Carjitsu is just part of the portfolio of sports that the co-founders of Pro League Network hope can fill gaps in the betting calendar. PLN is already live with DraftKings and offered betting on a live SlapFight Championship event earlier this month.

More sports, more content and, the founders hope, more sportsbook partners will come in 2023. PLN works on a revenue share with sportsbook partners so they believe it is within reach for any size operator. Yucatonis said content like carjitsu can be used as an acquisition tool because it is differentiated.

PLN provides data and live streams, and can assist with odds. The intent is to provide in-play markets on the niche sports as well, which should improve margins, Yucatonis said.

Making content to fill holes in calendar

The concept is simple, even though the execution is far from that: find niche sports with established fanbases and turn them into something sportsbooks can offer during slow times in the betting calendar. PLN hopes to offer three or four hours of content a week during daytime or off-hours for the major sports.

The founders have had talks with “everyone you can imagine,” Yucatonis said, but admitted it is hard to find the right time for a full pitch. Sportsbooks right now are focused on NFL betting, with March Madness betting right around the corner and significant state launches in Ohio and Massachusetts.

Tthere are positive signs for interest. When the two started pitching this idea in June, Yucatonis said one of the “big operators” said they would “take all you got” if they could produce content for primetime slots on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday during the slow summer months.

The current focus for the founders is building up that content portfolio. Another bettable SlapFight Championship event will be held in January, followed by a seven-event series from the Pro Mini Golf Tour after the Super Bowl in February.

But will regulators be up for carjitsu?

PLN’s pitches to regulators are not always met with straight faces, but they tend to see the appeal by the end, Yucatonis said.

“Not everyone appreciates slap fighting or mini golf or whatever, it’s not the NFL so you’ll get some chuckles,” Yucatonis said. “But the reality is at the end of the day it is a sport with professional athletes, it abides by all those check-the-box rules.”

SlapFight is available to bet in five jurisdictions with more approvals likely coming in January, according to Salvaris:

• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Ontario
• Oregon
• Wyoming

What a time for Barstool violations

PENN Entertainment has had an interesting December thanks to its Barstool Sportsbook.

It started when Barstool, its personalities and its events came under scrutiny from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. The MGC ultimately decided to postpone voting on a retail sportsbook license for PENN’s casino until it was satisfied with some of its concerns.

One of those concerns was over the college football shows Barstool produces at or around college campuses. PENN argued that was all above board, but clearly, not everyone agrees. One of those shows led to two violations in Ohio for potentially targeting underage audiences with promotional offers, with a pending $250,000 fine.

Later in the week, another PENN violation came to light in Michigan. The Barstool online casino offered games before they were approved by regulators, which led to a $30,000 fine.

Will MGC eye Barstool, BetMGM sports betting violations?

It will not be a long wait to see what, if anything, Massachusetts commissioners have to say about the recent violations. The MGC intends to discuss PENN’s retail and mobile applications Monday.

PENN might not be the only operator under watch at Monday’s meeting. BetMGM‘s mobile application is also on the agenda and may have to explain how its app went live five days too early in Maryland.

PlayUp believed Ohio operation legal

PENN’s fine was far from the biggest issue presented at the most recent Ohio Casino Control Commission meeting. Pending a hearing that could sway opinions, the commission intends to deny PlayUp a mobile license because of illegal betting operations.

Those operations concern its slots+ program, which uses historic horse racing events instead of RNG for its online slot portfolio. PlayUp told LSR it thought it was operating legally and has pulled the product from Ohio since regulators brought the issue to their attention:

PlayUp received the Commission Notice for Opportunity for Hearing and is reviewing its provisions with legal counsel. At all times, PlayUp believed it was operating within the bounds of Ohio law. As noted by the Executive Director, PlayUp acted diligently to come into compliance with the Cease-and-Desist Order. PlayUp remains committed to compliance with all Ohio laws.

Other gaming commissions are keeping an eye on the proceedings in Ohio, multiple people told LSR.

The post Business By The Books: Can Carjitsu Fill Sports Betting Calendar Gaps? appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

In the study, titled Traumatic encephalopathy syndrome: application of new criteria to a cohort exposed to repetitive head impacts, the authors accessed data from the Professional Athletes Brain Health Study. 176 combat sports athletes participated (boxers and MMA fighters). The authors applied the Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Traumatic Encephalopathy Syndrome (“TES” which are the criterial for when someone is suspected to have CTE while alive since a formal diagnosis cannot be made until death). They found that 41% of the participants had TES.

Of the TES positive group the authors then compared MRI brain volumes, cognitive testing results and certain biomarkers to see the difference in these objective findings compared to the group without TES. They found that the TES group had differences in brain volume and reduced cognitive testing results leading them to conclude that using the Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Traumatic Encephalopathy Syndrome have value when studying harm from repetitive head impacts.

In discussing the prevalence of CTE among fighters in the study and the risk factors the authors noted as follows:

One of the outstanding questions regarding CTE is the incidence and prevalence in various groups exposed to RHI. The prevalence of TES in our entire cohort of retired professional fighters and those over the age of 35 was 41% and increases with age. More than 60% of retired fighters above the age of 50 met criteria for TES…

The heterogeneity of previous cohorts studied makes it difficult to compare our findings to prevalence rates reported in the literature. In the initial description of CTE, Martland claimed that 50% of boxers had symptoms of what was termed ‘punch drunk’.20 One of the most extensive epidemiological study of boxers performed over 50 years ago on 250 randomly selected retired fighters in Great Britain found that 17% had what would be considered CTE and 40% with some neurological findings or alcoholism.21 Using the NINDS Consensus pathological criteria, postmortem studies have indicated rates of CTE ranging from 32% of individuals who had a history of playing contact sports in the Mayo Clinic Brain Bank, to 99% of former National Football League players in the Boston University Brain Bank.

Aside from age, we found the major factor associated with TES+ in our group was amount of exposure to RHI.…. Looking at boxers in our cohort, we found that a threshold of 25 or more fights predicted whether a patient was categorised as TES+, though the sensitivity and specificity of this was relatively low (72 and 64, respectively). This finding may help guide required exposure levels for combat sports in future iterations of the TES criteria, but further data modelling may be improved by incorporating other factors that can be easily assessed such as frequency of competitions, age of starting fighting or number of knock outs.

While it may be that anyone given enough exposure to RHI will develop TES, other factors have been reported to interact with exposure to determine an individual’s long-term neurological outcome from RHI.23 Of note, and similar to previous findings in our cohort and others, age at which one starts exposure to RHI may be a risk factor for worse performance and TES

The full abstract reads as follows:

Abstract

Objective To examine the characteristics of those who fulfil the recent National Institute of Neurological Disease and Stroke (NINDS) Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Traumatic Encephalopathy Syndrome (TES) and test whether they show differences in MRI-based regional brain volumes, cognitive domains, and certain plasma biomarkers.

Methods Professional fighters 35 years of age or older and/or retired were included. Participants were categorised as either having TES (TES+) or not (non-TES). TES+ participants were further subtyped by their cognitive profile. Multiple linear regression models were used to compare MRI-based regional brain volumes, cognitive performance, plasma tau and neurofilament light levels between TES– and TES+ groups.

Results 176 participants (110 boxers and 66 MMA) were included in the analysis. 72 (41%)/176 were categorised as having TES, the likelihood of TES increasing with age. TES+ participants tended to be boxers, started fighting at a younger age, had more professional fights and knocked out more frequently. The TES+ group had lower regional brain volumes including both grey and white matter structures. TES+ also had lower scores on simple and choice reaction time, psychomotor speed and Trails A .

Conclusion The new TES criteria does distinguish a group of fighters with differences in regional brain volumes and reduced cognitive function. Our findings support the use of the NINDS criteria for TES in further research of the long-term effects of repetitive head impacts.

Here’s a look ahead at odds for all the upcoming games this week, including spreads, moneylines, and point totals at legal US sportsbooks.

Analysis will be added as news develops.

NFL Week 16 Odds

NFL Week 16 best odds and betting breakdown

Jacksonville Jaguars at New York Jets

• Spread: Jaguars (), Jets ()
• Moneyline: Jaguars (), Jets ()
• Total:

The Jaguars won their second straight with a 40-34 overtime win against the Cowboys in Week 15 Trevor Lawrence threw for 318 yards and four touchdowns with one interception, and safety Rayshawn Jenkins sealed it with a pickoff returned for a score in overtime to win it. The Jaguars are now right behind the Titans in the AFC South, but also play their next two on the road where the team has struggled, going just 2-5 so far this season.

The Jets blew a late lead against the Lions at home for their third straight loss, dropping the team to 7-7 overall and the bottom spot in the AFC East. Zach Wilson played reasonably well in relief of injured Jets QB Mike White, throwing for 317 yards and two touchdowns with one interception. But again the Jets had trouble protecting their play-caller, as Wilson was hit 10 times and sacked four. With the quick turnaround, as of right now White isn’t expected to be back under center on Thursday night for this one.

Atlanta Falcons at Baltimore Ravens

• Spread: Falcons (), Ravens ()
• Moneyline: Falcons (), Ravens()
• Total:

The Falcons lost their third straight, falling to the Saints on the road with rookie quarterback Desmond Ridder under center, replacing Marcus Mariota. It wasn’t exactly a spectacular start, as Ridder went just 13-of-26 for 97 yards and no scores in the game. Atlanta’s currently in a three-way tie for second place in the NFC South, where no team has a winning record at this point.

The Ravens really felt the loss of starting quarterback Lamar Jackson in a 13-3 loss against the Browns on Saturday. Backup Tyler Huntley went just 17-of-30 with 138 yards and one interception, and the offense was blanked entirely in the second half. The loss brings the Ravens down to 9-5 overall, putting Baltimore at risk of losing the AFC North lead to the Bengals.

Detroit Lions at Carolina Panthers

• Spread: Lions (), Panthers ()
• Moneyline: Lions (), Panthers ()
• Total:

The Lions got a lot of help from their scrappy defense and some clutch late plays from Jared Goff, who threw for 352 yards and one score, to pull off a late comeback win on the road against the Jets. That’s the third consecutive win for Detroit, which is now a serious contender in the NFC wild card race with three games remaining.

The Panthers suffered a blow to their playoff hopes in a 24-16 loss to the Steelers at home. Sam Darnold completed 14 passes on 24 attempts and ended with 225 yards and one score, but the ground game was limited to just 21 yards rushing all day. The loss snapped a two-game winning streak, leaving the Panthers in need of a win at home here before they finish the season out on the road, where they’re a dismal 1-5 this year.

Seattle Seahawks at Kansas City Chiefs

• Spread: Seahawks (), Chiefs ()
• Moneyline: Seahawks (), Chiefs ()
• Total:

The Seahawks dropped a Thursday night game against the 49ers which dimmed the team’s playoff hopes. Geno Smith threw for one touchdown and was sacked three times, while the running game was held to 70 yards on the ground – 18 of which came on one run by Smith. Seattle has now lost four of the last five to drop to 7-7 overall and needs to find some way to stop the skid on the road to salvage any hope of making the postseason.

The Chiefs had to work harder than expected to beat the league’s worst team, but Patrick Mahomes threw for 336 yards and two touchdowns while running for another in a 30-24 overtime win over the Texans that clinched the AFC West title for Kansas City. Defense is clearly still a concern for the Chiefs, as they found themselves in a tight one with one of the NFL’s worst offenses, and also committed 10 penalties that cost the team just over 100 yards.

New Orleans Saints at Cleveland Browns

• Spread: Saints (), Browns ()
• Moneyline: Saints (), Browns ()
• Total:

The Saints squeaked by the Falcons with a 21-18 win on Sunday to stop a two-game slide and keep their playoff hopes alive. Andy Dalton threw for 121 yards and two scores, while Taysom Hill added two completions for 80 yards and a touchdown. It was good enough to improve the team to 5-9 on the season, which is still potential playoff territory in the NFC South. Now the Saints head back out on the road, where they’re just 1-5 this season.

