P a g e | 1

““I think sports gave me the first place where this awkward girl could feel comfortable in my own skin. I think that’s true for a lot of women—sports gives you a part of your life where you can work at something and you look in the mirror and you like that person.”

- Teri McKeever

P a g e | 2

ARUN JAITLEY’S BUDGET : SPORTS GETS MARGINAL RAISE

The allocation for the Sports Ministry got a marginal hike of Rs. 50.87

crore from last year in the union budget for 2016-17 was presented by

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley in the Parliament. Jaitley allocated Rs.

1400 crore as plan outlay to sports, while Rs 192 crore was set aside for

non-plan, taking the total to Rs. 1592 crore. Last year the total allocation

was Rs. 1541.13 crore. The plan outlay has been increased to

approximately Rs. 10.82 crore as compared to the previous year, while

the non-plan outlay has been hiked by Rs. 40.15 crore. The allocation for

the scheme for the Benefit of North Eastern Area, has been revised to Rs.

144.98 crore this year as compared to Rs. 150.23 crore last year. The

Sports Authority, entrusted with the task of organising national camps,

has been granted a total of Rs. 381.30 crore this year, which is a hike of

Rs. 11.91 crore. However, assistance to sports institutions has been kept

at Rs. 545.90 crore. Under youth affairs, the National Service Scheme

has been allocated Rs. 215.70 crore. Rs. 12 crore has been allocated for

anti-doping activities, which is the same as last year.

P a g e | 3

TEAM PLAWYERED

Editorial Board

.

.

Authors

Gaurav Misra , Publishing Editor , Plawyered

He is currently pursuing B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) from Chanakya

National Law University, Patna. A voracious reader and an

ardent Arsenal supporter, Plawyered is his way of bringing

his love for law and sports on one single platform.

Tejaswini Ranjan, Managing Editor, Plawyered

She is currently pursuing B.A. LL.B. from Chanakya National

Law University, Patna. She is a sports enthusiast and a big fan

of cricket. It is her love for sports that made her come up with

this portal. Apart from this, she also holds the experience of

working with several legal portals and research journals.

Avi Dhirendra is a 4th year student of National Law University,

Odisha and has keen interest in Intellectual Property Rights Laws

along with Criminal laws. He is also interested in sports law and

has been publishing articles related to the same.

P a g e | 4

*The views expressed in the articles are solely the views of the respective

authors.

**The copyright of the magazine vests with www.plawyered.com . All

communications are to be made at plawyered@gmail.com.

Gurjot Singh Khurana is a 4th year student of B.A.LL.B.

(Hons.) in University Institute of Laws, Panjab University,

Ludhiana. He has been a part of research team of Mindbatteries-

an online startup. Apart from being an activist, he is also a

member of Rotaract Chandigarh, youth wing of Rotary

International.

Sabah Khan is a 4th year student of National Law University,

Odisha and has a prominent interest in the Intellectual Property

Rights Laws along with Corporate Laws. She has presented various

papers on different subject in various seminars and conferences.

Venkat siddharth is currently pursuing law at Chanakya

National Law University. He garners love for all kinds of

sports especially tennis, football and formula1. He is a

tennis player having won a number of titles at the all India

level. He has also successfully represented the university in

tennis and football in various competitions.

P a g e | 5

#1 MARIA SHARAPOVA: MELDONIUM

DOPING SCANDAL

VENKAT SIDDHARTH

Image courtesy :www.espn.go.com

Maria Sharapova burst onto the tennis

scene as a 17 year old in 2004,

defeating Serena Williams, the then

defending champion to lift the

Wimbledon trophy. From then on she

has added a further 4 grand slams to

her trophy cabinet and reached the

pinnacle of the WTA (Women’s Tennis

Association) Rankings. According to

Forbes, she is also the highest paid

female athlete in the world.

Sharapova’s tennis is again a topic of

discussion, but not for her blistering

groundstrokes or her deafening high

pitched grunts but for failing a doping

test. On March 7 Sharapova called in

P a g e | 6

press conference to admit that she had

failed a doping test for the use of

‘meldonium’ which has been recently

banned by the WADA (World Anti

Doping Agency). She further stated

that she had been using this drug as

prescribed by her family doctor for the

treatment of magnesium deficiency,

indications of diabetes and cardiac

conditions. The former world no 1

claims it to be a mistake on her part

and has taken full responsibility of the

situation. Sharapova has been using

the drug since 2006 and the drug has

only been banned since 1st January

2016.

Before we delve more into this matter,

we should know what meldonium is

and what effects can it have. Also

known as Mildronate, it was developed

in Latvia and was approved in the early

2000s for the treatment of heart

related diseases. It is also considered

beneficial for people suffering with

diabetes. On the other hand it can also

have a positive effect on the endurance

of an athlete. The drug is capable of

moving oxygen faster into the muscles

which helps the stamina of an athlete.

It can easily aid a quicker recovery

after an effort and can also have a

positive effect on the endurance of an

athlete. The website of the drug’s

Latvian manufacturer Grindeks says

meldonium gives sufferers of heart and

circulatory conditions more “physical

capacity and mental function” — and a

similar boost to healthy people. It is to

be noted that the drug is not illegal in

itself. It is not licensed in the United

Kingdom thus it cannot be legally sold

there, but it can be imported from

abroad for personal use without any

violation of the law. Considering the

safety of the drug, there are no tests

which show any signs of any serious

side effects. However, headache and

agitation are a possibility along with a

very rare side effect of skin irritation.

Also to be noted is that meldonium or

mildronate is a commonly used drug.

According to WADAs testing results

from its centre in Cologne last year,

2.2% of the total samples tested

positive for the drug. The 2.2% is a

huge proportioned in doping tests

where overall positive tests account for

only 2% which consisted of all other

banned substances. The drug is very

commonly used in Russia. So much so

that it has been enlisted as an essential

drug and is entitled to a price cap.

Meldonium has been banned recently.

P a g e | 7

The WADA monitored the effects and

use of the drug and decided to ban it.

The decision was announced in

September 2015 and ban took effect

from 1st January 2016.

Coming back to the current event, the

whole thing started when Sharapova,

subsequent to her loss to Serena

Willams at the Australian Open,

provided a sample to WADA. The

sample was scrutinized by the WADA

and it resulted in positive for the drug

meldonium. The WADA had notified

all athletes about the changes to be

brought regarding the banned

substances. Sharapova herself

admitted that she got an e-mail

regarding the subject and she failed to

go through the email. A discrepancy

regarding this fact has also arisen. The

authorities claim to have sent 5

notifications about the ban. Sharapova

has replied to the claim that she

received only one email whose subject

was directly related to the changes.

The other notifications, according to

her, were somewhere buried in

newsletters and articles. The company

which manufactured the drug has

stated that the prescribed dosage for

meldonium runs for four to six weeks.

This statement allegedly weakens

Sharapova’s position who claims to

have been taking the drug legally for

the past 10 years since 2006. But

Sharapova has clarified her statement

that she did not take the drug on a

daily basis, but as and when prescribed

by the doctor.

At the moment, Sharapova has been

provisionally banned from tennis.

Investigations will be held and the five

time grand slam champion is facing a

ban which can extend to as long as 4

years.

A ban as long as that can spell an end

to Sharapova’s playing career. She

turns 29 in April. Considering she gets

banned for 4 years, then she can only

comeback at the age of 33. I am not

ruling out a comeback, in fact I will be

hopeful for one if she gets banned, but

the age of 33 is by no means a suitable

age for a comeback. Add to it the injury

problems she has had, a comeback

would be a tough task to accomplish.

This admission may have a

catastrophic effect on the financial

aspect Sharapovas life. Major sponsors

have cut ties with the star athlete. Nike

suspended its relationship with

P a g e | 8

Sharapova hours after her admission.

Porsche followed soon and stated that

they have postponed their planned

activities. Tag Heuer suspended its

contract extension negotiations with

Sharapova, which had expired in

December last year. These companies

along with Evian have decided to

monitor the situation till the whole

episode draws to a final conclusion.

But the racquet sponsor head has

stood firmly behind Sharapova in these

testing times and has stated that it

intends to extend its contact with

Sharapova.

Analysing the whole situation, we can

certainly put forward a question that is

such a mistake acceptable from a top

athlete. With so much of backroom

staff or support staff that these athletes

employ, it is unacceptable that a

mistake of such magnitude can occur.

Even if we take her word that she did

not open the email sent to her, still it

would not count for an honest mistake

but a very careless and negligent act.

The former world no.1, Caroline

Wozniacki has stated that an athlete

has to be extremely aware of what they

are consuming. It is their duty and the

doctors whom the work with to

confirm and reconfirm if the drug they

are going to consume has any

substance which is present on the list

of banned substances. Even a drug for

cold has to be rechecked. Some

factions have also called for her being

stripped off all her titles. In my

opinion that is going a step too far. The

drug has been banned very recently.

Thus means that she did not resort to

any illegal practice when she

consumed the drug prior to 1st January

2016. Moreover, there has been no

proof of how regularly she used the

drug. The worst case scenario would be

that she did use the drug on a regular

basis, but was it illegal. The answer is

no. She was entitled to use it, it may

not have been in the spirit of the sport

but it was not illegal and to strip

someone off her title for something

which is not illegal is not the right step

for me.

The WADA has confirmed that there

have been 99 cases where samples

have tested positive for meldonium.

Out of the 16 confirmed cases, 7 are

Russians. This lends support to the

fact that it is a widely used substance

especially in Russia.

P a g e | 9

It is to the credit of Maria Sharapova

that she had the courage to come

forward and accept the failed drug test.

An easier alternative could have been

to suppress the news until the final

verdict was out, but she did not opt for

that.

Sharapova will be hoping for a not so

lengthy ban. She hopes that her

coming out and taking charge of the

situation will help things to be

perceived in a lenient way. She would

be expecting people to believe that it

was an honest mistake on her part. In

case she is banned, there is no doubt

that she will be sorely missed, not only

by her fans but by the whole tennis

fraternity. No one likes to see an

athlete depart in the shadows of

doping, especially not a top star. Then

again, no one is bigger than the sport.

The integrity of the sport has to be

protected at all costs. Sharapova

should serve the punishment she

deserves. At the same time, it is a

moment when others should realise

that one cannot be negligent instead

one should be overly careful in being

aware of what is being consumed.

.

P a g e | 10

#2 GENDER INEQUALITY IN SPORTS:

THE PERSISTING THREAT TO

FEMALE ATHLETES

GAURAV MISRA

Dipika Pallikal has been protesting for past four year for wage inequality. Image

courtesy: www.hindusantimes.com

While every cricket enthusiast is busy

speculating the outcome of the Men’s T

20 cricket World Cup, hardly are even

a third of them aware that a cricket

World Cup tournament for women is

simultaneously taking place in the

same country. It isn’t a big surprise

that for the first time in cricketing

history ICC TV will broadcast live

coverage of only 10 out of 22 group

matches in addition to the semi final

and finals whereas the Men’s world

cup, or for that matter almost every

cricket match, gets a wide coverage

P a g e | 11

and broadcast by different

broadcasting agencies. Till the

previous version of the tournament,

not even a single group match was

broadcasted. We all remember the

incident when P.T. Usha broke down

in front of live media for the indecent

treatment she received during an event

conducted by Sports Authority of

India. This is the state of affairs when

it comes to an internationally

acclaimed athlete; the situation of not

so popular sportswomen is left to the

imagination of the reader. India ranks

127 out of 147 in gender inequality

index which sums up the situation

quite well. All this suffices to say that

gender inequality is prevalent to the

core when it comes to sports.

Patriarchal society and conservative

mindset still hinders the path of a

female sportsperson, be it India or be

it the developed nations.

The problem starts right away at

home. If a girl communicates her wish

to even participate in a sporting event,

she is laughed off by her parents using

a strange reason every such girl is sick

of hearing, again and again, ‘sports are

meant for men’. Even if she continues

to pursue sports as a career she has to

face endless challenges starting right

from school. She is ridiculed and

questioned about how will she be able

to continue sporting activities during

her menstrual cycle, she is often said

to have lost her feminine

characteristics, often preached by the

sports teacher that ‘a female body is

biologically not capable of such things

and she is again and again discouraged

by her parents and society including

women themselves. Her growth and

the opportunity to hone her talent is

nipped in the bud. More than 70

percent of girls discontinue all sports

related activities by the time they pass

out from the school in India. For the

rest, it only gets rockier. The district

level sporting authorities lack

infrastructure and training facilities

for women. Usually male trainers train

these girls and more than often than

not they have to go through physical

and mental abuse by these trainers. In

a survey conducted by an NGO, almost

50 percent of the female athletes in

India confessed that at some point of

time of their career, they were sexually

abused. Even after this, if a girl is able

P a g e | 12

to make it to state or national level;

there is a complete lack of

encouragement. Women competitions

are not given much importance by the

press and media and rarely are any

broadcasts made covering these

competitions. Media houses are

interested more in the attire or the

outfit of a female athlete instead of her

accolades and talent. Sania Mirza is

dictated upon what or what not to

wear on a tennis court. Paparazzi are

interested in covering the details of the

garments worn by Serena or in which

exotic location Maria Sharapova is

spending her vacations. Women are

viewed as an object of sexual desire.

Even their private decisions are

debated on National Television.

Whether Sania Mirza should marry

Shoaib Malik or not becomes a tea-

time discussion in every household.

While male sportspersons, especially

the cricketers are regarded to be the

pallbearers of nationalism and are

worshipped as gods, female cricketers

don’t even get substantial recognition.

General masses don’t even know about

the names of the players in the

national squad. Exclusion and non-

recognition of women in cricket sends

a deep rooted message that Indian

society does not associate women with

the nationalism which cricket

generates. The notion that men and

women are biologically and physically

different has been used to justify the

exclusion of women from sports from

time immemorial. Boys do not have

such parental and societal constraints

which restrict their choices. Boys are

usually encouraged by their father to

indulge more in sports and when they

fail to do so they are often regarded to

be ‘girly’. This notion of male

superiority is reflected even when it

comes to coaching. Where male

coaches coaching a female team is a

common occurrence, it is very rare to

find a female coaching a male team. It

is generally assumed that men are

capable of training women, but the

thought of a woman coaching a male

team is almost unthinkable to the

society.

Another incidence which clearly

indicates the deep rooted gender

inequality in sports is the wage gap

between a male and female athlete. In

India, women cricketers receive a fee

of around 1 lakh rupees per Test

Series, male cricketers receive around

P a g e | 13

7 lakh rupees per Test Match and

around 4 lakh rupees per One Day

International match. Also when it

comes to prize money, the gap is huge.

The female players who won the FIFA

World Cup won $2 million, whereas

their male counterparts won, $35

million. It was comparably even much

less than the U.S male team which

received $9 million for getting knocked

out of round of 16. The only exception

to this is tennis which provides for

almost equal prize money for both men

and women. Indian athletes have been

for long protesting for equality in

wage. Deepika Pallikal has been

protesting for the past four years for

this injustice by not participating in

national competitions but to no avail.

At the Squash Rackets Federation of

India (SRFI) Nationals held last year,

the winner in Male category walked

away with a prize money of Rupees

1,20,000 while the women champion

got only Rupees 50,000. This issue

needs to be addressed as soon as

possible, but after closely watching the

situation, the Government of India and

Sporting Authorities seem to be in no

hurry regarding this.

The problems are innumerable.

Especially in a developing country like

ours, where the practices like female

foeticide and dowry are still prevalent,

almost nobody gives a second thought

to gender inequality prevalent in

sports. Many structural changes and

reforms are needed. The problem

needs to be addressed from the grass

root level. Infrastructural facilities for

female athletes need special attention.

District level bodies should ensure that

separate hostels, gymnasium and

training facilities are to be constructed

and well maintained to encourage the

spirit of sports for women. More and

more female coaches should be

brought about in these facilities. A

vigilance authority should be made

accountable to curb the practice of

sexual abuse. Most of the State

federations and National federations of

women’s sports have a large number of

male office bearers than their female

counterparts. This should be

addressed by balancing the proportion.

The Sports ministry and the Sports

Federation of India should be made

responsible directly for the

mismanagement. The issue regarding

the wage gap is one of the most

important issue as this gap is

P a g e | 14

responsible for the lack of incentive.

This needs to be addressed

immediately through statutory

measures. The Ministry of

telecommunications also needs to

ensure that proper broadcasting and

coverage should be done at par with

the male sporting events. The

procedure to determine the sex of an

athlete is also obsolete and this needs

to be reviewed by the Medical council

of India and should be amended in

accordance with the global standard.

The biggest responsibility is yet on us,

being members of the abhorrently

patriarchal society that we are, to try

and break the patriarchal shackles and

encourage the female athletes, instead

of mocking and making them feel

uncomfortable. The dangerous trend

which is still continuing is a slap on the

whole concept of gender equity. In the

words of Sania Mirza , ‘It is difficult

to be a Sania Mirza in this

country.’

P a g e | 15

#3 LIGHTING THE FLAME – KEEPING

THE TRADITION ALIVE

GURJOT SINGH KHURANA

Image courtesy: www.dailymail.co.uk

Mia Hamm, Gold medallist in women’s

football in 2004 and 1996 and silver

medallist in 2000 said, “I am building

a fire, and everyday I train, I add more

fuel. At just the right moment I light

the match.” Fire has always been seen

as a source of inspiration and energy

for everyone and specially sportsmen

and hence, marks the beginning of the

biggest event in sports as well-The

Olympics.

Definition

Rule 13 of Olympic Charter gives the

definition of Olympic flame and states

that:-

1.) The Olympic Flame is the flame

which is kindled in Olympia under the

authority of IOC.

P a g e | 16

2.) An Olympic Torch is a portable

torch or a replica thereof, as approved

by the IOC and intended for

combustion of the Olympic flame.

Origin

The ancient Greeks considered fire to

be a divine element, and they

maintained perpetual fires in front of

their principal temples. This was the

base in the sanctuary of Olympia,

where the ancient Olympic Games took

place. The flame was let using the rays

of the sun, to ensure its purity, and a

scaphia, the ancestor of the parabolic

mirror used today for lighting the

Olympic flame. A flame turned

permanently on the altar of the

Goddess Hestia, and such fires were

also lit on the altars of Zeus and Hera,

in front of whose temple the Olympic

flame is lit today.

In the context of Modern Games, the

Olympic Flame represents the positive

values that man has always associated

with fire. The purity of the flame is

guaranteed by the way it is lit using the

sun’s rays. The choice of Olympia as a

departure point emphasises the link

between Ancient and Modern games

and underlines profound connection

between these two events.

Ceremonies

A relay precedes the arrival of the

flame at its final destination: the

Olympic stadium in the host city of

Olympic Games. The Organising

Committee of Olympic Games is

responsible for bringing the Olympic

flame to the Olympic Stadium

(Olympic Charter, Rule 54) When the

flame finally arrives at its destination,

the final torchbearers run into the

stadium to light the Olympic cauldron

with the flame, which remains lit for

the duration of games and is

extinguished only at the closing

ceremony of the Game. Like the

messengers who proclaimed the sacred

Olympic truce, the runners who carry

the Olympic flame carry a message of

peace on their journey.

P a g e | 17

Torch relay in modern times

The torch relay in modern times, has

not regained everything that was

followed in Ancient Greece. The torch

relay in modern times is a non-

competitive replication of the ancient

flame relay. The torch relay, however

makes symbolic celebration of the

Olympic games.1936, Berlin Olympics

saw the introduction of torch relay,

when a lighted torch from Olympia

was carried to the site of Berlin

Olympic Games. The lighted torch

passed through seven countries-

Greece, Bulgaria, Hungary, Yugoslavia,

Czechoslovakia, Austria and Germany.

The first runner of the Olympic Torch

was young athlete Konstantinos

Kondylis.

Who Lights the torch?

The choice of the athlete, who lights

the flame in the Olympic Stadium, is

enjoyed by the host nation. Usually a

popular and a great sportsperson

enjoys the honour to light the flame in

cauldron of the stadium. The Olympic

torch has become a symbol of peace

between the continents of the world.

Since inception, the torch has travelled

across almost all nations that

participate in summer and winter

Olympics. In 1960, Rome Olympics,

the Olympic torch relay was televised

for the first time. In 2000 Sydney

Olympics, the Olympic Flame made its

underwater journey in the Great

Barrier Reef. In 2008 Beijing

Olympics, there was a record of

maximum travel during any Olympic

Relay in the history of modern games

2016 Rio Olympics Torch Relay

The Rio 2016 torch relay was

announced at a special event in Rio De

Janeiro on 24th February. The relay is

due to begin in Brazil on 3 May, and by

the time it has reached the host city for

2016 Opening Ceremony on 5th

August, it will have visited 329 towns

and cities across Brazil, covering an

astonishing amount of ground.

Starting in the capital city Brasilia, it

will travel 20,000 kilometres by land

and 10,000 by air, reaching an

estimated 90 percent of Brazil’s

population. Following its traditional

short relay of Greece, this will follow

the Olympic flame’s lighting on 21st

P a g e | 18

April. The torch will briefly visit

Switzerland before being brought to

Brazil. After departing Brasilia, it will

take in many of country’s most

stunning attractions, from the city of

Salvador and the beaches of Bahia to

the jungle-bound north, the mountains

and wine growing areas of the south, to

the vibrant city of Sao Paulo and,

eventually, Rio De Janeiro, itself.

Rio 2016 President Carlos Arthur

Nuzman remarked, “By taking the

Olympic Flame to the whole country,

we will be keeping our promise to give

millions of people the chance to

participate in a celebration that will

stay in their memories for a long time.

We want to see the pride of people on

streets, show our cultural diversity and

our nature. We will reveal to the world

essence of our country.”

A special hash tag #ChamaGeral ,

which can be translated as #Call

Everyone in English but features on

pun on ‘chama’, meaning call and

flame when read in Portuguese has

been created and a digital campaign

will encourage people to get out and

participate in this historic event from

wherever they will be in country. There

will be around 12,000 torchbearers in

total, all handed the exciting task of

carrying the torch along different

stages of 95 day journey. IOC

President Thomas Bach revealed that

one of the torchbearers in the Greek

Phase of the relay will be a refugee

from Eleonas camp in Athens.

Design of the Torch

The torch has a uniquely Brazilian

design, uniting movement, innovation

and the local flavour. It is intended to

reflect the sense of traditional Olympic

flame and warmth of Brazilian people

in all corners of the country. Just as

Theodore Bikel, an Austrian American

musician, composer and activist

stated, “You don’t really need

modernity in order to exist totally and

fully. You need a mixture of modernity

and tradition.” This tradition of

lighting the flame has evolved with

time. It can only be said that it is going

to ignite the passion for sportspersons

to lose their inhibitions, unite and

inspire them for all times to come.

P a g e | 19

#4 INDIAN PREMIER LEAGUE &

ASSOCIATED INTELLECTUAL

PROPERTY RIGHTS

TEJASWINI RANJAN

Image courtesy:www.intoday.in

All of the official names, phrases,

trademarks, trade names, logos,

trophy image and designs related to

the IPL are protected by the law in a

variety of ways. If anyone could use

the IPL IPR for free, or could create or

suggest an association with the IPL,

there would be no incentive for

sponsors, partners or broadcasters to

invest in or support the IPL and,

ultimately, the amount of financial

distributions that the BCCI-IPL would

be able to make across its franchises

and across its membership base for

investment in the sport of cricket

towards development of infrastructure,

support of retired cricketers and match

officials and development of the game

P a g e | 20

at all levels would be damaged

immeasurably.

The IPL IPR is legally protected by a

wide variety of means, which include

trade mark and design laws, copyright

laws, competition and trade practices

laws, telecommunications and

broadcast laws relating to signal theft,

common law and the terms and

conditions under which IPL match

tickets are sold and pursuant to which

stadium entry is permitted.

What uses are unlawful without a license from the BCCI-IPL?

Without license from the BCCI-IPL, it

is unlawful to

(i) use the IPL Names and IPL Marks

in a manner likely to cause confusion

among members of the public as to the

existence of a commercial association

with the IPL, or

(ii) reproduce or distribute items using

IPL IPR in the course of trade. The IPL

Names and IPL Marks cannot be used

on goods, in business names or in

advertising or promotions without

license from the BCCI-IPL or one of its

authorised licensees that, in turn, has

the rights to grant sub-licenses.

(iii) to falsely represent or imply any

association, affiliation, endorsement,

sponsorship or similar relationship

with the BCCI-IPL.

Situations in which the IPL IPR can be used without the BCCI-IPL’s

explicit license and consent. :

The IPL Names, IPL Marks and, to a

limited extent and subject to the

current IPL Media Accreditation and

News Access Guidelines (and all

relevant copyright laws), the IPL

Footage, may be used for news

reporting purposes in non-commercial

editorial-only news pieces without the

BCCI-IPL’s prior authorisation.

In certain circumstances when

reporting and providing information

on the BCCI-IPL and/or the IPL,

journalists are able to use the IPL

Names and IPL Marks to illustrate

their editorial-only feature subject to

full compliance with applicable laws

and regulations. Such use of the IPL

IPR must be in compliance with these

guidelines.

P a g e | 21

Rights enjoyed by the franchise sponsors and partners :

Franchise sponsors and partners are

granted certain rights by the franchises

they associate with. The rights that

franchises may grant to their sponsors

and partners are governed by the

franchise agreement, sponsorship

guidelines, player ID guidelines and

other applicable league rules. In no

event may a franchise grant or a

franchise sponsor or partner be

granted any rights in IPL IPR. As a

result, a franchise sponsor or partner

shall in no event use IPL IPR (other

than specifically granted rights to use

franchise names, franchise marks, etc.)

by virtue of being a franchise sponsor

or partner. For the sake of clarity, no

franchise sponsor or partner may use

the IPL Names or IPL Marks in any of

its marketing communications or

promotions.

Some specific examples of impermissible unlicensed behaviour:

Advertisements, promotions and events :

Advertisement features stating or

suggesting an association between a

brand, product, service or event and

the IPL by using IPL Names, IPL

Marks and IPL Footage are

impermissible. Similarly, businesses

that produce newsletters to customers

or clients must ensure that IPL Names,

IPL Marks and IPL Footage are not

used, especially in a way which

suggests a commercial association

between their business and the IPL.

The same applies to businesses that

invite customers to IPL themed events.

