Nottingham Forest FC appeal decision of independent Commission

Nottingham Forest Football Club has appealed the decision of an independent Commission to impose a four-point deduction on the club, after its admission of a breach of the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules.

The club lodged the appeal to the Chair of the Judicial Panel today, who will now appoint an Appeal Board to hear the case. 

Premier League statement

The Premier League has today referred Leicester City FC to an independent Commission for an alleged breach of Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSRs) and for failing to submit their audited financial accounts to the League.

The alleged breach relates to the assessment period ending Season 2022/23, when the club was a member of the Premier League. 

Leicester City were relegated to the EFL Championship prior to the introduction of the Premier League’s new Standard Directions, which prescribe a timeline within which PSR cases should be heard. Therefore, the proceedings will be conducted in accordance with a timetable to be set by the independent Commission, and its final decision will be published on the Premier League’s website. 

Premier League to study Football Governance Bill, working closely with Government, parliamentarians and key stakeholders

The Premier League will now study the Football Governance Bill, working closely with Government, parliamentarians and key stakeholders. We agree it is vital that football clubs are sustainable, remain at the heart of their communities and that fans are fundamental to the game.

The Government has consistently stated that it wishes to support the Premier League’s continued global success which generates funding to help sustain the entire football pyramid. With our clubs, we have advocated for a proportionate regime that enables us to build on our position as the most widely watched league in the world. Mindful that the future growth of the Premier League is not guaranteed, we remain concerned about any unintended consequences of legislation that could weaken the competitiveness and appeal of English football. 

The Premier League remains fully committed to delivering its world-leading funding to the wider game, through £1.6 billion distributed to all levels of football across the current three-year term. This significant investment will continue and includes longstanding contributions to EFL and National League clubs, as well as women and girls’ football, and the grassroots of the game.

White Paper Provides Key Recommendations to Address Competition Manipulation

A new white paper from the Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport (CCES) and McLaren Global Sport Solutions (MGSS) builds on expert perspectives and experiences shared during two international symposiums hosted in Toronto, Canada. The white paper, titled Competition Manipulation and Gambling: Threats to Canadian Sport, provides a summary of the 2023 Symposium on Competition Manipulation and Gambling in Sport, outlines five key recommendations to mitigate the risks of competition manipulation, and describes recent changes in the Canadian sport gambling landscape.

“Competition manipulation – or match fixing – is rising at an alarming rate globally, and Canada is not immune to this threat. Both regulated and illegal betting markets are being exploited by bad actors and criminal organizations, who often prey on vulnerable athletes in the process. Several Canadian sports have been shown to be at heightened risk and can be influenced from abroad, including offshore betting. The Toronto symposium brought together global experts and key Canadian stakeholders on this subject; the white paper is an outcome of this important consultation and provides several strategies and recommendations to protect the integrity of Canadian sport,” said Richard McLaren, CEO of MGSS.

Co-hosted by the CCES and MGSS in May 2023, the Symposium on Competition Manipulation and Gambling in Sport brought together more than 150 delegates from sectors including athletes, national, multi, and international sport, national and provincial governments, sport gambling operators and regulators, professional sport leagues, integrity units, and law enforcement agencies. With the introduction of single-event sport betting to the Canadian market in 2021, the increased likelihood of competition manipulation and other threats to sport integrity requires a coordinated response from all stakeholders.

“Competition manipulation is a real and present threat to sport integrity and this white paper provides a clear look at the comprehensive plans that other domestic and international organizations have successfully implemented to protect athletes and sporting events. It also reinforces the need for an independently administered harmonized Canadian competition manipulation policy that’s developed with athletes and adopted by all sports in Canada. The symposium and white paper both put a heavy emphasis on the need for a comprehensive education program to support a policy and protect sport, which the CCES has been providing to the sport community,” said Jeremy Luke, CCES president and CEO. “We appreciate everyone who shared their knowledge and lived experience during the symposium and support these initiatives and thank MGSS for their expertise and collaboration.” 

Read about the 2023 Symposium and the five key recommendations, and download the white paper

Clubs agree to prioritise the swift development and implementation of a new League-wide financial system

At a Premier League Shareholders’ meeting today clubs agreed to prioritise the swift development and implementation of a new League-wide financial system.

This will provide certainty for clubs in relation to their future financial plans and will ensure the Premier League is able to retain its existing world-leading investment to all levels of the game.

Alongside this, Premier League clubs also re-confirmed their commitment to securing a sustainably funded financial agreement with the EFL, subject to the new financial system being formally approved by clubs.

The League and clubs also reaffirmed their ongoing and longstanding commitment to the wider game which includes £1.6billion distributed to all levels of football across the current three-year cycle.

The Premier League’s significant funding contributions cover all EFL clubs and National League clubs, as well as women and girls’ football, and the grassroots of the game.

Instrumented Mouthguard (iMG) update

Following a recommendation from its independent Concussion Working Group, World Rugby is making interim changes to the Instrumented Mouthguard (iMG) process which will apply from this weekend (8 March).  The changes are being made following consultation with doctors, players and coaches who have been using iMGs in elite rugby under the new protocols which came into effect on January 1.

Players will continue to wear the iMGs in all competitions using the premium Head Injury Assessment protocols, and alerts will be detected where a player experiences a high acceleration event.

Players who have triggered an alert will receive immediate medical attention via an on-field doctor’s check. If the doctor has any concerns the player will then leave the field for a Head Injury Assessment (HIA).   Players checked by a doctor and cleared to continue in the game will not be required to immediately leave the field but will still be subject to a full HIA1 assessment, either at half-time or full-time depending on when the alert takes place.  All players with alerts will also undergo the post-match HIA2 test and HIA3 test after two sleeps, as per the World Rugby HIA protocol.

The Match Day Doctor still has the power to unilaterally remove any injured player for HIA assessment, or to remove a player from the game if necessary.

These interim changes have been recommended by World Rugby’s Concussion Working Group with contains representatives from unions, competitions, International Rugby Players and independent members.  This interim change is being implemented due to some technical issues with the speed at which an alert notification reaches the pitch side doctor.  The issue is with signal strength in some stadia and not the operation of the mouthguards themselves. The updated process will remain in place while measures to reduce the lag time on the signal are evaluated across all competitions.

Player safety remains the top priority for World Rugby, and there is a shared understanding between all stakeholders that iMGs are a key technology for the game moving forward. 

EFL Statement: Clemente Morfuni & Swindon Town

An independent Disciplinary Commission (IDC) has fined Swindon Town owner Clemente Morfuni £10,000 for failing to declare a transfer of shares in the Club, as required by EFL Regulations.

