World Athletics adopts new rules for Athletes' Representatives and Safeguarding

World Athletics will introduce a centralised licensing system for Athletes’ Representatives from 1 September 2023 after the regulatory framework was approved by the World Athletics Council this week.

The new system will set global minimum standards for becoming an Athletes’ Representative (AR) and maintaining a licence to act on behalf of athletes for any competition.

Under the new system, Member Federations (MFs) will not be permitted to regulate World Athletics ARs or charge any fees to them. If MFs wish to implement a framework to regulate ARs, they will only be permitted to regulate matters falling within their national jurisdiction but must meet the minimum standards of the World Athletics framework.

World Athletics President Sebastian Coe said: “We have consulted with ARs and athletes around the current system, examining the practical realities faced by ARs and athletes working within the global athletics market and we believe a centralised system which sets minimum professional standards and provides ongoing professional development will lead to a better outcome for both athletes and agents.”

The new rules will introduce eligibility criteria to become an AR, which will apply equally on a global basis. Individuals who apply will be subject to a vetting and exam process.

The vetting requirements will be similar to those required to become a World Athletics official, but will also include specific requirements related to the duties of an AR. A new World Athletics Athletes’ Representative Panel will conduct the vetting.

The AR exam will contain essential subjects for acting as a sports agent including ethical compliance and safeguarding.

To maintain a licence an AR must pay an annual licence fee (to cover costs incurred by World Athletics), maintain professional indemnity insurance, and complete a minimum amount of continuing professional development.

World Athletics will establish an online portal to facilitate the licensing process and also plans to provide education to athletes on matters such as the meaning of their contracts, appropriate levels of payment/commissions and introductory information for emerging athletes on becoming an elite athlete.

The maximum amount of time that an athlete and AR may enter into an agreement will be two years, which can be extended for one-year periods. Athletes are also allowed to represent themselves.

Safeguarding

The World Athletics Council also approved new Safeguarding Rules to guard against abuse, harassment or exploitation by World Athletics officials or which may occur at a World Athletics Series event or Congress. In exceptional cases, these rules will also apply to MF officials.

These new Rules give World Athletics the power to make orders imposing safeguards, limitations and restrictions on certain individuals, in order for World Athletics to ensure that safe, happy and positive environments are created for everyone involved in athletics and that all involved are treated with dignity and respect.

An independent Case Management Group will be appointed to make decisions in relation to safeguarding concerns which are investigated by the Athletics Integrity Unit (AIU).

The role of the Case Management Group will be to review investigations by the AIU, assess risk and make orders relating to safeguards, limitations, restrictions, sanctions and other matters.

MFs and Area Associations must comply with the World Athletics Safeguarding Policy.

MFs are responsible for managing reports of abuse, harassment and exploitation in their own countries and dealing with safeguarding concerns relating to MF officials, athletes and athlete supporting personnel under their jurisdiction. All MFs are required to adopt and implement procedures for the investigation and prosecution of reported safeguarding concerns in their territories.

Area Associations are responsible for managing reports relating to their staff, officials or volunteers, accredited persons at their events and competitions and participants in activities hosted at Area Development Centres.

The AIU Board will have absolute discretion to decide whether to pursue a matter, taking into account the seriousness of the conduct in question and the other circumstances of the case.

Human Rights

As part of World Athletics’ Human Rights Strategy, human rights considerations have been rolled into the Safeguarding Essentials E-Learning course, which is now available on the World Athletics website.

The focus of the course is to prevent abuse, harassment and exploitation of everyone in athletics, however their involvement and whatever their age.

Furthermore, the appointment process for the new Executive Board and the Risk Committee references human rights expertise as one of the desired qualifications of nominees, and the new Board and new Committee will review the need for other human rights considerations to be included in their terms of reference.

Human rights considerations will also continue to be factored into amendments to new rules and regulations. A report on human rights has been included in the Annual Council Report which will be presented to the World Athletics Congress this week.