Holding an event which is only about

the IPL and uses the IPL Names, IPL

Marks and IPL Footage is not

permissible. This is particularly true of

events that have commercial sponsors

involved

Websites Trademark and copyright laws apply equally to the Internet and to websites

:

Websites that provide information

about the IPL and are being operated

on a purely non commercial basis – for

example, a supporters’ site used to

P a g e | 22

provide information about players

participating in the IPL, or a chat

forum about the IPL – are unlikely to

infringe the BCCI-IPL’s rights.

However, the creation of IPL specific

communities that use IPL Names, IPL

Marks and IPL Footage and solicit and

raise sponsorships and advertising

constitutes commercial use of IPL IPR

and are impermissible.

In particular, live streaming and

deferred uploading of IPL Footage

(whether or not for profit),

reproduction of IPL Names and IPL

Marks in commercial contexts online

and sale of counterfeit and unofficial

IPL merchandise on auction and other

websites constitute serious

infringements of the BCCI-IPL’s

intellectual property rights and could

result in civil penalties and even

criminal prosecution. The registration

and use of domain names that contain

IPL Names also infringes IPL

trademarks and any attempt to divert

web traffic by the use of IPL Names in

meta-tags or other notations or

through the purchase of IPL Names as

search or advertising keywords is

impermissible. The creation of fantasy

leagues or other online competitions or

events that use or make reference to

the IPL or claim “official” status

without license or use IPL IPR are

impermissible.

Business Names :

Adopting business or trading names

that include IPL Names and using

business logos that include IPL Marks

or confusingly similar marks are

impermissible. Tickets and Hospitality

Packages Tickets to IPL matches are

sold under specific conditions.

Primarily, these may only be

purchased through officially appointed

ticketing agents for personal use. IPL

tickets may not be used for promotions

or as prizes in contests. The right to

run ticket promotions is reserved for

IPL sponsors and partners and is

strictly prohibited by the tickets’ terms

and conditions. Further, IPL tickets

may not be resold for a profit or as part

of hospitality packages by unlicensed

travel agents or other entities. Only

IPL sponsors and partners may use

IPL marks in these promotions. IPL

tickets may not be sold, or otherwise

included for commercial purposes as

part of a travel or tour package (for

P a g e | 23

example combining match tickets with

flights and/or a hotel room for the

night) by unlicensed travel agents or

other entities. Further, unlicensed

travel agents or other entities may not

engage in any form of activity which

may result in an unauthorised

commercial association with the IPL,

to the detriment of the BCCI-IPL or its

commercial affiliates, whether by way

of an unauthorised use of IPL Names

and IPL Marks or otherwise.

Public Screenings :

The IPL and its official broadcaster

retain all rights to license commercial

screenings of IPL Footage made

available to members of the public or

displayed in public places. Prohibited

acts include display of IPL Footage in

movie theatres, the sale of tickets or

levying of a cover charge for entry to a

location screening IPL Footage or IPL

themed screening events that use the

IPL Names, IPL Marks and IPL

Footage.

Mobile and wireless services and applications :

IPL Names, IPL Marks and IPL

Footage may not be used on any

mobile or wireless technology,

including on mobile applications

without license. Further, SMS updates

of live scores, games, competitions and

features that utilise the IPL IPR may

not be offered or made available

without license from the IPL’s official

mobile and mobile activation partner.

Merchandise Merchandise with

general cricket terms, India related

terms (provided there is no usage of

IPL IPR) are permissible. Prohibited

acts include, the manufacture and sale

of counterfeit merchandise relating to

the IPL, and the unlicensed use of IPL

IPR or any reference to the IPL or

unlicensed use of the IPL IPR relating

to any of the teams participating in the

IPL, in the merchandise.

Match Schedule:

Use of the match schedule to provide

information in a purely non-

commercial sense is permitted.

However, the commercial use or

presentation of the match schedule by

third parties is not permitted.

P a g e | 24

Editorial uses, Newsletters :

Purely editorial use of IPL Names and

IPL Marks solely for conveying

information and without association

with any commercial entity is

permissible use. However, this

journalistic use exception with respect

to IPL Names, IPL Marks and IPL

Footage does not apply to the

production and distribution of

newsletters, client bulletins or other

marketing collateral produced in the

guise of journalism, which state or

suggest an official association between

a product, service or event and the IPL.

Consequences of using any IPL IPR without the BCCIIPL’s authorization

:

Unauthorised use of the IPL IPR may

infringe one or more of the intellectual

property rights of the BCCI-IPL, the

terms of the agreements signed

between the BCCI-IPL and official

sponsors and partners of the IPL

and/or the terms and conditions under

which IPL tickets are sold and stadium

entry is permitted. While the BCCI-IPL

expects full compliance with the above,

it is prepared to take all legal action in

the case of each and any infringement

and violation. This could include an

injunction to stop the infringing

activity, a suit for damages or

compensation or an enforced

accounting of profits by the infringer

to the BCCI-IPL. Both civil and

criminal remedies may be available in

the case of intellectual property

violations, signal theft and other

violations of the BCCI-IPL’s rights.

Before the BCCI-IPL initiates legal

proceedings, a suspected infringer may

receive a legal notice from the BCCI-

IPL’s lawyers or its designated agent,

advising the infringer of violations and

unlicensed usage relating to the IPL

IPR and/or potential infringements

constituting breach of the media

accreditation guidelines and/or the

news access guidelines and/or the

terms and conditions of download and

usage of the IPL Marks. In such event,

the offending party may be given the

opportunity, without prejudice to any

rights of the BCCI-IPL to take legal

action against the offending party, to

P a g e | 25

refrain from the continued use of the

IPL IPR and/or the potential

infringements. If the infringer fails to

respond to and adhere to the

requirements and conditions set out in

the legal notice, the BCCI-IPL will

exercise its right to pursue its legal and

administrative remedies. No such prior

warning, however, is required, and the

BCCI-IPL will utilise all resources

available to fully protect the IPL IPR

and ensure persons are dissuaded from

infringing any rights relating to the

IPL.

The BCCI-IPL must prevent

unlicensed third parties from

undertaking unauthorised activities

that damage or dilute the BCCI-IPL’s

exclusive rights and those of its

sponsors, partners and broadcasters.

Also, in order to maintain the integrity

of the IPL brand and to protect against

dilution and damage to its reputation

and prestige, it is vital that the BCCI-

IPL retains careful control of IPL IPR

and their use.

P a g e | 26

#5 PHENOMENAL CONCEPT OF SPORTS

CONTRACT: PROCEDURES AND PRINCIPLES

AVI DHIRENDRA & SABAH KHAN

Image courtesy:pspk9.com

I. INTRODUCTION

Employment relationship between the

athlete and team is hold by the legal

glue known as contracts. When both

the parties intend the act of signature

to be the last act in the formation of a

valid contract, it results in the

formation of valid contract. Contract in

sports defines the various roles and

responsibilities of participants in the

business of professional sports.

Sports contract are different from

normal contracts due to various

factors. Sports contract are relatively

short in duration and moreover the

P a g e | 27

money is typically staggering, the

terms and conditions are on take it or

leave it basis, basis emphasize is made

on the maintenance of excellent

physical condition, and participants

are considered as entertainers who are

playing and are paid accordingly. The

principles followed in the Formation of

sports contract are same as in more

standard contract. In evaluating the

validity of the contract, there must be

an offer and offeree, consideration,

and a proper acceptance.

The standardized agreement between

the athlete and the team is Standard

Player’s Contract (SPK). The player’s

rights are specified by this

employment contract. The SPK states

that the player has unique skills and

that the team controls the activities of

the player. The SPK is used in the

major team sports and is usually a part

of the collective bargaining agreement.

There is little flexibility in its term, and

its signing is a prerequisite to

compliance. If the player has relative

bargaining strength to demand

Specialty Clauses then they are added

to the SPK. These clauses include

signing bonus, option clauses, no-cut

clauses, and various incentive bonuses.

Through the inclusion by way of an

incorporation clause the collateral

agreement is considered as modify

contracts, examples of which are

collective bargaining agreements and

the league constitution and bylaws.

Terminations, Assignments, and

Remedies are methods to end, change

or satisfy potential contract disputes.

In order to terminate a contract the

club must act in his rights; if it does

not, the termination represents a

breach of contract. When the athlete is

traded to another team an assignment

of player’s contract occurs. Money

damages, restitution, or specific

contracts are included as the remedies

for the breach of contract.

Defenses may be posited in an alleged

breach of contract; unclean hands,

unconscious ability, and mutuality are

the typical defenses for sports contract.

II. PRINCIPLES OF LAW OF CONTRACT

Contracts dominate daily business

dealings in all over the world. Parties

enter into contracts to gain a better

understanding of the rights and

responsibilities of each party to the

agreement. Contracts should clearly

P a g e | 28

state the obligations of each party to

the contract and also state the

repercussions if one party fails to fulfill

those obligations. Parties exchange

goods and services in the stream of

commerce on an everyday basis

through written or oral contracts.

Some contracts are more detailed than

others, but it is wise for all parties to

an agreement to fully understand the

terms of a contract before reaching an

agreement. Sports contracts are

governed by the basics of contract law

but possess some unique features as

well. It is essential to have a basic

understanding of contract law to

determine how sports contracts

function and how they can be

interpreted. This part of the paper is

not meant to be a treatise on contracts

but merely to provide the reader with a

rudimentary overview of the subject of

contracts so the reader may have the

necessary background to understand

contract law in the context of sports

law.

DEFINITION OF CONTRACT

Contract law deals with the concept of

the formation and enforcement of

agreements between parties. A

contract has been defined as “an

agreement between two or more

parties which creates an obligation to

do or not to do a particular thing.” The

Restatement (Second) of Contracts

defines a contract as “a promise or set

of promises for the breach of which the

law gives a remedy, or the performance

of which the law in some way

recognizes as a duty.

III. HOW SPORTS CONTRACTS ARE DIFFERENT?

Contracts in sports are different from

other contracts. The preeminent

contract in sports is the employment

contract . If a team hires a player to

play say for a period three years, there

will be clauses in the contracts that will

appear incongruous. For example, at

the time of signing the contract the

athlete might agree to abide by a

morality clause or a clause that forbids

his participation in certain sports.

As every athlete is deemed to be

unique and each contract stipulates

that the each athlete posse’s unique

and irreplaceable skills, no matter how

P a g e | 29

average is he. Every athlete then must

swear that his skills are one of a kind.

The reason for this is that the courts

recognized that in team sports there

exists a mystical chemistry between

the teammates and even if one element

is taken from the equation, no matter

how unremarkable, the entire team is

changed. The concept which adds

uniqueness in sports employment

contract is the concept of “juice” which

is defined as the ability based on

unique skills to write your own tickets

or rampant popularity. The more juice

a player posses, the greater his ability

to modify his employment contract by

attaching standard modifications or

not so standard modifications, and this

principle is clearly stated in the case of

Napoleon Lajoie.

IV. FORMATION OF SPORTS CONTRACT

In order to form a valid contract both

the team and the athlete must intend

to sign the contract as the last and final

act in the creation of the binding

agreement. During the act of signing

the minds should meet genuinely. The

parties in the contract must be

identified. The team, the entity that

offers the contract, is the offerer, and

the athlete, the one who is offered the

contract, is the offeree.

After the identification of parties the

next step is to determine whether the

athlete has properly accepted the

team’s offer. If the response of the

athlete is different from what was

offered by the team then it is

considered as the counter offer to the

team’s original offer. In earlier days

the signature of the league

commissioner for approving the

contract were considered as the

condition precedent for a binding

contract. If the commissioner has not

signed the approval, then the contract

was merely a counteroffer and the lack

of signature results into material

breach; and the signing by the player

was considered as only a revocable

offer. The Los Angeles Rams V.

Cannon and Detroit Football Co. V.

Robinson cases are the early examples

how contracts were interpreted before

the National Football League changed

its SPK to reflect a lessened

importance to commissioner’s

signature approving the contract. Both

cases came at the time of interleague

rivalry between the National Football

League and the American Football

P a g e | 30

League in which there was a fierce

competition to sign the best collegiate

players.

THE FORMATION OF SPORTS CONTRACT CAN BE CATEGORIZED INTO 3

PARTS:

(1) Offer

(2) Acceptance

(3) Interpretation

OFFER

The team forms the origin of the

contract. The original offer,

employment contract etc. are prepared

by the team. The acceptance of the

player is come into existence when he

signs the contract. But if the signing of

the contract by the player is not

accompanied by the consideration and

a withdrawal is forwarded to the team

before an acceptance, then the player’s

signature is merely an authentication

of a revocable offer as opposed to the

formation of a binding contract. The

validity of the offer is solely

determined by the intent of the parties.

ACCEPTANCE

While considering that there was a

valid acceptance or not, the initial

question which has to be determined is

that of timeliness. That is, was the

athlete’s acceptance of the contract

proffered in a timely manner or not.

The concept of acceptance is not

particularly delineated. Acceptance is

manifested or indicated by any act that

express the athlete’s willingness to be

bound by the exact terms of the offer.

INTERPRETATION

There are many terms in sports that

are almost inherently ambiguous, or

even oxymoronic. The folks who do not

inherently understand the dynamics of

the sports will misinterpret these

terms if these terms are not

predefined. The pre controversy

interpretation that parties place on the

contract term is given great weight in

the process of deciphering the intent

P a g e | 31

and understanding of the now

conflicting parties. If there is any

dispute as to the interpretation of the

terms of a contract than the Courts will

enforce the intent of the parties to the

contract. The intent which will be

enforced by court is what a reasonable

person would have believed that the

parties are intending. There may be a

times where the terms of a contract are

itself contradictory in such a situation

the court will try to interpret the

provision in light of other provisions

and resolve the conflict. However, if

the court is not able to arrive at a

particular conclusion, the Court will

declare that there is no contract. A

contract can be termed as ambiguous

when it is uncertain what the intent of

the parties was and whether the

contract is capable of more than one

reasonable interpretation. Also, Courts

abide by the rule that an ambiguous

contract is interpreted against the

party who drafted it. In other words,

the party who did not draft the

contract will be given the benefit of the

doubt so to speak. In contract

interpretation, earlier contract

between the parties may be useful as in

the case of Pasquel V. Owen where the

breach occurred after the partial

performance of the contract, it is

useful to look how the parties actually

functioned under the contract.

V. STANDARD PLAYER’S CONTRACT

Standard Player Contract (SPK) is the key

link between the players and their teams.

The only employment contract which is

allowed in professional sports is SPK. It is

a contract of adhesion that has been

shaped and reshaped by successful court

challenges and the collective bargaining

process. More particularly the SPK states

that it does not matter how average the

player appears, he always possess some

unique skills.

All major sports leagues use standard

player contracts. Star players are

sometimes able to modify the standard

player contract through the negotiation

process by adding incentives and bonus

clauses; however, the majority of

professional athletes will sign a standard

player contract without modification. The

standard player contract is a product of

the collective bargaining process.

Management and labor have negotiated

what they have deemed to be a contract

suitable for both parties, each arguing for

provisions that support the best interests

of either labor or management. Legal and

business issues arise when teams attempt

P a g e | 32

to modify the standard player contract.

Instead of proceeding through the court

system to litigate contractual issues,

players and management have determined

that those matters will be decided by

binding arbitration.

The standard player contract (SPK) can be

said to be usually in a “humdrum” form.

Humdrum is a standard wording that can

be reused again and again without any

change. Whether the athlete is involved in

a league with a players association or not,

the contract usually offered to the athlete

and other athletes are all the same other

than the salary and bonus. There can be

extension to the SPK. The leagues which

are newly formed model their own

contracts after one of the Big Four (NFL,

MLB, NBA and NHL) in order to recognize

issues which are relevant to team owners

and the athletes. There are some start-up

leagues which have taken a new approach

to contracts of professional services by

establishing minimal salaries for the

athletes in that sport and rewarding the

team and athlete on a per game basis with

other incentives. The now defunct Xtreme

Football League (XFL), for example,

offered modest salaries to its players. Such

wages were comparable to wages of the

average U.S. worker. This is primarily due

to the fact that the league owned all of the

teams rather than each team serving as a

franchise for the league. None of the Big

Four sports leagues are run by a single

entity. Each team is a franchise and

competes for players. That is a primary

reason for the escalation of player salaries.

VI. PROVISIONS IN STANDARD PLAYER CONTRACTS WHICH

ESTABLISH THE TEAM'S EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THE ATHLETE'S

SERVICES

a. EXPRESS COVENANTS

The express covenants are those

which are created by the express words

of the parties to the deed declaratory of

their intention. In the typical standard

player contract, there are three types of

covenants that support the team's

exclusive right to an athlete's services.

The first clause consists of the athlete's

promise to play for the contracting

team. In most instances, the athlete

promises to play "only" for the team

with which he signs. The second clause

limits the athlete's mobility by

restricting his right to engage in other

athletic activities. Although the

primary intent of this provision is to

minimize the athlete's exposure to

injury, it also rather expansively

supports a team's contention that the

athlete agreed to provide his services

P a g e | 33

exclusively to the contracting team.

The third commonly used "exclusivity"

clause specifies that the athlete's

services are "unique" and that the team

is entitled to seek an injunction if the

athlete accepts employment with

another team. Needless to say, this

clause is most frequently relied upon

as the team's primary basis for

obtaining injunctive relief.

b. IMPLIED COVENANTS

The implied covenants are those

which are inferred by the law from

certain words in a contract. In the rare

instance where an express covenant

establishing the team's exclusive right

to services does not appear in the

athlete's contract, the team may seek

“injunctive relief” on the theory that an

implied covenant exists. Both the

commentators and the courts have

provided support for the general

proposition that a covenant of

exclusive services will be implied if the

contract language and the intent of the

parties sustain such an inference. In

determining the intent of the parties,

courts characteristically focus on

whether the arrangement was

intended to be "exclusive." In major

team sports, such an inference is easily

established, at least with regard to

playing other professional sports.

VII. SPECIALTY CLAUSES IN SPORTS CONTRACT

The SPK leaves a little room for

negotiating or sweetening the pot. It is

so called specialty clauses, however,

where the astute agent is able to add

incentives or bonuses. The addition of

more and more specialty clauses in

SPK depends upon the bargaining

power of the athlete, thus making the

entire agreement attractive. Only

player’s juice and agent’s imagination

can delineate the limit of specialty

clause. Specialty clause includes

signing bonuses, options, releases, no-

cuts, and collateral agreements. On the

other hand there are Collateral

agreements, which are the documents

that affect the player-club relationship

and these provisions are incorporated

into the SPK. So, in effect, when a

player signs the six-page SPK he also

agrees to some 300 pages of other

materials. The main three specialty

clauses are defined below:

SIGNING BONUS

P a g e | 34

The contract negotiation process aims

at signing bonus. The agent wants to

upfront the maximum money possible.

A signing bonus is up-front money in

that the entire player has to do, at a

minimum, is to appear in the training

camp ready to play. Since the money

received is for the mere act of signing,

and not for actual playing, therefore, it

is not considered as salary. The player

will keep all the bonus money received

if he is “cut” later on. The most well

known form of specialty clause is

known as the signing bonus. The

athlete must appear at training camp

in good shape, ready to play in order to

receive these are the minimum which

the athlete has to do. The signing

bonus of a player cannot be considered

to be his salary. The employee will

receive it for little more than the mere

act of signing. If he is "cut" later on, he

will still keep the bonus money. In

some cases where the team folds in the

interim, the player must only show a

willingness to perform. In the case of

Albama Football, Inc v. Stabler the

athlete was allowed to keep the signing

bonus even after though the team was

no longer in existence.

NO-CUT

The no cut clause ensures that the

player will not be cut during the life of

the contract. This is very desirable for

the player. Termination of player by

the management can be done on

various grounds such as: skill, physical

injury, off-season injuries, or

suspension, for instance. As a result

there is variety of no-cut clauses that

prevents the player from certain types

of termination.

OPTION

The team can unilaterally bind the

player for another year at a stated

percent (usually 10 percent less) of the

prior year’s salary with the help of an

option clause. Some control of

management still retains over the

employee even after the contract is

over and thus it is thought to be

anticompetitive. However, the onerous

aspects of the option year are usually

ameliorated through the collective

bargaining process. The court in

Hennigan v. Charger Football Co.

pertaining to payment for the option

P a g e | 35

year in case of player’s injury observed

that the plaintiff was not entitled to

compensation for the 1967 football

season from the defendant. The

plaintiff was terminated for his

inability to pass the physical

examination. The “no-cut” clause did

not protect plaintiff, and the proviso in

this clause was inapplicable.

VIII. TERMINATIONS, REMEDIES & DEFENSES BY THE PLAYERS

TERMINATIONS

The majority of the rights that foster

the drafting and redrafting of a sports

contract appear to be most closely

associated with management’s right.

The non justified termination of the

athlete’s employment contract may be

deemed as a breach of contract.

However, justification is interpreted

broadly. If the athlete is physically

unable to perform, the employer can

terminate the contract. But, if the

termination is made by the team on

the basis of an injury, such an action is

covered by a provision in the union-

management collective bargaining

agreement.

In order to terminate an athlete’s

employment contract the club must act

in the framework of its rights. If the

athlete is out of shape, lack skill, or

defies club and league rules, or for a

material breach of standard player

contract, then the club has the full

right to terminate the athlete’s

employment contract.

REMEDIES

A contract breach is usually remedied

by money damages, restitution, or

specific performance. Usually, a party

will seek the benefit of the bargain that

which was promised in relation to

what was received. After that, if the

legal remedy is inadequate the party

may seek specific performance if the

services are unique i.e. the court will

not force the athlete to play against his

will but because of athlete’s

uniqueness the court will allow the

prevailing party to enjoin the athlete

from playing with any team or league

other that the one that he is currently

under contract with.

DEFENSES

P a g e | 36

When either party alleges a breach of

contract, several defenses are

available. On the termination of

contract by the team due to injury the

collective bargaining agreement comes

into play. The doctor of the team

prepares a diagnosis report which is

submitted to the arbitration and is

reviewed by a normal physician.

During the arbitration the club can

raise some defenses such as failure to

pass the preseason medical exam,

failure to make complete disclosure of

a physical or mental condition, an

injury that has occurred prior to the

physical examination, a non sport, no

new sports related injury after exam,

and no aggravation of a prior injury

after the physical.

THE DEFENSES CAN BE BROADLY CATEGORIZED INTO 3 PARTS

LACK OF MUTUALITY

Although mutuality has numerous

meanings in various contexts, the term

most frequently refers to the required

reciprocal exchange of consideration

between the promisor and the

promisee to a bilateral contract. In the

sports context, mutuality has a

specialized meaning which denotes a

required “mutuality of remedy” or

“obligation”. Notwithstanding the fact

that lack of mutuality was a primary

defense in early sports cases, today the

doctrine is all but dead. The modern

focus in sports cases is not on

mutuality per se, but rather on

whether equity will enforce an unfair

bargain."

UNCONSCIONABILITY

As in any other contractual setting, an

athlete may assert unconscionability as

an affirmative defense. Modem courts

scrutinize the fundamental fairness of

contracts, requiring that terms fairly

proportion the rights and duties of the

contracting parties. In sports litigation,

unconscionability has particular

applicability in challenging reserve or

option clauses, which are common in

standard player contracts. If contract

terms are sufficiently harsh and

P a g e | 37

oppressive, modem courts will simply

refuse to enforce those terms.

Although an attack on option or

reserve clauses predicated on illegality

may fail, an appeal to the fairness of

the court may still succeed, as courts

retain discretion to deny enforcement

of unconscionable agreements. When

courts take action to enjoin a “jump”,

some authorsity exists for the

proposition that the defendant-

athlete’s rights will be protected by

examining whether the former team

will satisfy all of its obligations under

the contract - the most important of

which are the former team’s ability and

willingness to continue paying the

athlete’s salary. Some courts will

ensure this protection by issuing a

conditional injunction.

UNCLEAN HANDS

A party cannot request the court to

grant an equitable remedy if the party

enters into contract with unclean

hands. Athletes have successfully used

this doctrine to defend against teams

that have attempted to enjoin a player

from playing with another team.

IX. CONCLUSION

Throughout the article, the authors has

tried to cover various aspects of Sports

Contracts and other allied matters. It

has been seen that sports contract

differ typically from contracts of

ordinary nature. The authors has

discussed Standard Player contracts,

the formation of the contracts, the

negotiation process, termination

process, several special clauses

embedded in sports contract which

give it altogether a different

dimension. Sports contract give

players certain level of security as they

are embedded with certain special

elements to protect the interests of the

players and provide them with

affordable quality to play.

Moreover, the sports contract being in

the nature of a contract different from

ordinary contracts does find a special

mention insofar the drafting is

concerned. The drafting of sports

contracts must be done in a very

sophisticated manner, whereby it is

assured that the interest of the player

as well as of the employer is protected.

P a g e | 38

The drafting has to be done carefully

also because if room for error is

allowed, it may lead to long term court

settlement in case of a dispute. It has

to be kept in mind that sports

contracts do hold a very important

place in sports world comprising of

sports entertainment, etc and

therefore the consumer and player

satisfaction are also the prime

importance while such contracts are

drafted and implemented.

P a g e | 39

#6 ZAFIR: NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY, DELHI SPORTS FEST

3-6 MARCH ,2016

SHWETA KABRA

KUMAR RITWIK

SIDDHARTH GAUTAM

P a g e | 40

P a g e | 41

P a g e | 42

P a g e | 43

P a g e | 44

P a g e | 45

P a g e | 46

Most events happened in Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium except for basketball which

happened in NLUD. Some other facts are here:

1. Total of 19 colleges not only from in and around Delhi but across the country- Bits

Pilani, NLU Jodhpur, Tamil Nadu National Law University etc.

2. 697 participants in total

3. 13 sports and 9 events in athletics

4. Encouraging women's participation- 3 teams in women's cricket.

BITS Pilani got the highest points, thus winning the overall best contingent trophy.

Mona Nooreyezdan from NLUD won the Best Female Athlete Prize. The top 3 female

athletes received the free sports law course from MyLaw.net.