Mr Morfuni had been charged on 7 December 2023 for failing to disclose to the Club’s management the transfer of a 17.1% shareholding to Mrs Hollie Kiely in September 2022.

This led to the Club breaching its requirements to disclose to the League details of any ‘Significant Interest’ shareholder with more than 10% of voting rights and failing to update the official club website for public record.

The Club and Mr. Morfuni admitted the charges, with the latter taking full responsibility for the breach.  

While the independent Disciplinary Commission acknowledged Swindon Town suffered an ‘inadvertent breach’ after Mr Morfuni’s administration error, the Club was issued with a reprimand and warning as to its future conduct.  

The IDC’s Decision and written reasons are available to view on EFL.com.

Club owner jailed for not paying outstanding salaries: Malaysian player union hails legal win

• High Court in Malaysia sent club owner to jail for not paying outstanding salaries to players
  
  
• The Professional Footballers Association of Malaysia (PFAM) expects this precedent will help prevent non-payment
  
  
• "If the owner doesn’t pay, he will remain behind bars," says Malaysian player union CEO Izham Ismail

"Those who believe in good governance will be delighted," said Izham Ismail, the Chief Executive Officer of the Professional Footballers Association of Malaysia, after the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled that an owner of two clubs will be imprisoned until he has cancelled all outstanding debts he has with players.

More than 30 players of Kuantan FA and Marcerra United FC had salary claims for the 2018 season amounting to more than six million Ringgit (approximately 1,250,000 USD). They filed their lawsuit in January 2022.

In January this year, two years after the owner was first told to settle his outstanding debts and after admitting he was liable, the High Court handed down a suspended jail sentence of seven days to give the owner time to cancel the outstanding wages. However, when the deadline expired, the owner still had not fulfilled his duties, forcing the players to ask the High Court to carry out the jail sentence.

"This is not ideal, but it is necessary," said Ismail. "Unfortunately, this case shows that football’s legal system does not force people to fulfil their obligations. The owner of these clubs apparently does not care about football decisions.

"When club leaders do not want to pay, there is no way that this can be arranged within the football industry. That’s why we decided to invoke the High Court, as it was the only way to get the players what they are due. We assume that the High Court’s decision will force the owner to take action. And otherwise, he will remain behind bars until justice is done."

Ismail expects that the High Court’s decision will change the behaviour of other club owners. "As a club owner you have a huge responsibility. And we will hold everyone who is failing the players and not taking dispute resolution seriously accountable. We don’t take the issue of non-payment lightly." To Ismail, the case underscores the need for a fairer and more just accountability in Malaysian football.

The Malaysian player union worked closely together with a law firm that supported the legal action in the High Court. According to these lawyers, the players could take other initiatives to get the money they are owed, for example by declaring the owner bankrupt or by confiscating his property.

Breaking the bank or building the game? The tightrope walk of Premier League football finance

Published Tuesday, 27 February 2024.

FIFA Series international friendlies pilot project to commence in March 2024

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Registers Four Appeals Against The Re-Ranking Announced By The International Skating Union (ISU) in Relation to the Figure Skating Team Event

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has registered the following appeals further to the announcement made by the International Skating Union (ISU) on 30 January 2024 by which the final standings for the Team Event in figure skating at the Olympic Winter Games Beijing 2022 were adjusted following the disqualification of the skater Kamila Valieva, a member of the Russian team:

CAS 2024/A/10354 Madeline Schizas, Piper Gilles, Paul Poirier, Kirsten Moore-Towers, Michael Marinaro, Eric Radford, Vanessa James and Roman Sadovsky, and, Skate Canada, and Canadian Olympic Committee (COC) v. International Skating Union (ISU), and, International Olympic Committee (IOC), and Russian Olympic Committee (ROC), and Figure Skating Federation of Russia, and, Aleksandr Galliamov, Victoria Sinitsina, Anastasia Mishina, Nikita Katsalapov, Kamila Valieva and Mark Kondratiuk

The Canadian Appellants in this appeal seek a ruling from CAS ordering the ISU to re-rank the figure skating Team Event at the 2022 Beijing Olympic Winter Games as follows:

i. United States of America: 67 points;

ii. Japan: 65 points;

iii. Canada: 55 points;

iv. ROC: 54 points;

v. People’s Republic of China: 52 points.

The Appellants further request that medals be awarded by the IOC, as follows:

i. Gold medal: United States of America;

ii. Silver medal: Japan;

iii. Bronze medal: Canada.

CAS 2024/A/10355 Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) v. International Skating Union (ISU)

CAS 2024/A/10360 Figure Skating Federation of Russia v. International Skating Union (ISU)

The Appellants in these separate appeals both seek a ruling from CAS ordering the ISU to re-rank the figure skating Team Event at the 2022 Beijing Olympic Winter Games as follows:

(l) ROC - Gold medal;

(2) United States of America - Silver medal;

(3) Japan - Bronze medal.

CAS 2024/A/10356 Aleksandr Galliamov, Nikita Katsalapov, Mark Kondratiuk, Anastasia Mishina, Victoria Sinitsina and Kamila Valieva v. International Skating Union (ISU)

The Appellants in this appeal are the athletes of the ROC figure skating team at the 2022 Beijing Olympic Winter Games who seek a ruling from CAS ordering the ISU to re-rank the figure skating Team Event at the 2022 Beijing Olympic Winter Games with the ROC team in first place and with the gold medal being awarded to the ROC athletes.

All four CAS arbitration procedures have just commenced. Given the early stage of the proceedings, no indication can be given as to when a hearing may take place, if any.

New FIFPRO Asia/Oceania report encourages collaboration between the AFC, clubs and players to unlock value in Asian Champions League

• The report has been produced in collaboration with leading sporting intelligence agency Twenty First Group (TFG) and represents the most comprehensive public analysis of the AFC Champions League

• The analysis, which contains extensive data and feedback from players and clubs, weighs the costs and benefits for clubs and players participating in the AFC-organised competition

• With a new competition format introduced from next season, the AFC Champions League Elite, the report suggests a new partnership between the players, clubs and Asia’s football governing body will deliver a sustainable model for all stakeholders

A new report from FIFPRO Asia/Oceania analysing the Asian Football Confederation’s (AFC) flagship club competition, the AFC Champions League (ACL), has delivered extensive insights into the experiences for players and clubs participating in the competition.

The report, undertaken in collaboration with leading sporting intelligence agency Twenty First Group (TFG), provides an evidence-based assessment of the ACL’s performance and examines the likely impact of reforms announced by the AFC for the 2024/25 season onwards.