The Browns gutted out a 13-3 win over a diminished Ravens team on Saturday, keeping their playoff hopes just barely alive. Deshaun Watson continues trying to shake off the rust, going 18-of-28 for 161 yards and one touchdown. The bad news for Cleveland is that defensive end Jadeveon Clowney suffered a concussion and must now clear the NFL’s concussion protocol in order to be eligible to play this week. Safety John Johnson III also suffered a thigh contusion in the win and his status is unclear.

Houston Texans at Tennessee Titans

• Spread: Texans (), Titans ()
• Moneyline: Texans (), Titans ()
• Total:

The Texans continue to be the worst team in the NFL on paper, but they’ve been putting up a fight lately, losing to the Chiefs in overtime on Sunday after nearly beating the Cowboys on the road the week before. Davis Mills did the bulk of the quarterback work against Kansas City, going 12-of-24 with 121 yards and two touchdowns through the air, plus another on the ground. Houston may be well out of it, but the team doesn’t seem to have given up.

The Titans lost their fourth straight in a 17-14 loss against the Chargers on Sunday. Missing four starters, including rookie receiver Treylon Burks, the Titans briefly looked like they might also lose quarterback Ryan Tannehill when he exited early in the game with an ankle injury. Tannehill would return and end up going 15-of-22 for 165 yards, while also throwing one interception. The Titans now find themselves barely clinging to a lead in the AFC South, with the Jaguars nipping at their heels.

Cincinnati Bengals at New England Patriots

• Spread: Bengals (), Patriots ()
• Moneyline: Bengals (), Patriots ()
• Total:

The Bengals pulled away late to beat the Buccaneers 34-23 on Sunday, capitalizing on the chance to seize the top spot in the AFC North after the Ravens loss a day earlier. Joe Burrow threw for 200 yards and four touchdowns with one interception, and Cincinnati won its sixth straight game in this late-season push. Now the team heads to New England for its final road game of the regular season, where it’ll hope to put more distance between itself and Baltimore.

The Patriots seemed headed for overtime against the Raiders, but instead managed to lose on the last play of the game when Jakobi Myers tried to pass the ball backwards to keep the play going with no time on the clock, only to end up tossing it directly to a Raiders defensive lineman who took it home for the winning score. It closed out a game in which offensive touchdowns were tough to come by for New England. Mac Jones threw for 111 yards and no scores, while Rhamondre Stevenson ran in one touchdown. The Patriots have lost three of their last four and sit at the bottom of the AFC East, tied with the Jets.

New York Giants at Minnesota Vikings

• Spread: Giants (), Vikings ()
• Moneyline: Giants (), Vikings ()
• Total:

The Giants take on the Commanders on Sunday Night Football before making a quick turnaround to play Saturday in Minnesota. New York has fallen in the standings after going four games without a win. The Giants are 3-2 on the road so far this season and have just one home game left this year.

The Vikings very nearly let themselves get embarrassed by the Colts on Saturday, but instead made NFL history by rallying back from a 33-point deficit to win 39-36 in overtime. Kirk Cousins threw for 460 yards – almost all of which came in the second half and overtime – along with four touchdowns and two interceptions. The win clinched the NFC North for the Vikings, who now have the second-best record in the NFC behind only the Eagles.

Buffalo Bills at Chicago Bears

• Spread: Bills (), Bears ()
• Moneyline: Bills (), Bears ()
• Total:

Josh Allen led the Bills to a comeback victory at home against the Dolphins on Saturday, throwing for 304 yards and four touchdowns while also engineering an 86-yard drive through the snow to set up the game-winning field goal. Allen also ran for 77 yards, including ripping off a 44-yarder to help set up the game-tying touchdown. The win put more distance between Buffalo and Miami, with the Bills now one win away from clinching the AFC East.

The Bears came up short against the Eagles, but quarterback Justin Fields proved again that he can make magic at times. Fields threw for 152 yards and two touchdowns, but also ran for 95 yards on 15 attempts, including turning a near sack into a 39-yard run that set up a touchdown on the next play. The loss was the seventh in a row for Chicago, which now sits all around at the bottom of the NFC North and is just 2-5 at home this season.

Washington Commanders at San Francisco 49ers

• Spread: Commanders (), 49ers ()
• Moneyline: Commanders (), 49ers ()
• Total:

The Commanders play Sunday night against the Giants in an important NFC East clash. Both teams enter with identical 7-5-1 records, leaving them battling in the bottom half of an extremely competitive division. The Commanders come into the game off a bye, having played to a 20-20 tie with the Giants in their last game earlier this month.

The 49ers clinched the NFC West with a win over the Seahawks on Thursday. Rookie quarterback Brock Purdy continued to look solid after taking over for an injured Jimmy Garoppolo, throwing for 217 yards and two touchdowns. The 49ers are still looking to improve their standing in the NFC playoff picture, so it’s unlikely they’ll choose to rest too many starters, even with injuries beginning to plague the team late.

Philadelphia Eagles at Dallas Cowboys

• Spread: Eagles (), Cowboys ()
• Moneyline: Eagles (), Cowboys ()
• Total:

The Eagles are coming off a 25-20 win over Chicago that made it all but certain they’ll get home-field advantage throughout the playoffs. Jalen Hurts bounced back from a couple early interceptions to end up with 315 passing yards on the day, plus another 61 on the ground and three rushing touchdowns. The Eagles are now one win away from securing the top seed in the NFC and wrapping up the NFC East.

The Cowboys fell in overtime against the Jaguars, despite having several chances to put the game away late. A win would have clinched a playoff spot for Dallas, but Dak Prescott threw his second interception of the day in overtime, and this one was returned for a touchdown to end it. Now the Cowboys need a win at home in this much tougher clash to seal a postseason spot. The good news is Dallas is 7-1 at AT&T Stadium this season.

Las Vegas Raiders at Pittsburgh Steelers

• Spread: Raiders (), Steelers ()
• Moneyline: Raiders (), Steelers ()
• Total:

The Raiders pulled out a win with no time left on the clock when defensive end Chandler Jones picked off an ill-advised backwards pass and took it almost 50 yards for the game-winning score. Derek Carr threw for 231 yards with three touchdowns and one interception. The Raiders have now won four of their last five, but need to win their remaining three to have any realistic hope of making the playoffs.

The Steelers beat the Panthers 24-16 and got a solid performance from backup Mitch Trubisky, who went 17-of-22 for 179 yards and no turnovers while stepping in for starter Kenny Pickett. Pittsburgh also got a late lift from its defense, which came up with a couple key sacks, and the result was a third win in four games for the Steelers. Pickett is still out with a concussion as of now, but his status for this week isn’t yet known.

Green Bay Packers at Miami Dolphins

• Spread: Packers (), Dolphins ()
• Moneyline: Packers (), Dolphins ()
• Total:

The Packers are at home against the Rams for Monday Night Football. Green Bay will be hoping for some help from the typically frigid Wisconsin winter weather as they look to finish strong at Lambeau Field, where they’ve been tough to beat in December games.

The Dolphins endured snowballs from fans and a late comeback by the Bills en route to a 32-29 loss on the road on Saturday. Tua Tagovailoa went 17-of-30 for 234 yards and two touchdowns, but he was the lesser of the two quarterbacks on the day and the Dolphins dropped their third straight. Still, it was an improvement on how Miami’s played lately, especially with a renewed running game that picked up 188 yards on the ground against one of the NFL’s best run defenses. Now the Dolphins get to come back home, where they’re 5-1 on the season.

Denver Broncos at Los Angeles Rams

• Spread: Broncos (), Rams ()
• Moneyline: Broncos (), Rams ()
• Total:

The Broncos stopped a five-game skid with a 24-15 win over the Cardinals on Sunday. Brett Rypien was 21-of-26 for 197 yards with a touchdown and a pick as a fill-in for the concussed Russell Wilson. Latavius Murray also had 130 yards on the ground with one score, as Denver finally showed some signs of life. Denver is still last in the AFC West and just 1-6 on the road. The Broncos coaching staff has said it intends to put Wilson back in at quarterback this week. He was also cleared from the concussion protocol and technically eligible for this game, but the team opted to sit him anyway.

The Rams are headed to Green Bay to face the Packers on Monday night. Quarterback Baker Mayfield is expected to be the starter after leading the Rams to a comeback victory over the Raiders just a few days after being claimed off waivers.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers at Arizona Cardinals

• Spread: Buccaneers (), Cardinals ()
• Moneyline: Buccaneers (), Cardinals ()
• Total:

The Buccaneers lost their third in four games, going down 34-23 at home against the Bengals. Tom Brady was picked off twice and threw for three touchdowns and 312 yards. Tampa Bay came out ahead in most offensive categories against Cincinnati, but turned the ball over four times – three of which Brady was responsible for. The Bucs now hold only a one-game lead over the other three teams in the NFC South, with the division still very much up for grabs.

The Cardinals lost another quarterback in their 24-15 defeat against Denver, as Colt McCoy left early with a concussion, leaving third-stringer Trace McSorley to step in. McCoy had been the backup for Kyler Murray, who went down with a season-ending knee injury last week, and here McCoy started off 13-of-21 for 78 yards and an interception before being knocked out of the game. McSorley came on to throw for 95 yards and two picks, and may now be the team’s best available option for this week. To further add to the tumultuous Cardinals season, the team is expected to fire GM Steve Keim.

Los Angeles Chargers at Indianapolis Colts

• Spread: Chargers (), Colts ()
• Moneyline: Chargers (), Colts ()
• Total:

Justin Herbert again pulled off some late magic as the Chargers escaped with a 17-14 win over the Titans. Herbert was picked off twice, but threw for 313 yards and engineered the final drive to set up a game-winning field goal. The Chargers improve to 8-6, putting them in the thick of the playoff hunt with nothing but games against teams with losing records remaining in the season.

The Colts squandered a 33-0 nothing lead in an overtime loss to the Vikings, handing Indianapolis its fourth consecutive loss and the seventh loss in the last eight games. The historic collapse was an added gut punch for a team that started the season 3-2-1 only to completely unravel as the year went on, and now sits tied with the Saints for the worst turnover differential in the NFL.

The post NFL Week 16 Odds: Opening Spreads, Moneylines, And Totals For Every Game appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Get Up to $1,250 + Credits at Caesars Sportsbook

1

Visit Caesars Sportsbook

Up to $1,250

On Caesars

Caesars Sportsbook Review

Stream NFL Games In App For Free

+ get 1,000 Caesars Reward Credits

+ also get 1,000 Tier Credits

Redeem for free bets, hotel stays, & more!

Use Promo Code: LEGALFULL

PLAY NOW

Caesars promo code for NFL Sunday

To claim the Caesars welcome bonus, use the Caesars promo code LEGALFULL when you sign up for an account. Currently, the welcome bonus at Caesars will cover your first bet with a refund if it loses, up to $1,250.

The refund takes the form of a free bet equal to the amount that you staked. If that free bet wins, you collect the profit as dictated by the odds but not including your wager amount. You’ll have 14 days to wager the free bet, after which it will expire and no longer be usable.

For new users in Maryland, there is a slightly different welcome bonus. To claim it, enter the Maryland-specific promo code LEGALPICS when you complete the registration form. This promo, like the standard Caesars bonus, applies to your first bet. If your first bet is for more than $100, you’ll receive a free-bet refund if it loses, up to $1,500, with the rest of the terms being the same as above. If your first bet is for up to $100, however, your bonus is a straightforward $100 free bet, which you receive regardless of the outcome of your initial wager.

To claim the Caesars sign-up bonus, you must be located in a state where Caesars is legal, and you must be of legal betting age in that state.

Caesars NFL Sunday preview for Week 15

Sunday’s Week 15 action kicks off with the Philadelphia Eagles (-9 on the point spread, -430 on the moneyline) at the Chicago Bears (+9, +328.) There’s also an important clash between the Detroit Lions, who’ve put themselves in playoff contention by winning five of their last six, and a New York Jets team that’s lost its last two (even odds, both teams -110 on the moneyline.)