Bodybuilding

Commission on preliminary consideration of anti-doping rules violations of RAA RUSADA rendered the decision that made athlete Danilov Sergey (bodybuilding) ineligible for 4 years for violation under cl. 4.3 of the All-Russian Anti-Doping Rules. The period of ineligibility is commencing on the date of the decision, namely on July 24, 2023, with credit for the served period of provisional suspension, namely from April 26, 2023.

Disciplinary Update: Owen Farrell

England fly-half Owen Farrell appeared before an independent judicial committee via video link having received a red card for an act of foul play, contrary to Law 9.13, in the Summer Nations Series match between England and Wales on Saturday 12th August 2023.  

Law 9.13 - A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously. Dangerous tackling includes, but is not limited to, tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders.

The independent Judicial Committee consisting of Adam Casselden SC – Chair, John Langford and David Croft, all from Australia, heard the case, considering all the available evidence and submissions from the player and his representative.

The player acknowledged that whilst he had committed an act of foul play, he denied that the act was worthy of a red card. After reviewing all the evidence, questioning the player in detail and hearing submissions from the player’s representative, the Committee concluded that the Foul Play Review Officer was wrong, on the balance of probabilities, to upgrade the yellow card issued to the player to a red card.  

The Committee determined, when applying World Rugby’s Head Contact Process, that mitigation should be applied to the high degree of danger found by the Foul Play Review Officer. The Committee found that a late change in dynamics due to England #2’s interaction in the contact area brought about a sudden and significant change in direction from the ball carrier. In the Committee’s opinion, this mitigation was sufficient to bring the player’s act of foul play below the red card threshold. 

The Committee believe it is important to record, that no criticism is made of the Foul Play Review Officer nor, would any be warranted. Unlike the Foul Play Review Officer the Committee had the luxury of time to deliberate and consider, in private, the incident and the proper application of the Head Contact Process. 

The Committee believe this is in contrast to the Foul Play Review Officer, who was required to make his decision in a matter of minutes without the benefit of all the additional material including hearing from the player and his legal representative. On that basis, the Committee did not uphold the red card and the player is free to play again immediately.

ITA sanctions Sri Lankan equestrian athlete Mathilda Karlsson with a 19-month period of ineligibility for 3 whereabouts failures

THE INTERNATIONAL TESTING AGENCY (ITA) REPORTS THAT THE SRI LANKAN RIDER MATHILDA KARLSSON HAS BEEN SANCTIONED WITH A 19-MONTH PERIOD OF INELIGIBILITY AFTER MISSING THREE ANTI-DOPING CONTROLS WITHIN A TWELVE-MONTH PERIOD.

The ITA, on behalf of the Fédération Équestre Internationale (FEI), confirms that Mathilda Karlsson has been suspended for a 19-month period, effective until 14 January 2025 after committing three whereabouts failures within a twelve-month period as defined in article 2.4 of the FEI ADRHA.

The case was resolved via an agreement on consequences pursuant to article 8.3.1 of the FEI Anti-Doping Rules for Human Athletes (FEI ADRHA), and equivalent provision in the World Anti-Doping Code.

The athlete qualified for a reduction of the otherwise two-year period ineligibility pursuant to article 10.3.2 of the FEI ADRHA which provides that the sanction can be reduced to a minimum of one year depending on the athlete’s degree of fault. The athlete’s results will be disqualified from 20 November 2022 until the start of the athlete’s provisional suspension on 15 June 2023.

Disciplinary | Match Review Panel

Following the Betfred Challenge Cup Final and latest Betfred Super League fixture, the Match Review Panel have issued the following sanctions:

• Elliott Minchella (Hull KR) – Grade B Other Contrary Behaviour – 1 Match Penalty Notice
• Chris Hill (Huddersfield Giants) – Grade A High Tackle – Not Applicable
• Matty Lees (St Helens) – Grade C High Tackle – 2 Match Penalty Notice
• Joe Greenwood (Huddersfield Giants) – Grade B Striking - £250 Fine
• Olly Russell (Huddersfield Giants) – Grade B Dangerous Contact - £250 Fine 

The following player was handed a caution: 

• Matty English (Huddersfield Giants) – Dangerous Contact

FIFA implements robust anti-doping programme for FIFA Women’s World Cup 2023™

International Youth Day: the IOC and Allianz reveal global research findings on youth participation in sport

