Sports Law & Practice

This is another high profile saga in the long list of anti-doping matters of cycling and one that raises several questions as to the true state of events. In line with similar previous cases and because of the application of strict liability, the present matter creates an antithesis with the precepts of fairness and justice in that, the athlete in question, is presumed to be guilty, until he is able to prove otherwise. 

I delayed the publication of this post for a few days, as the Premier League clubs in England voted in favour of the early closure of the football transfer window. This is an important development which ties in perfectly with the theme of the present post. The deadline of a football transfer window is always complicated and controversial, particularly when there is evidence that negotiations, as a matter of fact, take place until the very last minute of the transfer period. 

This is the second part of an analysis into the world of football transfers. The first part was published a few weeks ago  http://lawtop20.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/an-insight-into-world-of-football.html?view=classic   and it informed readers of some controversial and unique situations that occur in football transfers. It was suggested, in the first part of this analysis, that patience is the key component in every successful football transfer. There are many parameters that come into play on a constant basis and plans also change without warning and/or schedule. Hence, those in charge of securing, successfully, a football transfer, always apply a cautious approach in their dealings with all parties involved. 

This is an interesting, unique and controversial area of modern sport that deserves further examination. Football transfers are, of course, not a new phenomenon. A series of important developments, however, such as the modern and increased commercialisation of sport, as well as the implications and consequences of the decision in the Bosman case, have created a complex framework of individuals, regulations and financial opportunities that determine the present situation. 

European Athletics are proposing that all world records set before 2005 should now be rewritten and it wants IAAF to endorse such proposals. If the proposals are accepted by the IAAF, a world record would only be recognised if it meets all three of the following criteria:   1) It was achieved at a competition on a list of approved international events where the highest standards of officiating and technical equipment can be guaranteed;   2) The athlete had been subject to an agreed number of doping control tests in the months leading up to it; 3) The doping control sample taken after the record was stored and available for re-testing for 10 years.

I have appeared in the last few years before the National Anti-Doping Panel at Sport Resolutions in London and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne, on behalf of professional athletes. Such hearings mostly concerned appeals regarding periods of ineligibility imposed against athletes as a result of positive anti-doping tests. The adverse analytical findings were the result of the use of 'contaminated' nutritional supplements, which, unbeknown to the athletes, contained prohibited substances.