Other games include a matchup between the New England Patriots (PK, -110) and Las Vegas Raiders (PK, -110), a clash between two teams with matching 7-6 records in the Los Angeles Chargers (-3, -155) and Tennessee Titans (+3, +130), and a Burrow vs. Brady battle with the Cincinnati Bengals (-3.5, -195) visiting the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (+3.5, +162)

After a day full of action, Sunday Night Football keeps things interesting with an NFC East matchup between the New York Giants and Washington Commanders, who own identical 7-5-1 records and played to a 20-20 tie two weeks ago. This time around, the Commanders are a 4.5-point favorite, with moneyline odds of Washington -220, New York +180. The over/under is 40.5 points.

How to sign up with Caesars promo code

To set up an account at Caesars Sportsbook and claim the welcome bonus, follow the steps below:

• Click on one of the links on this page to the Caesars Sportsbook website.
• Click the sign-up button and fill out the registration page with your details to create an account. When prompted for a Caesars promo code, enter LEGALFULL (or LEGALPICS if you’re in Maryland) to claim the welcome bonus.
• Select one of the available payment methods and make your first deposit (Caesars has a $20 minimum deposit).
• Make your first wager and claim whichever welcome bonus you’re eligible for (see details above).

The post Caesars Promo Code for NFL Week 15: $1,250 Bet Insurance appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

$1,000 Risk Free Bet + $50 Free After First Wager

1

Visit BETMGM Sportsbook

$1,050 Bonus

Exclusive Special

BETMGM Sportsbook Review

Exclusive BetMGM Promo: 

$1,000 Risk Free Bet 

PLUS $50 Free after First Bet

Use Bonus Code: PLAYBONUS50

PLAY NOW

BetMGM bonus code for NFL Sunday

When you register for an account with BetMGM Sportsbook, enter the BetMGM bonus code PLAYBONUS50 to qualify for the welcome bonus. The current bonus at BetMGM is a risk-free first bet up to a limit of $1,000. That means that when you place your first wager at BetMGM, you’ll receive a refund in free bets if it loses. If it wins, you collect your payout as you normally would.

If your first bet is for less than $50 and it loses, you’ll receive one free bet, worth the entirety of your initial stake. If your first wager at BetMGM was for $50 or more and it lost, you’ll receive five free bets, each worth 20% of your initial stake. That means that a $200 first bet would result in a refund of five $40 free bets if it lost.

You won’t be able to withdraw the free bets; you have to wager them, and they expire within seven days if you don’t. Any wagers you make with free bets do not include the original wager in the payout. For example, a $10 free bet at odds of +120 would result in a payout of $12 if it won, not the $22 you’d stand to receive if you had made the wager with money from your account.

To claim this bonus, you must be in a state where BetMGM is legal (now including Maryland) and of legal betting age in that state.

BetMGM NFL Sunday Week 15 preview

Sunday has 11 games on the NFL Week 15 schedule, with one of the earliest being a crucial battle between the Detroit Lions (+1, -110) and the New York Jets (-1, -110.) Both still harbor playoff aspirations, with the Lions having won five of their last six to put themselves into the conversation.

Other big games include the Tennessee Titans (+2.5, +125) at the Los Angeles Chargers (-2.5, -150), with both teams currently sporting 7-6 records. Tennessee is trying to hold down the top spot in the AFC South, and the Chargers are second in the AFC West. Also, with Baltimore and Cincinnati still neck-and-neck in the AFC North, Joe Burrow and the Bengals (-3.5, -190) face Tom Brady and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (+3.5, +155.)

Finally, the primetime slot sees a showdown between two teams eyeing an NFC wild card slot, as the New York Giants and Washington Commanders play a rematch after tying 20-20 two weeks ago. The Giants, who’ve dropped from 7-2 to 7-5-1, need a win to keep the dream realistic, and a loss could also prove seriously damaging for the Commanders’ playoff hopes. Washington is a 4.5-point favorite at BetMGM, with moneyline odds of Commanders -225, Giants +185. The over/under is 40 points.

How to sign up with BetMGM promo code

To create an account at BetMGM and get a risk-free first bet, follow these instructions:

• Head to the BetMGM Sportsbook site, click the registration button and fill out the form. When prompted for a BetMGM bonus code, use PLAYBONUS50.
• Choose your preferred deposit method and transfer funds to your new BetMGM account ($10 minimum deposit).
• Place your first bet. If it doesn’t win, you’ll receive a refund in free bets (maximum $1,000; see details above).

The post BetMGM Bonus Code For NFL Sunday: $1,050 Promo for Week 15 appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario announced the crackdown in early October, giving existing unregulated operators approximately a month to determine their path forward. Operators still live in the unregulated market after Oct. 31 risk any future regulation, according to the AGCO. 

The agency said this month that 17 operators exited the unregulated ON sports betting market after the deadline. The AGCO declined to share which operators made up the 17. Those operators are working with the AGCO and iGaming Ontario to enter the regulated market, according to an email from an AGCO spokesperson.

Migrating Ontario sportsbooks

Since the April 4 launch of commercial online gaming in Ontario, 36 operators have launched in the province. Of those operators, 28 previously operated in Ontario’s previously unregulated market.

Regulators began accepting operator applications in September 2021 and hoped to give sportsbooks “a reasonable amount of time” to transition smoothly into a legal market. It is still working with operators on the transition, like BetRegal.

“A key objective of the AGCO has been to move igaming operators and suppliers into Ontario’s regulated market as quickly and as seamlessly as possible,” an AGCO spokesperson wrote. “The AGCO established a process for existing operators and suppliers in the unregulated market without causing significant interruption to their Ontario customer base.”

Ontario sports betting plan working?

In some aspects, Ontario regulators accomplished their goals. There are dozens of unregulated operators that made the switch, including major global sportsbooks like:

• 888
• Bet365
• Betway
• Sports Interaction
• Pinnacle

In other ways, however, the legalized market has fallen short.

Ontario sports betting revenue leaves room for improvement

In iGO’s second quarter report, Ontario operators generated $CAD 267 million.

Those figures will likely improve with the increased presence of more previously unregulated operators. The numbers also do not include revenue from Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp.

Still, the revenue is well below that of US markets with both online casino and sports betting that are smaller than Ontario. Comparison between the Canada sports betting market and US sports betting markets is difficult because Ontario does not separate iGaming and sports wagering breakdowns.

The post Ontario Sports Betting Regulators Happy With Gray Market Winding Down appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

In a few weeks, people in Ohio will be able to legally bet on sports both online and in-person. DraftKings Sportsbook is one of the several online sportsbooks approved to take bets starting Jan. 1. Sign up with DraftKings below to have $200 in free bets in your account on Jan. 1, when sports betting launches in Ohio.

Sign Up Early, Get $200 in Free Bets On Launch Day

1

Visit DraftKings Sportsbook

$200 FREE

Ohio Early Sign Up Offer

DraftKings Sportsbook Review

Ohio Early Sign Up Offer: 

Free $200 Sportsbook Bets 

PLUS $100K Free Bet Sweepstakes

To Claim: Click Sign Up Now

Sign Up NOW

Offer available in OH only. First time Sportsbook players only. Free Bets credited when OH goes live.

DraftKings Ohio promo code

To redeem the promotion, sign up for a DraftKings account using a DraftKings Ohio promo code link from this page, and eight free bets of $25 each will be in your account and available to you on Jan. 1 at midnight. DraftKings is also offering a $100K free bet sweepstakes. It will randomly select five users to win a $100,000 free bet on day one of sports betting in Ohio.

Sign up using the DraftKings Ohio promo link. This offer ends Jan. 1, and you must be in Ohio to redeem it.

DraftKings Ohio projected launch offer

In addition to the $200 pre-launch promo, we project that new customers in Ohio will also be eligible to receive DraftKings’ standard two-part new-user bonus when sports betting launches. This will be available to Ohio users starting Jan. 1.

The first part of the bonus is a $50 free bet with a first deposit of at least $5. Additionally, DraftKings will provide a 20% matching bonus on your first deposit, up to $1,000. For example, if you deposit $100 into your account, you’ll get an additional $20 in bonus funds from DraftKings plus the $50 free bet.

We anticipate this to be available for both Ohio pre-launch users and users who did not sign up for the pre-launch offer. So whether you have the $200 in free bets from the pre-launch offer or not, you will qualify for the 20% deposit matching bonus and the $50 free bet with a minimum first deposit of $5.

If you redeem the pre-launch offer, you could have access to up to $1,250 in bonuses from DraftKings (plus a chance at a $100K free bet.) Click here to sign up and get started.

Ohio sports betting update ahead of NFL Week 15

As the clock winds toward launch, the Ohio Casino Control Commission is approving sportsbooks to operate in the state. There could be as many as 25 online sportsbooks in Ohio on the Jan. 1 launch day. The state has approved DraftKings for a Type A (mobile) license to offer online sports betting via a partnership with Hollywood Casino Toledo.

In addition to betting on professional sports, the Ohio Casino Control Commission also permits betting on in-state and out-of-state college teams. The Ohio State Buckeyes will be playing the No. 1-ranked Georgia Bulldogs in the College Football Playoff on Dec. 31. A win for the Buckeyes there would take them to the CFP national championship game on Jan. 9, and Ohio sports fans would be able to bet on the title game.

The post DraftKings Ohio Promo Code and Pre-launch Offer: $200 No-deposit Bonus appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The MD sports betting market soft-launched for online operators on Nov. 21 , but BetMGM took online wagers as early as Nov. 16, according to the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Commission, which issued the largest fine in its 49-year history during a settlement meeting Thursday.

More than 140 mobile bets were placed on BetMGM’s platform during a three-hour window it operated without a license, according to BetMGM.

It sent the following message to customers who bet too early:

Wrong Maryland sports betting link

The operator attempted to explain how the improper wagers happened.

“At the time, we were going through the checks for our controlled demo that would start next week,” Roman Rubas, Director of Technical Governance said during the meeting. “One of those links got redirected in production, instead of being brought back to the splash page that said ‘it’s showtime, you’ll be able to wager soon,’ they were actually redirected to the sportsbook.”

BetMGM Compliance Officer Rhea Loney told commissioners the sportsbook has “learned its lesson” and is taking the proper precautions to ensure early betting does not occur before launch in more states.

The consent agreement prevents a formal hearing that could have resulted in a larger fine. Previously the largest settlement agreement the commission handed out was $5,000, according to Seth Elkin, a spokesperson for the commission.

Call for crackdown on wonky tech

Not every commissioner was satisfied.

“$146K may be the largest penalty that we’ve ever levied against a company, but I see that no more powerful than a slap on the hand,” said commissioner Harold Hodges, who called on the commission to reform its policies as more operators run into technical issues, such as the widespread hacking that occurred over the past few months.

His request to table the vote for a later date was denied by the commission. He was the only commissioner who voted to oppose the settlement agreement with BetMGM.

Will error affect BetMGM MA license?

Also on Thursday, Massachusetts sports betting regulators voted to delay a vote on BetMGM’s retail license, as they opted to spend more time reviewing Caesars’ license first.

Questions about BetMGM’s Maryland violations could come up during its upcoming hearing, as the Massachusetts Gaming Commission has been particularly thorough in its review of potential operators.

The post BetMGM Fined For Maryland Sports Betting False Start appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Get Up to $1,250 + Credits at Caesars Sportsbook

1

Visit Caesars Sportsbook

Up to $1,250

On Caesars

Caesars Sportsbook Review

Stream NFL Games In App For Free

+ get 1,000 Caesars Reward Credits

+ also get 1,000 Tier Credits

Redeem for free bets, hotel stays, & more!