England Boxing becomes a founder member of World Boxing

CAF requested by certain Cameroonian football stakeholders to investigate alleged improper conduct by Mr. Samuel Eto’o

Safeguarding Takes Centre Stage In Soloman Islands U-14 Competition

FIFPRO statement on behalf of Nigeria women's national team

Raphael Varane: "We want to protect the game we love"

Mercedes share latest sustainability report highlighting key improvements

BHA confirms introduction of new anti-doping saliva and sweat testing pilot

Sanction - Bobsleigh

Sanction - Sailing

U.S. Track & Field Athlete Gwendolyn Berry Accepts Sanction for Anti-Doping Rule Violation

Former British Cycling and Team Sky doctor Richard Freeman receives ban from sport for Anti-Doping Rule Violations

• Dr Richard Freeman violated the UK Anti-Doping Rules by (1) taking possession of an order of 30 sachets of Testogel (i.e. testosterone gel) at the National Cycling Centre in Manchester, in May 2011, and (2) lying to UKAD in respect of that order.
• By way of a decision of the independent National Anti-Doping Panel in July 2023, Dr Freeman received a four-year ban from sport.

UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) has today confirmed that former British Cycling and Team Sky doctor Richard Freeman has been banned from all sport for four years after the independent National Anti-Doping Panel found he committed the Anti-Doping Rule Violations of ‘Possession of a Prohibited Substance’ and (on two distinct occasions) ‘Tampering’.

In September 2016, UKAD commenced an investigation after receiving information that a possible Anti-Doping Rule Violation may have been committed by individuals associated with Team Sky in connection with the Critérium du Dauphiné, a professional cycling event, in June 2011. The possible violation in question concerned the alleged contents of a package (widely referred to as ‘the Jiffy bag’) that was delivered to Dr Freeman at the end of the event.

During the course of UKAD’s investigations into those matters, UKAD’s investigators uncovered that a delivery of 30 Testogel sachets had been made to British Cycling’s Headquarters, at the Manchester Velodrome in May 2011. Testogel is a prescription-only medication that contains the banned substance testosterone which, under the UK Anti-Doping Rules, is prohibited at all times. Each of the violations proved by UKAD in its proceedings before the independent National Anti-Doping Panel concern this Testogel delivery.

As part of its investigation into the Testogel, UKAD interviewed Dr Freeman in February 2017. In interview, Dr Freeman claimed to have ordered the Testogel for a ‘non-rider’ member of British Cycling staff, but said that the Testogel had been returned to the supplier for destruction. Dr Freeman failed to name the ‘non-rider’ patient who he claimed the Testogel was for, relying on patient confidentiality. He claimed that he had written to the patient asking them to waive confidentiality and they had refused to consent to matters being discussed with UKAD. UKAD, however, continued to investigate matters relating to the Testogel – including in particular Dr Freeman’s account that the order had been placed for a ‘non-rider’ member of British Cycling staff. Evidence obtained by UKAD indicated that the Testogel had not been returned to the supplier as Dr Freeman claimed. In April 2017, UKAD made a referral to the General Medical Council (GMC) in respect of UKAD’s concerns relating to Dr Freeman’s conduct and fitness to practise.

The GMC then investigated Dr Freeman and went on to commence a case before the independent Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) in October 2019. In March 2021, an MPTS tribunal found proven the allegation that Dr Freeman ordered testosterone, ‘knowing or believing’ it to be for an unnamed rider in May 2011 to improve their athletic performance. It was also found proven that he had lied to UKAD under investigation when claiming that the Testogel had been ordered for a ‘non-rider’ patient and had been returned to the supplier. The MPTS tribunal erased Dr Freeman from the Medical Register, a decision which was subsequently upheld by the High Court on appeal by Dr Freeman.

