Sports Law Reflection: Critical Analysis of Disrepute & Match-Fixing

This assignment provides a critical reflection on sports law, examining the concepts of disrepute and match-fixing through the analysis of journal articles and case studies. It covers cases such as South versus Royal Victorian Bowling Club, focusing on gender discrimination, and Avellino verses All Australia Netball Association LTD, addressing residency rules. The reflection also delves into articles discussing the causes and implications of match-fixing, emphasizing the need for international cooperation among governments, sports governing bodies, and the betting industry to combat this issue. The assignment highlights the importance of understanding and addressing misconduct and unfair practices in sports to maintain its integrity and reputation.

Sport Law Reflection 1
Sports Law Reflection
Student’s Name
Course Title
Professor’s Name
University
City and State
Date

Sport Law Reflection 2
VERSION A
Journal Reflection
According to the Patrick George’s journal article, the participants in sports who are found
with misconduct may bring a lot of damage to both their reputation and image, their sport’s
reputation in which they represent. This can affect the team, its teammates, its sponsors and also
its fans. I realized that there is disrepute clause in sports contracts responsible for damage
brought by sport’s players’ misconduct. I agree that the conduct’s nature that brings sportsman to
disrepute is the same as conduct which is known to be defamatory. I found out that this reduces
one’s reputation on how members of society think of him/her (George, 2009, p. 5). I also realized
that the selection of players according to membership agreement in Australia contributed to
disrepute hence breaking disrepute clause.
Case study
As per the case of South versus Royal Victorian Bowling club, the parties appeared
before the court because the complaint complained of being prevented from participating in
competition by the respondent because of her gender, only men were allowed by the RVBA to
participate (AustLII. 2001). The reason as to why the respondent denied the complaint from
participating in the competition was that the complaint lacked enough strength, the stamina and
the physique for participating in the competition for men. The court ruled that complaint had the
right to participate in the competition. Therefore, respondent had to amend the rule it made
which defined the affiliated membership through doing away with the requirement that stated
that the affiliated members should be made only from section b 136(a) Equal Opportunity Act of
the year 1995.
VERSION B

Sport Law Reflection 3
Journal Reflection
According to the article of Alison Chamberlain, match-fixing has brought a major
problem to the bodies governing it and also the national governments all over the world New
Zealand being one of them (Day, 2018). I found out that match-fixing is brought about by the
betting practices which are corrupt. The growth of legal/illegal betting via online has greatly
contributed to the coming up of criminal groups. Some of the participants in sports and the
competition differ regarding match-fixing. I observed that New Zealand has tried to eradicate the
match-fixing by even introducing the Amendment Act in the year 2014. I suggest that all nations
should cooperate starting with national governments, bodies governing sports and the betting
industry in order to discuss on how to end this problem.
Case study
As per the case of Avellino verses All Australia Netball Association LTD, the parties
appeared before the South Australia Supreme Court because plaintiff made an application
claiming that the defendant had prevented her from participating in Thunderbirds competition on
the basis that the plaintiff was not a resident of South Australia (AVELLINO v ALL
AUSTRALIA NETBALL ASSOCIATION LTD No. SCCIV-03-912 [2004] SASC 56, 2004).
The plaintiff claimed that the rule on residency is an unreasonable restraint of trade. The
defendant claimed that the plaintiff didn’t satisfy the requirements for her residency. I observed
that the court ruled that the plaintiff was not ineligible for the participation in Thunderbirds team
competition according to reg. 2.2 section b of the CTB Trophy of the regulations of the
Thunderbirds competition and that the regulations of CTB Trophy were void, hence allowing the
plaintiff to play.

Sport Law Reflection 4
References
AustLII. (2001). Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. [online] Available at:
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2001/207.html [Accessed 28 May 2018].
AVELLINO v ALL AUSTRALIA NETBALL ASSOCIATION LTD No. SCCIV-03-912 [2004]
SASC 56. (2004). Supreme Court of South Australia. [online] Available at:
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/sa/SASC/2004/56.html [Accessed 28 May 2018].
Day, J. (2018). The Sports Law Review - Edition 3 - The Law Reviews. [online]
Thelawreviews.co.uk. Available at: https://thelawreviews.co.uk/edition/1001108/the-
sports-law-review-edition-3 [Accessed 27 May 2018].
George, P. (2009). SPORT IN DISREPUTE. 9th ed. [ebook] pp.1-31. Available at:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ANZSportsLawJl/2009/3.pdf [Accessed 27 May
2018].