Use Promo Code: LEGALFULL

PLAY NOW

Caesars promo code for Thursday Night Football

Enter the Caesars Sportsbook promo code LEGALFULL on the registration page when you sign up for a Caesars account, and you’ll be eligible for a first bet on Caesars for up to $1,250.

That means that if your first bet at Caesars loses, you’ll receive a refund as a single free bet, up to a limit of $1,250. If your first bet at Caesars wins, you’ll receive your winnings as you would with any other wager.

Under the terms of the promo, if you receive a free bet refund, you’ll need to wager it within 14 days; otherwise it will expire. For a wager with the free bet, be aware that any potential payout will not include the original stake (for example, a $10 free bet at odds of +120 would stand to win you a total return of $12, not $22).

If you’re located in Maryland, the newest addition to Caesars’ roster of states, you’re eligible for a separate welcome bonus, which you can access by signing up with a different promo code: LEGALPICS. Under this promo, if your first bet at Caesars is more than $100, it’s eligible for a free bet in refund if it loses, up to $1,500 (same terms and conditions as the promo above.) However, if your first wager is for $100 or less, your bonus is a $100 free bet, win or lose.

To claim the Caesars welcome bonus, you must be in a state where Caesars is legal, and you must be of legal betting age in that state.

Caesars Thursday Night Football preview

Kyle Shanahan and the San Francisco 49ers are in an unexpected position with injuries wrenching the spotlight onto rookie QB Brock Purdy, who put in an admirable shift in the 49ers’ 35-7 win over Tampa Bay on Sunday. Now, though, with only a short break, Purdy will need to do it again at Lumen Field in Seattle, with the Seahawks hoping to make things interesting at the top of the NFC West.

The Seahawks lost 30-24 to the Panthers on Sunday and will be seeking a bounce-back to stop the 49ers from sealing up the division title. The 49ers will be without star WR Deebo Samuel, who sustained damage to his left ankle and MCL in Sunday’s win against Tampa Bay.

At Caesars, the 49ers are 3.5-point favorites, with moneyline odds of San Francisco -190, Seattle +158. The over/under on Thursday night’s game is 43.5 points, and Caesars also has plenty of prop and parlay options, including odds on the first touchdown scorer, with the current favorites being Christian McCaffrey (+285), Tyler Lockett (+675) and Brandon Aiyuk (+700).

How to sign up with Caesars Sportsbook

To make an account at Caesars Sportsbook and claim the welcome bonus, follow the steps below:

• Click on one of the links on this page to access the Caesars Sportsbook site.
• Find the sign-up button and fill out the form with your personal information to register for an account. Enter the code LEGALFULL or LEGALPICS (in Maryland) to qualify for the welcome bonus.
• Choose a payment method and make your first deposit (Caesars has a $20 minimum deposit).
• Make your first wager and claim whichever welcome bonus you’re eligible for (see details above).

The post Caesars Sportsbook Promo Code for TNF: Bet Insurance Bonus appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

DraftKings promo code for Thursday Night Football

There’s no code necessary to claim the sign-up bonus at DraftKings Sportsbook. Head to the DraftKings site via a DraftKings promo code link on this page, find the sign-up button, and create an account. Once you’ve filled out the registration form, your new account will automatically qualify for whichever welcome bonus applies in your area.

For most users, the welcome bonus will match your first deposit at a rate of 20%, up to $1,000. And on top of that, with a minimum first deposit of $5, you’ll also receive a $50 free bet. That means that a $100 first deposit would net you $20 in bonus funds plus the $50 free bet.

For bettors in Maryland, where online sports betting recently became available, the DraftKings welcome bonus is a “bet $5, get $200” offer, which nets you $200 in free bets when you make a wager of $5 or more with your new DraftKings account. It doesn’t matter if your bet wins or loses; you get the free bets just for wagering.

You won’t be able to withdraw those free bets, and you’ll need to wager them within seven days or they’ll expire. Any winning wagers that you place with free bets do not include the original amount of the free bet in the payout.

To claim the DraftKings welcome bonus, you must be in a state where DraftKings is legal, and you’ll need to be of legal betting age in that state.

DraftKings Thursday Night Football preview

This week’s Thursday Night Football game sees the San Francisco 49ers visit the Seattle Seahawks, live from Lumen Field at 5:15 pm Pacific Time (8:15 Eastern.)

On Sunday, rookie QB Brock Purdy stepped up for the 49ers in a 35-7 win over the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. With only a few days’ turnaround, Purdy will be asked to perform in a crucial matchup with major implications for the NFC West. The 49ers currently lead the division with a 9-4 record, while the Seahawks are second at 7-6.

Though Kyle Shanahan’s team has some injury concerns including wide receiver Deebo Samuel, a San Francisco win on Thursday night would see the 49ers clinch the division. The Seahawks, however, will be determined to bounce back after a 30-24 loss at home to the Carolina Panthers on Sunday.

DraftKings has San Francisco as a 3.5-point favorite, with moneyline odds on the game at 49ers -175, Seahawks +150. The over/under is 43.5 points.

How to sign up DraftKings Sportsbook

To sign up for an account at DraftKings Sportsbook and claim the welcome bonus that applies in your state, follow the steps below:

• Follow one of the DraftKings promo code links from this page to the DraftKings Sportsbook site.
• Click the sign-up button, and then add your personal information to the registration form to create your account. You’ll be asked to confirm your identity.
• Select one of the available payment methods at DraftKings, and make your first deposit ($5 minimum). Depending on your location, your first deposit may be eligible for a 20% deposit match and a $50 free bet (see details above).
• Make any wager of $5 or more and receive $200 in free bets, win or lose (Maryland only).

The post DraftKings Promo Code For Thursday Night Football: Bet $5 Get $200 appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

World Cup Final Odds

France vs. Argentina, Sunday, 10 a.m. ET

• Spread: France (), Argentina ()
• Moneyline (Regular Time): France (), Argentina ()
• Total:

For a team that began this tournament missing some major players due to injury, France has never seemed to be lacking in star-power throughout this World Cup. Kylian Mbappe has lived up to his reputation as one of the best goalscorers in the sport at the moment, and his five goals so far are good for a tie with Argentina’s Lionel Messi in the race for the Golden Boot. But Les Bleus have also gotten great performances out of Olivier Giroud, who’s scored four goals, as well as Antoine Griezmann, who’s created more scoring opportunities than any other player in the tournament.

France’s game often hinges on the team’s quick-strike ability on the counter rather than on controlling possession of the ball throughout a match. This should make for an interesting stylistic test against Argentina, which had to be encouraged by seeing how heavily Morocco managed to pressure France late in the semifinal match.

It’s no secret that Messi is Argentina’s greatest threat. Teams have to keep a close eye on him at all times, since you never know when he’ll go from idly walking to exploding into a dangerous scoring position. Argentina needs to control the pace of this match and avoid overcommitting on the attack. At the same time, it can’t fall back into a defensive shell, since France has so many scoring threats to choose from once it gets the ball in an opponent’s end.

It wouldn’t be a surprise to see this match go into extra time or penalty kicks in order to settle on a winner, which is especially important to note when betting on a team to win within regulation time. These two teams are so evenly matched, and three of the last four World Cup final matches have been decided in either an additional extra period or penalty kick shootouts. France hasn’t gone beyond the 90 minutes of regulation play so far in this tournament, while Argentina eliminated the Netherlands on penalty kicks to advance in the quarterfinals.

Other Betting Options For France vs. Argentina

Odds to Score a Goal

The favorites to score at some point in this match are Messi (+175 on FanDuel, as of Thursday) and Mbappe (+210). Also worth considering is Giroud at +310.

Both Teams to Score

These are two potent offenses going up against one another, and both have given up goals even in matches they’ve otherwise dominated. As of Thursday, FanDuel was offering +100 odds on both teams to score at least once in this match.

First Half Total

Neither of these teams has been an especially fast starter, and neither will want to make a mistake early on and end up playing from behind. Current odds have the first half total at , indicating an expectation of a somewhat conservative start.

The post World Cup 2022 Final Odds: France vs. Argentina appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The 49ers are on the road to take on the Seahawks in a crucial NFC West clash for Thursday Night Football, and BetMGM has a promo offer ahead of the game. New users can sign up and create an account with the BetMGM bonus code PLAYBONUS50 to receive a risk-free first bet up to $1,000, plus a $50 free bet. Read on for more details on the offer.

$1,000 Risk Free Bet + $50 Free After First Wager

1

Visit BETMGM Sportsbook

$1,050 Bonus

Exclusive Special

BETMGM Sportsbook Review

Exclusive BetMGM Promo: 

$1,000 Risk Free Bet 

PLUS $50 Free after First Bet

Use Bonus Code: PLAYBONUS50

PLAY NOW

BetMGM bonus code for Thursday Night Football

New users who sign up for a BetMGM Sportsbook account using the BetMGM bonus code PLAYBONUS50 can claim a risk-free first bet good for up to $1,000, plus an additional $50 free bet to use on a future wager.

This means, for instance, that if you sign up for a new BetMGM account and for your first wager you make a $100 moneyline bet on the 49ers to beat the Seahawks on Thursday night, and instead the Seahawks prevail, BetMGM will refund that bet with $100 in free bets, plus another $50 free bet to use later.

The offer is good for a first wager of any amount up to $1,000. You can use the free bets on wagers in any sport of your choice, but they expire if you don’t use them within seven days. The promo is only available to new users. You must be in a state where BetMGM is available and of legal betting age in that state. To use the BetMGM app, you must enable geolocation on your mobile device.

BetMGM Sportsbook Thursday Night Football preview: 49ers vs. Seahawks

The 49ers bring a six-game winning streak into Seattle for this week’s Thursday night showdown, but they’re without quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo, who suffered what could be a season-ending foot injury against the Dolphins in Week 13. Brock Purdy has been a strong backup in his one game so far, guiding the team to a 35-7 trouncing of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers last week, but now he too is banged up and listed as day-to-day on this short practice week.

The Seahawks are coming off a 30-24 loss to the Panthers on Sunday that marked their third defeat in four games. Seattle is currently sitting two games behind the 49ers in the NFC West and would love to make up some of that ground with a win over a diminished San Francisco squad that’s also missing receiver Deebo Samuel for at least the next couple of weeks.

The big problem of late for the Seahawks, on both sides of the ball, has been the run game. The defense has struggled to stop opposing running backs, allowing a total of 838 yards on the ground in the last four games, with opponents averaging 5.14 yards per carry in that span. Meanwhile, Seattle’s own rushing attack hasn’t cracked 100 yards in a game even once over that same period, with the Panthers holding the Seahawks to just 46 yards last week.

BetMGM Sportsbook currently has the 49ers as 3.5-point favorites. The moneyline has the Seahawks at +150, with the 49ers at -185, and the total is 43.5 points. BetMGM also offers player props, odds on first-half point totals and more.

How to sign up with BetMGM bonus code

• Head to the BetMGM Sportsbook site.
• Sign up for a new account with the BetMGM bonus code PLAYBONUS50 and fill out the necessary personal information.
• Select a deposit method and add money to your account.
• Your first bet will then qualify for the above promotion, plus the additional $50 promo

The post BetMGM Bonus Code for Thursday Night Football: $1,050 in Promo Offers appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Prop 27 received just 18% of the vote, meaning the earliest the state could legalize CA sports betting would be 2024. However, given the increasingly frosty relationship between the sides, a path to legalization two years from now remains murky at best. 

“I am not about looking in the past, but in order to stop repeating that behavior, we as an industry have to sit down as co-equals with the tribes, and work out a solution,” lawyer and lobbyist Bill Pascrell III told LSR at the NCLGS conference in Las Vegas. 

“If that doesn’t happen, they could bring back sports betting on the ballot two years from now, four years from now, it’s going to fail again. The tribes need to be respected.” 

Tribes have leverage

After scoring a resounding victory in maintaining the status quo, and preventing the likes of FanDuel, DraftKings and BetMGM from entering the market, tribes gained significant leverage. 

