sport | In Principle

Clubs are withdrawing from Russian leagues and foreign players are terminating contracts with Russian clubs. This is not just a protest against the war, but a rational step in the face of EU economic sanctions. And possibly the biggest shocks are still to come.

One of the fundamental principles enshrined in the Olympic Charter is the principle of neutrality. According to this principle sport must be separate from political, religious or any other type of interference. This principle has been put to a major test by the international sport community’s response to the Russian invasion on Ukraine.

On Sunday, 18 April 2021, the whole football world was electrified by news that major clubs from England, Spain and Italy are finalising the construction of the “Super League.” These exclusive matches would be independent of the Union of European Football Associations and pose competition for the Champions League organised by UEFA.

E-sport is gaining in popularity, resulting in an increase in the number of players, games and spectators, as well as an increase in revenue from e-sport. Such revenue is taxable, but it is not always clear under which rules.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused mayhem in the world of sport. An earthquake hit when top leagues suspended competitions or cut them short. Then the tensions only kept rising as one major tournament after another was cancelled. The climax was reached when the Tokyo Olympic Games had to be postponed. As a result, the industry has incurred multi-billion-dollar losses. And it is uncertain when the situation can be expected to improve.

Will the need to seek state aid due to the COVID-19 pandemic encourage sports unions to implement good governance principles?

Does cancellation of matches due to the pandemic constitute just cause for terminating a player’s contract without damages?

FIFPro and FIFA have launched a guarantee fund securing the payment of salaries to players unable to enforce judgments against their football clubs. This approach would also be helpful in other sports, as there are growing calls for support for professionals in their dealings with teams and sports federations.

“Phoenixing” is a term coined to describe a situation in which stakeholders of an organization which becomes insolvent transfer its operations to a different entity, which continues them while ignoring the predecessor’s debts.

A term that’s been crunched recently by lawyers and economists in Europe and throughout the world is the Uberisation of work. This refers to the phenomenon in the modern economy where members of various professions don’t work for employers as such but provide services to clients as independent contractors via a range of online platforms. The term takes its name from the well-known ride-hailing app, but similar platforms function in other industries.

Sport is an increasingly important sector of the economy. It is a significant contributor to GDP. It attracts massive capital investment and is a source of livelihood for many service providers and employees. Industrial relations in the sport sector are therefore subject to intensifying scrutiny, especially in jurisdictions where the sector is still developing and in the process of professionalisation. But sport-specific industrial relations also have certain peculiarities that make them intriguing in the discussion of employment market trends in the modern economy.

Sport is an important part of global civil society and it is best managed by that society’s institutions, in the form of non-government organizations of sufficient autonomy to be immune to the inherently corrupting political power of the state. But with freedom – with the “autonomy of sports” – comes responsibility.