WADA Statement regarding the IOC’s decision concerning Russia suspension
International Table Tennis Federation (ITTF) signs new multi-year integrity partnership with Sportradar
Panathinaikos (overdue payables), Decision of 12 December 2017, UEFA Decision
Circumstances of the case
On 8 November 2017, the Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) Chief Investigator referred the case of the club Panathinaikos to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber due to the presence of overdue payables as at 30 September 2017. The club accepted the findings of the CFCB Chief Investigator, admitting the breach of Articles 65(1) and 66(1) of the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations (CL&FFP Regulations). The club states that the aim of the club is to survive, comply with its obligations towards its creditors and asking for leniency considering its critical situation without harming the objectives of the UEFA’s Financial Fair Play System. The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber determined that Panathinaikos has breached Articles 65(1) and 66(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations because it had overdue payables towards other football clubs and in respect to its employees as at 30 September 2017. The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber deemed that an exclusion from the next UEFA club competition for which the Club would otherwise qualify in the next three (3) seasons and a fine of €200,000 are appropriate penalties. However, considering the circumstances and particularities of the case, the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber decided that the exclusion as well as half of the fine, i.e. €100,000, will be lifted if the club is able to prove having paid the amounts or concluded an agreement with the creditors with regard to the amounts identified as overdue payables.
Decision
The Adjudicatory Chamber of the Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) decided to exclude Panathinaikos from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next three (3) seasons (i.e. 2018/19, 2019/20 and 2020/21 seasons), unless the club is able to prove by 1 March 2018 that it has paid the amounts or concluded an agreement with the creditors with regard to the amounts that were identified as overdue payables as at 30 September 2017.
The club was also fined €200,000, from which €100,000 is suspended and will only fall due in case the club is not able to prove by 1 March 2018 that it has paid the amounts or concluded an agreement with the creditors with regard to the amounts that were identified as overdue payables as at 30 September 2017.
Chairman: José Narciso da Cunha Rodrigues (Portugal)
Vice-Chairmen:
Christiann Timmermans (Netherlands)
Louis Peila (Switzerland)
Members:
Charles Flint (England)
Adam Giersz (Poland)
on Tuesday, 12 December 2017. Posted in Sports, Football, Cases, Articles, Regulation & Governance
Result of an Enquiry (P. Mulrennan) heard by the Disciplinary Panel on Thursday 7 December 2017
Sports Tribunal Decisions ST07 & 08/ 17 DFSNZ v Lachlan & Mitchell Frear
Hapoel Beer Sheva – Shir Tzedek (Doping), Decision of 7th December 2017, UEFA Decision
Circumstances of the case
On 22 August 2017, the Hapoel Beer Sheva player, Mr Shir Tzedek (the “Player”) underwent a doping control test after the UEFA Champions League match between Hapoel Sheva and NK Maribor. The analysis of the Player’s A sample revealed the presence of a substance called “octopamine”. In conformity with the WADA Prohibited List 2017, the above substance is prohibited in-competition under the category S6.b Specified Stimulants. On 22 September 2017, UEFA notified the player of this finding and of the fact that this may result in a possible antidoping rule violation. On 2 October 2017, disciplinary proceedings were instigated by UEFA against the player for Doping Offences (Art.13 DR). On 19 October 2017, UEFA confirmed to the player that the CEDB accepted the player’s voluntary provisional suspension.
Legal framework Article 2 (1) (a) of the UEFA Anti-Doping Regulations
Decision
The CEDB recognized that the player committed some mistakes with regard to the use of supplements, however due to his own limitation he had to rely on the experts of his club which seemed reasonable in this case. The CEDB considered that the starting suspension in this case should be 12 months suspension due to a normal degree of fault from an objective perspective. The CEDB then examined the jurisprudence and the mitigating subjective factors in this case to determine if a lower suspension was justified. The supplement concerned sold in Israel were not supposed to contain octopamine, however the company responsible for manufacturing and packing the product in question recognized that it is was possible that some bottles were mislabelled and contained octopamine. It was also recognized that the club expert failed in its obligation to check the product and the player had reason to believe he was safe using the product because he did not test positive at a prior test. In view of the above, the CEDB decided to suspend Mr Tzedek Shir for a period of eight (8) months from 19 October 2016, commencement date of his voluntary provisional suspension.
Ad-hoc Chairman: Hansen Jim Stjerne (DEN)
Vice-Chairman: Berzi Sándor (HUN)
Member: Antenen Jacques (SUI)
on Thursday, 07 December 2017. Posted in Sports, Football, Cases, Articles, Regulation & Governance
Afghanistan’s Shahzad suspended for 12 months after pleading guilty to breaching the ICC Anti-Doping Code
IOC Publishes second full decision as part of the Oswald Commissions findings
WADA reinstates the Mexico City Laboratory
UCI and Peter Sagan relieved to end legal dispute
Sports Betting in the United States: Supreme Court begins hearing Christie v. NCAA
Published Tuesday, 05 December 2017.