“The key takeaway from the election is that any future gaming expansion in California must go through the tribes,” San Manuel chief intergovernmental affairs officer Dan Little told LSR in November. 

The tribes also do not want to be viewed as co-equals with the operators. 

“Inviting the DraftKings, the FanDuels, etc., as subservient partners — subservience isn’t the issue,” Pechanga chairman Mark Macarro said in October. “It’s that they would be sitting essentially in parity with tribes in figuring out legalization. That’s not our goal, how do we bring these folks in so that we can legalize together? No.”

CA sports betting on tribal agenda

While sports betting has been an agenda item in recent CA tribal meetings, the conversations will expand during the all-tribes meeting in February. 

CA has 110 tribes, many of whom have different interests when it comes to gaming. It will be tough attempting to get everyone on the same page. 

“When will California have sports betting? My gut instinct says 4-6 years. The tribes are in no hurry. They can play defense forever,” Indian Gaming Association chairman Victor Rocha tweeted. 

Why Prop 27 failed

San Manuel contributed over $100 million in opposition of Prop 27. On a tribal panel, Little provided the tribal perspective of why it failed so miserably:

• Prop 27 was poorly crafted 
• Thinly veiled attempt to convince voters that the measure would provide a “solution to homelessness” 
• Commercial operators failed to understand the strong partnerships tribes have with Californians 
• Very favorable tax rate (with generous deductions) which would have resulted in 90% of the profits sent out of California 

“I thought the approach to California by the industry was a fool’s errand,” Pascrell said. “I’m a big proponent of the industry, but my counsel to many of the major operators was don’t proceed in California — and this was advice I gave them 2-3 years ago — without sitting down, locking the door, and working with the tribes for a solution.” 

Tribes concerned over iGaming

Ttribes are most concerned about the expansion of online casino gaming, which could cut into their retail casino revenues. The operators would have to show them data to defuse those cannibalization concerns. 

“Some in the industry are saying, ‘Well, the tribe’s ballot referendum (Prop 26) lost too. The tribes didn’t care,’” Pascrell said. 

“How do you justify some of these companies that still aren’t turning a profit spending $400-$500 million and starting out at 32% of the poll, and ending up at 16%? What politician is going to stick their neck out to provide other solutions?” 

Potential CA sports betting solutions

A potential solution could come via a tribal-led online initiative that includes in-person registration. Tribes or operators could look to file a 2024 initiative by the end of summer 2023, where they would not begin gathering signatures until fall. 

CA tribes would also be enthused, industry insiders believe, by commercial operators serving as tech providers. That would be a B2B model where tribes, operators and state would each receive a third of the pie. Yet it is not clear if sportsbooks would be amenable to that scenario. 

At this point, it is hard to envision a legislative compromise. Yet one casino executive believes that is the most likely endgame.

“Until (the tribes) get on the same page and get behind something legislatively, I think that’s what needs to happen,” Caesars CEO Tom Reeg told LSR in November. 

Operators must make better case

Pascrell believes preliminary conversations with the tribes — which could even be 1-on-1 — should begin around the start of the new year. Regardless, whenever those talks take place, the approach needs to be different. 

Tribes, operators and legislators need to be pulling in the same direction. 

“The gaming industry still doesn’t understand politics. There’s (110) federally-recognized tribes in California — (60) of which opposed the ballot referendum,” Pascrell said.  

“Those (60) tribes have a large number of constituents that listen to the tribal chief in terms of who to vote for. That’s a built-in base. Who does the industry have? Major League Baseball was the best we could do?

“We have a good case to make to the tribes,” Pascrell added. “We just haven’t made it properly.” 

The post Lobbyist: CA Sports Betting Push Needs Overhaul appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Schuler said potential illegal gambling activity by PlayUp was discovered during the licensing suitability process. The notice was accompanied by a cease and desist to both PlayUp and technology partner Potent Games.

PlayUp requested a hearing on the matter after which the commission will vote on potential action. Christian Goode, CEO of the SPAC in talks to take PlayUp public, had no comment when reached by LSR.

PlayUp was not the only hopeful Ohio sports betting operator to get bad news Wednesday. PENN Entertainment‘s Barstool Sportsbook was notified of a potential $250,000 fine for alleged violations of the commission’s rules against advertising at Ohio colleges and advertising to people under 21.

Details on PlayUp, Barstool issues

There were three specific alleged issues with PlayUp, according to the notice sent to the company provided by the OCCC:

1. PlayUp has one or more disqualifying violations of accepting illegal wagers from individuals in the US after April 16, 2015, through its slots+ product.
2. Violations of conducting, participating in the conduct, or facilitating the conduct of the slots+ product in Ohio or through affiliates. That includes sports betting, games of chance and casino gaming.
3. Engaging in false, deceptive, misleading, or otherwise impermissible advertising by advertising the slots+ product as legal in Ohio.

Barstool, meanwhile, advertised the Barstool Sportsbook and its pre-registration promos during the Barstool College Football Show that was either “on, or targeting the area of,” the University of Toledo‘s campus on Nov. 15. The same show also targeted persons under the age of 21 by encouraging the audience to take advantage of the promotions.

Bad timing for Barstool Ohio violation

The alleged violation by Barstool sounds like what some commissioners with the Massachusetts Gaming Commission are worried about:

I also want to emphasize as we head in toward our universal start date that all applicants and eventual licensees must comply with the law,” Schuler said. “Unfortunately, staff was compelled to issue a notice of violation to Penn Sports Interactive, doing business as Barstool Sportsbook, for alleged violations of the commission’s rules against advertising on or targeting the area of an Ohio college or university campus as well as its rule against targeting individuals under the age of 21.”

Like PlayUp, the OCCC will eventually vote on any final action to be taken against PENN. Schuler did not say if PENN requested a hearing, though he noted it is entitled to one.

Barstool already has been granted conditional approval by the OCCC.

PlayUp going public hits a snag

This potential denial in Ohio might not even be the biggest news concerning PlayUp this month.

IG Acquisition Corp and PlayUp entered an amended agreement that says neither company is exclusively bound to negotiate with each other, according to an 8K issued last week.

IGAC said there has been a delay in getting audited financial results from PlayUp and also noted difficulty to secure financing in current market conditions.

Either company is now free to find other partners. A proposed combination with either company and a new third-party partner would immediately end the acquisition talks between PlayUp and IGAC.

Four Ohio sports betting operators approved

There were four more sports betting operators approved for a Jan. 1 launch at Wednesday’s meeting, pushing conditionally approved mobile sportsbooks to 20:

• BallyBet: Launching mobile and retail through the Cleveland Browns.
• Betway: Launching a second-skin mobile app through Boyd‘s Belterra Park.
• Out The Gate: Launching mobile and retail through the SPIRE Institute.
• Underdog Sports: Launching mobile through the Cincinnati Reds.

Lori’s Roadhouse and J&J Ventures Gaming of Ohio received Type B and Type C proprietor licenses, respectively. The most recent licensing update from the OCCC as of Nov. 16 does not list a supplier for Lori’s Roadhouse.

The post Ohio Regulators Intend To Deny PlayUp Sports Betting License Over ‘Illegal Gambling’ appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

UFC President Dana White has changed his tune regarding the Nov. 5 event that has caused several sports betting jurisdictions to limit action on the sport. After initially saying there was “absolutely zero proof” about the Nov. 5 scandal, White said last week there was suspicious activity and that fight fixing is a “huge concern.”

“Huge concern. … Now that there’s an investigation and it could be possible that it happened, yeah,” White told ESPN.

Ontario and Alberta asked sportsbooks to pull UFC events from their betting menus, while New Jersey sports betting regulators prohibited wagering on events involving MMA coach James Krause. The promoter banned working with Krause Dec. 2 after the Nevada State Athletic Commission suspended the coach’s corner license based on his involvement in the Nov. 5 event.

The FBI could also be involved in an investigation into the Nov. 5 event, according to ESPN.

Ongoing investigation into Nov. 5

Multiple regulators and sportsbooks raised concerns following the Nov. 5 UFC match that saw Shayilan Nuerdanbieke knock out Darrick Minner in the first round. The Krause-coached Minner failed to disclose injuries prior to the bout and rumors began circulating.

Prior to the event, heavy money was bet on Nuerdanbieke and for the bout to last fewer than 2.5 rounds. Multiple sportsbooks reportedly reported suspicious activity, and sports betting integrity firm U.S. Integrity told LSR it cannot comment on ongoing investigations.

Krause, a former fighter, is a known sports bettor and ran now-defunct sports betting Discord and YouTube channels. Along with the UFC banning working with Krause, the promotion released Minner. Minner will face NSAC disciplinary action Wednesday, according to ESPN.

White warns insiders on UFC betting

In October, the UFC changed its code of conduct to prohibit fighters, coaches and team members from betting on the UFC.

In the interview with ESPN last week, White said the organization has always told fighters to stay away from gambling.

“In every sport, somebody thinks they’re smarter than everybody else when really they’re the dumbest guy in the room,” White told ESPN. “And you will get caught — you will get caught and you will go to prison. It is what it is. If you’re that dumb and you’re willing to take that risk for money. Ruin your life for money.

We can tell people until we’re blue in the face. Same thing as steroids, performance-enhancing drugs. ‘Don’t do it, USADA is testing, you’re gonna get caught.’ But this is a whole other level. … If you’re that stupid, have fun in prison.”

Alberta reinstates UFC betting

Alberta regulators pulled sports betting from their approved sports Dec. 3, following Ontario regulators doing so Dec. 2.

Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis is already satisfied with the UFC’s efforts to solidify its integrity. The regulator reinstated UFC betting Friday.

“With the recent announcement by the UFC that Krause, his managers and fighters will not be permitted to participate in UFC events, pending Nevada State Athletic Commission’s investigation, Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis (AGLC) has reinstated UFC betting markets on PlayAlberta.ca,” AGLC Communications Manager Karin Campbell wrote in an email to LSR.

“Protecting consumers in Alberta is of the utmost importance to AGLC. We will remain vigilant in monitoring the situation and ensure players continue to have safe and secure gaming opportunities on Play Alberta.”

Ontario still waiting for more

Unlike its counterpart in Alberta, the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario is still waiting for more assurances the UFC can guarantee its integrity before allowing Ontario bettors to wager on the events again.

“The AGCO is aware of UFC’s recent statement and is encouraged by their commitment to integrity,” an AGCO spokesperson wrote in an email to LSR Monday. “Protecting the betting public by providing the necessary safeguards against the risk of insider betting on event and wagering integrity are a high priority to the AGCO.

“We recognize the recent steps taken and are committed to engaging with Ontario’s gaming industry, UFC, the OLG, and iGaming Ontario to ensure that the UFC has the necessary betting integrity framework in place, in particular relating to wagering by UFC insiders.”

The post UFC President Bends On Suspicious Activity, Provinces Split On Integrity Efforts appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission on Tuesday voted unanimously to grant WynnBet an online sports betting license, after more than six hours of reviewing its app and accessing its economic benefit to the Commonwealth.

Under a bill signed by Gov. Charlie Baker in August, MA sports betting law allows up to 15 online sports betting apps, six of which must be partnered with one of three state casinos. Earlier this week, Encore Boston Harbor, WynnBet’s retail partner, became the first casino cleared for in-person sports betting.

Start date still unknown

Based on commentary from Tuesday’s meeting and from earlier meetings, the earliest Massachusetts might allow legal online sports betting is March 2023.

If the the meticulous nature in which commissioners have spent on reviewing first designated operators is any sign, it may take even longer.

Before it squares away an official start date, the MGC still needs to review Plainridge Park Casino and MGM Springfield, which are partnered with sports betting apps owned by their parent companies, Barstool Sportsbook and BetMGM.

Caesars, MGM and Barstool to come in Massachusetts sports betting

Caesars Sportsbook‘s application was on Tuesday’s agenda as well, though commissioners opted to focus on just WynnBet instead. With WynnBet now off the board, Caesars is the sole item on the agenda for their Dec. 14 meeting.

