Introduction

2010 is now firmly placed in the rear view mirror – with the drama of an AFL season lasting a week later than all had originally planned and a typical spring racing carnival featuring all four seasons and an international ‘raid’ of silverware. The new year has barely begun and we are already seeing legal issues arise in the world of ‘sports law’ - The Ashes have been retained by the English Cricket team in emphatic fashion, which has led to calls for an independent review of Cricket Australia’s operations. Rugby League will now be governed by an independent commission, and calls are being heard for cricket to adopt a similar format, while the AFL adopts an expansionary policy to the north of the country.

While those involved with cricket and the upcoming Australian Open tennis have their hands full, the summer break has given us an opportunity to take stock of a very busy 2010. The year saw corporate governance issues being regularly featured in the back pages of newspapers – from the fall from grace of the Melbourne Storm rugby league club, Paul MacNamee’s push for change within Tennis Australia, through to the failed ICC presidential candidacy of Australia’s former Prime Minister, John Howard.

These and other events have shone a spotlight on the manner in which sporting entities approach corporate governance matters, both within their constituent documents as well as at a practical level in running the organisation, which we consider in some detail within this edition.

The newsletter also considers the opportunity AFL club members have to participate in determining issues relating to the club’s core identity and strategic direction – club nicknames, jumper colours, location of home games – is it important to you and do your club members have a say? The answers may surprise …

Finally, we provide a snapshot of the sports law ‘year that was’ and the year to come.

Enjoy!

James Paterson
Senior Associate

Board convention does not equate to a mandatory process – the ICC and John Howard

AFL club membership – A glorified stadium entry ticket, or a genuine ownership stake in the club?

John Howard’s failed presidential candidacy for cricket’s governing body, the International Cricket Council (ICC) received significant media coverage during 2010, and amounted to a rude rebuke to Cricket Australia’s strategic plans – perhaps a forewarning of the summer that was to come.

The ICC is the official international body governing cricket, co-ordinating international fixtures in conjunction with the various playing nation’s governing bodies (such as Cricket Australia), organizing tournaments such as the One Day and the T20 World Cup’s, as well as managing the various codes of conduct relating to playing the game, including addressing match-fixing allegations and player conduct issues. For many years it had operated as simply an outpost of the England-based Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), with the President of MCC automatically assuming the chairmanship of ICC (a practice which continued until 1989). read more

Do you think it is important whether AFL club members are treated as genuine stakeholders in the club? Consider the following hypothetical scenarios and whether membership support should be obtained before the steps occur:

A hypothetical AFL club, the Northcote Football Club, announces that the club intends to trade under a new business name, the “Northern Kings”.
The club announces a sponsorship deal with a recycling company, where it changes its traditional blue and white striped jumper to play all “away” games wearing a green jumper.
The “Northern Kings” then announces that it intends to move from Northcote to the Northern Territory, and play its home games in Alice Springs.

As a member, would you want to have say in those decisions? More importantly, are you able to? read more

The year that was

Five items to watch for this year

Melbourne Storm salary cap breaches leading to loss of 2007 and 2009 premierships
Australia’s failed World Cup hosting bid and allegations of the influence of petrodollars on FIFA’s deliberations
Members of the Pakistan national cricket team allegedly caught engaging in ‘spot fixing’ cheating
Twitter and other social media platforms providing greater public access to athletes, but often leading to conflicting messages by athletes and governing bodies (see Pietersen, Kevin) opening up new avenues for disciplinary action against athletes
The Federal Government’s response to the Independent Sport Panel Report (aka the Crawford Reporzt) which had queried Australia’s lack of national sports policy, in part through there being no agreed definition of ‘success’.

Greater clarification of the federal Anti-siphoning legislation and the AFL’s push for a $1 billion TV broadcasting rights package.
The establishment of an independent commission to govern Rugby League in Australia
Introduction of new teams in the Rugby Union (Rebels) and in the AFL (Gold Coast) and the establishment of the AFL’s GWS Giants in preparation for a 2012 debut season.
The NFL (and other professional leagues’) reaction to the Supreme Court of the United States’ review of the NFL’s exclusive apparel licensing activities American Needle which concluded that the NFL and its teams are not considered a ‘single entity’, and are thus subject to the US’ anti-trust collusion prohibitions
Further conflict in the US between athletes claiming a ‘right of publicity’ (actually more akin to a right to control their own publicity) versus third parties seeking to exploit their images under the guise of the first amendment ‘right to free speech’ (See Images Rights v Free Speech in video game suit).

Tailenders

NHL voids a 17 year playing contract as an attempt to circumvent the league salary cap due to almost 97% of the $102 million contract being paid in the first 11 years.

ACT Football being represented on the Board of GWS Giants – in part thanks to over 5,000 Canberra residents donating $50 to become a GWS member…

A Texas judge adjourns hearing to allow local lawyer to travel interstate and attend the World Series…

Unsubscribe

This e-mail is from Anzarut & Holm. Level 2, Professional Chambers, 120 Collins Street, Melbourne 3000. The e-mail and any attachments are confidential and are intended for the named addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately and do not disclose, distribute, or retain this e-mail or any part of it. While we have checked this e-mail and any attachments for viruses, we do not warrant that they are virus-free. You must therefore take full responsibility for virus checking.