Track & Field Athlete Nana Owusu Accepts Sanction for Anti-Doping Rule Violation
WADA provisionally suspends accreditation of Bucharest Laboratory
Decoding the Indian Premier League Media Rights Sale – Part 1
Published Friday, 01 December 2017.
AAA Arbitrator imposes four-year sanction on cycling athlete Jenna Blandford for doping violation
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) upholds the appeal of football club Real Garcilaso
Defamation in sport – A comparison of the law in France, England and Australia
Published Thursday, 30 November 2017.
INTERPOL Integrity in Sport Bi-Weekly Bulletin - 14 November - 27 November 2017
Nan Sato explains how player contract disputes are treated under Japanese labor law - Episode 56
Report from the first ISLJ Annual International Sports Law Conference
New mobile app to strengthen AFC’s fight against match-fixing
Building Momentum: The evolution of women’s wages In Australian Professional Team Sports
CAS cancels two fines imposed on the Mexican Football Federation and imposes warnings in their place
WADA Foundation Board takes important decisions that will significantly strengthen the Agency and the future of clean sport
Sports Tribunal Decision ST0117 Frost v MNZ
Powerlifting Athlete Suspended for Presence of Four Anabolic Agents
INTERPOL Integrity in Sport Bi-Weekly Bulletin - 28 November 2017 - 11 December 2017
Reasons following a Disciplinary Panel Hearing (Michael McConville, Stephen McConville) heard on 19 September 2017
3 additional Russian athletes file appeals at the CAS
Football's greatest threat: Why technology & stakeholder collaboration are key to combating global match-fixing
Published Friday, 08 December 2017.
Football Club Zenit (Setting off of fireworks; racist/discriminatory behaviour), Decision of 7 December 2017, UEFA Decision
Circumstances of the case
Supporters of FC Zenit displayed from 75th to 87th minute a banner saying "Ratko Mladic - Hero of Serbia". In the 23rd minute, there was smoke on south tribune of the home-team supporters. In the 43rd minute, a firecracker was set off on the south tribune. In the 85th and 92 nd minutes, another massive firecracker were set off in the south tribune. None of these fireworks Impact on the game. The club explains the historical connection between Serbs and Russians, before further stating that the banner under scrutiny is not of a discriminatory, but of a political nature as it merely criticizes the decision of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The club further makes reference to related CAS jurisprudence, stating that from the perspective of a “reasonable observer”, such interpretation was obvious. Finally, the club states that the banner was displayed for 12 minutes.
Legal framework Articles 14 and 16 (2) UEFA Disciplinary Regulations.
Decision
The CEDB had no reason not to believe the connection between Serbs and Russians, but could not make any assumption that the incident was rather political than discriminatory or racist. CEDB first emphasized that it is not bound by the interpretation or the comment made by the UEFA match delegate who had referred to the potential “political dimension” of the banner. Obviously, discriminatory banners can have an additional political dimension, which does not necessarily mean that such would make such banners only political. The CEDB acknowledged that one day before the match, the ICTY made its verdict in the proceedings against Ratko Mladic finding the latter guilty of 10 of the 11 charges, inter alia for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. In view of such judgement, taking into account the crimes Ratko Mladic was found guilty of and which were particularly directed against the Muslim part of the relevant communities, the display of a banner which glorifies Ratko Mladic as a hero of Serbia, is obviously discriminatory with regard to the victims of the crimes committed by Ratko Mladic. Finally, the CEDB considered that the closure of the entire sector should be considered the appropriate and adequate sanction for the discriminatory banner. Regarding the setting off of fireworks, the CEDB decided that a fine of €10’000 was the appropriate sanction.
Chairman: Partl Thomas (AUT)
Vice-Chairmen:
Berzi Sándor (HUN)
Hansen Jim Stjerne (DEN)
Members:
Antenen Jacques (SUI)
Gea Tomás (AND)
Leal João (POR)
Lorenz Hans (GER)
Řepka Rudolf (CZE)
Wolff Joël (LUX)
on Thursday, 07 December 2017. Posted in Sports, Football, Cases, Articles, Regulation & Governance
A review of the current inquiries & investigations into abuse in UK football
Published Thursday, 07 December 2017.
22 Russian athletes file appeals at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
Artur Taimazov and Tatyana Chernova / International Olympic Committee
Weightlifter Banned for Four Years.
How UK Sports Governing Bodies can prepare for the new General Data Protection Regulation
Published Tuesday, 05 December 2017.
USADA v. Ryan Bailey
Social issues & the extent of the NFL Commissioner’s powers: A review of Ezekiel Elliott case
Published Monday, 04 December 2017.
Decoding the Indian Premier League Media Rights Sale – Part 2
Published Friday, 01 December 2017.