The MGC will convene Dec. 15 as well, when it should resume its review of BetMGM and Barstool Sportsbook retail partners. WynnBet and each operator approved after it will pay the state a $5 million licensing fee.

Once each retail entity and its online partners receive approval, the MGC should move on to the seven online sports betting licenses that do not require partnerships with an in-state gaming property. Several of those, including a spot Boston-headquarted DraftKings is vying for, are still up for grabs.

The post WynnBet Gets First Online Massachusetts Sports Betting License appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

While the sale of a gaming property may not automatically scream ‘important sports betting news,’ in this case, it is worth noting that the Havenick family are the owners of West Flagler Associates. West Flagler Associates is the Florida-based gaming entity that sued both the Governor of Florida, in a lawsuit that was dismissed, and the Department of Interior over the 2021 gaming compact that was negotiated between Governor Ron DeSantis and the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

The announcement is perhaps most interesting because of the timing, as oral arguments are set in the appeal filed by the Department of the Interior over West Flagler’s District Court victory, which resulted in the plug being pulled on FL sports betting, on December 14 at the federal D.C. Court of Appeals.

What is reportedly being sold?

The report in the Miami Herald details that Magic City Casino is being sold to the Poarch Band of Creek Indians for an undisclosed amount of money. As part of the deal, the Alabama-based tribe will reportedly receive the permits necessary to operate and own the Magic City Casino, as well as the greyhound racing permit, which was issued in 1931.

While dog racing is now banned, the permit allows the operation of slot machines at the Magic City property, as well as other South Florida facilities, according to the Herald story.

The story further notes that approval of the transaction will be subject to approval by the newly established Florida Gaming Control Commission.

How that commission appeared

The Gaming Control Commission was created during a special legislative session held in association with the approval of the newly minted Compact back in 2021. In December of that year, the government appointed the five members of the Commission tasked with overseeing the Florida gaming industry.

The Commission’s staff reportedly recommended approval of the deal in a memo issued to the five commissioners, though the Herald story notes that much of the details of the deal were redacted from public view.

Despite the pending sale of perhaps the Havernick family’s most-prominent property, the Herald reports that the family is not leaving the gaming industry altogether. Instead, the family will continue operating its jai alai fronton and the Bonita Springs Poker Room.

Not so fast, my friends

Despite the positive recommendation, the Commission put off approval of the transfer.

According to Steve Schult of PlayFL, an attorney for the Seminole Tribe of Florida “petitioned the FGCC to block the license transfer.”

What does this mean for Florida sports betting litigation?

In the most likely event, this means nothing for the current litigation at the D.C. Court of Appeals even assuming the transfer is approved.

While not frequently mentioned, the lawsuit filed that ultimately took down the Florida Compact and turned the regulated Florida sports betting tap off also included the Bonita – Fort Myers Corporation, who own and operate the Bonita Springs Poker Room. This property was not a part of the sale to the Alabama-based Tribe.

It is also likely that the incoming purchasers of Magic City Casino will want the District Court’s decision upheld and could seek to appeal a decision in favor of the Department of Interior because even though the purchasing group is a federally recognized tribe, the property will be operated on a commercial basis, making unable to qualify as tribal lands under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.

You want out? We’ll see about that

Even if West Flagler Associates wanted to drop out of the suit, the federal government is the party appealing the District Court’s decision. The federal government wants to see the case resolved in its favor.

The addition of Poarch Band of Creek Indians to the mix also seems unlikely to change what seems like an inevitable Supreme Court appeal regardless of how the D.C. Circuit rules, as it is unlikely the group would want to participate in the arrangement spelled out in the 2021 Compact for the same reasons that West Flagler opposes the Compact.

Even if the group dropped out, it seems possible, at minimum, that the Bonita-Fort Meyers Corporation would continue and see this litigation to its terminal point.

So what is the takeaway for sports betting in Florida?

The pending sale of Magic City Casino would be a huge shakeup in the Florida gaming landscape.

The Havernick family has been the dominant player in the South Florida commercial gaming scene for decades now, and the addition of a new player is an interesting plot twist, especially after an initiative backed by casino magnates failed to make the ballot for November. While this move may spark more interest in the Florida market, it seems unlikely to impact the ongoing litigation over the 2021 Compact significantly.

In looking ahead at oral arguments slated for December 14, the D.C. Court of Appeals will hear from not only the Department of Justice on behalf of the Department of Interior and lawyers for West Flagler Associates and the Seminole Tribe of Florida, but also from lawyers representing the State of Florida.

There have even been two minutes of oral argument time granted to the lawyers representing the Monterra plaintiffs, who filed a similar but separate lawsuit against the Department of Interior.

The post Analysis: What Havenick Plan To Sell Magic City Casino Means To Florida Sports Betting appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Sports betting will be live in Ohio in less than a month. Caesars is offering people in Ohio a pre-launch promo of $100 in free bets on launch day if they sign up at the online sportsbook before Jan. 1.

Sign Up Early, Deposit $20, Get $100 in Free Bets On Launch Day

1

Visit Caesars Sportsbook

$100 FREE

Ohio Early Sign Up Offer

Caesars Sportsbook Review

Ohio Early Sign Up Offer:

Deposit $20, Get $100 Free

PLUS Entry to Win Cavs Tickets

Promo Code: LEGALTIX

SIGN UP NOW

Offer available in OH only. First time Sportsbook players only. Free Bets credited when OH goes live.

Caesars Ohio promo code & pre-launch bonus

Sign up using the Caesars Ohio promo code LEGALTIX and make a qualifying deposit of at least $20 into your sportsbook account. That deposit will qualify you for $100 in free bets at Caesars, available to you at midnight Jan. 1 when your Caesars Sportsbook account activates in Ohio. 

Signing up using will also enter you to win two Cleveland Cavaliers tickets. Caesars will randomly select five pre-launch customers per week to receive two tickets to a Cavaliers game. There will be nine drawings of five names each (45 total.) Every new user who signs up will be eligible for all nine drawings. 

The offer is live until Jan. 1 at midnight when sports betting launches in Ohio. 

Caesars Ohio launch & bonus details

In addition to the $100 and Cavaliers tickets, we anticipate that Caesars will also offer its standard new-user bonus. This is a risk-free bet for up to $1,250 on your first bet at the online sportsbook.

So if your first bet at Caesars Ohio loses, Caesars will refund you the full amount of your wager up to $1,250. The refund will be in the form of a single free bet that you can use to wager on Caesars Sportsbook. 

We project this offer will be available for both pre-launch users and those who do not redeem the pre-launch offer, so whether you have $100 in your account from the pre-launch or not, everyone will be able to redeem the standard first-bet promo on Jan. 1. 

Ohio Sports Betting Update

There could be as many as 25 online sportsbooks in Ohio by the Jan. 1 launch date in addition to retail sportsbooks. 

There are three licenses that entities can apply for in Ohio sports betting:

• Type A: Available for the state’s casinos and professional sports teams to partner with online sportsbooks.
• Type B: Retail sportsbook license.
• Type C: Available for grocery stores, bars, restaurants and any sellers of Ohio Lottery tickets that want to offer sports betting kiosks.

The post Caesars Sportsbook Ohio Promo Code & Pre-Launch Bonus: $100 Free appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

World Cup Semifinal Odds

France vs. Morocco, Wednesday, 2 p.m. ET

• Moneyline (Regular Time): France (), Morocco ()
• Spread: France (), Morocco ()
• Total:

France came into this World Cup as one of the biggest favorites, and so far the squad has looked nothing short of spectacular. Its 2-1 win over England in the quarterfinals showed that the team has more scoring threats than just Kylian Mbappe, who is currently tied with Argentina’s Lionel Messi as the top goalscorers in this tournament with five. While Mbappe continues to be a lethal finisher, French forward Antoine Griezmann has created more scoring chances than any other player in this World Cup, and Olivier Giroud has excelled as the man who gets free in front of the net while defenses are keying on Mbappe.

Morocco deserves to be the underdog here, but that’s a role this team has gotten very comfortable with lately. This squad has been underestimated and overlooked throughout the tournament, only to surprise foes with an opportunistic offense and a defense that’s looked almost impossible to crack at times. Morocco has allowed just one goal in this entire tournament so far, and none since advancing to the knockout phase.

One major concern for Morocco here will be injuries. Team captain Romain Saiss had to be stretchered off the field in the second half of the match against Portugal, while Naif Aguerd and Noussair Mazraoui missed that match entirely due to injuries. Morocco will also be without forward Walid Cheddira, who was sent off on a red card during the Portugal match.

Still, a strength of this team is its depth. Unlike some of the other star-centric teams in the tournament, Morocco hasn’t gotten here by relying too heavily on any one player. But against France, the defense will have to be flawless. This French team is playing with a ton of confidence, and it’s brimming with offensive firepower. If Morocco starts giving up good chances early on, that could spell doom.

Other Betting Options for France vs. Morocco

Odds to Score A Goal

The favorite to score at some point in this match is still Mbappe, who was going off at +135 on FanDuel as of Tuesday afternoon. Giroud wasn’t far behind at +195. Griezmann was listed at +270.

Both Teams to Score

As offensively potent as France is, this is also a team that will give up some scoring opportunities from time to time. It’s just a question of whether Morocco can capitalize, especially since defense has been so much of the team’s focus. Unibet and BetRivers had +133 odds on both teams to get at least one goal, as of Tuesday.

The post World Cup 2022 Semifinal Odds: France vs. Morocco appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

President of the University of Georgia and Chair of the Division I Board of Directors Jere Morehead said in August that NCAA members are “committed to resolving cases fairly and in a timely fashion, thus holding those responsible for violations accountable and avoiding penalizing those who were not involved in rule-breaking.”

Among the key changes are the following:

Enhanced duty to cooperate: Institutions, staff, and student-athletes, upon learning of potential violations, will be required to preserve information, to provide immediate access to all electronic devices, and to encourage family members, spouses, boosters, and others to cooperate in the investigation. The number of aggravating and mitigating factors in the Bylaws has been expanded to reward prompt and full cooperation and deter efforts to hinder or impede investigations.

New head coach responsibility standard: Head coaches will be held responsible for serious violations committed by those who report to them directly or indirectly. Only in determining the appropriate penalty will the Committee on Infractions (COI) consider whether the head coach promoted compliance and monitored the program. The previous infractions approach, which included a rebuttable presumption of responsibility on the part of a head coach, has been abandoned.

Additional method for resolution: A new alternative for resolving infractions cases has been added, with the aim of providing the COI greater flexibility and reserving full hearings for only the most serious cases. The new method, known as a “Written Record Hearing,” will be employed in cases in which the facts are largely undisputed and the alleged violations not numerous or significant.

Clarification of appeal standard and limitation of appeals: Findings and penalties by the COI will be affirmed by the Infractions Appeals Committee (IAC) if there is information in the record that supports the decision. Findings and penalties will not be set aside unless no reasonable person could have made the ruling given the factual record. Appeals to the IAC as to the penalties imposed will be limited to those sanctions that fall outside legislated penalty guidelines, or “core penalties.” The majority of appeals will be decided based on the written record without the need for oral argument. Finally, and as is also the case with the revised COI process, extensions of time will be granted only in extreme and clearly defined circumstances.

Aggravating and mitigating factors: The new guidelines clarify which factors apply to institutions and which apply to involved individuals. Previously, this was unclear and often debated. New aggravating factors have been added, including hindering an investigation or inhibiting the COI’s processing of a case. New mitigating factors also have been added, including a demonstration of exemplary cooperation by, for example, securing meaningful cooperation from an outside party.

Name, image and likeness (NIL): In this rapidly evolving area, the bylaws provide that if available information indicates that behaviors surrounding an NIL offer or agreement is contrary to NCAA legislation, it shall be presumed that a violation occurred.  The charged institution or involved individual will then be required to rebut this presumption with credible and sufficient information that a violation did not occur.