On 22 December 2020 (whilst the MPTS hearing was ongoing), UKAD provisionally suspended Dr Freeman and charged him with the commission of Anti-Doping Rule Violations. He was charged with an Article 2.6 violation under the 2009 UK Anti-Doping Rules for ‘Possession of a Prohibited Substance’, namely testosterone, in connection with an Athlete, Event or training. UKAD also charged Dr Freeman with two separate Article 2.5 violations under the 2015 UK Anti-Doping Rules for ‘Tampering’. The first Tampering violation concerned Dr Freeman knowingly providing UKAD with false information that the Testogel had been returned to the supplier. The second Tampering violation concerned Dr Freeman knowingly providing UKAD with false information that he had written to a non-rider member of staff requesting that they waive patient confidentiality and claiming that they had refused to do so.

An independent tribunal of the National Anti-Doping Panel convened in July 2023 to consider UKAD’s case against Dr Freeman and found all charges proven. The tribunal was comfortably satisfied that Dr Freeman had ‘intended to make available to one or more of his athletes the Prohibited Substance delivered to the Manchester Velodrome'. Whilst Dr Freeman had accepted that he had lied to UKAD about returning the Testogel to the supplier, he maintained that he had written to a non-rider member of staff requesting that they waive patient confidentiality and that they had refused to do so. The independent tribunal found that UKAD had also proved the second Tampering violation against Dr Freeman whose ‘conduct subverted Doping Control'.

The independent tribunal of the National Anti-Doping Panel sanctioned Dr Freeman with a four-year ban, effective from 22 December 2020 (the date of his provisional suspension), making him ineligible to participate in any World Anti-Doping Code-compliant sport until 21 December 2024.

Jane Rumble, UKAD’s Chief Executive added, “The decision of the independent tribunal of the National Anti-Doping Panel confirms that Richard Freeman broke the UK Anti-Doping Rules. The rules are in place to make sure everyone plays their part in keeping sport clean and to ensure a level playing field.

“The outcomes of both UKAD and the GMC’s respective investigations were vital to outing the truth in this matter. This case sends a strong message to all athlete support personnel that the rules apply equally to them, just as they do to athletes, and that they have a clear responsibility to uphold the values of integrity in sport. When they fail to do so, every effort will be taken to ensure that the rules are enforced.”

Mario Theophanous, Head of UKAD’s Intelligence and Investigations Team, who led UKAD’s investigation into Dr Freeman:

“This was a complex and comprehensive investigation to ascertain whether any wrongdoing had been committed, working with individuals who bravely came forward to give information to protect the values of their sport.

Every piece of information, no matter how small, can make the difference in a complex case like this, building enough evidence to hold to account those who choose to break the rules. I would like to place on record my thanks to all those individuals who placed their trust in UKAD and provided evidence that led to this result. I encourage anyone who has concerns around doping activity in sport, to report it to UKAD via our Protect Your Sport initiative.”

Frank Slevin, British Cycling Chair said: “We note today's verdict from the National Anti-Doping Panel and thank them for the time and consideration put into reaching their decision. Throughout this case we have reiterated our belief that it is in public interest that all matters are heard and thoroughly examined, and have made every effort to support both UK Anti-Doping and the General Medical Council in their respective investigations.

“As we have stated previously, Richard Freeman’s conduct during his employment by British Cycling bore no resemblance to the high ethical and professional standards which we, our members and our partners rightly expect.”

Rugby

Commission on preliminary consideration of anti-doping rules violations of RAA RUSADA rendered the decision that made athlete Smirnov Andrey (rugby) ineligible for 5 years for violation under cl. 4.1 and cl. 4.2 of the All-Russian Anti-Doping Rules. The period of ineligibility is commencing on the date of the decision, namely on July 31, 2023, with credit for the served period of provisional suspension, namely from July 6, 2023.

FEI Tribunal issues Consent Award for failure to submit sample collection

The FEI Tribunal has issued a Consent Award under the FEI Equine Anti-Doping Rules Article 2.3 for Evading, Refusing or Failing to Submit the horse to Sample Collection.

In this case, the athlete Abdullah Aldhuwayhi (FEI ID 10203839/KSA), failed to submit the horse Shaymaa (FEI ID 106RQ41/KSA), to the doping control station for a sample collection at the CEI2* 120 - Al Ula (KSA), 03-04 March 2023.