IAAF successful in CAS appeal against the Anti-Doping Agency of Kenya, Athletics Kenya & Benjamin Ngandu Ndegwa
Reasons following a Disciplinary Panel hearing (Paul David Evans) heard on Monday 6 November 2017
Campaigning for equality and recognition of human rights in sport - Episode 57
BHA seeks rule change on anti-doping penalties
Arka Gdynia (throwing of objects; setting off of fireworks; stairways blocked; insufficient organization), Decision of 22 November 2017, UEFA Decision
Circumstances of the case
According to the official reports of the UEFA Europa League 2017/2018 match between Arka Gydnia and FC Midtjylland on 27 July 2017, Arka Gdynia’s supporters ignited an extremely large number of fireworks and a cap of flare was thrown on the pitch from the South Stand by the home supporter. The UEFA delegate also reported that away fans standing blocked the stairways the whole match in lower sector. The Control, Ethics and Disciplinary Body (CEDB) considered that the large number of fireworks during the match shows that the body searching was unsatisfactory. The CEDB decided on 17 August 2017 that a fine of €60’000 was the adequate disciplinary measure to be imposed on the club. Arka Gdynia appealed the decision stating that there are sufficient mitigating circumstances to impose a maximum sanction amounting to €30’000 or any other lower fine than €60’000.
Legal framework Article 16 (1) of the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations. Article 16 (2) (b) and (c) of the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations. Article 38 UEFA Safety and Security Regulations.
Decision
On 17 August 2017, the CEDB decided to fine Arka Gdynia €60,000. The Appeals Body decided to partially admit the appeal lodged by Arka Gydnia and thus, the CEDB’s decision of 17 August 2017 is amended and Arka Gydnia was imposed a fine of € 50,000 for the setting of fireworks, the throwing of objects and the blocking of stairways. The Appeals Body decided that the club must not be held responsible for an inadequate body searching during the match and dropped the charges for the insufficient body searching. The Appeals Body considered although is true that the high amount of fireworks ignited during the match speaks for a negligent attitude in this regard, the burden of proof that there was an inappropriate body searching lies on UEFA and the delegate didn´t mention that the body search was badly implemented. The Appeals Body considered that there might be other reasons allowing the entrance of fireworks inside the stadium.
Chairman: Pedro Tomás (Spain)
Members:
Michael Maessen (Netherlands)
Björn Ahlberg (Sweden)
on Wednesday, 22 November 2017. Posted in Sports, Football, Cases, Articles, Regulation & Governance
Result of an Appeal (G. Gibbons) heard by the Appeal Board on Monday 20 November 2017
Student-athletes square up against lone objector to attorneys fee award in $209 million NCAA settlement
Cycling, doping & the importance of due process: A review of the Karl Murray case
Published Monday, 20 November 2017.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport rejects an application for urgent provisional measures filed by Adrien Silva
Everton FC (Aggressions by supporters against players, referees). Decision of 16th November 2017, UEFA Decision
Circumstances of the case
The referee of the match reported that he “he was told by the Lyon Goalkeeper, Anthony Lopes, that he was pushed or touched by a spectator from the home crowd in the brawl between players in minute 64.” The club stressed that it was not negligent in any way in relation to the organization of the match, stressing that it does not tolerate any form of aggressive behavior from the side of its supporters. The club also argues that it fully complied with all rules and regulations regarding safety and security at the match, particularly with regard to the deployment of stewards. In the incident at hand, the stewards reacted quickly and efficiently. Finally, the club held that the supporter was identified by the police and might be facing criminal charges as well as a life ban from the stadium.
Legal Framework Article 16 (2) UEFA Disciplinary Regulations.
Decision
The CEDB on a preliminary note took into account the video footage of the incident from which it can be seen how the players of both teams engage in a confrontation behind and on the goalline, close to the stands behind the goal. During said confrontation the spectators who are sitting and standing at the scene, scream, yell and gesticulate in the direction of the players, while one home-team supporter who is apparently holding a young child on his arm throws a punch at one player from the visiting team. It goes without saying that such images are more than shocking and cannot be tolerated. The CEDB emphasized that in any case, there should never be a moment when players on the pitch engage in violent altercations, but this goes even more for spectators during a match. According to Article 8 DR, which stipulates the principle of "strict liability", and Article 16 (2) DR, which builds on this principle, a club is to be held responsible for the improper conduct of its supporters, even if it might not be at fault itself. In light of the foregoing, the CEDB decided that the club is to be held responsible for the improper conduct of its supporters in accordance with Article 16 (2) (h) DR and needed to be punished with a fine of €30’000.
Chairman: Partl Thomas (AUT)
Vice-Chairmen:
Berzi Sándor (HUN)
Hansen Jim Stjerne (DEN)
Members:
Antenen Jacques (SUI)
Gea Tomás (AND)
Leal João (POR)
Lorenz Hans (GER)
Řepka Rudolf (CZE)
Wolff Joël (LUX)
on Thursday, 16 November 2017. Posted in Sports, Football, Cases, Articles, Regulation & Governance