P a g e | 47

#7 CASE LAW ALERT

Image Courtesy:www.pspk9.com

Chantelle Kerry v Ice Skating Australia

The Appellant, Chantelle Kerry, an

Australian figure skater, filed an

Application in the Appeals Division of

CAS on the 4th December 2013,

seeking a declaration that Brooklee

Han, another Australian figure skater,

is ineligible to be nominated by Ice

Skating Australia (ISA) to the

Australian Olympic Committee (AOC)

to skate at the Winter Olympic Games

in Sochi in 2014, together with other

forms of relief. The Application named

ISA as the Respondent, Brooklee Han

as an Affected Party, and the AOC as

an Interested Party. At a Directions

Hearing by teleconference on the 9th

December, the parties agreed that “the

Court of Arbitration of Court (CAS) has

jurisdiction to determine, by

arbitration the question of eligibility

(the Eligibility Question) of Ms

Brooklee Han (the Affected Party) to

be nominated by the ISA (the

Respondent) to the Australian Olympic

Committee for the 2014 Winter

Olympic Games in Sochi”. They also

agreed that “once the Eligibility

Question has been determined by the

CAS, the question of nomination is to

be referred back to the Respondent for

determination in accordance with the

applicable nominations criteria” and

that “the determination of the

Respondent referred to (above) is to be

final and binding on all athletes, and

all other persons whose interests might

P a g e | 48

be affected, unless the determination is

so obviously perverse or irrational, in

which case the determination will be

subject to a further appeal to the CAS.”

The Appellant filed an Appeal Brief,

containing submissions and some

evidentiary documents. The

Respondent and the Affected Party did

likewise in their respective Outlines of

Submissions, and the Appellant also

filed some submissions in Reply, which

included some new evidence. The

Respondent’s and Affected Party’s

rights to reply to that new evidence

were reserved.

APPLICABLE RULES AND REGULATIONS

Nomination of skaters for selection in

the 2014 Australian Winter Olympics

Team is governed by the AOC Olympic

Team Selection By-Law (the Selection

By-Law), the 2014 Australian Olympic

Winter Team Selection Criteria –

Figure Skating (the Selection Criteria)

and the 2014 Australian Olympic

Winter Team Ice Skating Australia

Incorporated Nomination Criteria –

Figure Skating (the Nomination

Criteria).

The Selection Criteria set out relevant

provisions for eligibility for selection

including as follows: “In order to be

selected by the AOC as a member of

the 2014 Australian Olympic Winter

Team, each Athlete (or team where

applicable) must: (1) have met the

requirements prescribed in the

Qualification System; (2) have met and

continue to observe and meet the

eligibility requirements for Australian

competitors described in the Olympic

Charter; (3) have met and continue to

meet the requirements of Rules 40 and

44 of the Olympic Charter and their

Bye-Laws.”

The Bye-Law to Rule 40 of the

Olympic Charter provides:

“1. Each IF [International Federation]

establishes its sport’s own eligibility

criteria in accordance with the

Olympic Charter. Such Criteria must

be submitted to the IOC Executive

Board for approval.

2. The application of the eligibility

criteria lies with the IFs, their affiliated

national federations and the NOCs in

P a g e | 49

the fields of their respective

responsibilities.”

In Ice Skating, the current rules

relating to eligibility of skaters

generally are to be found in the

International Skating Union

Constitution and General Regulations

2012 (the ISU Regulations). In relation

to this matter, the relevant provisions

relied on by the Appellant are found in

Part B of the General Regulations,

headed “Eligibility” and in particular

in Rule 102 which provides:

1. Eligibility Status

a) The eligibility Rules of the ISU are

based upon the principles that:

i) a person has the privilege to take

part in the activities and competitions

under the jurisdiction of the ISU only

if such person respects the principles

and policies of the ISU as expressed in

the ISU Statutes and fulfils those

obligations on the basis of which the

ISU functions and governs all its

activities;

ii) the condition of eligibility is made

for the adequate protection of the

economic and other interests of the

ISU, which uses its financial revenues

for the administration and

development of the ISU sport

disciplines and for the support and

benefit of the Members and their

Skaters.

b) An eligible person is one who elects

to take part only in International

Competitions which are:

i) sanctioned by the Member and/or

the ISU;

ii) conducted by ISU recognized and

approved Officials, including Referees,

Technical Controllers, Technical

Specialists, Judges, Starters,

Competitors Stewards and others; and

iii) conducted under ISU Regulations.

.................

2. Definition of an ineligible person A

person becomes ineligible to

participate in ISU activities and

competitions by:

i) skating or officiating without the

prior express authorization of the

respective Member, in any capacity in

a Skating competition, exhibition or

tour in any of the sport disciplines of

the ISU:

P a g e | 50

ii) skating or officiating in a

competition conducted by Officials

(Referees, Technical Controllers,

Technical Specialists, Judges, Starters,

Competitors Stewards, etc.) not on the

approved list of the respective Member

or on the ISU approved list;

iii) skating or officiating in an event

not sanctioned by a Member and/or

the ISU; or

iv) otherwise violating this Rule 102.”

The Appellant’s contention is that

Brooklee Han became ineligible to be

considered for nomination through the

application of Rule 102(2)(i).

Loss of eligibility

a) The consequences of a breach of the

eligibility Rules shall be the loss of

eligibility. The status of a person

disqualified or suspended under other

applicable Rules, does not affect the

eligible status of such person, but it

limits, according to the terms of the

applicable disciplinary sanction, the

right of such person to participate in

the competitions and activities of the

ISU.

b) The ISU Council, upon presentation

of such evidence as it considers

sufficient at its sole discretion, may

rule upon an alleged breach of the

eligibility Rules, whether or not any

protest has been made against an

individual’s eligible status in skating.

c) Before a ruling is made by the

Council, both the Member and the

person concerned shall be notified and

the person concerned shall be given

the opportunity to furnish an

explanation of the alleged breach

(which may be in writing). If the

person concerned does not avail

himself of such opportunity within

fifteen (15) days of receipt of such

notice, his right to furnish an

explanation shall be waived.

Matters concerning eligibility not

otherwise foreseen in the ISU Rules

shall be considered by the Member

concerned in a manner consistent with

the spirit and intent of the ISU Rules.”

Finally the relevant Nomination

Criteria are as follows:

“2. Nomination of Athletes For the

purposes of nomination to the AOC of

Athletes for selection to the 2014

Australian Olympic Winter Team, Ice

Skating Australia will nominate

P a g e | 51

Athletes according to the following

process:

(a) if Australia qualifies a quota

place(s) at the ISU Olympic

Qualifiying Competition, then

Ice Skating Australia will

nominate the Athlete(s) who

qualified the quota place

............”

It is common ground between the

parties that Brooklee Han competed

for Australia at the Olympic Qualifying

Event, the Nebelhorn Trophy at

Oberstdorf, Germany in September

2013 and there she qualified Australia

for a quota spot for ladies figure

skating at the Olympic Winter Games

in Sochi. There has been no argument

that, apart from the Eligibility

Question, Clause 2 (2) of the

Nomination Criteria would then see

her automatically nominated to

represent Australia in Sochi. 10.

However, in August of 2013, Brooklee

Han competed in the Hershey Open

2013 Figure Skating Competition in

New York City. The question which is

raised by the Appellant in her

Application and Submissions is

whether Brooklee Han’s competing in

that competition rendered her

ineligible under ISU Rule 102 (2) (i),

the contention of the Appellant being

that she did not have “prior express

authorization of the respective

Member”, namely the ISA, to do so.

The evidence as to authorisation is as

follows:

On June 30, 2011, the President of ISA

wrote to Brooklee Han as follows:

“Dear Brooklee, RE: Permission to

Skate in US Figure Skating sanctioned

events On behalf of Ice Skating

Australia, I am pleased to give you

permission to skate in any competition

or exhibition that is sanctioned by US

Figure Skating. I encourage you to take

whatever opportunities are available.

All the best for the Summer, and I look

forward to seeing you in Brisbane for

the Junior Grand Prix in September.

Sincerely, (Signed) Cathy Taylor,

President, Ice Skating Australia.”

Then on 25 July 2012 there was a

further letter as follows: “To Whom It

May Concern Ice Skating Australia is

pleased to give permission for

Brooklee Han to skate in any

exhibition or compete in Junior or

Senior singles competitions sanctioned

by US Figure Skating during 2012. I

P a g e | 52

can confirm that Brooklee is a current

member in good standing. She

competed at Junior and Senior

National and International level in

2011 and is still Junior age eligible

(Date of Birth 06/07/1995). Sincerely,

(Signed) Cathy Taylor, President, Ice

Skating Australia”

There was no similar letter written in

2013. However, evidence adduced by

the Affected Party included a proposed

competition schedule for her for the

2013-2014 season, sent to ISA in April

2013, which proposed competing in

the Hershey Open in August 2013,

amongst other events.

On 28 November 2013, an email was

sent to the Appellant’s father in

response to correspondence from him

raising the eligibility issue, which

stated that “Reading ISA and ISU

Rules, the ISA Board of Management

has determined that Ms. Brooklee Han

continues to be an eligible skater.

Regards Sean O’Brien, Honorary

Secretary, Ice Skating Australia.”

There is no evidence that the eligibility

question has been raised with the ISU.

It is common ground between the

parties that the Hershey Open is an

event which is sanctioned by US Figure

Skating, the ISU Member Federation

in the USA. It is a domestic

competition which, it seems, accepts

entries from foreign competitors.

However, Brooklee Han, who is a dual

Australian and US citizen, competed in

the event under the name of the US

club of which she is a member.

The Appellant also adduced evidence

in her Submissions In Reply outlining

the process usually undertaken in

seeking authorisation to compete

internationally, and examples of

eligibility decisions and rules from

other countries. This evidence was

admitted on the condition that the

Respondent and Affected Party would

have the opportunity to answer it, if

need be.

THE PARTIES’ SUBMISSIONS

The Appellant contends that

authorisation from the ISA was

required for Brooklee Han to skate in

the Hershey Open in 2013, and that no

such authorisation was obtained. It

was argued by the Appellant that

because the Hershey Open was an

event being conducted by a Member

other than ISA, whether sanctioned or

P a g e | 53

ot, authorisation was required.

Further, it was put that the

authorisation of 2011 must be read as

limited to competitions in that year, as

evidenced by the fact that a further

authorisation was sought in 2012. The

lack of authorisation specifically

referring to 2013 events, or to the

Hershey Open in particular, has the

effect of her competing being

unauthorised. This, it is contended,

results in automatic ineligibility, which

does not require a decision of ISU or

ISA to come into effect. The

submission was that “once having

breached Rule 102.2 (i), Brooklee is

and will remain ineligible and this

breach will not be capable of remedy.”

The Respondent ISA made

submissions which were adopted by

the Affected Party, Brooklee Han. First

it was submitted that the question of

whether Rule 102 (2) (i) applied to the

Hershey Open should be determined

by reference to the ISU Eligibility

Rules as a whole. Rule 102 (1) (a) (ii)

establishes the purpose of the Rules

and that purpose is clearly related to

“the adequate protection of the

economic and other interests of the

ISU”. Therefore, the argument goes on

to propound that Rule 102 (2) (i)

should be restricted in its operation to

events which might work contrary to

the economic and other interests of the

ISU, in particular, events operating

outside the control of the ISU and its

Member federations, of which the

Hershey Open was not one. Secondly,

the Respondent also contended that it

was not entirely clear that the Hershey

Open was covered by Rule 102 (2) (i)

as it was a Local Competition under

the definition of various Competitions

in Rule 108 and Article 38 of the

Statutes, and therefore governed by

the Rules of a Member (Rule 108(16)).

21. Thirdly the Respondent contended

that if Rule 102 (2) (i) applied to the

Hershey Open, the lack of

authorisation could not lead to

automatic ineligibility without an

appropriate determination to that

effect. Rule 102 (7) (b) invested in the

ISU Council the power to determine

eligibility, and without a decision of

the ISU Council the Affected Party

remained eligible under Rule 102 (1).

Moreover, the Respondent ISA as the

relevant ISU Member had considered

the issue under Rule 102 (8) consistent

with the spirit and intent of the ISU

P a g e | 54

Rules, and of Rule 101 (1) (a) (ii) in

particular and had come to a

conclusion that she was not ineligible,

as communicated in the email of 28

November.

Finally, the Respondent and the

Affected Party submitted that the letter

of June 30, 2011 provided the relevant

authorisation under Rule 102 (2) (i)

for Brooklee Han to compete in the

Hershey Open.

CONCLUSIONS

The correct interpretation of ISU Rule

102 (2) (i) is that it does apply to

competitions such as the Hershey

Open. In its terms the provision is not

restricted to international

competitions. Whilst the use of the

term “ISU activities and competitions”

in Rule 102 (2) does not fit well into

the definitions of various skating

events and competitions contained in

Article 38 of the Statutes and Rule 108,

to restrict the operation of Rule 102 (2)

to unsanctioned events would be to

ignore the natural breadth of the

words “in a Skating competition,

exhibition or tour in any of the sport

disciplines of the ISU”. Moreover,

paragraphs (ii) and (iii) of Rule 102 (2)

deal specifically with unsanctioned

events and competitions conducted by

persons who are not approved by the

ISU, and therefore the inference is that

paragraph (i) extends in its terms

beyond these events and competitions.

This distinction is supported by the

different provisions for re-instatement

of ineligible persons under Rule 103,

where a person who is ineligible under

paragraph (i) of Rule 102 (2) is treated

differently from one who is ineligible

under paragraphs (ii) or (iii). The

latter in fact may not be reinstated.

Also, it is clear that the Members of

ISU, including ISA treat Rule 102 (2)

(i) as requiring authorisation by the

skater’s federation for the skater to

participate in another Member

federation’s events. The circular from

the British federation which is in

evidence makes this clear, as does the

practice which the ISA has followed in

requiring authorisation to be granted

where an Australian skater wishes to

compete overseas. There is no

evidence or explanations from the ISU

to suggest that the Member federations

are incorrect in this understanding.

However, in my view, Brooklee Han

was authorised by the ISA to skate in

P a g e | 55

the Hershey Open in August 2013.

First, the authorisation granted in 2011

was, on its terms, unrestricted, and

there is no evidence to suggest that it

was revoked or expired. The

circumstances surrounding the

provision of a further more restricted

letter of authorisation in 2012 do not

detract from the unrestricted

authorisation granted in 2011.

Secondly, apart from the express terms

of the 2011 letter, this conclusion is

also implicit from the fact that ISA was

informed in March 2013 of her

intention to skate in the Hershey Open

in August, and the question of

authorisation (or any lack thereof) was

not raised then. Thirdly, the assertion

by ISA through its Counsel in this case,

that she was authorised and is eligible,

is not without significance. The email

of 28 November 2013 from the ISA

makes it clear that this is the ISA’s

view.

It is also my view that the submission

that ineligibility would be automatic

upon Brooklee Han competing in the

Hershey Open, if she were not

authorised to do so, lacks support from

the Rules themselves and from the

evidence. Rule 102 (2) itself refers to

the power of the ISU Council to declare

a person ineligible, and Rule 102 (7)

describes the mechanism for this to

occur, where the ISU Council can rule

upon an alleged (my emphasis) breach

of the eligibility Rules. There is, as

would be expected, provisions for the

person concerned to be notified and

given the opportunity to be heard

before a ruling is made by the Council.

This is inconsistent with the notion of

automatic ineligibility. The only case of

ineligibility referred to in the hearing

of this case was one of Evgeni

Plushenko, which was a case where the

Olympic gold medallist lost his

eligibility having skated in exhibition

shows without prior permission from

the Russian figure skating federation.

The ineligibility was effected through

a ruling from the ISU. Sub-rule (8) of

Rule 102 also empowers the “Member

concerned” to consider matters

concerning eligibility “not otherwise

foreseen in the ISU Rules....in a

manner consistent with the spirit and

intent of the ISU Rules”. Although no

details were provided in evidence of

the decision made by the ISA Board of

Management referred to in the email

of 28 November, it is apparent that the

P a g e | 56

ISA has duly considered the Affected

Party’s eligibility in this case, and

made a decision that she is eligible.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport

Ruled:

1. The Eligibility Question referred to

the Court is answered as follows:

Brooklee Han is an eligible person

within by the ISA to the Australian

Olympic C Sochi.

2. The question of nomination is

referred back to the Respondent for

determination with the applicable

nomination criteria.

3. In accordance with the agreement

between the parties, the CAS costs

shall be paid equal shares by the

Appellant, the Respondent and the

Australian Olympic Committee.

Otherwise there is no order as to the

costs incurred by the parties.

P a g e | 57

#8 UPDATES FROM CAS

Image courtesy:www.tas-cas.org

CAS ALTERNATIVE HEARING CENTRE IN SHANGHAI TO HOST THE HEARING IN THE ARBITRATION BETWEEN FIFA, KOREA

FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION & KANG SOO II The Fédération Internationale de

Football Association (FIFA) has filed

an appeal at the Court of Arbitration

for Sport (CAS) against the Korea

Football Association (KFA) and the

Korean football player Kang Soo II in

relation to the decision issued by the

Disciplinary Committee of the Korea

Football Association on 12 August

2015 in which the athlete was found to

have committed an anti-doping rule

violation and received a 6 month

period of ineligibility. In its appeal to

the CAS, FIFA seeks to increase the

player’s suspension to two years. The

CAS Alternative Hearing Centre in

Shanghai, China will host the hearing

on 5 February 2016, during which the

CAS Panel in charge of this matter

(Mr. Rui Botica Santos (Portugal),

President, Mr. Efraim Barak (Israel),

and Mr. Peter Van Minnen

(Netherlands) will hear the parties’

arguments. The Panel will then

deliberate before issuing an Arbitral

Award containing its decision at a later

date.

P a g e | 58

THE COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS) TO SUBSTITUTE FOR

THE ALL-RUSSIA ATHLETICS FEDERATION (ARAF) IN

ADJUDICATING EIGHT ANTI-DOPING RULE VIOLATIONS

The cases of Russian racewalkers Vera

Sokolova, Elmira Alembekova, Ivan

Noskov, Mikhail Ryzhov and Denis

Strelkov who all tested positive for

EPO at the Saransk race walking

centre on 2 June 2015 will be handled

by the Court of Arbitration for Sport

(CAS) in Lausanne, Switzerland. In

doing so, CAS will act as a sole

instance decision making authority,

substituting for the All Russia Athletic

Federation (ARAF) whose operations

have been suspended by the

International Association of Athletics

Federations (IAAF). The cases have

been brought before the CAS on the

basis of an agreement between the

parties which serves to ensure a timely

resolution of the cases with one sole

instance, and which is backed by both

the WADA Code and the IAAF Rules.

The CAS will put in place a tailored

arbitration procedure in order to

render a decision for each athlete

within a reasonable timeframe. In

addition to these cases, the case of

middle distance runner Ekaterina

Sharmina, who has been charged by

the IAAF with violating the IAAF Rules

through “use or Attempted Use by an

athlete of a prohibited substance or

prohibited method” following analysis

of her Athlete Biological Passport

(ABP), will also be handled by the CAS

but this time as a first instance

replacing ARAF. A further appeal

before a different CAS Panel will be

possible in her case. Two further ABP

cases belonging to middle distance

runner Kristina Ugarova and

heptathlete Tatyana Chernova have

also been referred to the CAS. These

cases will again be handled by the CAS

as a first instance decision making

authority. However, for both of these

athletes, this constitutes a second

antidoping rule violation as CAS

already has pending arbitration

procedures with them relating to

separate matters, although these are

suspended until the outcome of the

ABP cases is known. Finally, it is noted

that the six appeals filed at the CAS by

the IAAF in 2015 against the ARAF

and Sergey Kirdyapkin, Sergey

Bakulin, Olga Kaniskina, Valeriy

Borchin and Vladimir Kanaikin are

close to conclusion. The hearing in the

P a g e | 59

final case of Yuliya Zaripova is being

heard today. The Panel of arbitrators

in charge of these matters will issue a

decision for each appeal in a few days.

FIFA PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION : CAS REJECTS JEROME

CHAMPAGNE’S REQUEST FOR URGENT PROVISIONAL MEASURES

The Court of Arbitration for Sport

(CAS) rejected an urgent request for

provisional measures filed by FIFA

Presidential election candidate Jerome

Champagne. On 24 February 2016,

Jerome Champagne filed an appeal at

the CAS against a decision issued by

the FIFA Ad-hoc Electoral Committee

dated 17 February 2016, together with

an urgent request for provisional

measures seeking an order from the

CAS that FIFA be directed, inter alia,

to use transparent voting booths and

independent scrutineers to safeguard

the integrity of the voting process and

to ensure that the vote is conducted in

secret. The request for provisional

measures was rejected by the President

of the CAS Appeals Arbitration

Division. The full order with grounds

will be communicated in a few days.

CAS REJECTS HRH PRINCE ALI AL HUSSEIN’S REQUEST FOR

URGENT PROVISIONAL MEASURES

The Court of Arbitration for Sport

(CAS) issued its decision on the urgent

request for provisional measures filed

by HRH Prince Ali Al Hussein of

Jordan. The request for provisional

measures has been rejected by the

President of the CAS Appeals

Arbitration Division. The full order

with grounds will be communicated in

a few days. On 22 February 2016, HRH

Prince Ali Al Hussein filed an appeal

against a decision taken by the FIFA

Ad-hoc Electoral Committee dated 15

February 2016 in which it declined to

incorporate the use of transparent

voting booths for the upcoming FIFA

Presidential Election. In an urgent

request for provisional measures, HRH

Prince Ali Al Hussein sought an order

that FIFA be directed to use

transparent voting booths, as well as

independent scrutineers, in order to

safeguard the integrity of the voting

process and to ensure that the vote is

conducted in secret. In addition, HRH

Prince Ali Al Hussein also asked for

the FIFA Presidential Election to be

postponed in the event the CAS could

not rule on the request for provisional

P a g e | 60

measures before the election, but this request is now moot.

MICHEL PLATINI FILES AN APPEAL AT THE COURT OF ARBITRATION

FOR SPORT (CAS)

Michel Platini has filed an appeal at

the Court of Arbitration for Sport

(CAS) against the decision issued by

the FIFA Appeal Committee on 24

February 2016. In appealing to the

CAS, Michel Platini seeks to annul the

decisions taken by the Adjudicatory

Chamber of the FIFA Ethics

Committee and by the FIFA Appeal

Committee which lead to him being

declared ineligible to take part in

football-related activity at national and

international level for six years.

A CAS arbitration procedure is in

progress. First, the parties will

exchange written submissions and a

panel of three arbitrators will be

constituted.

The Panel will then issue directions

with respect to the holding of a

hearing. Following the hearing, the

Panel will deliberate and on a later

date, it will issue a decision in the form

of an Arbitral Award.

P a g e | 61

LIST OF HEARINGS THIS MONTH

14 March 2016

CAS 2015/A/4222 ItCF, CONI, BOA, BC v. ICF, RCF, ROC, DNOC, DCF, CNOSF,

FFCK

16 March 2016

CAS 2015/A/4206 Hapoel Beer Sheva FC v. Ibrahim Abdul Razak

CAS 2015/A/4209 Ibrahim Abdul Razak v. Hapoel Beer Sheva FC

CAS 2015/A/4355 Jonas Legaard Andersen & Anti-Doping Denmark v. International

Paralympic Committee

17 March 2016

CAS 2015/A/4299 Hady Khaled Mohamed Hussein v. Egyptian Anti-doping

Organization

18 March 2016

CAS 2015/A/4274 Anatoli Gantvarg v. Fédération Mondiale du Jeu de Dames

21 March 2016

CAS 2015/A/4231 Piotr Gadomski v. Professional Tennis Integrity Officers

23 March 2016

CAS 2015/A/4324 Jean-Michel Rodriguez v. Swiss Olympic & Antidoping Suisse &

Association Suisse de Football

30 March 2016

CAS 2015/A/4327 FC Dinamo Minsk v. Christian Udubuesi Obodo

7 April 2016

CAS 2015/A/4121 Clube Atlético Mineiro v. FC Dynamo Kyiv

28 & 29 April 2016

CAS 2015/A/3979 International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) v.

Athletics Kenya & Rita Jeptoo

P a g e | 62

#9 FIXTURES THIS MONTH

Image courtesy :espnfc.com

MARCH 2016

8TH March-3 April: Cricket - ICC World Twenty20, India

8-9: Football - Champions League round of 16 (second leg)

8-13: Badminton - All England Championships, Birmingham

9: Women's Football - SheBelieves Cup, England v France

10: Football - Europa League round of 16 (first leg)

12: Rugby Union - Six Nations, Ireland v Italy, England v Wales

12: Football - FA Cup sixth round

P a g e | 63

13: Rugby Union - Six Nations, Scotland v France

13: Football - Scottish League Cup final, Hampden Park

15-16: Football - Champions League round of 16 (second leg)

15-18: Formula 1 - Winter testing, Barcelona

15-18: Horse Racing - Cheltenham Festival

17: Football - Europa League round of 16 (second leg)

17-20: Athletics - World Indoor Athletics, Portland, USA

18-20: Formula 1 - Opening race of the season, Australian GP, Melbourne

19: Rugby Union - Six Nations final round, Wales v Italy, Ireland v Scotland, France

v England

26: Football - Germany v England, Berlin

27: Rowing - Boat Races, London

29: Football - England v Netherlands, Wembley

APRIL,2016

1-3: Formula 1 - Bahrain Grand Prix, Sakhir

3: Cricket - World Twenty20 finals (men and women), India

5-6: Football - Champions League quarter-finals (first leg)

7: Football - Europa League quarter-finals (first leg)

7-10: Golf - The Masters, Augusta

8: Women's Football - England v Belgium, Euro 2017 qualifier

P a g e | 64

8-10: Rugby Union - European Champions Cup quarter-finals

8-10: Gymnastics - Mens & Womens Artistic British Championships, Liverpool

9: Horse Racing - Grand National, Aintree

9: Boxing - IBF World Heavyweight Title, Anthony Joshua v Charles Martin, London

10: Cricket - County Championship starts (to April 13)

12-13: Football - Champions League quarter-finals (second leg)

12-17: Swimming - British Championships and Olympic Trials, Glasgow

14: Football - Europa League quarter-finals (second leg)

P a g e | 65

#10 ICC REVEALS PLANS FOR EXPANDED BROADCAST COVERAGE

OF THE ICC WOMEN’S WORLD TWENTY20 2016

Image Courtesy : www.icc-cricket.com

The International Cricket Council

(ICC) announced the schedule of

broadcast matches for the ICC

Women’s World Twenty20 India 2016,

which will be played alongside the

men’s Super 10 matches from 15

March. For the first time in the history

of this competition, ICC TV will

produce live broadcast coverage of 13

women’s matches, which, in turn will

be carried around the world by ICC’s

Global Broadcast Partner Star

Sports and other broadcast partners.

