Week 6 Sport Law Post

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 states: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

One or more of the following three prongs must be satisfied in order to be in compliance with Title IX:

Prong 1: Participation opportunities must be provided in a manner that is substantially proportionate to the student enrollment.

Prong 2: The institution must show a continual expansion of opportunities for the underrepresented sex

Prong 3: The institution must fully and effectively accommodate the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.

Athletic opportunities for women have increased greatly since the implementation of Title IX. One issue that pops up often is the disproportionately high size of football teams in comparison to other teams. While a university may appear to have an equal number of teams, the players on a football team could equal the number of players on 4 or 5 women's teams. The number of athletes participating must be taken into account and not just the number of teams.

Another issue is the idea that men's teams are cut in order to bring institutions into compliance with Title IX as opposed to adding women's teams to accomplish the same objective. However, a study conducted by the US General Accounting Office found that the majority of schools do not cut men's teams in order to increase female participation. The reasons for cutting teams are typically focused around budget and interest concerns.

Sport Law Related Article of the Week:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/09/sports/09titleix.html?_r=3&hp=&pagewanted=all

This article discusses the problems Cal is facing in cutting some of its teams due to budget shortfalls. In addition to public outcry at the loss of teams, there is the issue of falling out of compliance with Title IX. Cal had been relying on the "interests and abilities" prong of the test to satisfy Title IX. However, if it cuts a women's team it cannot claim this. As a result Cal will be out of compliance with Title IX because the proportionality prong is currently nowhere near being fulfilled and it will not have a history of expansion.

I found this part to be very interesting:

"Until now, Cal had been fulfilling Title IX requirements by asserting that it met the “interests and abilities” of its female students, one of three so-called prongs that institutions can choose to comply with the law. When a university cuts even one women’s team, it can no longer rely on that claim, nor can it argue that it has a history of expanding opportunities for women, which is another option for compliance. Now, Cal has effectively backed itself into a corner and is left with only the third option — proving that female participation in athletics is proportionate to female undergraduate enrollment in the university.

By that measure, Cal falls considerably short. Just 40 percent of the 965 participants on the university’s varsity teams were women in the 2009-10 academic year; its overall student enrollment was 53 percent female. To comply with Title IX, officials have said they plan to trim male rosters while expanding the size of female teams, a practice known in college athletics as roster management."

Week 5 Sport Law Post

Beyond fiduciary duty, discuss the two primary duties that an agent has to his or her client (Duty of loyalty and duty of obedience).

The agent has the duty of loyalty to his or her client. This means that "the agent must act solely and completely for the benefit of the principal. The agent may not compete with the principal unless the principal has agreed to it. The agent also may not work on anything adverse to the principal. The agent must also refrain from entering the principal into agreements which will benefit the agent personally unless an agreement has been made with the principal, Even then the transaction will only be enforced if it deemed fair and reasonable by the courts.

The agent also has the duty of obedience to his or her client. This means that the agent has a "duty to follow all reasonable instructions given by the principal." Even if the principal tells the agent to do something harmful to the principal's cause, the agent must follow through on it. The agent should inform the principal that the action could have negative effects and should document his or her dissent.

Sport Law Related Article of the Week:

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/11022011/2/australia-major-sports-want-national-law-against-match-fixing.html

This article discusses the push for legislation against fixing sporting matches. While this is currently not a major issue in Australian sports they are trying to put measures in place to prevent future problems. The gambling industry is a major growth industry in Australia.

Week 4 Sport Law Post

Discuss the concept of strict liability and provide a relevant example from the sport industry.

Strict liability is defined as legal concepts where liability results regardless of fault; often used in product liability cases. There is no need to prove that the defendant acted with negligence. You must only prove that "the product was defective when it left the defendant's hands, and the defect caused the plantiff's injuries" (Spengler , 38). Wikipedia uses the example of the owner of a Tiger. The owner could have the most sophisticated Tiger cage on earth. However, if the Tiger still finds a way to escape the owner is responsible for the damages even though they took strong measures to prevent the escape.

Here is a sports example taken from an article on A Sea of Blue: (http://www.aseaofblue.com/2010/9/22/1697467/ncaa-sports-strict-liability-and)

"The NCAA has recently adopted strict liability to some of its transgressions, or so they appear to say. The now-famous University of Memphis case involving Derrick Rose is the archetypal strict liability application on record in the NCAA when it comes to academic eligibility. In the NCAA bylaw context, the Committee on Infractions said in Memphis that it doesn't matter whether or not Calipari, the school, Rose, or God Himself knew about Rose's invalid college entrance exam. It doesn't even matter if it was declared invalid after the basketball season was over, and without dispositive proof of wrongdoing or even due process. All that matters is the fact that it was declared invalid, and that rendered Rose ineligible, period. No further inquiry required. No blame to Memphis, or Rose, or Calipari, or anyone else, but wins must be vacated."

Sports Law Related Article of the Week:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6121861

The NFL has filed an unfair labor practice charge against the NFLPA with the National Labor Relations Board. The NFL claims that the NFLPA is not working with the NFL in good faith. The current CBA expires on March 3rd, at which point a lock out is expected. From my point of view it appears that the two sides are posturing in the media to gain the public's support. While listening to the radio on my drive home today, one of the analysts said that the side that has the most unified front typically comes out ahead in these negotiations. He said the owners are presenting a unified front at this moment while the players are splintered. This is the first major labor dispute in sports since the explosion of internet based social media such as Twitter and Facebook. Already, many players have been in the limelight for their Tweets on the negotiations which occasionally run counter to what the NFLPA is presenting.