Combining expert analysis, independent insights and direct feedback from players and participating clubs, the comprehensive report illustrates that much of the competition’s costs and burdens fall on clubs.

Extensive travel across a vast continent and mid-week matches contribute to players' already-rising workload, which in turn is impacting clubs’ domestic form, the report reveals. The financial subsidies provided to clubs by the AFC do not cover the costs clubs incur, particularly for long-haul away trips.

The report demonstrates the geographic, sporting, economic and workload challenges of the competition for players and clubs, and recommends the AFC establishes a genuine partnership that delivers a more sustainable model that rewards all stakeholders.

“This report analyses the merits and drawbacks of the current AFC Champions League based on various data and the results indicate that the merits do not outweigh the drawbacks for most players and clubs, making it an unsustainable system,” said FIFPRO Asia/Oceania Chairperson Takuya Yamazaki.

“However, this does not mean that the future of football in Asia is bleak. On the contrary, we believe that this economically significant region can lead a discussion for truly sustainable competition formats.”

Jerome Perlemuter, General Secretary of World Leagues Forum, which represents professional football leagues on a global level, said collaboration between all stakeholders in the Asian region would help shape and deliver sustainable competitions.

"FIFPRO’s contribution to shaping the future of Asian continental competitions is most welcome," Perlemuter said. "Sustainable football development requires confederations, leagues and players to work together with a common objective to shape high potential continental competitions in a consistent global calendar. In this context, it is important to consider economic, geographical and cultural specificities. We look forward to continuing these discussions with FIFPRO and all stakeholders."

The AFC has announced significant reforms to the competition, which will be relaunched as the AFC Champions League Elite from the 2024/25 season. This includes major changes to the number of teams, the structure of play and the hosting arrangements for the final rounds.

The AFC Champions League Elite kicks off with the preliminary rounds in July 2024, while the league stage gets under way in September. The AFC has announced increased prize money for the two finalists and tweaks to other regulations, though full details have not yet been released.

To download the report, see here.

Youth players in Romania no longer required to sign with team that trained them

• Romanian Football Federation (FRF) abolishes rule that requires minor players to sign with team that trained them
  
  
• The nation’s player union AFAN welcomes the "historic win"
  
  
• Minor players in Romania will finally enjoy freedom of movement and can negotiate fair contract, with rule coming into effect from 1 July 2024

Young players in Romania can now decide which club they will sign their first contract with, after player union AFAN convinced the Romanian Football Federation (FRF) to abolish a rule that 16- and 19-year-old players are required to sign a new contract with the club that trained them. The change will come into effect from 1 July 2024.

"This is a historic win," said AFAN President Emilian Hulubei. "This rule was in place when I was a youth player," the 45-year-old added.

The rule limited players’ freedom of movement and right to negotiate fair contract terms. Players also had to accept what the club offered them.

Sixteen-year-old players had to sign a three-year contract with a minimum salary of 800 lei (approximately USD 175) and if their club offered them a new contract before they turned 19, they had to accept it as long as the minimum salary was equal to a certain amount: USD 550 for first division players, USD 440 for second division players and USD 330 for third division players.

"When players refused to sign the contract, they risked a two-year suspension and a financial penalty," said Hulubei.

Because of this rule, clubs could retain youth players against their will and then try to release them against a transfer fee payment. "Clubs didn’t care about the players’ careers," Hulubei said. "Players at smaller clubs could not move to better teams because bigger clubs were not always willing to pay transfer fees. Unfortunately, too many players left football because of this."

The player union had been fighting this practice for years. "When I started working at AFAN in 2007, we were already trying to abolish this rule," said Hulubei. "We started many procedures against clubs. We even tried to have this practice banned by labour law, but five years on the law is still pending in parliament."

Starting last summer, the player union held various discussions with the football federation to change this regulation. In December both parties reached an agreement, which was accepted by the federation’s executive committee in late January.

"I think the FRF and the clubs understood that this rule was no longer sustainable when two 16-year-old players who had been suspended for two years after refusing to sign a contract with the club that trained them turned to CAS being supported by AFAN and FIFPRO," Hulubei said. "Even though the case is still pending, the FRF and the club already annulled the suspension. However, the players have suffered losses that need to be compensated which explains why AFAN and FIFPRO keep supporting them in their appeal."

Hulubei concluded: "The FRF and the clubs must have realised that we can be successful at CAS, which will have financial consequences for them as they risk having to pay compensation and the costs for the procedure. If we win, we could bring many more cases to CAS, which could prove very costly for the clubs. I think this helped them realise that they should better abolish this rule. Now, young players finally have the freedom to find the best opportunity for their career."

Will England & Wales’ new independent Cricket Regulator help improve the integrity of the game?

Published Friday, 09 February 2024.

Circular no. 1877 - FIFA Integrity Summit 2024

TO THE MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS OF FIFA

Circular no. 1877

Zurich, 8 February 2024

FIFA Integrity Summit 2024

Dear Sir or Madam,

As per the FIFA Statutes, one of FIFA’s key objectives is to promote integrity and prevent practices, such as match manipulation, that might jeopardise the integrity of matches, competitions, players, officials and member associations, or give rise to abuse of association football.

FIFA remains steadfast in the fight against match manipulation through the implementation of integrity initiatives, including the establishment of dedicated integrity educational programmes. In this regard, and in line with our commitment to promoting and protecting the integrity of football worldwide, we are delighted to announce that the first FIFA Integrity Summit will be held in Singapore on 4 and 5 April 2024.

The FIFA Integrity Summit aims to bring together the integrity officers of all 211 FIFA member associations and of the six confederations, with the primary goal of collaboratively tackling the pressing issue of match manipulation and formulating effective measures to combat it. This summit will serve as a crucial platform for engaging in profound discussions on the best practices and strategic approaches to combating match manipulation. For more information on the FIFA Integrity Summit, please consult the brochure attached to this circular. 

FIFA hereby invites all member associations and confederations to nominate one integrity officer (or one official responsible for integrity matters within their association) to participate in the upcoming FIFA Integrity Summit. In order to ensure that the entire community of integrity officers can participate in this event in person, FIFA will cover the travel and accommodation expenses of this person.

Integrity officers are invited to complete the registration process by filling out the registration form available under the following link.

Registration will be open until 25 February 2024.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Yazid Zakaria, Integrity Manager, at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. 

We look forward to your feedback and to working closely with you to protect the integrity of football. 