In the four ICC Women’s World

Twenty20 tournaments so far, only the

semifinals and final were broadcast

live. In what will be a massive boost to

women’s cricket and exposure to the

women’s event, there will be live

coverage of 10 out of 22 group matches

in addition to the two semifinals and

the final. This expanded coverage is in

line with ICC’s strategic plan to further

promote and publicise women’s

P a g e | 66

cricket, which continues to scale new

heights globally. The ICC is committed

to promoting all formats of the game,

both men’s and women’s. The quality

and depth of women’s cricket

continues to improve year on year,

producing an exciting, skillful and

attractive brand of cricket. The live

broadcast coverage of 13 matches from

the ICC Women’s World Twenty20

India 2016 is part of this strategy and

will provide further impetus to the

growth of the women’s game. The ICC

Women’s World Twenty20 India 2016

will feature the eight sides

participating in the ICC Women’s

Championship along with Bangladesh

and Ireland, which progressed from

the ICC Women’s World Twenty20

Qualifier England won the inaugural

tournament in England but then

Australia won in Barbados, Colombo

and Dhaka to complete a hat-trick of

titles.

The following is the schedule of women’s broadcast matches:

Tuesday, 15 March – India v Bangladesh, Bengaluru (1530) Group B

Thursday, 17 March – England v Bangladesh, Bengaluru (1530) Group B

Saturday, 19 March – India v Pakistan, Delhi (1530), Group B

Monday, 21 March – Australia v New Zealand, Nagpur (1530) Group A

Tuesday, 22 March – England v India, Dharamsala (1530), Group B

Thursday, 24 March – Australia v Sri Lanka, Delhi (1530), Group A; Pakistan v

Bangladesh, Delhi (1930) Group B

Saturday, 26 March – Australia v Ireland, Delhi (1530), Group A

Sunday, 27 March – West Indies v India, Mohali (1530), Group B

P a g e | 67

Monday, 28 March – South Africa v Sri Lanka, Bengaluru (1530), Group A

Wednesday, 30 March – First semi-final, Delhi (1430)

Thursday, 31 March – Second semi-final, Mumbai (1430)

Sunday, 3 April – Final, Kolkata (1430)

P a g e | 68

#11 OLYMPIC ROUND UP

Image Courtesy:www.olympic.org

Team of Refugee Olympic Athletes (ROA) created by

the IOC

The Executive Board (EB) of the

International Olympic Committee

(IOC) today created a team of Refugee

Olympic Athletes for the Olympic

Games Rio 2016. It will be treated at

the Olympic Games like all the other

teams of the 206 National Olympic

Committees (NOCs). The EB also

approved the operational aspects

surrounding Team ROA. The name of

the team will be Team Refugee

Olympic Athletes Team ROA will get

its own welcome ceremony at the

Olympic Village, like all other teams;

The team will be housed like all the

other teams;A team entourage will be

appointed by the IOC to meet all the

required technical needs of the

athletes, including: Chef de Mission,

coaches and technical officials (as per

official quotas); The team uniforms

will be provided by the IOC; For all

official representations of the team

(including possible medal ceremonies),

the Olympic flag will be raised and the

Olympic Anthem will be played; The

P a g e | 69

team will march behind the Olympic

flag before host team Brazil at the

Opening Ceremony; An adequate

insurance policy will be contracted; A

proper doping control process will be

introduced through the World Anti-

Doping Agency (WADA); and Olympic

Solidarity will cover travel and other

participation expenses for the team

and will continue to support the

athletes of the team after the Olympic

Games.

As part of the IOC’s pledge to aid

potential elite athletes affected by the

worldwide refugee crisis, the NOCs

were asked to identify any refugee

athlete with the potential to qualify for

the Olympic Games Rio 2016. Such

candidates could then receive funding

from Olympic Solidarity to assist with

their preparations and qualification

efforts. Forty-three promising

candidates have been identified, whom

the IOC is now assisting. In view of the

complexity of the process and in order

to allow sufficient time to finalise and

consolidate all the necessary

information about these candidates,

the EB decided today to close the call

for new candidatures. Only under

exceptional circumstances requiring

the approval of the IOC President will

new candidates be considered. “By

welcoming the team of Refugee

Olympic Athletes to the Olympic

Games Rio 2016, we want to send a

message of hope for all refugees in our

world,” said IOC President Thomas

Bach. “Having no national team to

belong to, having no flag to march

behind, having no national anthem to

be played, these refugee athletes will

be welcomed to the Olympic Games

with the Olympic flag and with the

Olympic Anthem. They will have a

home together with all the other

11,000 athletes from 206 National

Olympic Committees in the Olympic

Village.” The ROA team for Rio 2016 is

expected to number between five and

10 athletes. The participating athletes

and the other members of the ROA

team will be named by the IOC

Executive Board at its next meeting in

June this year. The nomination criteria

include sporting level, official refugee

status verified by the United Nations,

and personal situation and

background. Following the approval of

Olympic Agenda 2020, the IOC’s

strategic roadmap for the future of the

Olympic Movement, and in light of the

current global refugee crisis, the IOC

P a g e | 70

created a special fund of USD 2 million

to develop relief projects through sport

in collaboration with NOCs around the

world. The IOC already works with a

number of United Nations agencies to

help refugees around the world. For

the last 20 years, the IOC and UNHCR

in particular have been using sport to

support healing and development

among young refugees in many camps

and settlements around the world.

They have consequently seen

thousands of refugees benefit from

sports programmes and equipment

donated by the IOC.

IOC Executive Board concludes first meetings of 2016

The Organising Committee for the

Olympic Games Rio 2016 gave an

update on the status of preparations.

The delegation was joined by Mayor

Eduardo Paes by video conference,

who highlighted the fact that despite

the current political and economic

climate in Brazil, public support for

the Olympic Games was over 70 per

cent in the city of Rio de Janeiro. The

Organising Committee announced that

they have balanced their budget. The

delivery of all test events has gone well,

and construction of facilities is

progressing according to schedule. The

report also included an update on

water quality testing in Guanabara

Bay, which will switch from monthly to

weekly testing as of May and daily

testing at Games time, according to

World Health Organisation (WHO)

parameters. Mayor Paes assured the

Executive Board that the Zika outbreak

was under control in Rio de Janeiro,

with numerous preventive measures

being taken. Weather conditions from

May onwards with the onset of the dry

season will also help to improve the

situation. IOC President Thomas Bach

underscored the close cooperation

between the IOC and WHO, which has

expressed its confidence in safe and

successful Olympic Games this August.

The Executive Board was reassured

that Metro Line 4 linking the Olympic

Park with the rest of Rio de Janeiro

would open in July. A new VLT tram is

currently in the testing phase and is

scheduled to open to the public in

April. The Olympic Village is expected

to be delivered this month. The route

of the Olympic Torch Relay was

presented. The lighting ceremony in

Olympia will take place on 21 April

P a g e | 71

2016 and the flame will arrive in

Brasilia on 3 May 2016 before

travelling across the whole country,

visiting 329 cities and towns. An

update on the Olympic Winter Games

PyeongChang 2018 was delivered by

POCOG Chairman Cho Yang-ho and

IOC Coordination Commission Chair

Gunilla Lindberg. The success of

recent test events was highlighted, as

was the construction of the high-speed

gtrain from Seoul. An initial meeting

was held during the test events

between the Organising Committees

for PyeongChang, Tokyo and Beijing to

discuss cooperation and collaboration

between these Olympic cities. The

Organising Committee for the Olympic

Games Tokyo 2020 gave an overview

of the progress of preparations, which

continue to meet all their milestones. A

contractor has been selected to

complete the construction of the new

National Stadium. The venue should

be completed by end of November

2019. Coordination Commission Chair

John Coates called the success of

Tokyo 2020’s marketing programme

“unprecedented”, with 28 partners

already signed. The selection of the

logo for the Games is progressing well,

with 15,000 entries received from the

public in Japan and worldwide. A final

selection of the logo is expected this

spring.

IOC signs MoU with International Committee of Sports for the Deaf

The Organising Committee for the

Olympic Winter Games Beijing 2022

has been established. The EB also

received reports on the host cities of

upcoming Youth Olympic Games in

Buenos Aires 2018 and Lausanne

2020. A recap of the successful Winter

Youth Olympic Games Lillehammer

2016 was also given. EB agreed to

make doping results management and

sanctioning during the Olympic Games

independent by delegating to an

independent body. A new Anti-Doping

Division of the Court of Arbitration for

Sport (CAS) will handle cases from the

Olympic Games Rio 2016 onwards. A

number of other decisions were made

in the lead-up to the Olympic Games

Rio 2016, including the change of

nationalities for 11 athletes. Those

members who had a conflict of

P a g e | 72

interests absented themselves from

these discussions:

Ms Anna BURIAK (Modern

Pentathlon) from Ukraine to

Russia

Ms Lasma LIEPA (Canoe) from

Latvia to Turkey

Ms Otgontsetseg

GALBADRAKH (Judo) from

Mongolia to Kazakhstan

Ms Cansel DENIZ (Taekwondo)

from Turkey to Kazakhstan

Mr Chakir ANSARI (Wrestling)

from France to Morocco

Mr Oliver DINGLEY

(Swimming) from Great Britain

to Ireland

Ms Emily BOYD (Swimming)

from Australia to Great Britain

Ms Iryna KHOKHLOVA

(Modern Pentathlon) from

Ukraine to Argentina

Ms Victoria SOLNCEVA, now

Ms Viktoria Zeynep GÜNES,

(Swimming) from Ukraine to

Turkey

Mr Maksim OBEREMKO

(Sailing) from Ukraine to Russia

Mr Ruslans NAKONECNIJS

(Modern Pentathlon) from

Ukraine to Latvia

In a report on NOC relations, an

update was given on the suspended

NOC of Kuwait. In the context of the

five legal proceedings that have been

initiated by various Kuwaiti sports

organisations in front of the Court of

Arbitration for Sport (CAS) and in

front of the Lausanne Civil Court, the

IOC notes the recent positive

provisional decisions taken so far in its

favour. In particular, the CAS rejected

four Appellants’ requests for a stay of

the challenged decisions pending the

issuance of an award on the merits. On

the sport front, the EB took note of the

technical decision of the International

Boxing Association (AIBA) to remove

the head guards for male competitors

at the Olympic Games. AIBA provided

medical and technical data that

demonstrated that the number of

concussions is actually lower without

head guards. The EB approved a

proposal from the IOC Medical and

Scientific Commission to make it

compulsory for the first time at the

Olympic Games Rio 2016 for all

doctors to comply with the Olympic

Movement Medical Code as a

condition of their registration for the

Olympic Games. Any violation could

lead to the withdrawal of their

P a g e | 73

accreditation. With a focus on

protecting clean athletes, an athlete

replacement plan was approved by the

EB that will see athletes who fail

doping tests ahead of the Olympic

Games being replaced by the next best-

ranked clean athlete. The IOC will

work with each International

Federation (IF) to ensure that the

reallocation process is best suited to

each individual sport. The EB received

a full report on the progress of the

Olympic Channel. Preparations for the

launch of the Channel are going well,

with 51 staff members representing 18

different nationalities already on

board. IOC Athletes’ Commission

Chair Claudia Bokel provided an

update on the recent launch of the

newly revamped Olympic Athletes’

Hub, a digital platform for Olympians

and other elite athletes, and gave a

sneak preview of the IOC Athletes’

Space for the Olympic Games Rio

2016. With regard to the

implementation of Olympic Agenda

2020, the IOC’s strategic roadmap for

the future of the Olympic Movement,

the EB heard that all 40

recommendations have either already

been implemented or are in the

process of being implemented. A total

of 144 deliverables are scheduled for

2016. The EB also approved the

operational aspects concerning refugee

athletes who will take part in the

Olympic Games Rio 2016. A

Memorandum of Understanding

(MoU) between the International

Olympic Committee (IOC) and the

International Committee of Sports for

the Deaf (ICSD) was signed on 8

March at the IOC headquarters in

Lausanne. The MoU, signed by IOC

President Thomas Bach and ICSD

President Dr. Valery Nikitich

Rukhledev, follows Recommendation 7

of Olympic Agenda 2020, which aims

to “strengthen relationships with

organisations managing sport for

people with different abilities, with a

view to exploiting synergies in all

possible areas including technical

assistance, communication activities

and promotion of events via the

Olympic Channel”. Olympic Agenda

2020 is the IOC’s strategic roadmap

for the future of the Olympic

Movement, which was unanimously

approved by the IOC Session in

December 2014. The IOC will work

with the ICSD to supplement the MoU

by providing athlete support through

the IOC Athlete Learning

P a g e | 74

Gateway and Olympic Athletes’ Hub,

and an implementation model for

the Olympic Movement Code on the

Prevention of the Manipulation of

Competitions. ICSD President

Rukhledev said: “Promotion of the

rights of persons with disabilities is my

life. This is an important day for the

ICSD, with the signing of the

Memorandum of Understanding that

formalises the relationship that we

have had with the IOC since 1955. We

look forward to a strengthened

relationship between our two

organisations in the future.” The IOC

recognised the ICSD in 1955 and has

granted patronage to the Deaflympics

since 1985. The ICSD officially opened

its new offices yesterday at the House

of International Sport in

Lausanne. The ICSD delegation that

visited the IOC headquarters included

ICSD Chief Executive Officer Dmitry

Rebrov and ICSD Board members.

Candidate Cities 2024 deliver vision, concept and

strategy plans to IOC

The Candidature Process 2024 is the

first to be launched following the

adoption of Olympic Agenda 2020, the

IOC’s strategic roadmap for the future

of the Olympic Movement. The new

Candidature Process encourages the

Cities to present Olympic projects that

best match their sports, economic,

social and environmental long-term

planning needs. It calls for the use of

existing facilities where possible, and

provides flexibility for the venue

concept to meet local sustainability

and legacy needs and ambitions. “Los

Angeles, Rome, Budapest and Paris are

all submitting projects fully in line

with Olympic Agenda 2020. It is

impressive to see how they have

incorporated the Olympic project into

the long-term development plans of

their city, region and country. Coming

from different starting points, for all

four there is a clear focus on

sustainable development, legacy and in

particular how the facilities are going

to be used after the Olympic Games.

We are delighted to have four

extremely strong candidatures and

look forward to a fascinating

competition”, IOC President Thomas

Bach said. Jacqueline Barrett,

Associate Director Olympic

Games/Olympic Candidatures,

commented: “Following Olympic

P a g e | 75

Agenda 2020, the Candidate Cities are

making use of an extremely high

percentage of existing and temporary

venues, possibly the most ever. The

plans received indicate very thoughtful

consideration of what the Cities and

their people need for the future. The

IOC has significantly simplified the

Candidature Process, symbolised by

the fact that the submissions arrived

for the very first time on a USB key

only, instead of thousands of pages of

paper documents.” The new

Candidature Process features a

progressive submission of information

to allow planning to develop

organically and at an appropriate pace.

The three stages each address different

elements of the Cities’ proposals:

• Stage 1: Vision, Games Concept and

Strategy (delivered 17 February 2016)

• Stage 2: Governance, Legal and

Venue Funding

• Stage 3: Games Delivery, Experience

and Venue Legacy

The next steps include the analysis of

each City’s file by an IOC-appointed

working group, which will report to the

IOC Executive Board (EB) in June

2016. The deadline for submission of

the Candidature File Part 2:

Governance, Legal and Venue Funding

is 7 October 2016; and for Stage 3:

Games Delivery, Experience and

Venue Legacy, it is 3 February 2017. At

the end of each stage, the EB will

confirm that each City will transition

through to the next stage. During Stage

3, an IOC Evaluation Commission will

make working visits to each City to

study their projects in detail and issue

a final report. The election for the host

city will take place in September 2017

at the IOC Session in Lima, Peru.

First IF Women in Leadership Forum ends in call to

action

The first International Federation (IF)

Women in Leadership Forum

concluded in Lausanne with the

approval of a 10-point action plan

designed to increase possibilities for

girls and women in sport both on and

off the field of play.

The action plan calls to:

P a g e | 76

1. Create a Gender Equity Working

Group – which would include

representatives from the International

Olympic Committee (IOC), IFs,

National Federations (NFs); National

Olympic Committees (NOCs), Olympic

Solidarity and the Association of

Summer Olympic International

Federations (ASOIF) – to support

strategies, policies and opportunities.

This group would be created to

monitor and review the progress of the

10-point plan as well as enhance the

communication between all

stakeholders.

2. Promote research to monitor the

evolution of gender equity and drive

best practices. Revisit and consider the

research: “Gender Equality and

Leadership in Olympic Bodies”; and

the “Asset-Based Approach to Sport

Governance.”

3. Request that IFs ensure that

gender equity is included in their

governance principles.

4. Request each IF to nominate an

employee in charge of gender equity.

5. Request stakeholders to develop

recruitment and succession plans

which specifically target and support

female leadership.

6. Request stakeholders to establish

and maintain target percentages

around female leadership. This should

be monitored by the Gender Equity

Working Group.

7. IOC/Olympic Solidarity to

consider more support for projects

targeting women in leadership, such

as:

a. Female Leadership Workshops

b. Training for male leaders around

gender equity

c. Mentoring and coaching support

8. Encourage IFs to develop more

family-friendly working practices for

both genders.

9. The IOC, ASOIF and IFs to work

together to encourage full use of the

Gender Equality e-platform.

10. Respective stakeholders to cascade

the principles outlined in this 10-point

P a g e | 77

plan to national/regional/continental sports organisations.

IOC Statement on the merger of the Korean NOC and

Korea Council of Sport for All

A delegation composed of

representatives of the International

Olympic Committee (IOC), the

Association of Summer Olympic

International Federations (ASOIF) and

the Olympic Council of Asia (OCA) met

at the IOC headquarters in Lausanne

with a delegation composed of

representatives of the Korean Olympic

Committee (KOC), the Korea Council

of Sport for All (KOCOSA) and the

government of the Republic of Korea

to discuss and facilitate the ongoing

process of the merger of the KOC and

KOCOSA, in accordance with the

principles and rules that govern the

Olympic Movement. During the

meeting, all parties came to the

conclusion that the merger of the KOC

and KOCOSA will have a very positive

impact, and that is a major and

historic step for the development of

the Olympic Movement and sport in

general in Korea. The parties also

agreed that the merger will be

undertaken in accordance with the

rules of the Olympic Charter. All

parties therefore agreed on the

principle of the merger and on the

procedure and timeframe for the

process, which is to be completed by

27 March 2016. In particular, it was

agreed that the new statutes of the

merged organisation will be finalised

with, and approved by, the IOC before

they are adopted by the General

Assembly of the merged organisation.

All parties will continue to work closely

together with mutual understanding

and in a constructive manner to reach

this objective by the agreed deadline,

for the benefit of the Olympic

Movement in Korea.

IOC shares insights on preventing competition

manipulation with European policy-makers

At a workshop entitled “Developing

European initiatives to fight match-

fixing”, organised by the European

Commission and attended by members

of the European Parliament, IOC Chief

Ethics and Compliance Officer

Pâquerette Girard-Zappelli presented

the angle of the Olympic and Sports

P a g e | 78

Movement on the topic of “Identifying

the risk factors for match-fixing”. The

event took place in Brussels, Belgium,

on 17 and 18 February. Participants

analysed methods to increase public-

private cooperation and discussed a

number of cases involving organised

crime.

IOC partners with European “Keep Crime Out of Sport” project

The European Commission presented

several projects dedicated to fighting

match-fixing that have been granted

EU funding. One such project, of

which the IOC is a partner, is called

“Keep Crime Out of Sport – Together

against sports competition

manipulation”. The 18-month project,

run by the Council of Europe, aims to:

-gather up-to-date information on

match-fixing and betting regulations in

member states;

-help countries to implement the

Council of Europe Convention on the

Manipulation of Sports Competitions

and set up appropriate national

structures through practical and

technical assistance, by way of regional

seminars, study visits and expert

missions;

- promote the international exchange

of information and best practices,

including through a network of

national contact points; and

- promote the signing and ratification

of the Council of Europe Convention.

The IOC was consulted during the

drafting of the aforementioned

Convention and supports national

legislation that enables the criminal

prosecution of those involved in

competition manipulation.

Protecting the Olympic Games

At the upcoming Olympic Games Rio

de Janeiro 2016, the IOC will work

with Brazilian law-enforcement

authorities in a Joint Integrity

Intelligence Unit to monitor all sports

for instances of possible manipulation

of competitions or related corruption.

The IOC’s Integrity Betting

Intelligence System (IBIS), which

successfully operated for the first time

P a g e | 79

in Sochi 2014, will serve as the system

for information and intelligence

exchange between law-enforcement,

sports organisations and betting

operators/regulators. In addition, the

Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro will

see the first implementation of

the Olympic Movement Code on the

Prevention of the Manipulation of

Competitions. The Code is a regulatory

framework defining the different kinds

of violations, minimum standards of

disciplinary procedures and the scope

of sanctions. It was published as a

first-of-its-kind in December last year.

Furthermore, the IOC is currently

running a Play Fair Booth at the

Winter Youth Olympic Games

Lillehammer 2016 to educate young

athletes about the threats related to all

forms of competition manipulation.

The Play Fair Booth features

interactive games, workshops and

advice on the Code of Conduct for the

Games. Similar activities will be

provided to the athletes in Rio de

Janeiro this summer aimed at raising

awareness of the issue and preventing

unethical behaviour.

Olympic Agenda 2020 focus on integrity

Olympic Agenda 2020, the IOC’s

strategic roadmap for the future of the

Olympic Movement, has strengthened

the IOC’s already strong commitment

to protecting clean athletes and the

integrity of sports. A number of

measures have been initiated and

implemented since the adoption of

Olympic Agenda 2020 in December

2014. These include robust educational

awareness programmes to safeguard

Olympic events from any kind of

manipulation. Together with

INTERPOL, the IOC is currently

delivering workshops around the

world in partnership with National

Olympic Committees, International

and National Federations, law-

enforcement agencies, government

entities and betting regulators on the

risks of manipulation of competition

and related corruption. A new

reporting mechanism for potential

cases of competition manipulation as

well as other violations – the Integrity

and Compliance Hotline – was also

successfully launched last year

P a g e | 80

IOC makes doping results management and sanctioning independent

The Executive Board (EB) of the

International Olympic Committee

(IOC) today agreed to delegate the

decisions on alleged anti-doping rule

violations during the Olympic Games

to an independent body. A new Anti-

doping Division of the Court of

Arbitration for Sport (CAS) will handle

cases from the Olympic Games 2016

onwards. The CAS Anti-Doping

Division will replace the IOC

Disciplinary Commission to hear and

decide on doping cases at the Olympic

Games, as well as the subsequent re-

analysis of samples taken at the

Games. The move comes as part of the

Olympic Agenda 2020 reforms, and

follows the Resolution of the Fourth

Olympic Summit to make anti-doping

testing independent of sports

organisations. “This is a major step

forward to make doping testing

independent, following the decision of

the IOC Executive Board three months

ago after the proposal of the Olympic

Summit. It represents support for the

IOC’s zero tolerance policy in the fight

against doping and in the protection of

the clean athletes,” the IOC President

Thomas Bach said. The delegation of

the results management and hearings

to the CAS is another step taken by the

IOC in recent weeks to make the anti-

doping system more independent.

Earlier it was proposed that the World

Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) lead

intelligence-gathering funded by the

IOC to make testing in the lead-up to

the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro

as efficient and independent as

possible. Out-of-competition testing

during the Olympic Games will also be

guided by this intelligence group from

WADA, to make it more targeted and

more effective. The delegation by the

IOC Executive Board to the CAS Anti-

doping Division is pursuant to Rule

59.2.4 of the Olympic Charter. The

IOC Anti-Doping Rules applicable to

the Games of the XXXI Olympiad, Rio

de Janeiro, 2016 will be amended

accordingly to reflect this change.

P a g e | 81

#12 OFF GROUND CLASSROOM

WADA : PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AND PERSONAL

INFORMATION ode The International Standard for the

Protection of Privacy and Personal

Information was first adopted and

approved by the World Anti-Doping

Agency Executive Committee on 9 May

2009. The World Anti-Doping

International Standard for the

Protection of Privacy and Personal

Information is a level 2 mandatory

International Standard developed as

part of the World Anti-Doping

Program. WADA and Anti-Doping

Organizations share responsibility for

ensuring that Personal Information

Processed in connection with Anti-

Doping Activities is protected as

required by data protection and

privacy laws, principles and standards.

The main purpose of this International

Standard is to ensure that

organizations and persons involved in

anti-doping in sport apply appropriate,

sufficient and effective privacy

protections to Personal Information

that they process. The following

articles of the Code are directly

relevant to this International Standard

for the Protection of Privacy and

Personal Information:

Article 14: Confidentiality and

Reporting : The Signatories agree to

the principles of coordination of anti-

doping results, public transparency

and accountability and respect for the

privacy interests of individuals alleged

to have violated anti-doping rules.

Article 14.1.5 : The recipient

organizations shall not disclose this

information beyond those Persons

with a need to know (which would

include the appropriate personnel at

the applicable National Olympic

Committee, National Federation, and

team in a Team Sport) until the Anti-

Doping Organization with results

management responsibility has made

public disclosure or has failed to make

public disclosure as required in Article

14.2 .

Article 14.2 : Public Disclosure

Article 14.2.1 : The identity of any

Athlete or other Person who is asserted

by an Anti-Doping Organization to

P a g e | 82

have committed an anti-doping rule

violation, may be Publicly Disclosed by

the Anti-Doping Organization with

results management responsibility

only after notice has been provided to

the Athlete or other Person in

accordance with Articles 7.2, 7.3 or 7.4,

and to the applicable Anti Doping

Organizations in accordance with

Article 14.1.2.

Article 14.2.3 : In any case where it

is determined, after a hearing or

appeal, that the Athlete or other

Person did not commit an anti-doping

rule violation, the decision may be

disclosed publicly only with the

consent of the Athlete or other Person

who is the subject of the decision. The

Anti-Doping Organization with results

management responsibility shall use

reasonable efforts to obtain such

consent, and if consent is obtained,

shall publicly disclose the decision in

its entirety or in such redacted form as

the Athlete or other Person may

approve.