In addition to the above changes, the new infractions construct eliminates the Independent Accountability Resolution Process (IARP), which had been created at the recommendation of the Commission on College Basketball chaired by Condoleezza Rice. While acknowledging the panel’s thoroughness in deciding the several cases referred to the IARP, it was concluded that this new process prolonged case timelines and required substantial additional resources to bring cases to resolution.

Finally, the Board of Directors announced that it will consider additional future changes that may help to deliver timely and fair outcomes in infractions matters. Among the subjects under further consideration are (i) requiring increased documentation of recruiting efforts, (ii) adjusting the size and composition of the COI, (iii) modification of penalty ranges (including alternatives to post-season bans), and (iv) enhancing confidentiality rules for involved parties during investigation by the NCAA enforcement staff.

The Collegiate and Professional Sports group at Jackson Lewis has represented Division I institutions in infractions cases and stands ready to assist colleges and universities facing such issues in 2023 and beyond.

During Australia’s 2022 National Rugby League season, seven players from the Manly Sea Eagles, a team in the National Rugby League competition, refused to play in a jersey that featured rainbow trim. The design, called the “Everyone in League” kit, was intended to be worn by the team as a one-off to celebrate inclusivity, but it became known as a “pride jersey”, supporting the LGBTIQ+ community, due to the use of the rainbow palette. The seven players cited religious and cultural objections to wearing the jersey and, because the rules of the National Rugby League require all players in a team to wear a “distinctive” (seemingly interpreted as “identical”) jersey¹, opted not to play the match in which the jersey was worn.

The story made international headlines² and was widely talked about across Australia. Instead of uniting the rugby league community to promote inclusivity, the issue divided the Manly Sea Eagles team, rugby league fans and the general population. While some argued that a sporting club has no right to force a particular ideology on its players, others argued that wearing the jersey was just part of their “job”.

The “pride jersey” controversy highlights an important message for all organisations that want to foster diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) – even initiatives implemented with the best of intentions can have unintended consequences. With that in mind, and taking inspiration from other events in the world of sport, this article examines some interesting examples from Australia and the UAE, before suggesting some “rules of play” for organisations to follow to lessen the risk of inadvertent outcomes.

What Is DEI?

DEI is now considered a crucial element in any organisation. Broadly speaking, DEI is typically used to describe the initiatives of an employer or other organisation to improve and maintain the fair and equitable treatment of all people, including those who have historically been underrepresented or subjected to discrimination.

DEI is now more than just ticking boxes in order to comply with anti-discrimination legislation. Embracing DEI initiatives is said to enhance brand reputation, increase innovation and improve business performance. In addition, employers that embrace DEI are reported to have higher employee satisfaction levels and lower incidences of unconscious bias, bullying and harassment.

Sporting organisations in particular are embracing DEI initiatives. This is being done by introducing broad inclusion policies, or initiating specific projects to address racial equality, homophobia, gender equality, transgender issues and religious inclusion.

Reading The Play

One of the biggest lessons to come out of the dispute about the Manly Sea Eagles jersey is that consultation is key. The players who refused to wear the jersey for religious reasons cited disappointment that that there had not been consultation with the entire playing group about it being worn. It has been reported that the players found out about the jersey and their need to wear it in a media release and the boycott was not entirely about the jersey itself, but also the lack of consultation about the players’ religious and cultural beliefs.

In effect, despite the Manly Sea Eagles’ best intentions, its decision to implement a DEI initiative that would appeal to the masses was unsuccessful because it failed to consider how it might impact others who would be affected. The club has noted it has learnt from the experience and will consult players more broadly if the initiative is undertaken again. All organisations should similarly look to engage in a consultation process with a cross-section of stakeholders and, if possible, allow those who would be affected by the initiative to opt out if they do not feel comfortable participating.

On The Field

As DEI evolves, so too do expectations about the suitability of clothing and apparel that may have previously been considered acceptable. In 2021, the Norwegian beach handball team refused to wear the regulation bikini bottoms that had for years been the official competition uniform. Upon wearing shorts, rather than the bikini bottoms that were to be “a close fit and cut on an upward angle toward the top of the leg”³, the team was fined €1,500 due to an “improper clothing” ruling by the European Handball Federation’s Disciplinary Commission⁴. Following public scrutiny, the International Handball Federation determined to change the regulations to require women to wear “short tight pants with a close fit”⁵ when competing.

To embrace DEI, uniforms and other attire cannot be one-size-fits-all. Organisations should look to ensure that they do not impose requirements that do not allow individuals to embrace their culture, sexuality or beliefs. Just as Netball NSW has created guidelines⁶ for inclusive uniforms (permitting uniforms that can cover additional body surface, including the legs, arms and/or head) to create “more welcoming and inclusive netball environments”, organisations should ensure that they do not impose requirements on employees that do not allow them to embrace their culture, sexuality or beliefs.

Celebrating The Win

Following the Australian cricket team’s win in the 2021/2022 Ashes Test Series against England, Usman Khawaja, a Muslim who does not drink alcohol, left the podium when the celebrations began to involve the spraying of champagne⁷. Upon noticing his absence, several players, including the Australian captain Patrick Cummins, told teammates to put the champagne bottles down and invited Khawaja back to the podium. Millions of people watching at the time had probably never considered that such “traditional” celebrations would mean that certain players would be unable to participate.

A matter the author worked on many years ago involved a workplace complaint of discrimination made by a young Muslim woman. She felt as though she was being treated differently by her peers, saying she often felt excluded from workplace activities. One such activity was the monthly office barbeque at which sausages were cooked on the premises and served for lunch. The company had considered this activity one that would bring its employees together on a Friday afternoon, but it had the opposite effect for the complainant who ate a halal diet and did not drink alcohol. In many circumstances, such as this one, there will be a relatively simple and inexpensive way to prevent people from feeling uncomfortable or ostracised.

Reform In The UAE

Currently, the United Arab Emirates is going through a huge transformative period, in which diversity has been the focus of many organisations and positive steps are being taken from a public policy perspective. For example, this year, the UAE has seen the implementation of a new Labour Law⁸ which now explicitly prohibits various forms of discrimination, bullying and sexual harassment in the workplace. More broadly, the UAE continues to place great emphasis on implementing measures which accommodate to the needs of individuals with disabilities (referred to in the UAE as “People of Determination”). For example, the Department of Community Development ( DCD ) in Abu Dhabi have issued a “ Comprehensive Strategy for People of Determination 2020-2024”⁹, a new government initiative which is focused on creating an accessible and enabling environment in buildings, facilities, transportation, housing and other services for People of Determination.

The overlap of DEI into the sporting arena has also become more pronounced in the UAE in recent years with a number of local initiatives as well as milestone events including:

• In mid-2009, the UAE Football Association formed a Women’s Football Committee¹⁰ dedicated to creating a national team that could officially represent the country internationally.
• The participation of the first Emirati women to represent their country at the Beijing and London Olympics in 2008 and swimming’s World Championships in August 2015;
• Abu Dhabi hosting the first-ever Special Olympics World Games¹¹ in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.
• The Arab Women Sports Tournament was held in Sharjah in February 2020 had a record number of participants, with 78 clubs from 18 Arab countries taking part, while in August, the Dubai Sports Council held a football, basketball, volleyball and handball skills tournament for female athletes from the UAE, joined remotely by online competitors from all over the world due to COVID-19 restrictions.
• A partnership between Expo Dubai 2020 and Luxembourg’s Ministry of Sports which gave rise to a community event, ‘Ride Your Bike for Youth, Diversity and Inclusion’, providing residents in the UAE with an opportunity to cycle around Yas Marina Circuit in Abu Dhabi with former Tour de France winner, Andy Schleck.

Sporting bodies such as FIFA, as well as commercial brands such as Nike, have also acknowledged the striking growth of sport within the Middle East, with new regulation in respect of the use of hijab within football and the introduction of sports-based clothing lines which are “hijab-friendly”. The International Basketball Federation’s ( FIBA ) decision to lift its prohibition¹² on the use of “headgear, hair accessories and jewellery” in 2017 is another example of the shift towards more inclusive regulation within sports with players now able to wear turbans, hijab and other forms of religious headgear.

In view of the continuing growth and evolution of the UAE’s statutory framework (in relation to DEI) during this exciting period of transformation, we anticipate increased measures and efforts by the relevant local authorities towards improving DEI within the sports arena and other commercial sectors in the UAE.

The Rules Of Play

While DEI will mean different things to different organisations, some steps to improve DEI in an organisation may include:

• Ensuring that employees understand, through education and training, what DEI means and why DEI initiatives are important.
• Developing and implementing policies that promote DEI, including anti-discrimination, harassment and bullying policies.
• Involving a diverse cross-section of employees when developing workplace initiatives.
• Not forcing DEI initiatives on employees where those initiatives may contradict personally held values or beliefs.
• Looking to establish a DEI committee that is tasked with considering initiatives through a DEI lens.
• Setting measurable DEI targets around company demographics, retention rates and engagement scores.
• Revisiting employee policies and benefits to ensure that they are not discriminatory and promote a DEI culture.
• Analysing pay data to identify pay gaps and take action to close any gaps that exist.
• Making senior executives and managers accountable and ensuring they “walk the talk”.

References

¹ Section 4, Rugby League Laws of the Game International Level with Notes on the Laws and NRL Telstra Premiership Interpretations (Approved by the Australian Rugby League Commission) Official July 2022, https://www.nrl.com/siteassets/operations/the-game/nrl-international-laws-of-the-game-2020.pdf.

² https://www.nrl.com/news/2022/07/26/significant-mistake-hasler-makes-wide-ranging-apology-over-jersey-handling/, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-62301091, https://www.espn.com.au/nrl/story/_/id/34292206/seven-manly-players-boycott-rainbow-jersey

³ International Handball Federation, Rules of the Game, 8 July 2014 Ed, https://www.ihf.info/sites/default/files/2019-05/0_09%20-%20Rules%20of%20the%20Game%20%28Beach%20Handball%29_GB.pdf, Page 92.

⁴ Disciplinary Commission Imposes A Fine For Improper Clothing, beacheuro.eurohandball.com, 19 July 2021, https://beacheuro.eurohandball.com/news/en/disciplinary-commission-imposes-a-fine-for-improper-clothing/

⁵ International Handball Federation, Rules of the Game, 3 Oct 2021 Ed, https://www.ihf.info/sites/default/files/2022-02/09B%20-%20Rules%20of%20the%20Game_Beach%20Handball_E.pdf, page 55.

⁶ Netball NSW Inclusive Uniform Guidelines for Associations & Clubs 19 October 2021, https://nsw.netball.com.au/sites/nsw/files/2021-10/Netball%20NSW%20-%20Inclusive%20Uniform%20Guidelines.pdf

⁷ ‘Why Australia’s cricket team stopped their Ashes’ celebrations after popping champagne’, abc.net.au, 17 Jan 2022, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-01-17/why-australias-cricket-team-stopped-ashes-celebration/100761016

⁸ Federal Decree Law No. 33 of 2021 on the Regulation of Labour Relations in the Private Sector, known as the ‘UAE Labour law’ https://u.ae/en/information-and-services/jobs/employment-laws-and-regulations-in-the-private-sector

⁹ Comprehensive Strategy for People of Determination 2020 2024, https://www.addcd.gov.ae/-/media/Project/DCD/DCD-v2/POD-Booklet/Abu-Dhabi-Strategy-for-POD-Booklet—English.pdf

¹⁰ ‘UAE ready for women’s football’ https://www.thenationalnews.com/sport/uae-ready-for-women-s-football-1.521700

¹¹ ‘Special Olympics World Games 2019 in Abu Dhabi’ https://www.specialolympics.org/stories/news/special-olympics-world-games-2019-in-abu-dhabi

¹² Saurabh Mishra, ‘A Short Analysis Of FIBA’s Decision To Permit The Use Of Headgear’, lawinsport.com, 8 June 2017, https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/fiba-removes-its-ban-on-religious-headgear-in-basketball; see also ‘How FIBA’s “No Headgear Rule” Highlights The Socio-Cultural Challenges Of Regulating A Sport’, lawinsport.com, 19 Nov 2015, https://www.lawinsport.com/topics/item/how-fiba-s-no-headgear-rule-highlights-the-socio-cultural-challenges-of-regulating-a-sport

The post Improving Diversity, Equity & Inclusion In Sport – Lessons From Australia & UAE appeared first on Sports Shorts.