The athlete, admitted the rule violation and accepted the consequences. In its final decision the FEI Tribunal disqualified the horse and rider combination from the event and imposed an 18-month ineligibility period on the athlete from the date of the Consent Award. He was also fined CHF 5,000.

The full Decision is available here.

County and League Appeals Results Circular From July 2023

If produced and published, written reasons can be found for Appeal Board hearings by clicking *here* and selecting “County Appeal” on the “Offence Type” dropdown list. Alternatively, use this URL: https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/discipline/written-reasons.  

Southend Manor FC v Essex Senior League – 4 July
Appellant: Club 
Charge: Failure to fulfil a fixture
Sanction: £645 fine 
Result: Appeal Dismissed

Craig Worton v Birmingham FA – 7 July 
Appellant: Manager 
Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct against a Match Official (including abusive language/behaviour).
Sanction:  5-match suspension, £70 fine, warned as to future conduct. 
Result: Appeal Dismissed

Dequann Jamaal Ebanks v Berks & Bucks FA – 11 July
Appellant:  Coach 
Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct (including threatening and/or abusive language/behaviour)
Sanction: Warning as to future conduct
Result: Appeal Allowed – Sanctions Quashed.
Written Reasons: https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2023/dequann-jamal-ebanks-v-berks-and-bucks-fa---18-may-2023.ashx

Jake Sobalak v Middlesex FA – 12 July
Appellant: Player 
Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct - Assault or Attempted Assault on a Match Official
Sanction: 343-days suspension (backdated to 11 May 2023), £75 fine, to complete a face-to-face education course, 7 club penalty points. 
Result: Appeal Allowed – Remitted for a rehearing.

Grace Lovett v Lincolnshire FA – 13 July
Appellant: Player 
Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct - Assault or Attempted Assault on a Match Official
Sanction: 1825 Days from 23/03/2023 to 20/03/2028, complete a face-to-face education course, 8 club disciplinary points.
Result: Appeal Allowed – Sanction Varied: 1825 Day to 150 Day Suspension (23/03/2023-20/08/2023), £75 fine. 
Written Reasons: https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2023/grace-lovett-v-lincolnshire-fa---appeal-board---13-july-2023.ashx

Mark Cooper v Wiltshire FA – 13 July
Appellant: Player
Charges: 
• Charge 1: FA Rule E3 – Improper Conduct (including foul and abusive language)
• Charge 2: FA Rule E3.2 - Improper Conduct - aggravated by a persons Ethnic Origin, Colour, Race, Nationality, Faith, Gender, Gender Reassignment, Sexual Orientation or Disability.
Sanction: 8-Match Suspension, complete an online education course, £65 fine. 
Result: Appeal Dismissed

Bayley Vaughan v Essex FA – 18 July
Appellant: Player
Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct (including violent conduct and threatening and/or abusive language/behaviour)
Sanction: 2-match suspension, £25 fine.
Result: Appeal Allowed – Remitted for rehearing.
Written Reasons: https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2023/bayley-vaughan-v-essex-fa---appeal-board---24-july-2023.ashx

Patrick Carton v Amateur FA – 20 July
Appellant: Manager 
Charges: 
• Charge 1 - FA Rule E3.1 - Improper Conduct (not including threatening and/or abusive language/behaviour).
• Charge 2 - FA Rule E3.1 - Improper Conduct Against a Match Official.
Sanctions:
• Charge 1 – 1-Match Suspension, £20 fine. 
• Charge 2 – 2 match suspension, £40 fine. 
Result: Appeal Dismissed.
 
Patrick Carton v Amateur FA – 21 July 
Appellant: Manager 
Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct (including violent conduct and threatening and/or abusive language/behaviour).
Sanction: 7-match suspension, £90 fine  
Result: Appeal Allowed – Sanction Varied (Reduced from 7-match suspension to 3-match suspension, and £90 to £60).
 