Yours faithfully, 

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE

DE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION

Huddersfield Town's Kian Harratt Suspended For Four Months And Fined £3,200

Huddersfield Town’s Kian Harratt has been suspended for four months and fined £3,200 following breaches of The FA’s Betting Rules.

It was alleged that the forward had breached FA Rule E8.1 by placing 484 bets on football matches between 30 June 2020 and 3 June 2023, and he subsequently admitted to this charge.

An independent Regulatory Commission imposed his sanctions after a hearing, and its written reasons for them can be seen here. 

Fulham Manager Marco Silva Fined £80,000 and Warned

Fulham FC’s manager Marco Silva has been fined £80,000 and warned as to his future conduct for a breach of FA Rule E3 following their Premier League game against Newcastle United FC on Saturday 16 December 2023. 
 
Mr Silva admitted that his comments in the post-match media interviews following the fixture, constitute improper conduct in that they imply bias and/or question the integrity of, and/or are insulting towards the match official (Referee) and/or the Video Assistant Referee, and/or bring the game into disrepute. The sanction was imposed by an independent Regulatory Commission.

The full decision can be viewed here.

EFL Statement: Swindon Town

In Autumn 2023, the EFL issued Swindon Town with a financial penalty of £2,000 alongside a three-transfer window fee restriction as a result of the Club accumulating 30 days or more of late payments in the current 12-month period (1 July 2023 to 30 June 2024).  

As permitted by EFL Regulations, the Club opted to appeal the both the fine and fee restriction on the basis that the sanction was disproportionate to the offence committed by the Club. The matter was referred to an independent Disciplinary Commission.   

On review of the case, the Commission has determined that the three-transfer window fee restriction should be reduced to two with the second window (August 2024) suspended and triggered upon a further breach. The Club is still required to pay the £2,000 fine.  

The Commission’s decision can be viewed here.  

FIFA publishes second CAS & Football Annual Report 2023

FIFA Appeal Committee confirms ban on former Spanish Football Association president Luis Rubiales

The FIFA Appeal Committee has rendered its decision on the appeal lodged by Mr Luis Rubiales, the former president of the Spanish Football Association (RFEF), against the decision issued by the FIFA Disciplinary Committee banning him from all football-related activities at national and international levels for three years.

After analysing the submissions presented to it and conducting a hearing, the Appeal Committee decided to dismiss the appeal, and to confirm the sanction imposed upon Mr Rubiales. Amongst other considerations, the Appeal Committee was comfortably satisfied that Mr Rubiales behaved in a manner contrary to the principles enshrined under article 13 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code during and after the final of the FIFA Women’s World Cup™.

The findings of the decision passed by the Appeal Committee were notified today to Mr Rubiales. In accordance with the relevant provisions of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, he has ten days in which to request a motivated decision, which, if requested, will subsequently be published on legal.fifa.com. The decision remains subject to a possible appeal before the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

FIFA reiterates its absolute commitment to respecting and protecting the integrity of all people and ensuring that the basic rules of decent conduct are upheld.

Balancing parallel governing body and police investigations: When to press pause and when to push back

Published Friday, 26 January 2024.

FIFA introduces new regulatory framework for national dispute resolution chambers

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.

FIFA will continue improving the FIFA regulations in line with the Strategic Objectives for the Global Game: 2023-2027.

The National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles and the accompanying Annexe (National Dispute Resolution Chamber Standard Regulations), the revised edition of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players, as well as the Explanatory Notes on the New Regulatory Framework for National Dispute Resolution Chambers are available on legal.fifa.com.

National Dispute Resolution Chamber Recognition Principles

Explanatory Notes on the New Regulatory Framework for National Dispute Resolution Chambers

Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players

Information on the new Payment Order Procedure

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).

EFL Statement: Mr Dai Yongge

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. 

Legal battle for the creation of new sporting competitions – only the end of the beginning

Published Friday, 12 January 2024.

Football Governance Bill: supporting documents

Supporting documents for legislation which introduces an independent regulator for professional clubs in the English football pyramid.

Impact assessment: Regulation of English men’s professional football

ECHR memorandum

Fact sheet - overview

Fact sheet - the Independent Football Regulator (IFR)

Fact sheet - licensing regime

Fact sheet - owners and directors of regulated clubs

Fact sheet - duties on clubs and competition organisers

Fact sheet - financial distribution backstop mechanism

Fact sheet - investigations, enforcement, and appeals

The Football Governance Bill - Regulation of English men’s professional football: RPC Opinion (Green rated)

Details

How will AI and new technology help sport, on and off the pitch: Key Takeaways

Published Wednesday, 20 March 2024.

Historic Football Governance Bill introduced in Parliament

Historic legislation to reform the governance of men's elite football in England and put fans back at the heart of the game has been introduced in Parliament today.

• ‘Independent Football Regulator’ to be enshrined in law that will give fans a greater voice in the running of their clubs
• Regulator will promote financial sustainability and will have the ability to fine clubs up to 10% of turnover for non-compliance 
• Breakaway closed-shop competitions such as the European Super League to be blocked under new legislation
• Regulator will implement strengthened owners’ and directors’ tests and be equipped with backstop powers to impose a ‘new deal’ on financial distributions

The Bill comes at a critical juncture for English football, following the attempted breakaway European Super League, and a series of high profile cases of clubs being financially mismanaged or collapsing entirely. 

The legislation being introduced today goes further than the Government’s manifesto commitment, establishing the new ‘Independent Football Regulator’ (IFR) as a standalone body - independent of both Government and the football authorities. 

The body will be equipped with robust powers revolving around three core objectives: to improve financial sustainability of clubs, ensure financial resilience across the leagues, and to safeguard the heritage of English football. 

Under the Football Governance Bill, new owners and directors will face stronger tests to stop clubs falling into the wrong hands, and face the possibility of being removed and struck off from owning football clubs if they are found to be unsuitable.

The Bill also includes new backstop powers around financial distributions between the Premier League, the English Football League (EFL) and National League. These powers mean that if the leagues fail to agree on a new deal on financial distributions, then the backstop can be triggered to ensure a settlement is reached. 

For the first time, clubs from the National League (Step One in the football pyramid) all the way to the Premier League will be licensed to compete in men’s elite football competitions in England. The proposed licensing regime will be proportionate to any problems, size and circumstances and involve a system of provisional and full licences, to give clubs time to transition. 

It follows a number of issues in recent years including financial mismanagement, breakaway plans for the European Super League, and changes to club names, badges and colours against the wishes of fans. 

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said:

"Football has long been one of our greatest sources of national pride. Up and down the country, it brings people together in celebration or commiseration.