Article 14.2.4 : For purposes of

Article 14.2, publication shall be

accomplished at a minimum by placing

the required information on the Anti-

Doping Organization’s Web site and

leaving the information up for at least

one (1) year. Code Article 14.2.5 No

Anti-Doping Organization or WADA-

accredited laboratory, or official of

either, shall publicly comment on the

specific facts of a pending case (as

opposed to general description of

process and science) except in

response to public comments

attributed to the Athlete, other Person

or their representatives.

Article 14.3 : Athlete Whereabouts

Information As further provided in the

International Standard for Testing,

Athletes who have been identified by

their International Federation or

National Anti-Doping Organization for

inclusion in a Registered Testing Pool

shall provide accurate, current location

information. The International

Federations and National Anti-Doping

Organizations shall coordinate the

identification of Athletes and the

collecting of current location

information and shall submit these to

WADA. This information will be

accessible, through ADAMS where

reasonably feasible, to other Anti-

Doping Organizations having

jurisdiction to test the Athlete as

provided in Article 15. This

information shall be maintained in

strict confidence at all times; shall be

P a g e | 83

used exclusively for purposes of

planning, coordinating or conducting

Testing; and shall be destroyed after it

is no longer relevant for these

purposes.

Article 14.5 : Doping Control

Information Clearinghouse :

WADA shall act as a central

clearinghouse for Doping Control

Testing data and results for

International-Level Athletes and

national-level Athletes who have been

included in their National Anti-Doping

Organization’s Registered Testing

Pool. To facilitate coordinated test

distribution planning and to avoid

unnecessary duplication in Testing by

the various Anti-Doping

Organizations, each Anti-Doping

Organization shall report all In-

Competition and Out-of-Competition

tests on such Athletes to the WADA

clearinghouse as soon as possible after

such tests have been conducted. This

information will be made accessible to

the Athlete, the Athlete’s National

Federation, National Olympic

Committee or National Paralympic

Committee, National Anti-Doping

Organization, International

Federation, and the International

Olympic Committee or International

Paralympic Committee. To enable it to

serve as a clearinghouse for Doping

Control Testing data, WADA has

developed a database management

tool, ADAMS, that reflects emerging

data privacy principles. In particular,

WADA has developed ADAMS to be

consistent with data privacy statutes

and norms applicable to WADA and

other organizations using ADAMS.

Private information regarding an

Athlete, Athlete Support Personnel, or

others involved in anti-doping

activities shall be maintained by

WADA, which is supervised by

Canadian privacy authorities, in strict

confidence and in accordance with the

International Standard for the

protection of privacy. WADA shall, at

least annually, publish statistical

reports summarizing the information

that it receives, ensuring at all times

that the privacy of Athletes is fully

respected and make itself available for

discussions with national and regional

data privacy authorities.

Article 14.6: Data Privacy When

performing obligations under the

Code, Anti-Doping Organizations may

collect, store, process or disclose

personal information relating to

Athletes and third parties. Each Anti-

P a g e | 84

Doping Organization shall ensure that

it complies with applicable data 4

protection and privacy laws with

respect to their handling of such

information, as well as the

International Standard for the

protection of privacy that WADA shall

adopt to ensure Athletes and non-

athletes are fully informed of and,

where necessary, agree to the handling

of their personal information in

connection with anti-doping activities

arising under the Code.

ICC : HOW ARE CRICKET RANKINGS CALCULATED

1. What is a rating?

A rating is worked out by dividing the

points scored by the match/series

total, with the answer given to the

nearest whole number. It can be

compared with a batting average but

with points instead of total runs scored

and a match/series total instead of

number of times dismissed. After every

Test series, the two teams receive a

certain number of points, based on a

mathematical formula. Each team’s

new points total is then divided by its

new match/series total to give an

updated rating. With batting averages,

if you are dismissed in your next

innings for more than your average,

your average will increase. Conversely,

scoring less than your average will

cause it to fall. Similarly, under the

Reliance ICC Test Championship

method, the points earned from a Test

win will always be more than the

rating the team had at the start of the

series. Equivalently, a team

losing a Test match will always

score fewer points than its

rating. So a win will always

boost a team’s rating and a

defeat will harm it. A draw

between a higher and lower

rated team will slightly benefit

the rating of the lower rated

team at the expense of the higher

rated team. A draw between two

similarly rated teams will leave

both their ratings unchanged. A

tied match is treated the same as

a draw for rating purposes.

2. What does a particular rating

signify?

A team that, over the period

being rated, wins as often as it

P a g e | 85

loses while playing an average

mix of strong and weak

opponents will have a rating of

close to 100. A rating of 100

could also correspond to a side

that wins more often than it

loses but who has generally

played more matches against

weak teams. Similarly, if the

majority of its matches are

against strong teams, then a

rating of 100 could be achieved

despite having more defeats

than victories. It is quite often

the case that there are a number

of teams in the 90-110 range.

These teams are of broadly

similar standard. A rating above

120 suggests consistently strong

performances. Above 130 is

rarely achieved and suggests a

high degree of dominance over

all other teams. In every match

the total rating points available

equals the sum of the initial

rating of the two teams, so

ratings can be thought of as

being redistributed rather than

created. There is therefore no

‘inflation’ in this rating system,

so a rating of 120 suggests the

same degree of superiority over

opponents now as in the past or

future, and a team can

meaningfully compare its rating

movements over time.

3. How quickly do ratings

change?

The amount by which a rating

improves after winning a Test

will depend on the rating of the

opponent. A win over a much

stronger team (i.e. one with a

much higher rating) boosts the

rating more than beating a much

weaker opponent. Conversely,

losing to a much stronger team

will not cause the rating to drop

too far, but losing to a weaker

side would. It is possible for a

team to win a series yet for its

rating to fall. This will happen if

a stronger team wins a series

but by a smaller margin than the

respective ratings suggest

should be the case. For example,

when Australia played England

in a five-Test series in 2002-03,

Australia needed to win by a

margin of at least three Tests

just to maintain its very high

rating.

4. How is the series result

incorporated?

P a g e | 86

At the end of any series

comprising two or more Tests, a

series bonus will be awarded.

Like an individual Test match, a

series can be won, drawn (tied)

or lost. For rating purposes, the

series result is equivalent to the

result of one further Test. To

explain, suppose a team has just

won a Test series. The series

bonus can be regarded, for

rating purposes, as if one extra

Test has been played and won by

the team that has just won the

series. If a series finishes level,

the series bonus is equivalent to

the two teams playing an extra

drawn Test.

5. What period does the table

cover?

The table reflects all Test series

completed since the annual

update made three to four years

previously. This pattern is

repeated each May, with the

oldest of the four years of results

removed to be gradually

replaced with results of matches

played over the following twelve

months. Thus once a year, the

rankings will change overnight

without any new Tests being

played. This process, called

updating the data, takes place at

the start of May each year. This

time has been chosen since it is

usually a relatively quiet time in

the international calendar.

Before 2012, the annual update

took place in August.

6. How are the results weighted?

All matches included within the

Reliance ICC Team Rankings

Tables will always fall into one

of two time periods:

Period One covers the earliest

two years of matches

Period Two covers all

subsequent series, i.e. the past

one to two years Weightings are

applied to these two groups of

series so that the ratings more

fully reflect recent form.

The weightings are as follows:

Period One matches have a

weighting of 50 per cent.

Period Two matches have a

weighting of 100 per cent. In the

current table, series completed

since last May receive a

weighting of 100 per cent. After

next May, the weighting of series

P a g e | 87

being played now will remain at

100 per cent, while the weighting

of series played in the previous

year will fall to 50 per cent. The

‘match/series total’ column in

the Reliance ICC Test Team

Rankings table comprises a

combination of individual Tests

and series. This total along with

the number of points earned in

each period is multiplied by the

weighting factor. For example,

suppose a team played 20 Tests

and six series in Period One, plus

15 Tests and five series in Period

Two. The total matches played

for rating purposes is 50 per cent

of (20+6) plus 100 per cent of

(15+5), which equals 33. (A small

technical adjustment ensures

that, for all teams, the total

number of matches and rating

points is always a whole

number.)

7. How does the system compare

with the current ODI rating

method?

There are a number of

similarities between the

Reliance ICC Test Team

Rankings table and the official

Reliance ICC ODI Team

Rankings table, and these are

summarised as follows:

The underlying formula that

determines the number of points

awarded to each team for its

performance in an individual

match is identical; so as with the

ODI system it takes no account

of the venue or margin of victory

of any match.

A rating of 100 reflects average

performance, so a team winning

and losing a similar number of

matches and playing a broad

mix of opponents will have a

rating close to 100.

The ratings are updated each

May, whereby the weightings

assigned to older matches are

reduced.

The new Reliance ICC Test Team

Ranking differs from the official

ODI rankings as follows: In

addition to reflecting the

performance in every Test, there

is also a series bonus, carrying

the same weight as one

additional Test and awarded to

the winner of a series of two or

more matches.

P a g e | 88

Test draws are treated in the

same way as ties in ODIs, even

though in character they may be

more reminiscent of no results

(especially if interrupted by bad

weather); only Tests abandoned

without a ball bowled would be

excluded for rating purposes.

The ratings are officially

updated after each series rather

than after each Test

The ICC Player Rankings are a

sophisticated moving average. Players

are rated on a scale of 0 to 1000

points. If a player’s performance is

improving on his past record, his

points increase; if his performance is

declining his points will go down. The

value of each player’s performance

within a match is calculated using an

algorithm, a series of calculations (all

pre-programmed) based on various

circumstances in the match.

Test Match Rankings

For a batsman, the factors are:

Runs scored

Ratings of the opposing bowling

attack; the higher the combined

ratings of the attack, the more value is

given to the batsman’s innings (in

proportion)

The level of run-scoring in the match,

and the team’s innings total; an

innings of 100 runs in a match where

all teams scored 500 is worth less than

100 runs in a match where all teams

were bowled out for 200. And if a team

scores 500 in the first innings and 200

in the second innings, a century in the

second innings will get more credit

than in the first innings (because the

general level of run scoring was higher

in the first innings)

Out or not out (a not out innings

receives a bonus)

The result. Batsmen who score highly

in victories receive a bonus. That

bonus will be higher for highly rated

opposition teams (i.e. win bonus

against the current Australia team is

higher than the bonus against

Bangladesh.)

For a bowler, the factors are:

P a g e | 89

Wickets taken and runs conceded

Ratings of the batsmen dismissed (at

present, the wicket of Kumar

Sangakkara is worth more than that of

Makhaya Ntini – but if Ntini’s rating

improves, the value of his wicket will

increase accordingly)

The level of run-scoring in the match;

bowling figures of 3-50 in a high-

scoring match will boost a bowler’s

rating more than the same figures in a

low-scoring match

Heavy workload; bowlers who bowl a

large number of overs in the match get

some credit, even if they take no

wickets;

The result. Bowlers who take a lot of

wickets in a victory receive a bonus.

That bonus will be higher for highly

rated opposition teams

Bowlers who do not bowl in a high-

scoring innings are penalized. The

players’ ratings are calculated by

combining their weighted performance

in the latest match with their previous

rating. This new ‘weighted average’ is

then converted into points. Recent

performances have more impact on a

player’s rating than those earlier in his

career, but all his performances are

taken into account. A great player who

has had a lean run of form will still

have a respectable rating. Players who

miss a Test match for their country, for

whatever reason, lose one per cent of

their points. New players start at zero

points, and need to establish

themselves before they get full ratings.

There is a scale for calculating

qualifications. For example, a batsman

who has played 10 Test innings gets 70

per cent of his rating (i.e. his rating

will be between 0 and 700 points). He

doesn’t get 100 per cent until he has

played 40 Test innings. A bowler who

has taken 30 wickets also gets 70 per

cent of his full rating. He doesn’t get

100 per cent until he has taken 100

Test wickets. This means that

successful new players can enter the

top 30 after just a few Tests, but are

unlikely to reach the world top five

until they have many Test matches

under their belts.

One-Day Rankings

The principles behind the ODI Ratings

are similar to those for the Test

Ratings, with the following important

differences.

P a g e | 90

Batsmen gain significant credit for

rapid scoring. They only get a small

amount of credit for being not out

(because a not out batsman is, by

definition, batting at the end of the

innings when the value of his wicket is

low)

Bowlers gain significant credit for

economy. A bowler who bowls 10 overs

0-10 is likely to see his rating improve

significantly, even though he hasn’t

taken a wicket.

Players lose only a half per cent (½%)

of their points for missing a match for

their country.All ODI matches are

considered equal, except for ICC

Cricket World Cup matches, where

good performances gain extra

credit.Big scores or wicket hauls

against very weak nations get much

less credit than the same performances

against the main ODI countries.

Women’s ODI Rankings

The Women’s ODI Rankings operate in

the same way as the men’s equivalent.

However, statistically there are some

differences between men’s and

women’s ODI cricket, so there are

some adaptations for the women’s

version. The average scores in

women’s ODIs tend to be lower than in

men’s so the points scales were

adjusted so as not to favour bowlers,

and there are fewer women play ODIs

in a given year than men, so there are

typically more men bunched within a

few points of each other in the table

than in the women’s equivalent.

FAQs:

What do the ratings measure?

Think of the Mobile ICC ratings as a system for identifying the players who could be

selected for an ICC World XI if it was picked today. Take a look at the latest top tens,

and you should find that most of the players at the top would be candidates for your

current World XI. The ratings have often been described as a measure of form, but

this is a simplification. A form rating would only look at what a player has done in

(say) the last year, whereas our ratings take into account a player’s entire career –

though they put more emphasis on what he has done recently.

P a g e | 91

How do you decide who is or isn’t included in the list?

Players have to have appeared in a match within the qualifying period to appear in

the lists (normally 12-15 months for Tests, 6-12 months for ODIs). For example, Anil

Kumble disappeared from the ratings lists for a while in 2001 because he hadn’t

played a Test for over a year, but he reappeared as soon as he played his next Test. If

a player confirms his retirement he is also removed from the list. So, for example,

Darren Gough was removed from the Test ratings in August 2003 (though he

remained in the ODI list because he hadn’t retired from that form of the game).

Players are in the rankings as soon as they complete a match. However, we only

publish the top 100 players (at most), so it can take several matches for a player to

break into that.

When are the Ratings updated?

Our normal practice is to update the Test ratings after each Test match (usually

within 12 hours) and ODI ratings at the end of each ODI series. We try not to publish

Test ratings if another Test match is currently in progress. However, if there are lots

of overlapping Test matches running into each other we try to be more flexible so

that the Ratings on the website don’t get too out of date.

What happens to a player’s rating if he plays but does not bat/bowl ?

If a batsman does not bat, his rating is unchanged. We don’t want the ratings to

punish a player when he hasn’t done anything wrong (and it would be tough if, for

example, rain wiped out an innings causing all the team to lose points). The situation

with bowlers is slightly different. If the opposition are bowled out for less than 150,

then a bowler who has not bowled, is not penalised (conditions obviously suited the

other bowlers, and his services weren’t needed).

What does it mean to have, say, 500 points?

Ratings points have a meaning in the same way as traditional averages do. Over 900

points is a supreme achievement. Few players get there, and even fewer stay there for

P a g e | 92

long. 700 plus is normally enough to put a player in the world top ten. 500 plus is a

good, solid rating.

What about ratings for wicket-keepers?

The challenge is to find a fair way of rating a keeper. You can’t just rate him on

catches and stumpings taken, since these are highly dependent on the bowler

creating these chances (how many chances did Warne create for Healy, for

example?). No accurate details are kept historically on missed chances, and in any

case what is a missed chance? Perhaps Alan Knott ‘missed’ chances that other

keepers wouldn’t even have got to. So, as with other fielding skills, we won’t attempt

to produce a rating since we aren’t convinced it would be credible.

Who decides how good the pitch is?

Nobody does. There is a common misconception that there is an expert panel that

sits down to assess the pitch in each match. In fact, all the Ratings calculations are

based purely on the information in the scorecard (as you would find published in a

newspaper). If both teams score 500 in each innings, the computer rates this as a

high-scoring match in which run-making was relatively easy, and therefore

downgrades the value of runs scored. If both teams score 150, this indicates that runs

were at a premium and a player gets greater credit for scoring well in this game.

How do you rate all-rounders?

We have devised an all-rounder index that gives a good indication of who the best all-

rounders in the world are in Test and One Day cricket. To obtain the index, simply

take the player’s batting and bowling points, multiply them together and divide by

1000. So a player with 800 batting and 0 bowling gets an index of zero (because he

can’t bowl and therefore isn’t an all-rounder!), 600 batting/200 bowling gets 120,

and 400 batting/400 bowling points gets an index of 160. An index of 300 plus is

world class. There are far more all-rounders in ODIs than Tests, but the same names

tend to appear high in both lists. Incidentally, this index does omit one important all-

rounder skill, namely fielding. There is no satisfactory way of rating fielding skills

statistically at present.

P a g e | 93

Is it harder to score points against some of the lower ranked teams than

it might be to score points against the higher teams?

Because the ratings take account of the opposition strength, there shouldn’t be any

obvious advantage to playing against any particular team. Of course that’s not to say

that certain individuals do seem to play better against certain opposition or on

certain types of pitch.

What is the best way to determine the “best players of all time”. Can you

produce a definitive list?

The ratings represent a player’s standing have compiled a list of “best-ever ratings”

which are effectively snapshots of greatness. When it comes to judging a player’s

greatness over his career, it’s necessary to look at his entire graph rather than his

peak. It’s not so much how high a player gets as how long he stays there. If you think

of a player’s rating graph as being the shape of a mountain, then the greats will have

graphs shaped more like Kilimanjaro than the Matterhorn. Hence Tendulkar would

be deemed greater than Clyde Walcott despite the latter’s higher peak. One way of

assessing a player would be to calculate his ‘average rating’ over his career though of

course this could penalize a player whose long career included a slow start. So it’s

over to you to make your own judgment by comparing graphs, or by other more

subjective means.

How are the Ratings updated?

At the end of a match, the scorecard is entered onto our computer. The

computer performs a number of checks on the data to ensure that there are no

errors (for example the number of runs + extras has to be the same as the total !) and

then the ratings are calculated. Calculations used to take minutes in the early days of

the ratings. Now they are updated in a microsecond.

P a g e | 94

What happens to a player’s rating if they suffer a long-term injury?

A player who misses a game for his country is treated exactly the same whatever the

reason (injury, poor form etc). In Tests, the player loses 1% of his points for each

match missed, and a similar amount in ODIs.

Why isn’t there a combined Test and ODI player list to determine who is

the greatest all-round cricketer in all forms of the game?

We don’t try to mix apples and pears, though the points scales are similar for the two

forms of cricket, so it would not be completely unreasonable to add together a

player’s points for the two forms of the game to get a grand total. Readers are

welcome to produce their own lists.

How can I tell who is the greatest Twenty20 international player?

Wait till there’s been enough T20 cricket played…

How do you actually go about gathering the data required? Does some

lucky person get to travel to the test arenas?

If only! The ratings are designed so they could be calculated using only the

information that appears on a match scorecard. All of the ratings calculations are

done using desktop technology. Of course as cricket-lovers we do watch cricket when

we can, but that is not an essential part of running the ratings.

FIBA, THE INTERNATIONAL BASKETBALL FEDERATION : BETTING AND CORRUPTION RULES

“Benefit” means the direct or indirect

receipt or provision (as relevant) of

money or money’s worth (other than

prize money and/or contractual

payments to be made under

endorsement, sponsorship or other

contracts).

“Betting” shall mean making,

accepting, or laying a wager of money

or any other form of financial

speculation and shall include, without

limitation, activities commonly

referred to as sports betting such as

fixed and running odds,

P a g e | 95

totalisator/toto games, live betting,

betting exchange, spread betting and

other games offered by sports betting

operators.

“Bet” means a wager of money or any

other form of financial speculation;

“Inside Information” means any

information relating to any

Competition of FIBA that a Participant

possesses by virtue of his position

within the sport. Such information

includes, but is not limited to, factual

information regarding the competitors,

the conditions, tactical considerations

or any other aspect of the Competition

of FIBA, but does not include such

information that is already published

or a matter of public record, readily

acquired by an interested member of

the public or disclosed according to the

rules and regulations governing the

relevant Competition of FIBA.

“Participant” means any Player, Player

Support Personnel, judge, referee,

delegate, technical official,

commissioner, jury of appeal member,

competition official, National

Federation team or delegation member

and any other accredited person.

“Person” shall include natural persons,

bodies corporate and unincorporated

associations and partnerships

(whether or not any of them have

separate legal personality).

Manipulation of Results

(a) Fixing or contriving in any way or

otherwise improperly influencing, or

being a party to fix or contrive in any

way or otherwise improperly influence,

the result, progress, outcome, conduct

or any other aspect of a Competition of

FIBA.

(b) Ensuring or seeking to ensure the

occurrence of a particular incident in a

Competition of FIBA which occurrence

is to the Participant’s knowledge the

subject of a Bet and for which he or

another Person expects to receive or

has received a Benefit.

(c) Failing in return for a Benefit (or

the legitimate expectation of a Benefit,

irrespective of whether such Benefit is

in fact given or received) to perform to

the best of one’s abilities in a

Competition of FIBA.

Corrupt Conduct

(a) Accepting, offering, agreeing to

accept or offer, a bribe or other Benefit

P a g e | 96

(or the legitimate expectation of a

Benefit, irrespective of whether such

Benefit is in fact given or received) to

fix or contrive in any way or otherwise

to influence improperly the result,

progress, outcome, conduct or any

other aspect of an Event or

Competition.

(b) Providing, offering, giving,

requesting or receiving any gift or

Benefit (or the legitimate expectation

of a Benefit, irrespective of whether

such Benefit is in fact given or

received) in circumstances that the

Participant might reasonably have

expected could bring him or the sport

into disrepute.

Misuse of Inside Information

(a) Using Inside Information for

Betting purposes or otherwise in

relation to Betting.

(b) Disclosing Inside Information to

any Person with or without Benefit

where the Participant might

reasonably be expected to know that

its disclosure in such circumstances

could be used in relation to Betting.

Other Violations

(a) Inducing, instructing, facilitating or

encouraging a Participant to commit a

violation set out in this Article.

(b) Any attempt by a Participant, or

any agreement by a Participant with

any other person, to engage in conduct

that would culminate in the

commission of any violation of this

Article shall be treated as if a violation

had been committed, whether or not

such attempt or agreement in fact

resulted in such violation. However,

there shall be no Violation under this

Article where the Participant

renounces his attempt or agreement

prior to it being discovered by a third

party not involved in the attempt or

agreement.

(c) Knowingly assisting, covering up or

otherwise being complicit in any acts

or omissions of the type described in

this Article committed by a

Participant.

(d) Failing to disclose to FIBA or other

competent authority without undue

delay full details of

P a g e | 97

i. any approaches or invitations

received by the Participant to engage

in conduct or incidents that would

amount to a violation.

ii. any incident, fact or matter that

comes to the attention of the

Participant that may evidence a

violation under this Article by a third

party, including, without limitation,

approaches or invitations that have

been received by any other party to

engage in conduct that would amount

to a violation.

(e) Failing to cooperate with any

reasonable investigation carried out by

FIBA or other competent authority in

relation to a possible breach of this

Article, including failing to provide any

information and/or documentation

requested by FIBA or competent

competition authority that may be

relevant to the investigation.

GENERAL PROVISIONS:

The following are not relevant to the

determination of a violation:

1. Whether or not the Participant was

participating, or a Participant assisted

by another Participant was

participating, in the specific Event or

Competition;

2. The nature or outcome of any Bet in

issue;

3. The outcome of the Competition of

FIBA on which the Bet was made;

4. Whether or not the Participant’s

efforts or performance (if any) in any

Competition of FIBA in issue were (or

could be expected to be) affected by

the acts or omissions in question;

5. Whether or not the results in the

Competition of FIBA in issue were (or

could be expected to be) affected by

the acts or omissions in question.

TENNIS AND ANTI DOPING RULES Anti-Doping Rules are mentioned

under Article 2 of the International

tennis Federation Code. The important

provisions are hereby stated that shall

amount to violation :

P a g e | 98

2.1.1 It is each Player’s personal duty

to ensure that no Prohibited Substance

enters his/her body. A Player is

responsible for any 6 Prohibited

Substance or any of its Metabolites or

Markers found to be present in his/her

Sample. Accordingly, it is not

necessary that intent, Fault, negligence

or knowing Use on the Player’s part be

demonstrated in order to establish an

Anti-Doping Rule Violation under

Article 2.1; nor is the Player’s lack of

intent, Fault, negligence or knowledge

a defence to a charge that an Anti-

Doping Rule Violation has been

committed under Article 2.1.

2.2 Use or Attempted Use by a Player

of a Prohibited Substance or a

Prohibited Method, unless the Player

establishes that such Use or Attempted

Use is consistent with a TUE granted

in accordance with Article 3.5.

2.2.1 It is each Player’s personal duty

to ensure that no Prohibited Substance

enters his or her body and that no

Prohibited Method is Used.

Accordingly, it is not necessary that

intent, Fault, negligence or knowing

Use on the Player’s part be

demonstrated in order to establish an

Anti-Doping Rule Violation for Use of

a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited

Method under Article 2.2; nor is the

Player’s lack of intent, Fault,

negligence or knowledge a defence to a

charge that an Anti-Doping Rule

Violation of Use has been committed

under Article 2.2.

2.2.2 Without prejudice to Article

2.2.1, it is necessary that intent on the

Player’s part be demonstrated in order

to establish an Anti-Doping Rule

Violation of Attempted Use under

Article 2.2. 2.2.3 The success or failure

of the Use or Attempted Use of a

Prohibited Substance or Prohibited

Method is not material. For an Anti-

Doping Rule Violation to be committed

under Article 2.2, it is sufficient that

the Player Used or Attempted to Use

the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited

Method.

2.2.4 Notwithstanding Article 2.2.3, a

Player’s Use or Attempted Use of a

substance Out-of-Competition shall

not constitute an Anti-Doping Rule

Violation under Article 2.2 where the

Use of that substance Out-of-

Competition is not prohibited .

However, if that substance (or any of

its Metabolites or Markers) is still

present in a Sample collected from the

Player when he/she is next In- 6

Prohibited Substance or any of its

P a g e | 99

Metabolites or Markers found to be

present in his/her Sample.

Accordingly, it is not necessary that

intent, Fault, negligence or knowing

Use on the Player’s part be

demonstrated in order to establish an

Anti-Doping Rule Violation under

Article 2.1; nor is the Player’s lack of

intent, Fault, negligence or knowledge

a defence to a charge that an Anti-

Doping Rule Violation has been

committed under Article 2.1.