Max Onabanjo v Amateur FA – 21 July
Appellant: Player
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 200-day suspension, £80 fine, complete a face-to-face education course.
Result: Appeal Dismissed

Benjamin Webster v Huntingdonshire FA – 25 July
Appellant: Club Chair
Charges: 
• Charge 1: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct (not including threatening and/or abusive language/behaviour)
• Charge 2: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct against a Match Official (including abusive language/behaviour)
Sanctions: 
• Charge 1: 1-match suspension, £20 fine
• Charge 2: 3-match suspension, £50 fine
Result: Appeal Dismissed

Eric Armanazi v London FA – 25 July
Appellant: Manager 
Charge: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct against a Match Official (including abusive language/behaviour).
Sanction: 2-match suspension, £25 fine
Result: Appeal Allowed – Sanction effective from date amended of first qualifying match. 

Langley Old Boys v Berks & Bucks FA – 26 July
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: £75 fine
Result: Appeal Dismissed

Adam Garget v Durham FA – 26 July
Appellant: Manager 
Charges: 
• Charge 1: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct (including foul and abusive language)
• Charge 2: FA Rule E3.2 - Improper Conduct - aggravated by a persons Ethnic Origin, Colour, Race, Nationality, Faith, Gender, Gender Reassignment, Sexual Orientation or Disability
Sanction: 6-match suspension sanction, a £30 fine complete an online education programme.
Result: Appeal Dismissed

Jason Smith v Lancashire FA – 27 July
Appellant: Manager 
Charges: 
• Charge 1: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct (including foul and abusive language)
• Charge 2: FA Rule E3.2 - Improper Conduct - aggravated by a persons Ethnic Origin, Colour, Race, Nationality, Faith, Gender, Gender Reassignment, Sexual Orientation or Disability
Sanction: 8-match suspension and complete an online education programme
Result: Appeal Dismissed – sanction increased: 12-match suspension and complete a face-to-face education programme

Rhys Flitton v Surrey FA – 27 July
Appellant: Player 
Charges: 
• Charge 1: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct - Assault or Attempted Assault on a Match Official
• Alternate Charge 1: FA Rule E3 - Improper Conduct against a Match Official (including physical contact or attempted physical contact)
Sanction: 5-year sanction (from 03/02/23), complete a face-to-face education programme, 10 Club penalty points.
Result: Appeal Allowed - Remitted for Rehearing

Sporting Meadows FC v Leicestershire & Rutland FA – 28 July
Appellant: Club
Charges: 
• Charge 1: FA Rule E20 - Failed to ensure directors, players, officials, employees, servants, representatives, conduct themselves in an orderly fashion whilst attending any Match.
• Charge 2: FA Rule E20 - Failed to ensure directors, players, officials, employees, servants, representatives, conduct themselves in an orderly fashion whilst attending any Match.
Sanctions: 
• Charge 1: £80 fine
• Charge 2: £175 fine
Result: Appeal Dismissed

CPL Soccer Athlete Suspended for the Presence of Cannabis

The Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) announced today that Osaze De Rosario, a Canadian Premier League (CPL) soccer athlete affiliated with the York United Football Club, received a one-month sanction for an anti-doping rule violation. The athlete’s urine sample, collected during an in-competition sample collection session on October 1, 2022, revealed the presence of cannabis, a prohibited cannabinoid. The CCES is satisfied in this case, that cannabis was inadvertently ingested out-of-competition and unrelated to sport.

The presence of cannabis, classified as both a “specified substance” and a “substance of abuse” on the 2022 World Anti-Doping Agency Prohibited List, is considered an adverse analytical finding when the urinary concentration exceeds 150 ng/mL. The CCES assessed the relevant provisions of the Canadian Anti-Doping Program (CADP) and proposed a one-month period of ineligibility for this violation.  

In response to the CCES’s proposition, the athlete signed an Agreement on the Consequences thereby waiving their right to a hearing and accepting the proposed sanction and all other consequences. The sanction terminates September 3, 2023.

During the sanction period, the athlete is ineligible to participate in any capacity with any sport signatory to the CADP, including training with teammates.

In compliance with rule 8.4 of the CADP, the CCES’s file outcome summary can be found in the Canadian Sport Sanction Registry.