"But for too long some clubs have been abused by unscrupulous owners who get away with financial mismanagement, which at worst can lead to complete collapse – as we saw in the upsetting cases of Bury and Macclesfield Town.

"This Bill is a historic moment for football fans – it will make sure their voices are front and centre, prevent a breakaway league, protect the financial sustainability of clubs, and protect the heritage of our clubs big and small."

Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer said:

"Football is nothing without its fans. We are determined to put them back at the heart of the game, and ensure clubs as vital community assets continue to thrive.

"The new Independent Regulator of Football will set the game on a sustainable footing, strengthening clubs and the entire football pyramid for generations."

All clubs will be subject to new baseline requirements enshrined in legislation irrespective of licence status, such as protections against breakaway competitions and stadium relocations. 

The provisional licence will require all clubs to meet some mandatory conditions as standard, including basic requirements on fan engagement, corporate governance and financial reporting.

The regulator will then apply additional bespoke licence conditions on clubs, as necessary, to ensure they meet the necessary standards for a full licence across three key areas: financial resources, non-financial resources (such as relevant systems, policies and personnel), and fan engagement.

Fan engagement is a central tenet of the Football Governance Bill and will ensure fans are put back at the heart of the game. As part of the licence, clubs will be required to consult their fans on key off-field decisions, such as club heritage and the club’s strategic direction.  

Sports Minister Stuart Andrew said:

"Football clubs are vital community assets and for far too long some fans have been taken for granted, and clubs lost to unscrupulous owners.

"Today’s Bill will pave the way for the creation of an Independent Football Regulator, ushering in greater protections to help clubs and their fans thrive over the long term."

Chair of the Fan-Led Review of Football Governance Tracey Crouch CBE MP said:

"Football fans can begin to breathe a sigh of relief in the knowledge that the next steps towards protecting the long term sustainability of the pyramid have now been taken.  

"A significant amount of work has gone into this piece of legislation which will establish a truly independent force in football that will place fans and good governance at its heart."

Chief Executive of the Football Supporters Association Kevin Miles said:

"The FSA warmly welcomes the tabling of the Football Governance Bill arising from the 2021 Fan Led Review, and particularly its central proposal to introduce statutory independent regulation of the game.

"The regulator provides a means to intervene and stop clubs being run into the ground, protect the heritage of clubs, give supporters a much bigger voice in the running of the game, and prevent any chance of domestic clubs joining a breakaway European Super League.

"The regulator must be given the power to impose a financial settlement in the interests of the sustainability of the game as a whole. It is far too important to be left to the squabbling between the vested interests of the richest club owners."

In addition, today’s Football Governance Bill sets out further detail on how the IFR:

• will produce a periodic State of the Game report setting out an evidence-based analysis of any issues around financial sustainability and systemic resilience in English football.
• will assess all new owners and directors and be able to disqualify owners/officers, in the case of persistent and wilful non-compliance.
• will require clubs to meet licence conditions on fan engagement, where guidance for clubs will set out areas requiring fan consultation. 
• will not be overly-interventionist and will adopt an advocacy first approach, but backed up by a broad suite of powers to investigate suspected non-compliance, compel information, and enforce if necessary. 
• will have no input in on-field decisions and will act in a way that minimises any impact on sporting competitions. 

The Football Governance Bill is the result of the Government’s commitment to deliver a fan-led review of football governance. Triggered after the attempted breakaway European Super League competition, the review sought to examine the industry in detail following the failure of at least 60 professional football clubs since the advent of the Premier League in 1992. 

The key recommendation from the review chaired by Tracey Crouch MP was the introduction of an independent regulator of elite men’s football in England. 

In parallel with the Bill’s introduction, the Government has today confirmed plans to stand up a shadow regulator that will be operational as the IFR is formally set up. 

Decisions will be taken on the location of the IFR, the Chair of the regulator and other board members in the weeks and months ahead as the bill makes its passage through Parliament. This follows the appointment of the interim chief operating officer Martyn Henderson OBE in January, who will work with a team on the frameworks, policies and guidance required for the formation of the regulator. 

English football remains a global success story and the Premier League is the envy of sporting competitions around the world. The Government remains fully behind its continued success. 

Despite this success, the combined net debt of clubs in the Premier League and Championship had reached £5.9 billion by the end of the 2020/21 season. In the same season, the Championship reported a wage-to-revenue ratio average of 125 percent clearly demonstrating clubs were stretching themselves far beyond their means. 

While our national game remains one of the UK’s greatest cultural exports, with clubs and leagues around the world modelling themselves on its success, the Government is today taking the necessary and targeted steps to ensure that continues for generations through the introduction of the independent football regulator.

EFL Statement: Premier League discussions

Towhid Hridoy guilty of breaching ICC Code of Conduct

Bangladesh player Towhid Hridoy has been fined 15 per cent of his match fee for breaching Level 1 of the ICC Code of Conduct during the third T20I against Sri Lanka in Sylhet on Saturday.

Towhid was found to have breached Article 2.20 of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel, which relates to displaying conduct that is contrary to the spirit of the game.

In addition to this, one demerit point has been added to Towhid’s disciplinary record, for whom it was the first offence in a 24-month period.

The incident occurred in the fourth over of Bangladesh’s innings, when after being dismissed, Towhid turned around on his way back to the pavilion and remonstrated aggressively and inappropriately with the Sri Lankan players.

Towhid admitted the offence and accepted the sanction proposed by Andy Pycroft of the Emirates ICC Elite Panel of Match Referees, so there was no need for a formal hearing.

On-field umpires Sharfuddoula Saikat and Tanvir Ahmed, third umpire Gazi Sohel and fourth umpire Masudur Rahman levelled the charge.

Level 1 breaches carry a minimum penalty of an official reprimand, a maximum penalty of 50 per cent of a player’s match fee, and one or two demerit points.

EFL Statement: Leicester City

Earlier this season, based on financial information submitted by the Club, the EFL’s independent Club Financial Reporting Unit (CFRU) concluded that the Club was forecasting to breach the Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) loss limits for the three-year period ending with financial year 2023/24.   

The CFRU determined that it was appropriate under P&S Rule 2.9 to require Leicester City Football Club to submit a business plan to demonstrate how it planned to comply with the EFL’s P&S spending limits.  

The Club argued that the relevant P&S Rule did not apply to it, meaning the CFRU had no right to require a business plan in respect of Season 2023/24.   