2.3 Evading Sample collection, or

(without compelling justification)

refusing or failing to submit to Sample

collection after notification as

authorised in applicable anti-doping

rules.

2.4 Failing three times in any 12-

month period (a) to file whereabouts

information in accordance with Article

I.3 of the International Standard for

Testing and Investigations (a “Filing

Failure”); and/or (b) to be available for

Testing at the declared whereabouts in

accordance with Article I.4 of the

International Standard for Testing and

Investigations (a “Missed Test”).

2.5 Tampering or Attempted

Tampering with any part of Doping

Control. This Article prohibits conduct

that subverts or Attempts to subvert

the Doping Control process but that

would not otherwise be included in the

definition of Prohibited Methods.

Tampering shall include, without

limitation, intentionally interfering or

attempting to interfere with a Doping

Control official, providing fraudulent

information to an Anti-Doping

Organisation, or intimidating or

attempting to intimidate a potential

witness.

2.6.1 Possession by a Player at any

time or place of a substance that is

prohibited at all times or of a

Prohibited Method is an Anti-Doping

Rule Violation under Article 2.6,

unless the Player establishes that such

Possession is consistent with a TUE

granted in accordance with Article 3.5

or other acceptable justification.

2.6.4 Possession by a Player Support

Person In-Competition of any

Prohibited Substance that is only

prohibited In-Competition, in

connection with a Player, Competition

or training, is an Anti-Doping Rule

Violation under Article 2.6, unless the

Player Support Person establishes that

such Possession is consistent with a

TUE granted to 8 the Player in

accordance with Article 3.5 or other

acceptable justification.

P a g e | 100

2.8 Administration or Attempted

Administration to any Player at any

time or place of a substance that is

prohibited at all times or of a

Prohibited Method, or Administration

or Attempted Administration to any

Player In-Competition of any

Prohibited Substance that is only

prohibited In-Competition, unless the

Player establishes that such

Administration or Attempted

Administration was consistent with a

TUE granted in accordance with

Article 3.5.

2.9 Complicity: assisting, encouraging,

aiding, abetting, conspiring to commit,

covering up or any other type of

intentional complicity involving an

AntiDoping Rule Violation, an

Attempted Anti-Doping Rule

Violation, or a violation of Article

10.11.1 by another Person.

2.10.1 Association by a Player or other

Person subject to the authority of an

Anti-Doping Organisation in a

professional or sport-related capacity

with any Player Support Person who:

(a) (if subject to the authority of an

Anti-Doping Organisation) is serving a

period of Ineligibility; or (b) (if not

subject to the authority of an Anti-

Doping Organisation, and where

Ineligibility has not been addressed in

a results management process

pursuant to this Programme or the

Code) has been convicted or found in a

criminal, disciplinary or professional

proceeding to have engaged in conduct

that would have constituted a violation

of Codecompliant anti-doping rules if

such rules had been applicable to such

Person. The disqualifying status of

such Person shall be in force for the

longer of six years from the criminal,

professional or disciplinary decision or

the duration of the criminal,

disciplinary or professional sanction

imposed.

P a g e | 101

CHANGES BROUGHT IN EFFECT FROM 2015

FOR

2015The main changes to the TADP for

2015 are summarised below. Unless

otherwise indicated, they are being made

to implement the changes to the World

Anti-Doping Code agreed by WADA’s

stakeholders at the World Anti-Doping

Conference in Johannesburg in 2013.

A Player who retires and so is no

longer subject to testing must give six

months’ notice of any intended return

to the sport (previously it was three

months) and must make him/herself

available for testing in that period.

WADA has discretion to waive all or

part of this quarantine period in

exceptional cases (on a case-by-case

basis).

The following obligations have been

added to the list of responsibilities of

Player Support Persons:

to disclose prior doping violations

(new under 2015 Code), to cooperate

with investigations ,

not to use or possess prohibited

substances without justification.

A Player now has to commit 3 filing

failures or missed tests in 12 months in

order to commit a doping violation.

(Previously it was 18 months).

New violation of Players knowingly

associating (in a professional or sports

related capacity) with a Player Support

Person serving a doping ban, or who

has been convicted of conduct that

would constitute a violation of the

Code. New discretion to grant a TUE

for use of a prohibited substance

retroactively (i.e., after the Player has

started using it/tested positive for it)

where ITF and WADA agree fairness

so requires.

Disputes between ITF and

NADOS as to whether TUE

should be granted are now to be

resolved by WADA (and

ultimately CAS).

P a g e | 102

Where an Event’s rules require a

Player to be at the Event prior to the

day of the first match of the relevant

draw, the Player is deemed to be ‘in-

competition’ from the earlier date.

(This change is not Code-mandated

but comes from TADWG discussions).

A Player does not have to provide

whereabouts on days when he/she is

in-competition, but when he/she is

knocked out of competition, he/she

must update whereabouts filings so

he/she can be found for testing from

the next day until he/she is next in

competition. (This is a 2015 Code

change that confirms current TADP

practice).

ITF will now have results

management responsibility for all

filing failures and missed tests in

respect of players in the IRTP

(previously it was not responsible for

results management for missed tests

attempted by other ADOs). Review

Board process now includes provision

for Player to apply for retroactive TUE

after adverse analytical finding has

been issued.

Provisional suspension is mandatory

if expert panel issues an Adverse

Passport Finding (i.e., a finding based

on a longitudinal profile of the Player’s

biomarkers that it is highly likely the

Player used a prohibited substance or a

prohibited method) and the Review

Board reviews and confirms there is a

case to answer.

New ground for avoiding provisional

suspension: where positive test caused

by contaminated supplement/product.

8.4 Tribunal given express power to

consolidate related proceedings

(change not Code-mandated but arises

from TADWG discussions).

If Player tests positive in connection

with one competition at event (e.g.

singles), disqualification of results

from that competition remains

automatic. Disqualification of results

from other competition at same event

(e.g. doubles) remains mandatory, and

is not at the discretion of the Tribunal.

(By contrast, the Code gives tribunals

discretion to determine whether those

results are disqualified).

Sanctions for first offence increased for

certain violations from two years to

four years, depending on various

factors, such as proof of intent (or, in

some cases, Player not being able to

prove lack of intent). But no longer any

general discretion to increase

P a g e | 103

sanctions based on ‘aggravating

circumstances’.

New rules for multiple violations, such

that the ban for a second offence will

never be less than six months. In last

two months of ban or (if less) last

quarter of ban, a Player may start

using official facilities and training

with team/doubles partner.

Right to appeal to CAS extended to

apply to more decisions taken under

TADP. CAS not required to give any

deference to decision being appealed.

CAS decision not to be published if

minor involved.

Statute of limitations for doping

charges extended from eight to ten

years. 16 Anti-doping obligations on

national associations removed to ITF

Constitution.

FIFA : HOW ARE ‘LAWS OF THE GAME’ ALTERED?

The alterations in the ‘Laws of the

Game’ are made by International

Football Association Board. The

Football Association (England), The

Scottish Football Association, The

Football Association of Wales, The

Irish Football Association and the

Fédération Internationale de Football

Association (FIFA), constitute the

Board and each is to be represented by

four delegates.

The objective of the Board is to discuss

and decide proposed alterations to the

Laws of the Game and such other

matters affecting association football

as required to be referred to the Board

after consideration by the Annual

General Meetings or other appropriate

meetings of the associations forming

the Board or confederations or

member associations.

As per the provisions specified in FIFA

Laws of the Game,

Annual General Meeting : Each

association shall forward in writing,

not later than 1 December, to the

secretary of the association hosting the

meeting, suggestions or proposed

alterations to the Laws of the Game,

requests for experimentation to the

Laws of the Game and other items for

discussion, which shall be printed and

distributed not later than 14

December. Any amendments to such

proposed alterations must be

submitted in writing to the secretary of

P a g e | 104

the host association not later than 14

January, and such proposals and

amendments shall be printed and

distributed to the associations for

consideration not later than 1

February.

Annual Business Meeting: Each

association shall forward in writing to

the secretary of the host association, at

least four weeks before the date of the

meeting, any proposals, requests for

experimentation regarding the Laws of

the Game and other items for

discussion. The agenda and relevant

papers shall be distributed to all

member associations of the Board two

weeks before the meeting. Any

confederation or other member

association of FIFA may forward in

writing to the Secretary General of

FIFA, proposals, requests or items for

discussion in good time to ensure that

they may be considered by FIFA and, if

acceptable, forwarded to the secretary

of the host association at least four

weeks before the meeting.

Minutes : The minutes of the meeting

shall be recorded by the secretary of

the host association and shall be

reported in the official Minute Book,

which shall be forwarded to the

association next in rotation before the

first day of February ensuing.

Quorum and voting powers : The

business of a meeting shall not be

proceeded unless four associations,

one of which shall be FIFA, are

represented. FIFA shall have four votes

on behalf of all its affi liated member

associations. The other associations of

the IFAB shall each have one vote. For

a proposal to succeed, it must receive

the support of at least three-quarters

of those present and entitled to vote.

Alterations to the laws of the game No

alterations shall be made to the Laws

of the Game except in the Annual

General Meeting of the Board and then

only if agreed by at least three-quarters

of those present and entitled to vote.

Special meetings : The association

hosting the Board meetings for the

current year* shall, on receiving a

written requisition signed by FIFA or

by any two of the other member

associations, accompanied by a copy of

the proposals to be submitted, call a

special meeting of the Board. Such

special meetings shall be held within

twenty-eight days of the requisition

and the associations forming the Board

shall receive twenty-one days’ notice

together with a copy of the proposals.

P a g e | 105

Decisions of the Board : The decisions

of the Annual Business Meeting of the

Board shall be effective from the date

of the meeting, unless agreed

otherwise. The decisions of the Annual

General Meeting of the Board

regarding changes to the Laws of the

Game shall be binding on

confederations and member

associations as from 1 July following

each Annual General Meeting of the

Board but confederations or member

associations whose current season has

not ended by 1 July may delay the

introduction of the adopted alterations

to the Laws of the Game for their

competitions until the beginning of

their next season. No alteration to the

Laws of the Game shall be made by any

confederation or member association

unless it has been passed by the Board.

P a g e | 106

#13 ICC T20 WORLD CUP TOURNAMENT PREVIEW AND GUIDE

GROUP A TEAMS

SRI LANKA

Squad: Lasith Malinga (capt), Angelo Mathews (vice-capt), Dinesh Chandimal

(wk), Tillakaratne Dilshan, Lahiru Thirimanne, Shehan Jayasuriya, Milinda

Siriwardena, Dasun Shanaka, Chamara Kapugedara, Nuwan Kulasekara,

Dushmantha Chameera, Thisara Perera, Sachithra Senanayake, Rangana Herath,

Suranga Lakmal.

Sri Lanka is the defending champion of the ICC World Twenty20, after having

won its maiden title in the 2014 edition in Bangladesh. It is also in the midst of a

tough transition phase following the retirements of Kumar Sangakkara and

Mahela Jayawardena. The impact is telling on its performances – Sri Lanka has

won only four of its 14 matches since the historic triumph in Mirpur two years

back. Things have been difficult for Sri Lanka, but with the tournament being held

in the subcontinent, Sri Lanka will fancy its chances of lifting its game, as it has a

habit of doing in big tournaments.

SOUTH AFRICA

Squad: Faf du Plessis (capt), Kyle Abbott, Hashim Amla, Farhaan Behardien,

Quinton de Kock (wk), AB de Villiers, JP Duminy, Imran Tahir, David Miller,

Chris Morris, Aaron Phangiso, Kagiso Rabada, Rilee Rossouw, Dale Steyn, David

Wiese.

South Africa hasn’t won an ICC world event so far, but as on most occasions, it

will be among the favourites ahead of the ICC World Twenty20 2016 in India. The

outfit is a well-balanced one, with a deep batting line-up filled with men who can

clear the ropes easily, a potent and varied bowling attack, plenty of experience in

Indian conditions and a deep desire and hunger to start filling up a bare trophy

P a g e | 107

cabinet. The last time the team played a T20I series in India, it emerged

victorious by a 2-0 margin against the home team.

WEST INDIES

Squad: Darren Sammy (capt), Chris Gayle, Johnson Charles, Marlon Samuels,

Andre Fletcher, Dwayne Bravo, Denesh Ramdin, Andre Russell, Jason Holder,

Carlos Brathwaite, Ashley Nurse, Jerome Taylor, Sulieman Benn, Samuel Badree.

West Indies has been a Twenty20 powerhouse, winning the ICC World T20 in

2012 and reaching the semi-final in 2014.

Since that loss to Sri Lanka in Mirpur, though, West Indies has played only eight

T20 Internationals, winning four and losing three. The last of them was in

November 2015, and it will be interesting to see how the squad copes with the lack

of match practice when compared to some of its opponents.

ENGLAND

Squad

Eoin Morgan (capt), Moeen Ali, Sam Billings, Jos Buttler, Liam Dawson, Steven

Finn, Alex Hales, Chris Jordan, Adil Rashid, Joe Root, Jason Roy, Ben Stokes,

Reece Topley, James Vince, David Willey.

It’s the only world event the England men’s team has won to date, a stirring and

unlikely victory in the 2010 edition of the ICC World Twenty20 in the West

Indies. The star of England’s run to the title that year was undoubtedly Kevin

Pietersen, who hit two half-centuries on his way to 248 runs at an average of

62.00 and a strike rate of 137.77, with Craig Kieswetter chipping in with 222 runs

at 31.71 and a strike rate of 116.84. Graeme Swann’s bowling – 10 wickets at an

economy rate of 6.54 over in seven matches – played no mean part either.

A lot has changed in England cricket since that win, and before the ICC World

Twenty20 2016, the team looks good for the shortest format of the game, with a

line-up of good, clean, solid hitters and a bowling attack with quite a few short-

format specialists and a nice mix of different styles.

P a g e | 108

AFGHANISTAN

Squad: Asghar Stanikzai (capt), Mohammad Shahzad (vice-capt,wk), Noor Ali

Zadran, Usman Ghani, Mohammad Nabi, Karim Sadiq, Shafiqullah, Rashid Khan,

Amir Hamza, Dawlat Zadran, Shapoor Zadran, Gulbadin Naib, Samiullah

Shenwari, Najibullah Zadran, Hamid Hassan.

Afghanistan has come a long way since making its debut in the international

circuit in 2001, and making its way towards top-flight cricket in a fairtytale run.

With a battery of pace bowlers that can trouble the best batsmen, a pool of natural

talent and a never-say-die spirit, it is one of the teams that always has fans

excited. Though it could not qualify to the Asia Cup T20 this year, Afghanistan has

done well in the shortest format of the game recently, winning comprehensively

against Zimbabwe (2-0) and Oman (2-0). Afghanistan made it to the ICC World

Twenty20 2016 after winning three out of six matches in the Qualifiers played in

Ireland and Scotland last year.

GROUP B

INDIA

Squad: Mahendra Singh Dhoni (capt, wk), Shikhar Dhawan, Rohit Sharma, Virat

Kohli, Suresh Raina, Yuvraj Singh, Hardik Pandya, Ravindra Jadeja, R Ashwin,

Jasprit Bumrah, Ashish Nehra, Harbhajan Singh, Pawan Negi, Ajinkya Rahane,

Mohammed Shami.

In 2011, India became the first country to win the ICC Cricket World Cup in its own

backyard. Given its recent form and the brand of cricket it has portrayed in

Twenty20 Internationals since the start of the year, it will fancy its chances of also

becoming the first team to lift the ICC World Twenty20 crown on home turf. In a well

- structured build-up to the tournament, India has played only T20I cricket since the

end of January, and has stacked up an astonishing record under Mahendra Singh

Dhoni. After sweeping Australia 3-0 Down Under, it bounced back from the loss of

P a g e | 109

the first match to defeat Sri Lanka at home 2-1 and rounded off its preparations by

scything through the Asia Cup draw, winning all five matches on its way to the title.

NEW ZEALAND

Squad: Kane Williamson (capt), Ross Taylor (vice-capt), Corey Anderson, Trent

Boult, Grant Elliott, Martin Guptill, Adam Milne, Mitchell McClenaghan, Colin

Munro, Nathan McCullum, Henry Nicholls, Luke Ronchi (wk), Mitchell Santner,

Ish Sodhi, Tim Southee.

New Zealand weren’t, as so often, underdogs for the ICC Cricket World Cup in

2015, when conditions and an adventurous captain in Brendon McCullum made it

a favourite to take home the big prize. Now, with the team on foreign shores and

McCullum having bid adieu, the label is back in place.

Interestingly, while most of the other Super 10 teams have been playing various

Twenty20 International games to gear up for the marquee tournament, New

Zealand's last outing was a Test series, followed by a two-week break. There could

be some rustiness as a result, but Kane Williamson's men are unlikely to concern

themselves with the variables beyond their control. Like its captain, New Zealand

is quietly determined and could spring some surprises.

PAKISTAN

Squad: Shahid Afridi (capt), Anwar Ali, Imad Wasim, Khalid Latif, Ahmed

Shehzad, Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Hafeez, Mohammad Irfan, Mohammad

Nawaz, Mohammad Sami, Sarfraz Ahmed (wk), Sharjeel Khan, Shoaib Malik,

Umar Akmal, Wahab Riaz.

Pakistan's traditional unpredictability has made it successful in the 20-over game,

a format where anything can happen. The team has provided fans some

entertaining World T20 moments, from a bowl-out in only its second World T20

game, to a thrilling 2007 final, to scalping 5 Australian wickets in the last over of

the 2010 group game, and a cracker of a century from Ahmed Shehzad in 2014.

The glittering jewel of all is its ICC World T20 2009 title.

P a g e | 110

With the competition being held in familiar subcontinental conditions this time

around, Shahid Afridi's side will be hoping to go far and repeat that success.

AUSTRALIA

Squad: Steve Smith (capt), David Warner (vice-capt), Ashton Agar, Nathan

Coulter-Nile, James Faulkner, Aaron Finch, John Hastings, Josh Hazelwood,

Usman Khawaja, Mitchell Marsh, Glenn Maxwell, Peter Nevill, Andrew Tye, Shane

Watson, Adam Zampa.

Australia has been the most successful side at the World Cup, having won the trophy

four times: In 1987, and then a hat-trick of wins in 1999, 2003 and 2007.

Not surprisingly, it is one of the most successful One-Day International teams in the

World Cup. They are cricket’s pre-eminent side in all formats but Twenty20 and you

do not need to have just tuned in to their last five games (all lost) to know this. No

the truth of their performance in Twenty20 was articulated by Shane Watson after a

chastening 3-0 series loss to India at home: they have simply never known their best

XI in the format and even if they have, have not stuck with it long enough.

BANGLADESH

Squad: Mashrafe Mortaza (capt), Shakib Al Hasan, Tamim Iqbal, Mohammad

Mithun, Mahmudullah, Mushfiqur Rahim, Soumya Sarkar, Sabbir Rahman, Nasir

Hossain, Mustafizur Rahman, Al-Amin Hossain, Taskin Ahmed, Arafat Sunny,

Abu Hider, Nurul Hasan.

Bangladesh’s dramatic turnaround in the last couple of years is well chronicled.

Once considered the whipping boys of cricket, their progress as a One-Day

International side in the 2015-16 season has been phenomenal, and it would be

hoping to replicate the formula in the game’s shortest format as well, with a good

showing in the ICC World Twenty 2016. Bangladesh surprised many by knocking

out England in the ICC World Cup 2015, advancing to the quarterfinals for the

first time. It ensured the victory against England was no flash in the pan, and has

since inflicted ODI series defeats on Pakistan, India, South Africa and Zimbabwe

P a g e | 111

and qualified through to the Asia Cup T20 final on the back of wins over United

Arab Emirates, Sri Lanka and Pakistan.

Group A – Women – Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa, Sri

Lanka

Australia - Meg Lanning (capt); Kristen Beams; Alex Blackwell; Lauren Cheatle;

Sarah Coyte; Rene Farrell; Holly Ferling; Grace Harris; Alyssa Healy; Jess

Jonassen; Beth Mooney; Erin Osborne; Ellyse Perry; Megan Schutt and Elyse

Villani.

Ireland – Isobel Joyce (capt); Catherine Dalton; Laura Delany; Kim Garth;

Jennifer Gray; Cecelia Joyce; Shauna Kavanagh; Amy Kenealy; Robyn Lewis; Gaby

Lewis; Kate McKenna; Ciara Metcalfe; Lucy O'Reilly; Clare Shillington and Mary

Waldron.

New Zealand - Suzie Bates (capt.); Erin Bermingham; Sophie Devine; Leigh

Kasperek; Felicity Leydon-Davis; Katey Martin; Sara McGlashan; Thamsyn

Newton; Morna Nielsen; Katie Perkins; Anna Peterson; Rachel Priest; Hannah

Rowe; Amy Satterthwaite and Lea Tahuhu.

South Africa - Mignon du Preez (capt.); Trisha Chetty; Moseline Daniels;

Dinesha Devnarain; Yolani Fourie; Shabnim Ismail; Marizanne Kapp; Ayabonga

Khaka; Odine Kirsten; Masabata Klaas; Lizelle Lee; Matshipi Marcia; Sune Luus;

Chloe Tryon and Dane Van Niekerk.

Sri Lanka - Shashikala Siriwardene (capt.); Chamari Atapattu; Sugandika

Kumari; Nipuni Hansika; Ama Kanchana; Hansima Karunaratne; Eshani

Kaushalya; Harshitha Madavi; Dilani Manodara; Yasoda Mendis; Udeshika

Prabodhani; Oshadi Ranasinghe; Inoka Ranaweera; Nilakshi de Silva and

Prasadini Weerakkody.

Group B – Women – Bangladesh, England, India, Pakistan, West Indies

Bangladesh – Jahanara Alam (capt.); Ayasha Rahman; Fahima Khatun; Fargana

Hoque; Khadiza Tul Kubra; Lata Mondal; Nahida Akhter; Nigar Sultana; Panna

Ghosh; Ritu Moni; Rumana Ahmed; Salma Khatun; Sanjida Islam; Shaila Sharmin

and Sharmin Akhter.

P a g e | 112

England – Charlotte Edwards (capt.); Tamsin Beaumont; Katherine Brunt;

Georgia Elwiss; Natasha Farrant; Lydia Greenway; Rebecca Grundy; Jenny Gunn;

Danielle Hazell; Amy Jones; Heather Knight; Natalie Sciver; Anya Shrubsole;

Sarah Taylor and Danielle Wyatt.

India – Mithali Raj (capt), Ekta Bisht; Rajeshwari Gayakwad; Jhulan Goswami;

Thirush Kamini; Harmanpreet Kaur; Veda Krishnamurthy; Smriti Mandhana;

Niranjana Nagarajan; Shikha Pandey; Anuja Patil; Deepti Sharma; Vellaswamy

Vanitha; Sushma Verma and Poonam Yadav.

Pakistan – Sana Mir (capt.); Aliya Riaz; Anam Amin; Asmavia Iqbal; Nahida

Khan; Bismah Maroof; Iram Javed; Javeria Wadood; Muneeba Ali Siddiqui; Nida

Dar; Sadia Yousuf; Sania Khan; Sidra Ameen; Sidra Nawaz and Nain Abidi.

West Indies – Stafanie Taylor (capt.); Merissa Aguilleira; Shemaine Campbelle;

Shamilia Connell; Britney Cooper; Deandra Dottin; Afy Fletcher; Stacy-Ann King;

Kyshona Knight; Kycia Knight; Hayley Matthews; Anisa Mohammed; Shaquana

Quintyne; Shakera Selman and Tremayne Smartt.

P a g e | 113

#14 PLAWYERED MONTHLY ROUNDUP

Image courtesy:www.telegraph.co.uk

New Knockout Qualifying System Gets Green Light

Formula One bosses approved on

Friday a new format to qualifying for

this year's world championship,

despite some driver reservations. The

new format will see drivers eliminated

one by one in a type of knockout

format that will see its debut at the

opening race of the season in

Melbourne on March 20. Qualifying

will remain split into three segments

as before but rather than a block of

drivers being eliminated at the end of

each session, they will go one by one.

The first segment will last 16 minutes

and after seven minutes the slowest

driver will take no further part in the

session. Every 90 seconds thereafter,

the slowest driver will be knocked out

until there are only 15 remaining. A 15-

minute second segment follows a

similar pattern with the slowest driver

eliminated after six minutes and then a

further driver knocked out at 90-

second intervals. The final block will

last 14 minutes with knockouts

beginning after five minutes until the

two final drivers are left to fight it out

for pole position. The format was

P a g e | 114

approved by the World Motor Sport

Council having previously been

unanimously accepted by the F1

Commission. The aim of the changes is

to improve the spectacle of qualifying

for the fans but not all drivers have

been seduced.

IAAF: No Reinstatement For Russian Track And Field

Athletes at This Stage Russia still has "significant work" to do

to repair its anti-doping program

before its track and field athletes can

be considered for reinstatement ahead

of the Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, the

IAAF said Friday. The sport's world

governing body said Russia has made

progress but not yet done enough to

meet the conditions for readmission to

global track and field competition. The

IAAF will meet again in May for what

likely will be a final decision on

Russia's eligibility for the games in

August. IAAF President Sebastian Coe

made the announcement at the end of

a two-day council meeting in Monaco,

where officials examined the efforts of

the Russian federation - known as

RUSAF - to reform its anti-doping

system. The next meeting will be held

on an unspecified date in May, three

months before the Olympics. Mikhail

Butov, the secretary general of Russia's

track federation who serves on the

IAAF council, accepted the decision

and said Russia still has time to fulfil

the conditions. The IAAF suspended

Russia in November after an

independent report by a World Anti-

Doping Agency panel detailed

systematic corruption and doping

cover-ups in the country, then laid

down a series of criteria for the

Russians to meet before they can be

eligible for readmission. Rune

Andersen, head of the IAAF task force

on Russia, backed Coe's assessment

that Russia still has a long way to

go.The work still to be done centers

around "interviewing athletes and

coaches named in the WADA

independent commission report and

athletes and coaches who have had

anti-doping rule violations recorded

against them. Of Russia's track and

field medalists at the 2012 London

Olympics, eight have since either

served doping bans or are

provisionally suspended. WADA's

initial report was made following

P a g e | 115

allegations made in a documentary by

German broadcaster ARD. The

program featured a Russian

whistleblower, 800-meter runner Yulia

Stepanova, who helped expose the

doping scandal. She is hoping to be

allowed to compete at the Olympics,

though not representing Russia.