Tender process opens in Australia for media rights to the FIFA World Cup 2026™ and FIFA Women’s World Cup 2027™

FIBA and DIBF strengthen ties after agreeing closer collaboration

What’s new in 2023/24: Applications of the Laws of the Game

Safe Sport Day: UCI Safeguarding Policy and Toolkit for a safer cycling environment

IOC marks Safe Sport Day with two new athlete safeguarding courses

KTO becomes the latest Brazil focused sports betting operator to join IBIA

Executive Board takes important decisions for the IWF’s future

Disciplinary Charges, Responses and Suspensions for July 2023

Quality Out-Of-Competition Testing Is Crucial

Sanction - Athletics

Sanction - Weightlifting

Bosnian tournament director suspended

Athlete support personnel

Disciplinary Anti-Doping Committee of RAA RUSADA rendered the decision that made coach Ermakova Evgeniya (swimming) ineligible for 4 years for violation under cl. 4.8 of the All-Russian Anti-Doping Rules, the period commencing on June 01, 2023.

American Football

Commission on preliminary consideration of anti-doping rules violations of RAA RUSADA rendered the decision that made athlete Yatsunenko Aleksandr (American football) ineligible for 5 years for violation under cl. 4.1, cl. 4.2 and cl. 4.5 of the All-Russian Anti-Doping Rules. The period of ineligibility is commencing on the date of the decision, namely on July 24, 2023, with credit for the served period of provisional suspension, namely from May 31, 2023.

New FIFPRO Asia/Oceania strategic framework lays platform for player impact and legacy across region

• Power to the Players is a comprehensive vision for the transformation of football in Asia/Oceania
  
  
• Aims to channel unprecedented interest in the region, as demonstrated by 2023 Women’s World Cup, by positioning players at the heart of the sport
  
  
• Framework has five key objectives: player organising, member unions, bargaining, diversity, and innovation, data and alliances

FIFPRO Asia/Oceania has launched a new strategic framework for the division: Power to the Players, a comprehensive vision for the transformation of the football industry in the region.

The framework aims to channel the unprecedented interest in the sport in Asia/Oceania, as demonstrated by the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup, by positioning players at the heart of the sport.  

Launched at the division’s bi-annual congress in Auckland, the framework sets forward a path to build on the outstanding efforts of generations of players and member unions by elevating the players’ voice to achieve positive impact.

Designed to play a leading role in supporting FIFPRO’s global reform agenda, the framework has five key objectives:

• Player Organising and Mobilising: building and embedding a strong culture of organising across the region;
• Member Unions: enhancing all member unions throughout the region;
• Bargaining and Leverage: Building effective relationships with strategic partners such as the Asian Football Confederation (AFC);
• Diversity: Promoting the diversity of FIFPRO Asia/Oceania’s members while pursuing a workplace for players that is free from all forms of discrimination and risks to players’ human rights;
• Innovation, Data and Alliances: Commitment to proactively shaping the future of Asian and Oceanian football through evidence-based research, analysis and partnerships.

FIFPRO Asia/Oceania Chairman Takuya Yamazaki said: "The 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup has shone a spotlight on the immense talent and potential within Asia and Oceania, whilst also exposing the enormous challenges faced by players. Now, more than ever, it is imperative that we ensure our players are given the support and representation they deserve.

"A legacy of this transformational Women’s World Cup will be stronger representation for all footballers. We plan over the next three years to build stronger unions, enhance player organising and effective relationships to deliver better outcomes for players and the game."

Anna Green, NZPFA's representative on FIFPRO's Asia/Oceania Division board, an-82 time New Zealand international and Sydney FC defender, said: "The interests of the players and the game are inherently linked. Our mission is to enhance all of our unions across Oceania and Asia and ensure that the players’ rights are protected and respected.

"This is the starting point for the players having greater impact and transforming football across the region into a workplace that deeply respects and protects the rights of players."

Download the framework HERE. 

Disciplinary | Operational Rules Tribunal

Jorge Taufua of Bradford Bulls has been suspended for six matches and fined £375 after being found guilty of a Grade E charge of contrary behaviour in the Betfred Championship match against Barrow Raiders.

Taufua had been charged with a Grade F offence by the Match Review Panel, with the Operational Rules Tribunal delayed for logistical reasons.