That matter was referred by the Club to the independent Club Financial Reporting Panel (CFRP) which concluded that under the Rules as currently written, Rule 2.9 did not apply to the Club and so it was under no obligation to submit and agree to a business plan.  

The CFRP decision has been published today and will help in informing the EFL on the potential Rule amendments that will be proposed for consideration by Championship Clubs in the future to ensure all Clubs are treated equally under the Rules.  

Leicester City is responsible for meeting its obligations in respect of the P&S Rules which will be assessed along with the submissions of all other Clubs in accordance with the League’s established processes. 

The League will be making no further comment on this matter at this time.  

The CFRP decision can be found here

The IFAB approves permanent concussion substitutes among several changes to the Laws of the Game

The IFAB approved several changes to and clarifications of the Laws of the Game relating to players in relation to permanent concussion substitutes, player equipment, fouls and misconduct, and penalty kicks during its 138th Annual General Meeting (AGM), hosted by the Scottish Football Association at Loch Lomond, Scotland.

Trials confirmed

Detailed protocols for three trials in domestic competitions below the top two tiers aimed at improving participant behaviour were approved, namely: 

• Only a team’s captain being able to approach the referee in certain situations.

• The introduction of cooling-off periods to allow the referee to require teams to go to their own penalty area.

• Increasing the time limit for the goalkeepers holding the ball to eight seconds, otherwise possession will revert to the opposing team.

The current guidelines to temporary dismissals in youth and grassroots football were improved. Any potential wider application will only be considered once the impact of these changes have been reviewed. 

The IFAB decided to extend FIFA’s trial where the referee publicly announces the final decisions and the reasoning after a video assistant referee (VAR) review or lengthy VAR check to other competitions. Participating competitions will require permission from The IFAB and will have to commit to following FIFA’s refereeing and technology guidelines.

Changes and clarifications for the Laws of the Game 2024/25

The next edition of the Laws of the Game, which will come into effect on 1 July 2024, will feature the following changes and clarifications:

• Law 3 (The Players): Additional permanent concussion substitutions to be a competition option in accordance with the necessary protocol.

• Law 3 (The Players) and Law 4 (The Players’ Equipment): Each team must have a team captain who wears an identifying armband.

• Law 4 (The Players’ Equipment): Players are responsible for the size and suitability of their shinguards, which remain a compulsory part of their equipment.

• Law 12 (Fouls and Misconduct): Handball offences that are not deliberate, and for which penalties are awarded, are to be treated in the same way as other fouls.

• Law 14 (The Penalty Kick): Part of the ball must touch or overhang the centre of the penalty mark, and encroachment by outfield players will be penalised only if it has an impact.

Although the changes will take effect from 1 July 2024, competitions starting before that date may implement them earlier or delay their implementation until no later than the start of the subsequent competition.

Other topics

FIFA confirmed that it would launch a global campaign to raise awareness of how to recognise the symptoms of concussion and treat it appropriately, while The IFAB also requested relevant medical data analyses to be provided to the subsequent AGM in line with the amendment to Law 3 regarding this topic. 

In addition, members received an update on The FA’s trials with body cameras at grassroots level and with a ban on “deliberate heading” at U-12 level and below. The IFAB also received an update on the offside trial which has been undertaken at U-18 level in Italy, and agreed to further trials. 

The AGM, which was chaired and hosted by the Scottish FA, was also attended by representatives from FIFA, The FA, the Irish FA, the FA of Wales and The IFAB administration. At the meeting, FIFA Secretary General ad interim Mattias Grafström was confirmed as the new chair of The IFAB’s Board of Directors.

FIFA publishes Professional Football Report 2023

FIFA has published its Professional Football Report 2023 that provides a comprehensive overview of men’s professional football across all 211 FIFA Member Associations (MAs) and launched an encyclopaedic online database to encourage clubs to seek out best practice from around the world.

The report, which is based on a survey conducted by FIFA, is split into four key areas: players, clubs, competitions (with specific focus on each country’s top-tier competition), and transfers.

It gives a detailed picture of men's club football in each member association, and in a new approach adopted this year, provides various comparative statistics both at global and confederation level. 

The data is also presented in the Professional Football Landscape, the first digital database of its kind, which also includes a countdown of the different transfer windows around the globe, providing more clarity on the dates surrounding the international movement of players.

Based on the report, there were 128,694 professional male footballers at 3,986 clubs in 135 countries around the world. Mexico had both the most professional players (9,464) - with Spain (8,560) and England (5,582) next - and the most clubs (244), followed by Türkiye (136) and Argentina (118).

All member associations had made significant progress in club licensing with 88% reporting they have some form of regulations in place.

“The Professional Football Report 2023 as well as our digital platform – the Professional Football Landscape – will serve as a benchmarking tool for professional clubs, leagues, and federations around the world,” said Ornella Bellia, FIFA’s Director of Professional Football Relations & Development.

“This report gives a clear picture of not only the overall state of the game in their country but can also serve as a catalyst for future development as they draw inspiration from best practice around the world.”

The report is available here.

EFL Statement: Reading FC and Mr Dai Yongge

• Club issued with immediate two-point deduction for late payment of liabilities
• Owner Mr Dai Yongge fined six figures for non-compliance
• EFL calls on Mr Dai to adequately fund Club or sell shareholding

An independent Disciplinary Commission (IDC) has determined that Reading Football Club are to be deducted two points from the 2023/24 League One table with a further two points suspended after the Club failed to meet HMRC payment obligations in accordance with EFL Regulations.

The sporting sanction will be applied immediately resulting in the Club being deducted a total of six points in the current season, having received a one-point penalty in August 2023, before a further three points were removed in September 2023.

The suspended points deduction will be activated in the event the Club fails to pay amounts owed to HMRC, other Clubs or any other football creditor claims by the required due dates up until the end of the 2023/24 season.

Following separate charges being issued, the Club’s owner, Mr Dai Yongge, has been fined £100,000 for his repeated failures to deposit an amount equal to 125% of the Club’s forecast monthly wage bill in a designated account. He is required to pay the fine by 18 March 2024.

If Mr Dai fails to comply with the prior order of the IDC to meet the deposit requirement within 28 days a further suspended fine of £100,000 will be activated and an additional fine of £100,000 will be imposed if the money is not received within five weeks.

The EFL notes the written reasons issued by the Commission who have again opted not to disqualify Mr Dai because of the potential adverse consequences for the Club. However, as the League has previously stated, Mr Dai has demonstrated an unwillingness to support the Club’s current financial commitments, in contrast to his approach following the change of control in 2017. That is creating significant uncertainty, and the current impasse has to be broken.