Stepanova and her husband, a former

anti-doping official, left Russia in 2014

after providing undercover footage of

apparent doping violations for ARD's

documentary. ARD aired another

documentary Sunday, in which

Russian coach Vladimir Mokhnev was

accused of continuing to train athletes

while he serves an IAAF suspension.

The program alleged another coach

offered banned substances for sale and

that the acting head of the Russian

anti-doping agency had allowed an

unidentified athlete to reschedule a

supposedly no-notice drug test. Russia

is not the only country under serious

pressure. Ethiopia and Morocco (both)

need to implement as a matter of

urgency a robust and adequate

national testing program, both in and

out of competition.Kenya, Ukraine and

Belarus have been put on an IAAF

monitoring list for 2016 to ensure their

anti-doping programs are significantly

strengthened and their journey to

compliance completed by the end of

this year. More than 40 Kenyan track

athletes have failed drug tests since

2012, and four senior track officials

have been suspended by the IAAF for

"potential subversion of the anti-

doping control process in Kenya."

Three Ethiopian runners have been

suspended on suspicion of doping

amid a string of positive tests among

the country's athletes. The Ethiopian

Anti-Doping Agency said at least nine

athletes were under suspicion.

2020 FIFA Futsal World Cup bidding process underway

The FIFA Futsal World Cup Colombia

2016 may be looming large on the

horizon, but work is already underway

to lay the foundations for the next

edition in 2020. The bidding process

for that tournament recently got

underway, with a deadline of 24 March

2016 having been set for FIFA member

associations to declare an interest in

staging this global showpiece. After

that initial stage in the process,

bidding and hosting documents will be

P a g e | 116

sent by FIFA on 8 April to the relevant

associations, who will have until 6 May

to re-confirm their interest in

becoming the tournament’s hosts.

Definitive bids must then be submitted

by 5 August, with the winning nation

appointed in December 2016 by the

new FIFA Council. The 2020 edition

will be the ninth FIFA Futsal World

Cup, which began in 1989 in the

Netherlands and has since been hosted

by Hong Kong, Spain, Guatemala,

Chinese Tapei, Brazil and Thailand. In

that time, futsal has continued to grow

rapidly in popularity around the world,

with the 2016 edition featuring over

120 member associations vying to

qualify for the main event.

Papua New Guinea sanctioned after failing to play Olympic qualifier

The Papua New Guinea Football

Association (PNGFA) has been fined

CHF 10,000 and issued with a warning

following the withdrawal of its

women’s national team from the

second leg of the OFC qualifying play-

off match against New Zealand for the

Women’s Olympic Football

Tournament. FIFA’s Disciplinary

Committee found the PNGFA to be

liable for the violation of art. 6 par.1,

art. 6 par. 3 e), art. 7 par.1 and art. 7

par. 5 of the Regulations for the

Olympic Football Tournaments. The

relevant parties were notified of the

decision on Thursday, 10 March 2016.

Spartak Stadium kicks off separate waste collection in preparation for Russia 2018

As part of preparations for the FIFA

World Cup in 2018, FC Spartak

Moscow and the Russia 2018 Local

Organising Committee (LOC) have

launched a project to separate and

manage waste at Spartak Stadium,

which will host the FIFA

Confederations Cup Russia 2017 and

the 2018 FIFA World Cup Russia™.

The project is set to get underway on

12 March, when the Russian Premier

League resumes after the winter break

when Spartak face Amkar Perm. The

project is part of FIFA's and the LOC's

Sustainability Strategy for the

upcoming World Cup. The LOC will

share its successful prior experience of

similar initiatives with Spartak

P a g e | 117

Moscow, including the Russia 2018

Preliminary Draw in Saint Petersburg

in July 2015. During that event,

around 20 per cent of more than four

tonnes of gathered material was

collected for recycling. A pilot stage of

the project will be carried out in the

stadium's East Stand, which has been

specifically chosen for the task since

this is where the family sector is

situated and where fans sit with their

children. One of the main aims of

Spartak's and the LOC's initiative is to

promote a responsible approach to the

environment among the younger

generation. Separate waste collections

will then be set up throughout the

stadium.

Event Technical Committee Approves Replacement In Australia Women’s Squad For The ICC World

Twenty20 India 2016 The ICC has confirmed that the Event

Technical Committee of the ICC World

Twenty20 India 2016 has approved

Nicola Carey as a replacement player

for Grace Harris in Australia’s

women’s squad for the tournament,

which will run from 15 March to 3

April. Harris is suffering from Deep

Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and was

unable to depart Australia. Carey is

awaiting for her T20I debut but scored

a match winning 36 not out in her first

Women’s National Cricket League

appearance. She had earned a last

minute call-up for the ICC WWT20

2012 when Sarah Coyte fell ill but

didn’t feature in the tournament.

Performances during 2014-15 helped

her selection to Australia’s Shooting

Stars team which played England

Academy in Dubai in early 2015. Carey

also helped Sydney Thunder win the

inaugural Women’s Big Bash League

competition, scoring 168 runs and

taking 16 wickets in 16 matches. Any

injury or illness-based replacement

requires a written submission to the

Event Technical Committee along with

a diagnosis from a medical practitioner

as to the extent of the injury or illness.

Once replaced, a player may not return

to the squad save as an approved

subsequent replacement for another

injured or ill player. The Event

Technical Committee of the ICC World

Twenty20 India 2016 is Geoff Allardice

(ICC General Manager – Cricket,

Chairman), Anurag Thakur (host

representative), MV Sridhar

(Tournament Director), Campbell

P a g e | 118

Jamieson (IBC representative & ICC

General Manager – Commercial), and

Ian Bishop and Nick Knight

((independent nominees). Australia,

bidding to win the title for the fourth

successive time, is in Group A along

with Ireland, New Zealand, Sri Lanka

and South Africa, and will open its title

defence against South Africa in Nagpur

on Friday, 18 March.

Bangladesh’s Arafat And Taskin Reported For Suspect

Bowling Actions Bangladesh left-arm spinner Arafat

Sunny and fast bowler Taskin Ahmed

have been reported for suspect bowling

actions during their side’s opening

match in the ICC World Twenty20

2016 in India against the Netherlands

in Dharamsala on Wednesday. The

ICC is working with the Bangladesh

cricket team management to confirm

times for the independent testing of

both bowlers at the ICC-accredited

testing centre in Chennai. The ICC

regulations state “…every

reasonable effort shall be made

for the Independent Assessment

to be carried out and the

Independent Assessment Report

furnished within a period of 7

days from the date of receipt of

the Match Officials’ Report.” Both

players are free to continue bowling

until the results of testing are known.

Racquet firm Head to extend deal with Sharapova

despite the positive doping test report Racquet manufacturer Head plans to

extend its contract with Maria

Sharapova, despite her positive test for

banned drug meldonium.She has

already lost the backing of Nike and

Tag Heuer, while Porsche has

suspended its relationship with her.

Sharapova will be suspended from 12

March and could face a four-year ban

after she tested positive at the

Australian Open in January. Head

described Sharapova as “a role model

and woman of integrity who has

inspired millions of fans around the

world to play and watch tennis. The

honesty and courage she displayed in

announcing and acknowledging her

mistake was admirable. Russian

biathlete Eduard Latypov has been

suspended after testing positive, the

Russian Biathlon Union has

confirmed. The International Biathlon

P a g e | 119

Union temporarily suspended the 21-

year-old after traces of the banned

substance were found in a sample

taken last month.

ICC TV to broadcast under SUNSET+VINE For the first time at a major ICC event,

host broadcaster Sunset+Vine under

the banner of ICC TV will produce live

broadcast coverage of 48 matches,

including all 35 men’s and 13 women’s

matches, which, in turn, will be aired

around the world by ICC’s Global

Broadcast PartnerStar Sports and its

licensees into more than 200

territories. The coverage will include

30 cameras at all matches, including 6

Ultra-motion HawkEye cameras and

Spidercam. Enhancements will include

in-depth dynamic HawkEye packages,

edge detection technology provided by

UltraEdge, augmented reality graphics

and in depth analytics provided by

Cricviz. Following on from its success

at international cricket last year,

viewers back home will be able to hear

the third umpire’s audio during

umpire referrals, providing insight into

decision making using broadcast

technology. Fans will also be provided

with live scores, statistics and other

information vian a fresh and new ICC

graphics package provided by Alston

Elliot. A stellar commentary line up

will complement the new look and feel,

which includes Wasim Akram, Athar

Ali Khan, Russel Arnold, Harsha

Bhogle, Ian Bishop, Anjum Chopra,

Craig Cumming, Daren Ganga, Sunil

Gavaskar, Nasser Hussein, Melanie

Jones, Brendon Julian, Nick Knight,

David Lloyd, Sanjay Manjrekar,

Mpumelelo Mbangwa, Tom Moody,

Shaun Pollock, Ramiz Raja, Michael

Slater, Lisa Sthalekar, Scott Styris,

Shane Warne and Alan Wilkins.

The ICC TV world feed coverage will

begin with an in-depth 30-minute pre-

match show, which will also include

live toss, pitch report, player

interviews and profiles and a match

preview. The programme will be based

around ICC TV’s philosophy of

providing engaging and informative

content, to all cricket fans. ICC

TV will also distribute additional

created content beyond the boundary

to its Broadcast Partners and other

Media Rights Partners, via its Content

Delivery Service. This content will

include action from warm-up matches

and non-televised matches, player

P a g e | 120

profiles, team features and other

behind the scenes content, giving fans

an insight to the event like never

before. The tournament is expected to

have the biggest reach ever, with close

to 2 billion fans able to watch the ICC

World Twenty20 India 2016 action

televised by a global compliment of

ICC Broadcast Partners including

ICC’s Global Broadcast Partner Star

Sports (India and Indian sub-

continent), OSN (Middle East and

North Africa), BSKYB (United

Kingdom and Republic of Ireland),

Willow TV (USA) SuperSport (South

Africa and Africa), Fox Sports

(Australia), SKY TV NZ (New

Zealand), ESPN (Caribbean), PTV and

Ten Sports (Pakistan), Maasranga,

GTV & BTV (Bangladesh) as well as

reaching Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Hong

Kong, Fiji, Netherlands, Singapore and

Malaysia. Free-To-Air broadcasters

like Doordarshan (India), SABC (South

Africa) and Channel 9 (Australia) will

add to the reach of the event.

Additionally Highlights of each

televised match will be available on all

the official broadcasters and some

more free-to-air broadcasters around

the world. Fans who cannot watch the

broadcasts live have the option of

listening to live audio commentary on

Cricket Radio, produced by ICC’s

Global Audio Rights Partner, Channel

2, or on the various other official audio

broadcasters – BBC & TalkSport (UK),

Radio 4 (UAE), Karachi 107FM

(Pakistan), Zircon (Bangladesh), SLBC

(Sri Lanka), Guardian (West Indies),

SABC (South Africa). ICC Chief

Executive David Richardson said: “The

ICC with the support of its broadcast

partner Star Sports is committed to

expanding its coverage so that its

events can reach out to its fans as far

as possible. Not only that, through

innovative features and a line-up of

highly knowledgeable commentators,

we aim to bring to those fans who can’t

be at the ground a coverage they have

not experienced before and attract new

audiences. This high quality coverage

will also massively boost women’s

cricket whose 13 matches will be

broadcast for the first ever time.

FIFA steps up prevention measures in the fight against

doping

P a g e | 121

FIFA has launched a series of

prevention initiatives as part of its

ongoing efforts to keep football free

from doping. The aim is to raise

awareness among players, coaches and

doctors on the dangers of doping and

provide appropriate educational tools

for doping control officers across the

world. The latest initiative is the

production of two videos clips

following the FIFA Women’s World

Cup Canada 2015™. The first clip is

aimed specifically at female players

with the objective of raising awareness

about anti-doping procedures, while

the second video targets anti-doping

officers and provides a detailed

description of the procedure to ensure

consistent and up-to-date procedures

at all competitions. Another important

initiative is aimed at doctors and

medical staff. One of the modules of

the recently launched online FIFA

Diploma in Football Medicine provides

clinicians all around the world with

comprehensive background

information and guidance concerning

the application of FIFA’s and WADA’s

anti-doping rules. The aim is to

encourage all medical staff to embrace

the relevant information and fully

adhere to the regulations. The other

pillar of FIFA’s prevention work is the

education of players. A key tool in this

respect is World Anti-Doping Agency

(WADA)’s Athlete Learning Program

about Health and Anti-Doping

(ALPHA), an e-learning tool aimed at

changing attitudes among athletes.

FIFA calls on all football players to

make use of this important tool, which

provides them with positive solutions

to stay clean. Another important

educational initiative is the ”11 rules to

prevent doping in football” posters,

which aim to raise awareness among

young athletes, coaches, doctors and

parents about the dangers and

consequences of doping. They contain

11 simple messages selected by experts

in anti-doping management in

collaboration with WADA. FIFA has

appealed to all of its member

associations to distribute the posters to

their clubs and national teams at all

levels, while also reaching out directly

to fans and players across the world via

its digital and social media platforms.

P a g e | 122

FIFA extends sanctions imposed on 23 players and

officials in Italy FIFA confirmed the worldwide

extension of sanctions imposed on

several officials and players by the

Italian Football Association’s (FIGC)

Sport-Justice Bodies and theCollegio

di Garanzia dello Sport of the Italian

National Olympic Committee (CONI)

relating to incidents of match

manipulation and illegal betting that

took place between 2014 and 2015 in

different Italian football competitions.

Following investigations by the State

Prosecutors of Catanzaro and Catania,

the FIGC opened three disciplinary

proceedings for violations of art. 1, art.

6, art. 7 and art. 9 of the FIGC

Disciplinary Code. As a result of these

proceedings, several officials and

players have been banned from taking

part in any kind of football-related

activities. The sanctions imposed

range from bans for one to five years

and in some cases individuals have

received permanent bans from holding

any kind of position within the Italian

Football Association. The chairman of

the FIFA Disciplinary Committee

decided on 25 February 2016 to extend

all of the above-mentioned sanctions

to have worldwide effect in accordance

with art. 78 par. 1(c) and art. 136ff of

the FIFA Disciplinary Code. The

relevant member associations, UEFA

and CONMEBOL have been duly

notified of the chairman’s decisions.

FIFA will continue in its ongoing

efforts to combat match manipulation

through a variety of initiatives which

include the monitoring of international

betting markets via FIFA’s subsidiary

Early Warning System (EWS) and a

confidential reporting system with a

dedicated integrity hotline and e-mail

address.

Former United Kingdom Hockey Player Appears

Against Sardar Singh in Sexual Harassment Case An Indian-origin England Under-19

women’s hockey player, who had

lodged a complaint against Sardar

Singh of sexual harrasment at

Koomkalan police station on

Wednesday appeared before the

P a g e | 123

special investigating team, set up by

the Ludhiana Police Commissioner

Parmraj Singh. ADCP Satbir Singh

Atwal, who is heading the three-

member committee, said that she

appeared before the SIT on

Wednesday and endorsed all

allegations which she had written to

SHO Koomkalan police station on

February 1. She repeated that she was

engaged to Sardar. She also said that

he raped her and forced her to abort

their child. Later, he refused to marry

her. After their engagement, the duo

also visited the Gurudwara Bhaini

Sahib in Ludhiana. It may be recalled

that last week Sardar also appeared

before the SIT and refuted all

allegations made against him. He said

that he had only friendship with the

UK woman hockey player but no

sexual relations. He also said that he

had never made any promise to marry

her. ADCP Satbir Singh Atwal said that

the SIT would enquire further and may

summon the duo again.

FIFA Appeal Committee dismisses appeals from

investigatory chamber, Joseph S. Blatter and Michel

Platini; grants a reduction on sentences The FIFA Appeal Committee, chaired

by Larry Mussenden (Bermuda), has

partially confirmed the decisions taken

by the adjudicatory chamber of the

independent Ethics Committee on 17

and 18 December 2015 regarding

Joseph S. Blatter and Michel Platini

respectively, whose bans have been

reduced from eight to six years.

Following the hearings of Mr Platini

and Mr Blatter held in Zurich on 15

and 16 February 2016 respectively, the

Appeal Committee has decided as

follows:

Mr Platini’s and Mr Blatter’s appeals

are dismissed in respect of

infringements of art. 13 (General rules

of conduct), art. 15 (Loyalty), art. 19

(Conflict of interests) and art. 20

(Offering and accepting gifts and other

benefits) of the FIFA Code of Ethics, as

established by the adjudicatory

chamber. The Appeal Committee

concurred with the findings of the

adjudicatory chamber of the Ethics

Committee in the sense that the

evidence available in the present case

is not sufficient to establish a breach of

article 21 of the FIFA Code of Ethics

P a g e | 124

(Bribery and corruption).

Consequently, the appeal lodged by the

investigatory chamber for a life ban

from all football-related activity was

also dismissed. While agreeing with

the principles and arguments

presented by the adjudicatory chamber

in its calculation of the sanction, the

Appeal Committee determined that

some strong mitigating factors for Mr

Platini and Mr Blatter were not taken

into account when establishing the

sanction. In this sense, amongst

others, the Appeal Committee

considered that Mr Platini’s and Mr

Blatter’s activities and the services they

had rendered to FIFA, UEFA and

football in general over the years

should deserve appropriate

recognition as a mitigating factor.

Thus, after carefully analysing and

taking into consideration the

exceptional mitigating circumstances

of the cases, it was determined that a

one-year reduction of the five-year ban

for a breach of art. 20 of the FCE was

proper, and similarly a one-year

reduction of the three-year ban for the

other breaches was also proper. In

summary:

Michel Platini is banned from taking

part in any football-related activity

(administrative, sports or other) at

national and international level for a

period of six (6) years as from 8

October 2015, in accordance with art. 6

par. 1h) of the FIFA Code of Ethics in

conjunction with art. 22 of the FIFA

Disciplinary Code. Furthermore, Mr

Platini shall pay a fine in the amount of

CHF 80,000 within 30 days of

notification of the present decision.

Joseph S. Blatter is banned from

taking part in any football-related

activity (administrative, sports or

other) at national and international

level for a period of six (6) years as

from 8 October 2015, in accordance

with art. 6 par. 1h) of the FIFA Code of

Ethics in conjunction with art. 22 of

the FIFA Disciplinary Code. Mr Blatter

shall pay a fine in the amount of CHF

50,000 within 30 days of notification

of the present decision.

A new home for the FIFA World Cup trophies: FIFA

World Football Museum to open on 28 February Two-time world champions Cafu

(Brazil, 1994 and 2002) and Renate

Lingor (Germany, 2003 and 2007)

have unveiled the FIFA World Cup

P a g e | 125

Trophy and the FIFA Women’s World

Cup Trophy at the FIFA World

Football Museum. The trophies will be

permanently housed and exhibited at

the museum, having previously been

locked in a bank vault in-between

World Cups. The trophy presentation

also coincided with the first major

event at the museum: a media day

attended by over 130 representatives

from around the world. After nearly

two years of construction work, the

FIFA World Football Museum will

open its doors to the public later this

month on Sunday 28 February. An

interactive world of multimedia

experiences, the museum preserves

football’s fascinating history and has

over 1,000 objects, 1,480 pictures and

500 videos telling the captivating story

of the international game and the FIFA

World Cup – both male and female.

With unique exhibitions, interactive

stations, a 180 degree cinema, a

dedicated games area and a giant

pinball area, the CHF 30 million

project has been designed to suit all

ages. The trophies unveiled by Cafu

and Lingor will become a must-see

attraction for sports fans across the

globe. The footballers picked the

trophies up at the Home of FIFA

before escorting them to the museum

in Zurich’s Enge district. Only world

champions are permitted to touch the

trophies without wearing gloves, so

they will be kept in glass showcases

within the museum.

FIFA and Thailand sign agreement for implementation

of FIFA 11 for Health FIFA, the Ministry of Tourism &

Sports, Education and Public Health

and the Football Association of

Thailand signed a Memorandum of

Understanding (MoU) on Tuesday, 23

February 2016, to promote the ‘FIFA

11 for Health’ programme and to

improve public health in Thailand. The

MoU was sealed by FIFA Chief Medical

Officer and F-MARC Chairman

Professor Jiří Dvořák, the President of

the Football Association of Thailand

Pol. Gen. Somyot Poompunmoung, the

Advisor to the Minister of Public

Health Dr Mayura Kusum, the Deputy

Minister of Education General

Surachet Chaiwong and the Permanent

Sercretary Ministry of Tourism &

Sports Mr Pongpanu Svetarundra

during a ceremony held at the Ministry

P a g e | 126

of Education in Bangkok. The MoU

strengthens collaboration in the

promotion and implementation of the

‘FIFA 11 for Health’ programme in

Thailand. It was agreed in principle to

outline the strategy for a ten-year

programme, reaching one million

children per year as from 2019. The

pilot project will commence in June

2016 starting with 18 schools in

Bangkok and then followed by a

cascade implementation. ‘FIFA 11 for

Health’ is a football-based programme

targeting girls and boys between the

ages 11-13 years on how to lead healthy

lifestyles. The programme seeks to

improve the children’s knowledge,

attitude and behaviour on vital health

issues such as HIV, TB, malaria,

diabetes, obesity and hypertension. It

has been a success in more than 24

countries around the world since its

introduction prior to the 2010 FIFA

World Cup South Africa™.

Worawi Makudi banned for three months by FIFA Disciplinary Committee

Worawi Makudi, former President of

the Football Association of Thailand

(FAT) and a former member of the

FIFA Executive Committee, has been

sanctioned by FIFA’s Disciplinary

Committee for failing to comply with a

decision passed by the adjudicatory

chamber of the independent Ethics

Committee. In October 2015, the

Ethics Committee banned Mr Makudi

from all football activities for 90 days.

The Disciplinary Committee found that

Mr Makudi was still involved in FAT

affairs during this period –

constituting a breach of article 64 of

the FIFA Disciplinary Code – and has

therefore decided to ban him from

taking part in any kind of football-

related activity at national and

international level for a period of three

months. A fine of CHF 3,000 and a

warning were also imposed. The

sanction is effective from 22 February

2016, the date on which this decision

was notified. The adjudicatory

chamber of the Ethics Committee,

chaired by Hans-Joachim Eckert, has

suspended Worawi Makudi, the

President of The Football Association

of Thailand and a former member of

the FIFA Executive Committee, from

all football activities at national and

P a g e | 127

international level for 90 days. The

ban is effective immediately.The

decision was taken pursuant to the

FIFA Code of Ethics art. 83 par. 1, on

the grounds that a breach of the Code

of Ethics appears to have been

committed and a decision on the main

issue may not be taken early enough.

This decision against Worawi Makudi

followed a request from the chairman

of the investigatory chamber of the

independent Ethics Committee, Dr

Cornel Borbély. The case is now the

subject of formal investigation

proceedings.

FIFA rejects appeal of Belgian club sanctioned under

third-party influence and third-party ownership rules FIFA’s Appeal Committee has rejected

the appeal lodged by the Belgian club

FC Seraing and confirmed in its

entirety the decision rendered by the

FIFA Disciplinary Committee

sanctioning the club for breaches of

the regulations relating to the

prohibition of third-party influence on

clubs and to the ban on third-party

ownership of players’ economic rights

(TPO).As such, FC Seraing is to serve a

transfer ban which will see the club

prevented from registering any players

at both national and international level

for four complete and consecutive

registration periods, starting with the

next period (summer 2016) given that

the appeal of the club had been

granted suspensive effect by the

chairman of the FIFA Appeal

Committee. FC Seraing is also ordered

to pay a fine of CHF 150,000 and has

been issued with a reprimand and a

warning. The grounds of the FIFA

Appeal Committee’s decision have

been notified to FC Seraing today.

Gianni Infantino elected FIFA President Gianni Infantino has been elected as

the President of FIFA for the

remainder of the current term of office

(until 2019) by the Extraordinary FIFA

Congress held in Zurich. He was

elected as the ninth FIFA President

after the second ballot with 115 of 207

total votes. In line with the FIFA

Statutes, the mandate of the new FIFA

President started after the conclusion

of the Congress. At the beginning of

the proceedings, it was confirmed to

P a g e | 128

the Congress that 207 FIFA member

associations were entitled to vote (the

member associations of Indonesia and

Kuwait could not vote due to their

respective suspensions). The candidate

Tokyo Sexwale withdrew from the

election after his address to the

Congress. The Extraordinary FIFA

Congress approved a set of landmark

reforms to FIFA’s governance

structure, including improvements to

the governance of global football, a

clear separation of commercial and

political decision-making, greater

scrutiny of senior officials, and

commitments to women in football

and human rights.

Results of the elections for the office of FIFA President:

Ballot 1:

HRH Prince Ali Bin Al Hussein: 27

votes

Shk. Salman Bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa:

85 votes

Jérôme Champagne: 7 votes

Gianni Infantino: 88 votes

Ballot 2:

HRH Prince Ali Bin Al Hussein: 4

votes

Shk. Salman Bin Ebrahim Al

Khalifa: 88 votes

Jérôme Champagne: 0 votes

Gianni Infantino: 115 votes

FIFA Congress approves landmark reforms FIFA’s Member Associations approved

a package of landmark reforms that

pave the way for significant

improvements to the governance of

global football, including a clear

separation of commercial and political

decision-making, greater scrutiny of

senior officials, and commitments to

promoting women in football

and human rights. The reforms were

supported by 179 of the 207 Member

Associations present and eligible to

vote at the Extraordinary Congress in

Zurich. The Congress will also elect a

new FIFA President. The reforms were

based on proposals made by the 2016

FIFA Reform Committee and the

subsequent recommendations put

P a g e | 129

before the Congress by the Executive

Committee in the form of draft FIFA

Statutes. They represent an essential

step towards the modernisation of

FIFA’s institutional culture in key

areas such as the clear separation of

political and management functions,

term limits, the disclosure of

individual compensation, greater

recognition and promotion of women

in football and a commitment to

enshrining human rights in the FIFA

Statutes. Furthermore, they include

statutory principles of good

governance for member associations

and confederations, such as

compulsory annual independent audit

reports as well as independent judicial

bodies to ensure a separation of

powers on all levels of football

structures.

