 1500m All Classes.
Application for Flexibility
ADOs are also reminded that in accordance with Article 4.7.2 of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations (ISTI), “an ADO may apply to WADA for flexibility in the implementation of the MLA specified for Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods as outlined in the TDSSA.” ADOs can apply for flexibility (up to 50%) in the implementation of the MLAs against set criteria listed in Articles 3 and 6 of the TDSSA.
TDSSA Testing Guides
Information on the Prohibited Substances and/or Prohibited Methods within the scope of the TDSSA and relevant guidance on Testing strategies are provided within the TDSSA Testing Guides. A Testing Guide on Gas Chromatography/Combustion/Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (GC/C/IRMS) is also available. ADO staff involved in test planning and target testing of athletes are advised to be familiar with these Testing Guides, which can be requested by contacting WADA at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
Should you have any questions or comments regarding the TDSSA version 9.0 or the application for flexibility, we invite you to contact This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
On 19 June 2023, The FA confirmed that the agencies CAA Base, Wasserman, Stellar and ARETÉ had commenced arbitration proceedings to challenge the implementation by The FA of the National Football Agent Regulations (NFAR) relating to English domestic transfers.
On 30 November 2023, The FA Rule K Tribunal issued its award following the conclusion of proceedings, which declared that if the FA implements the Fee Cap and the Pro Rata Payment Rules in the NFAR, it will be in breach of the Competition Act 1998.
The full arbitration award remains confidential at this stage, but will be published in accordance with Rule K11.3. Until that time, no further details can be provided.
The FA is considering the implications of the decision and will provide a further update as soon as it is able.