Therefore, the League urges Mr Dai to provide his Club with the appropriate resources needed while at the same time accelerating his efforts to sell his majority shareholding to new owners, so that everyone associated with Reading FC, including staff, supporters and the local community, can move on and prepare for a positive future.

The IDC’s Decision and written reasons are available to view on EFL.com.

Premier League statement

An independent Appeal Board has concluded that the sanction for Everton FC’s breach of the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSRs), for the period ending Season 2021/22, will be an immediate six-point deduction.

This follows the club’s appeal of an independent Commission’s decision in November 2023 to impose a 10-point deduction for the club’s breach of the PSRs.

The appeal was heard over three days earlier this month, by an Appeal Board comprising Sir Gary Hickinbottom (Chair), Daniel Alexander KC and Katherine Apps KC.

Everton FC appealed the sanction imposed against it on nine grounds, each of which related to the sanction rather than the fact of the breach, which the club admitted.

Two of those nine grounds were upheld by the Appeal Board, which has substituted the original points deduction of 10 for six.

This revised sanction has immediate effect and the Premier League table will be updated today to reflect this.

Click here to read the independent Appeal Board’s full written reasons, which includes a two-page summary of its decision.

Appeal Boards are independent of the Premier League and member clubs. The members of the Appeal Board were appointed by the independent Chair of the Premier League Judicial Panel.

The Premier League Board is satisfied with today’s decision and that the independent disciplinary process, clearly set out in its Rules and agreed by all clubs, has been followed throughout.

The Court Of Arbitration For Sport (CAS) Dismisses The Appeal Filed By The Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) Against The Decision Taken By The International Olympic Committee To Suspend Its Membership

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has issued its decision in the appeal arbitration proceedings between the Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) in which the ROC sought to set aside the decision rendered by the IOC Executive Board (IOC EB) on 12 October 2023 (the Challenged Decision) in which it was suspended from the IOC with immediate effect until further notice due to its decision to include as its members some regional sports organisations which are under the authority of the National Olympic Committee (NOC) of Ukraine (Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia).

The CAS Panel in charge of this matter dismissed the appeal and confirmed the Challenged Decision, finding that the IOC EB did not breach the principles of legality, equality, predictability or proportionality. 

The Arbitral Award issued by the CAS Panel is currently subject to a confidentiality review meaning that the parties might request that the Arbitral Award, or certain information contained in it, remain confidential. For this reason, the Arbitral Award will not be published immediately on the CAS website.

The CAS Panel’s decision is final and binding except for the parties’ right to file an appeal to the Swiss Federal Tribunal within 30 days on limited grounds.

Ice hockey neck guards and legal liability following the tragic death of Adam Johnson

Published Friday, 16 February 2024.

Why it’s time for a centralised safeguarding regulator in UK Sport

Published Friday, 09 February 2024.

Serie A’s 2023 Sale of Broadcast Rights: Opportunities and Challenges for Italian Football

Published Thursday, 08 February 2024.

Hungarian player union celebrates new standard player contract that complies with minimum requirements

• Hungarian player union HLSZ makes positive changes to standard player contract
  
  
• Two provisions removed, including possibility to unilaterally reduce salary if player is sent to second team  
  
  
• Amendments a result of collaboration between European stakeholders and domestic social dialogue

Hungarian player union HLSZ actioned crucial amendments to its standard player contract that have improved the rights of professional footballers in the country.

As part of a social dialogue in Hungarian football, and after requests from HLSZ, the Hungarian Football Federation (MLSZ) decided to remove two controversial provisions from the standard player contract. One allowed clubs to unilaterally reduce a player’s salary up to 50 percent in case of relegation, while the other arranged that a club could unilaterally decide to reduce a player’s salary up to 50 percent when the club decided to send a player to the second team.

Gabor Horvath, the union’s general secretary, welcomes the revised standard player contract, which has been in force as of 1 January 2024.

“This is a very important achievement for us,” Horvath told FIFPRO. “We have often been criticised that the standard player contract in our country was not good.

"Through the years, we have tried to change this and now we can finally say that the Hungarian standard player contract is fully in compliance with the minimum requirements on standard player contracts, as laid down in the agreement signed by European stakeholders, including FIFPRO Europe, UEFA, the ECA and European Leagues.”  

Article 47, which allowed clubs to unilaterally reduce players’ salary when sending them away from the first team, was very problematic, according to Horvath. “Players were told that starting tomorrow they couldn’t train with the first team anymore but would have to train with the second or third team, and that their salary was reduced by 50 percent. The clubs could simply decide this unilaterally as a sort of sanction. This could last until the end of season or could lead to a player leaving the club.”

The provision is against Hungarian labour law and against jurisprudence of the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) and sports tribunal CAS. The FIFA DRC deemed it “potestative” and “abusive” in various cases.

To realise these amendments to the standard player contract, the Hungarian union invoked the help of FIFPRO Europe, which involved UEFA and the ECA, as both have respective members in Hungary.  

“We couldn’t have done this without the help of FIFPRO Europe and the European stakeholders,” Horvath said. “We had tried since 2018 to change the standard player contract but were unable to arrange this with the federation ourselves.

“With the help of FIFPRO Europe, who involved UEFA and ECA, we could finally discuss this with the federation and with some clubs. We had a couple of meetings involving representatives from the domestic and European stakeholders, in a friendly atmosphere, and it was clear to all parties that these two provisions had to be addressed, which made the federation decide to remove them from the standard player contract.”

HLSZ thinks that the collaboration with the European stakeholders will also be beneficial for the union and Hungarian football in the future.

“It is a good example of the power of the social dialogue,” Horvath said. “Being part of a strong international umbrella organisation, that has good relationships with UEFA, the ECA and European Leagues is very beneficial. Of course, we remain committed to any discussion with our domestic social partners, but it is good to know that, if necessary, we can easily involve FIFPRO to help address these issues.”

Government interference in sport - why the ICC suspended Sri Lanka Cricket and what happens next

Published Friday, 02 February 2024.

EFL Statement: Doncaster Rovers

In Autumn 2023, the EFL issued Doncaster Rovers with a financial penalty of £2,000 alongside a three-transfer window fee restriction as a result of the Club accumulating 30 days or more of late payments in the current 12-month period (1 July 2023 to 30 June 2024).  

As permitted by EFL Regulations, the Club opted to appeal the decision on the basis that the transfer window fee restriction imposed was disproportionate to the offence committed and the matter was referred to an independent Disciplinary Commission.   