FIFA Reform Committee proposals :

Term limits: maximum term limits

of three terms of four years for the

FIFA President as well as all members

of the FIFA Council (see below), the

Audit and Compliance Committee and

the judicial bodies.

Separation of political and

management functions: clear

separation of “political” and

management functions. The FIFA

Council (replacing the FIFA Executive

Committee) will be responsible for

setting the organisation’s overall

strategic direction, while the general

secretariat will oversee the

operational and commercial actions

required to effectively execute that

strategy.

The members of the Council will be

elected by the member associations of

the respective region under FIFA’s

electoral regulations, with a FIFA

Review Committee to conduct

comprehensive and enhanced

integrity checks

Concrete steps to increase the role of

women in the governance of football

with a minimum of one female

representative elected as a Council

member per confederation.

Diversity: promotion of women as

an explicit statutory objective of FIFA

to create a more diverse decision-

making environment and culture.

Independent committee

members: key financial decisions to

be made by the Finance, Development

and Governance Committees, which

will have a minimum number of

independent members and whose

activities will be audited by the fully

P a g e | 130

independent Audit and Compliance

Committee.

Enhanced committee

efficiency: reduction of standing

committees from 26 to nine, with

increased participation of the football

community, which will provide

efficiency while ensuring that all

member associations are involved in a

more meaningful and effective way.

Integrity checks: compulsory and

comprehensive integrity checks for all

members of FIFA’s standing

committees, conducted by an

independent FIFA review committee.

Greater transparency and

inclusion through broader

stakeholder

representation: creation of a

dedicated Football Stakeholders

Committee to include members

representing key stakeholders in the

game, such as players, clubs and

leagues

Building on FIFA’s commitment to

human rights, the Executive

Committee has recommended that the

Congress approve the implementation

of a new article to the FIFA statutes

that commits FIFA to respecting all

internationally recognised human

rights and striving to promote the

protection of these rights.

The Executive Committee also

discussed the proposal from the 2016

FIFA Reform Committee to increase

the number of teams at the FIFA

World Cup™ finals from 32 to 40.

There was no decision on this

proposal, but it will be further

debated.

Further key elements of the

meeting:

The Acting President also reiterated

that FIFA has continued to fulfil its

mission of supporting and promoting

the game of football around the world.

In the last six months alone, FIFA has

successfully staged four major

competitions, including the FIFA

Women’s World Cup™, as well as held

the Preliminary Draw for the 2018

FIFA World Cup™, completed

preparations for the FIFA Club World

Cup, which kicks off on in Japan 10

December, and run more than 660

technical training courses and

programmes on development since

the end of May 2015.

The kick-off times for the 2018 FIFA

World Cup™ and the FIFA

Confederations Cup 2017, both to be

P a g e | 131

played in Russia, have also been confirmed.

Asia Cup: Virat Kohli Fined For Showing Dissent at

Umpire’s Decision During India-Pakistan Game Virat Kohli has been fined 30 per cent

of his match fee for breaching Level 1

of the ICC Code of Conduct during his

India’s Asia Cup T20 match against

Pakistan in Mirpur on Saturday. The

player was found to have breached

Article 2.1.5 of the ICC Code of

Conduct for Players and Player

Support Personnel, which relates to

“showing dissent at an umpire’s

decision during an international

match”. The incident happened in the

15th over of India’s innings when

Kohli, after being given out leg before,

displayed dissent by first showing his

bat and then leaving the crease while

looking back at the umpire and

uttering some words that were

contrary to the spirit of the game. On

Sunday, Kohli admitted the offence

and accepted the sanction proposed by

Jeff Crowe of the Emirates Elite Panel

of ICC Match Referees. As such, there

was no need for a formal hearing. The

charge was levelled by on-field

umpires Ruchira Palliyaguruge and

Sharfuddoula, third umpire Enamul

Haque and fourth official Anisur

Rahman. For all first offences, Level 1

breaches carry a minimum penalty of

an official reprimand and a maximum

penalty of 50 per cent of a player’s

match fee.

Everton: Iranian Farhad Moshiri buys 49.9% stake Iranian businessman Farhad Moshiri

has bought a 49.9% stake in Everton,

the Goodison Park club says. Moshiri

sold his stake in Arsenal to business

partner Alisher Usmanov on Friday so

he could buy into Everton, who play

Chelsea in the FA Cup quarter-finals

next month. The deal needs Premier

League approval. Providing there are

no problems, it will bring to an end

Everton’s decade-long search for new

investment. Kenwright, who bought

Everton from Peter Johnson for £20m

on 26 December 1999, said he was

prepared to sell as far back as

November 2007. After years of inertia

regarding a sale, there has been a

growing intent to do a deal in recent

months, fuelled by serious interest

from a number of parties. Kenwright

has also been suffering from poor

health and has rarely attended Everton

P a g e | 132

games this season. Talks did take place

with an American consortium earlier

this month, although they did not

provide a clue to the eventual outcome.

Everton manager Roberto Martinez

has put together an impressive squad,

including spending a club record

£28m to sign striker Romelu Lukaku

from Chelsea. Silverware continues to

elude them. Everton were beaten by

Manchester City in the semi-finals of

the Capital One Cup last month and

remain without a major trophy since

they won the FA Cup in 1995.

11th Extraordinary UEFA Congress in Zurich The 11th Extraordinary UEFA

Congress will take place on Thursday

25 February at the Swissôtel Zurich,

Schulstrasse 44, in Zurich,

Switzerland. The event starts at

15.00CET and is scheduled to end at

approximately 18.00CET. It will be

followed by a press conference at the

same location. The main items on the

agenda for the 11th Extraordinary

UEFA Congress include:

• Report of the UEFA Executive

Committee and Report of the UEFA

Administration 2014/15

• Financial Report 2014/15

• Budget for 2016/17

• Amendments to the UEFA Statutes

A certain number of seats in the

Congress hall will be available for

media representatives, who will be

able to attend the whole session.

Photographers and TV crew will only

be allowed to shoot/film the opening

speeches and the press conference.

Media representatives are advised that

there is no media working area at the

Swissôtel, and that they should use the

media working area that will be used

for the FIFA Congress, which is located

at the nearby Hallenstadion. The

Extraordinary UEFA Congress will be

streamed live on UEFA.org.

Zika Virus, Power Cuts and Contrasting Weather

Affect Rio Olympics Test Centre

P a g e | 133

Contrasting weather — from sunshine

to thunderstorm — coupled with power

failure were what divers experienced

this weekend at an outdoor venue at

the ongoing FINA Diving World Cup

which is also a Rio Olympic test event

and Olympic qualifier. The World Cup

is being staged at the Maria Lenk

Aquatics Centre from February 19 to

24. In total, 272 athletes from 49

countries and regions are competing

for 88 spots in the Rio Olympic diving

competition. The divers also have to

evade mosquitoes in order to prevent

Zika as the mosquito-borne virus is

possibly linked to an increase in a rare

birth defect in Brazil. Staff from 36

departments of the Rio 2016

organising committee will be in action

alongside 462 volunteers. All

operations related to the competition,

services provided to athletes and

officials, security and athlete

accommodation will be tested to an

“Olympic level”. It is the first test event

to feature the National Force and

National Penitentiary Department — a

total of 300 agents from the two

organisations, as well as officers from

the federal, civil and military police,

fire officers and traffic agents, are part

of the test event. The Rio 2016

organisers refurbished the venue for

Olympic diving, synchronised

swimming and water polo. However, it

remains as an outdoor venue, which

provides divers numerous challenges

as the weather changes a lot from day-

to-night in Rio’s summer. It was

observed that the women’s

synchronised 10m platform

preliminary getting underway with

temperatures in the upper 30s and

dazzling sunshine. While in the

afternoon’s final, a thunderstorm

suddenly arrived. However, current

world champions Lui Huixia and her

partner Chen Ruolin were not affected

and took first place with a brilliant

display. In the men’s synchronised 3m

springboard final, the rain stopped but

was replaced by the wind. A total of 12

divers finished six rounds in relatively

cold weather. Chinese pair Cao Lin and

Qin Kai qualified first. In the final, the

pair made mistakes and the German

pair of Stephan Feck and Patrick

Hausding pushed the Chinese pair

down into second place. International

Swimming Federation (FINA) asked

P a g e | 134

organisers to put a roof on the outdoor

venue and complained openly about it

to Rio’s mayor Eduardo Paes. The city

declined to spend the money and said

the federation was too demanding. In a

letter to the mayor, FINA said

conditions like those at the diving

venue “will negatively affect the safety

conditions and the level of

performances of our athletes”. FINA

executive director Cornel Marculescu

acknowledged the letter but said that

FINA had to be satisfied with what the

organisers provided. Within the

current conditions, power supply also

gets into trouble. The first two days’

competitions suffered temporary

power failure with broadcast, large

screen breaking off and reporters from

around the world working in a totally

dark media centre. Four-time Olympic

gold medallist Wu Minxia of China

won the women’s synchronised 3m

springboard with her partner Shi

Tingmao on Saturday. “In the first

round of our final, we didn’t even

know the result because the screen

didn’t show it,” said Wu. Brazil’s Zika

virus outbreak has also made athletes

and tourists afraid of visiting the

country. Brazil has 1.5 million people

infected by Zika since early 2015.

While it causes only mild flu-like

symptoms, scientists suspect when it

strikes a pregnant woman, it can cause

her baby to be born with microcephaly

or an abnormally small head.

According to Chinese diving team

manager Zhou Jihong, the organising

committee provided repellents to

teams and also introduced the

information and raised awareness

about Zika prevention. Besides, day-

by-day cleaning inside the venue will

help sweeping the mosquitoes away.

BCCI holds Special General Meeting The Special General Meeting of the

BCCI held at Cricket Centre today,

Friday, 19th Feb 2016 took the

following decisions unanimously:

The Members authorized the Hony.

Secretary BCCI to file an affidavit in

the Hon’ble Supreme Court on behalf

of the BCCI pointing out the anomalies

and difficulties encountered in

implementation of Hon’ble Justice

P a g e | 135

Lodha Committee’s recommendations.

The Members authorized the President

and Hony. Secretary to discuss the

governance and financial restructuring

of the ICC subject to such restructuring

being incorporated in the constitution

of the ICC for permanency. Further the

members also authorized the President

and Hony. Secretary to rework the

FTPs for the period 2016 to 2023 and

ensure equitable distribution of the

matches. The Members approved the

recommendation of the affiliation

committee of BCCI to grant full

member status to Chhattisgarh State

Cricket Sangh. They will be a part of

the Central Zone for all the BCCI

tournaments.The Working Committee

authorized the President and Hony.

Secretary to appoint an agency to

search for candidates for the posts of

CEO and CFO for the BCCI.

Brian Vitori’s Bowling Action Found To Be Illegal The International Cricket Council

today confirmed that an independent

assessment has found the bowling

action of Zimbabwe’s Brian Vetori to

be illegal and, as such, the left-arm fast

bowler has been suspended from

bowling in international cricket with

immediate effect. The assessment

revealed that all variations of his

deliveries exceeded the 15 degrees level

of tolerance permitted under the

regulations. Vetori was reported after

the third T20I against Bangladesh in

Khulna on 20 January 2016. In

accordance with Article 6.1 of the

regulations, Vetori’s international

suspension will also be recognised and

enforced by all National Cricket

Federations for domestic cricket events

played in their own jurisdiction, save

that, with the consent of Zimbabwe

Cricket, Vetori may be able to play in

domestic cricket events played in

Zimbabwe under the auspices of

Zimbabwe Cricket. The player can

apply for a re-assessment after

modifying his bowling action in

accordance with clause 2.4 of the

Regulations for the Review of Bowlers

Reported with Suspected Illegal

Bowling Actions.

2.4 Re-assessment of Player’s bowling

action

2.4.1 A Player who has been

suspended from bowling in

International Cricket under these

Regulations shall be permitted under

P a g e | 136

the supervision and with the consent

of his Home Board to continue to play

domestic cricket. 2.4.2 Subject to the

provisions of paragraph 2.4.5 and

paragraph 2.5 , a Player who has

been suspended from bowling in

International Cricket under these

Regulations, may at any time apply to

the ICC for a re-assessment of his

bowling action.

2.4.3 Such re-assessment shall be

carried out in the same manner as the

Independent Analysis so that the

purpose of the comparison between

the re-assessed action and the action

of the Player as employed in the

Match in which he was reported shall

be to determine the extent, if any, of

the improvement to his bowling

action.

2.4.4 In the event of such re-

assessment concluding that the Player

has remedied his bowling action and

that his bowling action is no longer an

Illegal Bowling Action the Player’s

suspension shall be lifted and he shall

be permitted to continue bowling in

International Cricket forthwith.

2.4.5 The BRG shall have the

discretion to specify a fixed period

before the expiry of which the Player

shall not be entitled to approach the

ICC for a re-assessment of his bowling

action in terms hereof. Such discretion

shall only be exercised in the instance

of a frivolous application for a BRG

hearing and the maximum period so

specified shall be 1 year.

2.4.6 The Independent Assessment

resulting from the re-assessment will

stand in the place of the original

Independent Assessment.

The test was performed on 3 February

at the Sri Ramachandra Arthroscopy

and Sports Sciences Centre, Chennai,

ICC’s accredited testing centre

.

FIFA recruiting female security officers Safety and security at football events

across the world has always been the

highest priority for FIFA. To ensure

this, the FIFA Security Division is

providing support and expert advice in

security-related matters to host

countries, local security agencies,

Local Organising Committees and

FIFA’s Member Associations. During

FIFA World Cup qualifying matches or

P a g e | 137

final competitions, the assistance and

support provided by the Security

Division can range from reviewing

national security concepts or

operational security plans to

conducting inspection visits and, based

on risk/threat assessments and

operational needs, appointing FIFA

security officers in the venues where

matches or tournaments are taking

place. These assignments may consist

of a four-day mission when appointed

for qualifying matches or up to one

month for one of FIFA’s competitions.

After the new FIFA Stadium Safety and

Security Regulations went into effect

on 1 January 2013, FIFA started to

hold regional seminars across all FIFA

Member Associations in mid-2014 in

order to train national security officers

on the new regulations. So far these

seminars have been held in

CONCACAF, CONMEBOL, AFC and

CAF regions (link to news on

FIFA.com). To continuously improve

the level of service that can be offered

to Member Associations and Local

Organising Committees, FIFA’s

Security Division is currently looking

to enlarge and enhance its pool of

trained FIFA security officers by

identifying, recruiting and deploying

female security officers. By searching

for officers who have a background

and strong experience in the security

field that are nominated and endorsed

by their respective Member

Association, FIFA is looking to develop

a broader base of security officers to

serve domestically and abroad. As the

selected female security officers will be

assigned to FIFA’s competitions, they

will then in return be in able to further

officiate within their Member

Association and even conduct security

trainings back home, which offers a

win-win situation for everyone

involved. When the FIFA Security

Division started the regional seminars

in 2014, all of the candidates that were

identified to meet the requirements

were male. It has always been the goal,

however, to also include female

security officers. This is why FIFA has

now developed a dedicated

identification process through which

all Member Associations have been

asked to put forward applications of

female candidates.

P a g e | 138

Iraqi Football Association adopts FIFA TMS’s

Intermediary Regulations Tool The Iraqi Football Association (IFA)

has become the second member

association (MA) from the Asian

Football Confederation (AFC) to adopt

FIFA TMS’s Intermediary Regulations

Tool (IRT).The tool, which is now live

at the IFA and its affiliated clubs, is

designed to assist MAs in complying

with FIFA’s Regulations on Working

with Intermediaries and to facilitate

their ability to gather and track data

which is subsequently to be published

as part of the Intermediary Report by

30 March 2016. FIFA TMS’s

Intermediary Regulations Tool is fully

integrated with the International and

Domestic Transfer Matching Systems.

In practical terms, this means that all

of the information regarding the

transfer of professional players and

related intermediary involvement is

managed via one system. It allows MAs

to create annual reports relating to

intermediary involvement, which

assists them in complying with the

requirements set out in the

Intermediary Regulations. The system

is customisable to meet the needs of

MAs and is available in FIFA’s four

official languages. The adoption of the

IRT will allow the IFA to enhance the

efficiency and transparency of their

involvement with intermediaries. FIFA

TMS expects more MAs to adopt the

IRT in the coming months. Previous

MAs to adopt the IRT include Football

Federation Australia (FFA), the Ghana

Football Association (GFA) and the

Portuguese Football Association (FPF).

Beckenbauer warned and fined by Fifa’s ethics

committee Germany’s World Cup-winning captain

and coach Franz Beckenbauer has

been warned and fined by Fifa’s ethics

committee. He has been provisionally

banned for “failing to co-operate” with

Fifa’s inquiry into the bidding

processes for 2018 and 2022 World

Cups, won by Russia and Qatar

respectively. He was one of 22 men

who voted to decide the tournament

hosts. Fifa says he did not co-operate

during an in-person interview and in

response to written questions.

Beckenbauer, who Fifa said

subsequently demonstrated a

willingness to co-operate, was fined

P a g e | 139

7,000 Swiss Francs (£4,900). Fifa did

not look into matters relating to the

awarding of the 2006 World Cup to

Germany. Beckenbauer was head of

the tournament’s organising

committee which, reports alleged,

made a payment to Fifa in return for a

financial grant. Last year in October,

he had said that he made a “mistake”

in the bidding process but denied votes

were bought. Der Spiegel magazine

had reported an alleged slush fund of

6.7m euros was used to buy votes for

Germany – an allegation denied by the

German Football Association (DFB).

FA agrees to back Infantino for FIFA presidency The Football Association agreed to

back Gianni Infantino’s candidacy for

the Fifa presidency, at a board meeting

on Wednesday. Uefa general secretary

Infantino is one of five candidates

looking to replace Sepp Blatter on 26

February. Blatter, 79, announced in

June he would resign, amid a

corruption scandal at world governing

body Fifa. The FA had supported ex-

Uefa president Michel Platini, who in

December was banned from football

for eight years.

Jatuporn Nalamphun banned guilty of offences under

the Tennis Anti-Corruption Program Unranked Thai player Jatuporn

Nalamphun has been banned for 18

months and fined after being found

guilty of offences under the Tennis

Anti-Corruption Program, according to

the London-based Tennis Integrity

Unit (TIU). Nalamphun, 22, admitted

to three offences of betting on tennis

matches between July and November

2014 and was found guilty of a further

offence of failing to co-operate with the

TIU investigation. Nalamphun has

never held a ranking and his £3,400

(4,366 euros, $5,000) fine is

considerably greater than his reported

career earnings of £476. The initial

ban imposed on Nalamphun was six

months but independent anti-

corruption hearing officer Ian Mill, a

senior English lawyer, extended the

ban after finding the player guilty of a

further charge of failing to co-operate

with the TIU. In a TIU statement, Mill

said that “the full and timely co-

operation by participants in TIU

investigations is of paramount efforts

being made by the TIU to eliminate

corruption in professional tennis.” Last

P a g e | 140

week the International Tennis

Federation (ITF) announced that two

umpires had been banned for

corruption and four more were

currently suspended while under

investigation. Kirill Parfenov of

Kazakhstan was banned for life in

February 2015 for contacting another

official in a bid to “manipulate the

scoring of matches”, the ITF said in a

joint statement with the TIU. Tennis

was also hit by allegations over elite-

level match-fixing made by the BBC

and BuzzFeed shortly before the start

of the Australian Open last month.

After those allegations became public,

tennis authorities announced an

independent review into their fight

against corruption. In a joint

statement, the ATP, the WTA, the ITF

and heads of all four Grand Slam

tournaments said the review was

aimed at further strengthening the

integrity of the game, while calling for

governments worldwide to make fixing

a criminal offence. The priority of the

review, headed by Adam Lewis – a

leading expert on sports law who

works out of the same London

chambers as Mill – is to look at the

structure of the TIU, including how to

make it more transparent and better

resourced. It is expected that the

review will take at least 12 months,

with the publication of an interim

report during that time.

Delhi and District Cricket Association refused to

implement Justice RM Lodha Committee’s

recommendations The Delhi and District Cricket

Association on Wednesday refused to

implement Justice RM Lodha

Committee’s recommendations which

could have direct ramifications on the

functioning of Board of Control for

Cricket in India’s state units. The

managing committee of DDCA met

here to review and deliberate on

various observations of the Lodha

Committee, and was not quite

convinced about most of the major

recommendations calling for sweeping

reforms in the BCCI’s governing

structure. The DDCA is not on the

same page with Lodha panel on major

issues like elections and terms of office

bearers, DDCA office bearers

simultaneously holding a post in BCCI,

proxy voting and conflict of interest

P a g e | 141

among others. On the issue of one

person holding one post, the DDCA, in

a statement signed by vice-presidents

Chetan Chauhan and CK Khanna, said:

“We the managing committee of DDCA

feel that it is the freedom of concerned

state associations, to decide (whether)

the appointment of office bearers

would affect/restrict administrative

function of DDCA or not. So long

members of the executive committee

(directors) do not feel that the

functioning of DDCA is being

jeopardized, there cannot be any

justified reason in imposing this

clause.” The controversial cricket body

is in favour of continuation of proxy

voting. System should be continued as

in many associations, there is a

provision of voting in person.

Associations which are incorporated

under the Companies Act are

statutorily bound by section 176-178 of

the Act 1956. Even after appointing a

person as his proxy, any member

DDCA can come and cast his vote in

person in the General Body

meetings/election. The proxy may be

authenticated by Retired Judge of any

court as is the practice in DDCA. The

DDCA,though was optimistic about

state associations coming under RTI

Act in future, but it rejected the

recommendations on elections and

terms of office bearers. The election of

the office bearers is through a

democratic process as per the

constitution of the DDCA. Any

limitation on its term is not justified.

The committee was of the opinion that

the powers to appoint Electoral Officer

should rest with the Executive

Committee of DDCA as long as the

committee does not observe any

conflict of interest as regard to the

appointed person.

Cooper reported for suspect bowling action in PSL West Indian all-rounder Kevon Cooper

was on Wednesday was reported for a

suspect bowling action in the ongoing

Pakistan Super League in Dubai, the

first instance of this kind in the

Twenty20 league. He is yet to play

international cricket for the West

Indies but had featured in first class

cricket for his native , Trinidad and

Tobago was reported during Tuesday’s

game between Lahore and Quetta in

Dubai. The Pakistan Super League

(PSL) release said Cooper had been

put on a warning list for the moment.

P a g e | 142

Under the PSL Suspected Illegal

Bowling Action policy, if a player is

reported while on the warning list, the

player shall be suspended from

bowling for the remainder of the PSL

tournament and from bowling in any

matches organised by the PCB until

such date as he is cleared or upon

conclusion of any ineligibility period,”

said the release. A player suspended

from bowling may continue to be

selected to play in matches, however,

he will not be entitled to bowl. If

suspended under the PSL Suspected

Illegal Bowling Action policy, Mr.

Cooper will have to go through the

rehab process made applicable by the

West Indies Cricket Board. Cooper was

also reported for a suspect action

during the Indian Premier League in

May 2014 but was later cleared to play.

In June 2014, the International Cricket

Council launched a crackdown on

bowlers with suspect action and some

two dozen bowlers from international

teams were reported.

Sahara to sell Force India India’s embattled Sahara conglomerate

said it wants to sell its 42.5 per cent

stake in the Force India Formula One

team to help release founder Subrata

Roy from jail, but some motor racing

insiders are sceptical about how easy it

will be to find a buyer. Sahara, which

paid $100 million for the shareholding

in 2011, sought the Supreme Court’s

permission this month to dispose of

Force India and other assets to raise a

combined 53 billion Indian rupees

($778.38 million). With Formula One

far less popular than cricket in India,

and Mallya under pressure from

lenders to meet loan repayment

obligations linked to his grounded

Kingfisher Airlines, the stake on its

own could be a hard sell.

Rafael Benitez: Newcastle unveils new boss after

sacking McClaren

Newcastle confirmed Benitez as its

new manager, and three new

backroom staff, on a three-year deal.

He took over at Real Madrid in June

last year but was sacked in early

January. The news came just hours

after McClaren was relieved of his

duties. The 54-year-old has overseen a

P a g e | 143

disappointing campaign in which

Newcastle has won just six matches all

season. It sits one point from safety

and in danger of missing out on a

share of a bumper Premier League

television deal that kicks in next

season. Crucially, Benitez has been

appointed manager, not head coach as

McClaren was, which indicates he will

have more of a say in the running of

the club and especially transfers

P a g e | 144

NOTES AND REFERENCES

NOTES

PHENOMENAL CONCEPT OF SPORTS CONTRACT: PROCEDURES AND PRINCIPLES

1 Thomas v. Leja, 468 N.W. 2d 58 (1991). 1 BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, 365 (9th ed. 2009) 1 Anish Dayal, Sports Contracts: A Primer, 2 GNLU JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT AND POLITICS , 136-141

( 2010). 1 Philadelhphia Ball Club v. Lajoie, (1902) 51 A Eng. Rep. 973 (K.B.). 1 Los Angeles Rams v. Cannon, 185 F. Supp. 717 (S.D. Cal. 1960). 1 Detroit Football Co. v. Robinson, 186 F. Supp. 993 (E.D. La. 1960). 1 Pasquel v. Owen, 186 F.2d 263, (8th Cir. 1950). 1 J. WEISTART AND C. LOWELL, THE LAW OF SPORTS, 421 (Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc 1st ed. 1979) 1 Restatement of Contracts, Sec 380, Dec.28, 1932. 1 Albama Football, Inc. v. Stabler, 319 So. 2d 678, (Ala. 1975). 1 Hennigan v. Charger Football Co., 431 F.2d 308, (5th Cir. 1970). 1 Gary A. Uberstine and Richard J. Grad, The Enforceability of Sports Contracts: A Practitioner's Playbook, 7 Loyola L.A. Ent. L. Rev. 310, 317 (1987). 1 Brooklyn Baseball Club v. McGuire, 116 F. 782, (E.D. Pa. 1902). 1 Restatement of Contracts Sec. 372 (1932). 1 Connecticut Professional Sports Corp. v. Heyman, 276 F.Supp. 618, (S.D.N.Y. 1967). 1 Connecticut Sports Corp. v. Heyman, 276 F. Supp. 618, (S.D.N.Y. 1967).

REFERENCES

www.fifa.com

www.bcci.tv

www.tas-cas.org

www.bbc.com

www.ndtv.com

www.olympic.org

www.wada-ama.org

www.uefa.org

www.icc-cricket.com