The Tribunal found him guilty, but of a Grade E rather than Grade F offence.

First findings from 10-year Drake Football Study published

• Launched in 2019, Drake Football Study is a 10-year project tracking the physical and mental health of footballers
  
  
• Over 170 men’s and women’s players were included in the study, beginning during their playing careers and transitioning through to retirement
  
  
• Dr Lervasen Pillay, one of the PhD candidates working on the study, talks to FIFPRO about the first published data connected to knee and hip osteoarthritis in men’s players

The first data results from the 10-year Drake Football Study have now been published. Launched in 2019, the Drake Football Study is tracking the physical and mental health of around 170 men’s and women’s footballers – beginning during their playing careers and transitioning through to retirement.

The project’s first findings, based on studies on men’s professional footballers, showed a low prevalence of knee and hip osteoarthritis (degeneration of joint cartilage); that pain is a valid symptom to suggest osteoarthritis presence; and that the chances of developing knee osteoarthritis increased with the number of injuries by 1.5 times and just over four times more with surgeries.

"This is good news for footballers as further research now can be done on developing management guidelines and determining if any other risk factors for osteoarthritis exist in this population," said Dr Lervasen Pillay, who has been practicing in the field of sports medicine for 19 years and has been involved in the Drake Football Study since October 2021.

Most previous research in knee and hip osteoarthritis has been conducted on retired athletes using only X-rays, whereas these latest findings have been determined using validated questionnaires and clinical examinations on active players.  

"New information is always helpful to stimulate further research," said Dr Pillay. "It gives us a better understanding of the association of osteoarthritis with risk factors (like injury and surgery), pain and function in the active professional footballer.

"In the real-world setting, this translates into providing clinicians with more information to allow for improved management of their athlete’s condition – in this case osteoarthritis."

Learning from the players

The former Chief Medical Officer of the South African Premier Soccer League, Dr Pillay’s involvement in the Drake Football Study stems from his combined PhD with the University of Pretoria and University of Amsterdam.

While the 10-year study is giving priority to joint pain in ankles, hips and knees of players, and how it can potentially impact the wellbeing of players in the long-term, it also aims to explore mental health symptoms such as anxiety and depression which are often reported by players.

"Part of this study is to identify whether there is an association between mental health symptoms and severe injuries and surgeries," said Dr Pillay, who has been monitoring the analysis of men’s players during the study.

"The mental health component of professional male footballers has always been neglected. Through the study, we will be able to collect data on the prevalence and incidence of mental health symptoms and learn if there are associations with risk factors of players developing mental health symptoms."

Coordinated by FIFPRO, the Drake Football Study is seed-funded by The Drake Foundation and supported by Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Mehiläinen (Finland) and Push Sports (The Netherlands).

FIFPRO Chief Medical Officer Prof Dr Vincent Gouttebarge is the project lead together with Prof Dr Gino Kerkhoffs, chair of the Orthopedic Surgery and Sports Medicine department at the Amsterdam University Medical Centres.

As well as the length of the research and its focus on active players during their careers and transitioning through to retirement, what also sets the study apart is learning directly from the players.

"We are exploring data received from players themselves – the athletes voice is vital," said Dr Pillay. "The study also involves cohorts which aren’t European based, which helps give a global perspective.

"Since all the sub-studies are investigating the active professional footballers, it provides an opportunity for developing better identification and management guidelines of certain conditions.

"Studies looking at neurocognitive function and ankle cartilage may provide new information that has not been described in this population before, and thus begin a new research interest angle. I am excited about the entire project and its potential impact over the next 10 years."

World Rugby Team Up With AFLD For A Fair Rugby World Cup 2023

Three tennis players provisionally suspended

A 3 Year Update On Our Asian Inclusion Strategy

Five Sports Take The Lead In Safeguarding Their Members

HISA and Jockeys’ Guild Announce New Jockey Wellness Initiatives

Safe Sport Day celebrated at Trinbago 2023 Commonwealth Youth Games

Pooran found guilty of breaching the ICC Code of Conduct

French tennis coach suspended for 12 months

Sanction - Bodybuilding

Sanction - Boxing

Sanction - Bodybuilding