On review of the case, the Commission has determined that the three-transfer window fee restriction is to stand but with the second (August 2024) and third (January 2025) windows suspended and triggered upon a further breach. The Club is still required to pay the £2,000 fine.  

The Commission’s decision can be viewed here. 

Sports Betting – Significant Updates and Developments: Key Takeaways

Published Tuesday, 30 January 2024.

Subhash Bhandari found guilty of breaching the ICC Code of Conduct

Nepal U19 bowler, Subhash Bhandari, has received a reprimand for breaching Level 1 of the ICC Code of Conduct during the ICC U19 Men’s Cricket World Cup match against Pakistan in East London on 24 January.

Bhandari was found to have breached Article 2.9 of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel, which relates to “throwing a ball at or near a player in an inappropriate and/or dangerous manner during an international match.”

In addition to this, one demerit point has been added to Bhandari’s disciplinary record, for whom it was the first offence in a 24-month period.

The incident occurred at the end of the 14th over of Pakistan’s innings when Bhandari threw the ball inappropriately towards batter Shahzaib Khan, hitting him on the forearm.

Bhandari admitted the offence and accepted the sanction proposed by Graeme Labrooy of the Emirates International Panel of ICC Match Referees and, as such, there was no need for a formal hearing.

On-field umpires Phil Gillespie and Bongani Jele, TV umpire Forster Mutizwa and fourth umpire, K.N. Ananthapadmanabhan levelled the charge.

Level 1 breaches carry a minimum penalty of an official reprimand, a maximum penalty of 50 per cent of a player’s match fee, and one or two demerit points.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Confirms The Registration Of The Request For Arbitration Filed By US Swimmer Lia Thomas

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) confirms the registration of the request for arbitration filed by US transgender swimmer Lia Thomas (the Athlete), aimed at challenging certain parts of World Aquatics’ Policy on the Eligibility for the Men’s and Women’s Competition Categories in force as of 24 March 2023, and its associated Operational Requirements (the Challenged Provisions).

Ms Thomas accepts that fair competition is a legitimate sporting objective and that some regulation of transgender women in swimming is appropriate. However, Ms Thomas submits that the Challenged Provisions are invalid and unlawful as they discriminate against her contrary to the Olympic Charter, the World Aquatics Constitution, and Swiss law including the European Convention on Human Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; and that such discrimination cannot be justified as necessary, reasonable, or proportionate to achieve a legitimate sporting objective.

In bringing the matter before CAS, Ms Thomas seeks an order from the CAS declaring that the Challenged Provisions are unlawful, invalid, and of no force and effect.

The CAS arbitration proceedings commenced in September 2023. In accordance with the Code of Sportsrelated Arbitration, this “ordinary” arbitration procedure (i.e. not an appeal) was subject to strict confidentiality rules governing CAS procedures. The parties involved in this case have now agreed that general information concerning the procedure itself be communicated by the CAS Court Office. At this point, no hearing date has been fixed yet.

The registration of this case coincided with the reference number 10’000, which is the number of arbitrations (and former consultation procedures, but without ad hoc procedures and mediations) registered by the CAS since its creation in 1984. On 31 December 2023, the CAS had registered a total of 10’638 procedures (all included) since its creation and 943 in 2023 only.

EFL Statement: Reading FC

Reading v Port Vale 

The EFL Board has determined that the Sky Bet League One fixture between Reading and Port Vale should be replayed in full following its abandonment on Saturday 13 January 2024. 

Following a 16^th minute pitch incursion by a number of Reading supporters in protest at the ownership of the Club, the players and coaching teams were removed from the pitch, and it soon became clear that re-starting would not be possible.   

Having considered all relevant factors relating to the decision taken by the match officials and club stadium staff, alongside the options available to them in accordance with the Regulations, the Board felt the most appropriate course of action was to reschedule the fixture in full. 

The game will now take place on Tuesday 20^th February 2024, kick-off 8pm.  Both Clubs are liaising on the issue of ticket sales and will communicate arrangements via the normal channels.  

Sanction for Non-Fulfilment of a Fixture   

Following the abandonment, the League entered discussions with Reading in respect of the potential sanction to be imposed as a result of the Club failing to fulfil its fixture obligations and have now reached a consensus by way of an Agreed Decision, in accordance with EFL Regulations.   

The Club is now subject to a suspended three-point deduction with the sanction to be activated in either the 2023/2024 season or the 2024/2025 season if any fixture played in any EFL competition is postponed or abandoned due to disruption (including incursion onto the field of play) by the Club’s supporters. If it is required, the suspended three-point deduction will become active with immediate effect in the season during which the breach occurs.  

This level of sanction remains consistent with action taken in previous circumstances where an abandonment of an EFL fixture has taken place. The League continues to recognise the ongoing challenges for the Club and its supporter base and notes the views expressed at the supporter meeting held with the EFL last week in respect of imposing further immediate points deductions on the Club.  

This approach aims to balance the requirements of the EFL as the competition organiser to uphold its Regulations on behalf of all member Clubs whilst providing clarity to all associated parties on the impact of any future non-fulfilment of a fixture, coming as direct result of supporter protests.   

The decision is available HERE

Mr Dai Yongge  

The owner of the Club, Mr Dai Yongge, has today been charged with misconduct for his repeated failures to deposit an amount equal to 125% of the Club’s forecast monthly wage bill in a designated bank account.  

Mr Dai did not meet this month’s deadline, meaning he has been in default for nearly four months and remains in breach of both the first decision (August 2023) and second decision (December 2023) as ordered by the independent Disciplinary Commission. 

He has also been charged with bringing the Club and/or League into disrepute as a result of his actions.  

Both charges have been referred to an Independent Disciplinary Commission. 

Circular no. 1876 - National Dispute Resolution Chamber: new Recognition Principles and Standard Regulations

TO THE MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS OF FIFA

Circular no. 1876

Zurich, 18 January 2024

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.

Yours faithfully,

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE

DE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION

Everton and Nottingham Forest confirm Premier League PSR breaches

The two clubs have each confirmed to the Premier League that they are in breach of the League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules

County and League Appeals Results Circular For December 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.  

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. 

Written Reasons: https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2023/ojm-black-country-fc-v-midland-football-league---appeal-board---4-december-2023.ashx

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. 

Written Reasons: https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2024/ashley-davies-v-gloucestershire-fa---appeal-board---8-january-2024.ashx

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.

Written Reasons: https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2023/wetherby-athletic-fc-juniors-v-west-riding-fa---appeal-board---19-december-2023.ashx

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. 

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.

What does the future of integrated approaches to sports integrity look like?

Published Friday, 12 January 2024.