Marylanders wagered $186.08 million online from Nov. 23 to Nov. 30 (plus an eight-hour soft-launch on Nov. 21) in their first nine days of legal online sports betting, per numbers released Monday by the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Commission. That included $63 million in free bets given by online Maryland sportsbooks.

Maryland legalized sports betting in the 2020 election, though its waited more than two years for an online market. That is because of legal and bureaucratic hurdles that angered many, including Gov. Larry Hogan.

Maryland is the 10th-most populous state with a legal and live online sports betting market. For comparison, New York, the most populous state live with online sports betting, reported $603 million in its first nine days, a figure which also included promotional play.

FanDuel, DraftKings lead MD pack

FanDuel took the lead in Maryland early on, with transactions on its mobile app accounting for almost half of what Marylanders bet so far. The full handle breakdown by app:

• FanDuel: $89.9 million (48%)
• DraftKings: $69.6 million (37%)
• BetMGM: $15.07 million (8%)
• Barstool: $5.5 million (3%)
• Caesars: $3.46 million (2%)
• PointsBet: $1.6 million (0.86%)
• BetRivers: $631,175 (0.34%)

Maryland sports betting consistent with rest of country

That breakdown is relatively consistent with the rest of the country, according to a study from Vixio Gambling Compliance which shows FanDuel owning nearly 40% of the U.S. market.

Meanwhile retail sportsbooks reported $32.9 million in handle, slightly down from October, but still their second-most in one month since launching in Dec. 2021.

Promos eat up taxes in Maryland

Of the seven apps to take bets, BetRivers was the only one to pay taxes, generating $4,261 to state education.

The rest deducted more than $38.2 million in free promotional play and after payouts to winning players.

Like other many other states Maryland allows sportsbooks to deduct revenue from promotional bets, a tactic also pushed by the legal industry as a way of combating the offshore market.

Regulator: Maryland sports betting promo pace ‘not sustainable’

Maryland Lottery and Gaming Director John Martin said in a press release:

“We expect mobile sportsbook operators to continue to offer a lot of promotional wagers in the coming months as they venture into a new market and work to attract customers. There was tremendous pent up demand, and a lot of people are utilizing promotional offers from multiple operators simultaneously.

“But as many of the operators have acknowledged, this level of promotional play is not sustainable, and based on our regulations, it will be curtailed over time.”

Some states like Virginia and Colorado have changed their laws to no longer allow these writeoffs. Other states like New York outlawed the practice from the start.

The state taxes sports betting revenue at a 15% rate. A fiscal note attached to the Maryland sports betting law estimates it will raise that state between $17 million and $19 million a year in taxes. Its retail market, which went live in Dec. 2021, has generated more than $6 million in 11 months.

The post Online Maryland Sports Betting Nets Huge Total In First 9 Days appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The Buckeye State has a Jan. 1 launch date for OH sports betting. 

“I do think that the executive director being able to let the industry know that they were falling short of expectations really did improve some of the responsiveness that we really needed from all of the industry in order to meet these deadlines,” OCCC general counsel and director of skill games Andromeda Morrison told LSR at the NCLGS conference. 

“It wasn’t everyone. Just a certain segment that were perhaps a little slower in responsiveness than we had hoped.” 

What OH executive director said

In October, Schuler referred to some of the applicants as “petulant children.” That was because of their deluge of calls to the already swamped commission prior to the application submission deadline. 

As of Dec. 8, OCCC chair June Taylor said there were 3,980 sports betting licenses. 

Ohio will offer sports betting via online and retail channels, and lottery kiosks. Sixteen online sportsbooks have approval, and about two dozen could go live on Jan. 1. The OCCC will meet again Wednesday.

“Listen, I think that the executive director’s comments were just being authentic about what it has been like, especially at the beginning when all of this was new and being balanced,” Taylor told LSR, noting it’s “not easy.”  

Regulator: staff working hard on Ohio sports betting

Regardless, Taylor and her staff are working around the clock, and she doesn’t expect any delays with the Jan. 1 launch date:

“No, but we’ve got to make sure that every day and every night, we are diligent and remain focused,” Taylor said. “We’ll get some shut-eye here and there, but right now we’re focused on that date and nothing else. … We have a unique model, but regardless we’re making sure that our infrastructure can be responsive, and now we simply have to get the job done.” 

As calendar turns to 2023, Ohio residents and visitors will be able to place legal sports bets. That is significant as the state looks to boost tax revenues and stop bettors from placing wagers out-of-state, or with illegal offshore sites and local bookies. 

“It’s not about me, it’s about the citizens,” Taylor said. “And I think that come Jan. 1 the citizens are going to be pleased that they’ll be able to do sports betting in the manner they asked us to set up. And we’ll be ready.” 

Ohio sports betting projections

PlayOhio projects the state could generate $8 billion in bets in 2023. However, Taylor would not make any predictions. 

“I’m not going to speculate on that today, because I don’t want to overshoot it or undershoot it,” Taylor said. “More importantly, I’m tasked with Jan. 1 launch. So if we don’t launch Jan. 1, than all that means nothing. I want to stay in the lane that I’ve been given, drive in it, and just keep my eye on that ball for now.” 

Unfortunately, Buckeye State bettors won’t be able to wager on the Dec. 31 Ohio St.-Georgia college football playoff semifinals matchup. 

“I think it’s something that we always knew was a possibility, that they would make it, and so it is what it is,” Morrison said. “The commission needed to establish a firm deadline to give the industry something to work toward. But best of luck to the Buckeyes.” 

OH regulators prepared for challenges

The sports betting industry recently been dealing with a hacking scandal at both DraftKings Sportsbook and BetMGM. It is reportedly being investigated by the FBI. 

“Whether it’s the DraftKings occurrence or responsible gaming, whether it’s — I was just asked about 20 operators that seem like they’re ready to go — we want to make sure that any issue that can affect a citizen is being addressed,” Taylor said. “The DraftKings situation was unfortunate.

“But I think what we’ve done is now people are more aware of it. And we want to make sure that our team is prepared to be accessible and be ready to partner where we need to parter And to have conversations about things that are sometimes tough conversations like that too.”

State regulators are also hoping to avoid launch-day outages from traffic surges.

“(There’s) no overriding concerns,” Morrison said. “Just making sure that we’re continuing to get everyone across the finish line that has indicated that they’re ready to go. And then making sure that they have all of their equipment and all their required procedures in place, and tested and verified in advance. That process is currently ongoing — both through the online portion of testing those systems, as well as physical visits to the brick and mortar facilities to make sure that their facility plans are in line with what they’ve submitted and was approved by the commission.”

The post Regulator: Focus On Ohio Sports Betting Launch ‘And Nothing Else’ appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

UFC Bans Working With Coach After Betting and Sportsbook App Streams NFL Game | LSR 173

A bill filed in New York appears to be the first major fallout from the New York Times series on the legal US sports betting industry. Also, a PR stunt gone terribly wrong, movement around UFC, and an NFL game streaming inside a sportsbook app.

Full transcript

Adam Candee (00:15):             

Hello, and welcome in to episode number 173 of the LSR Podcast. I’m Adam Candee, sitting in for Matt Brown. Dustin Gouker joins me, as always, as we get you up to speed on the latest and greatest, and sometimes not so greatest, in legal sports betting throughout the United States. This week, we’re going to talk about one sportsbook potentially getting the dream stream going in its app, another operation that might be trying to solve some nightmares, and then I don’t have a good metaphor for where we’re actually going to start. So, we’ll actually just go ahead and begin the podcast by talking a little bit more about The New York Times series, Dustin. And I think we covered it in pretty good depth last week in terms of what we think of the series itself. And you and I both said, listen, this hasn’t been the greatest week for the optics of the legal and regulated US sports betting industry.

New York Times Series

(01:17):

And guess what? We’re not the only ones who noticed that. In fact, our Mike Mazzeo was at a conference and talking to a couple of executives about what’s coming in the industry and noticed something else that is coming in the New York Legislature, where one legislator put forward a bill talking about, and I’m going to put this in air quotes, “predatory” bonuses. And part of the justification for the bill is The New York Times series about legal sports betting in the United States. So, Dustin, I’ll throw it to you on this note. If you think that these things happen in a vacuum, they don’t. And when it’s in The New York Times, that vacuum is particularly loud, and people hear it.

Dustin Gouker (02:01):             

Let’s start here, too. I feel like we’ve been shouting this for a long time that something like this was coming, right? And it may not seem that bad when it starts, and maybe we can dismiss maybe this particular effort. But this New York Times piece has created a little bit of a narrative around sports betting that regulated sports betting isn’t good. And I’ve seen, I don’t know about you, I’ve seen more than a handful of knock-on stories following this story from other outlets. It was apparently on network television, or it was on CNBC coverage, I believe, recently, too. There’s a lot going on that’s come out of this, and people taking this and running with it and taking a harder look at the regulated market. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but the knock on here is that, yes, an actual state legislator, Senator Pete Harckham, introduced a bill that is targeting the sports betting industry.

(02:52):

And as we already know, New York’s not the easiest place to operate for operators, with the high tax rate and everything going on there, again, with the caveat that they agreed to that high tax rate. But this is the outcome. And if you think this bill, which I don’t know that this bill itself has a whole lot of chance of moving anywhere. It’s very vague, as Mike writes in his news story at LSR. But if you think this is the last of this, I’ve got news for you. This is not. We have been saying that all it takes is a little bit of this, and this New York Times piece, some of the knock-on media, legislators are going to start poking around on this stuff, and if you just dismiss this, do it at your own peril, I think, is the message.

(03:33):

I believe there’s going to be more pushback on all of this, and where it goes, I don’t know. And maybe it is just a small groundswell instead of a large one, but maybe we’ve been crying wolf for a long time, but now four years in, almost five, we have the evidence that everything that’s going on, all the advertising, all the bonusing, all of everything is coming to this critical mass of now there’s some action being taken around this. Now, does it stop here? Or does it keep getting bigger? That’s the question that you and I and the writers at LSR will be examining, I’m sure, into the new year.

Adam Candee (04:08):

And you get to the point there, Dustin, that we’ve been talking about an industry that needs to, one, take lessons from other markets, notably in the UK and some in Germany, I think, as well. And two, self-regulate before someone else does it for you. And that’s the idea behind this bill in New York. I’ll read the text from the bill amendment. It “directs the New York State Gaming Commission to promulgate rules and regulations regarding predatory sportsbook bonuses in mobile sports betting.” Now what does that mean? A whole lot of nothing in its current form. Mike Mazzeo, who wrote the story, did try to contact the senator and did not get a response. So, we are not leaving that out there intentionally vague. But the bill goes on and says, “The mobile sports betting industry is utilizing targeted advertising that is personally tailored to lure in new customers from right within their homes.

(05:00):

“This means that following legal sports betting in New York state, multitudes of people who are not formerly presented with these predatory practices will fall susceptible to gambling addiction that could have been otherwise avoided.” Now, you can parse out the logic of that if you want. And I think there are parts of that that don’t make a lot of sense on their face, and there are parts of it that are probably going to spark discussion. But the point that we’re making, ultimately, is this. When you have a piece like The New York Times series out there that, in some ways, is sparking good discussion, right? We talk about promo deductions and whether promo deductions should be allowed for sportsbook operators. That is a discussion that we’ve been having at LSR for the last couple of years. We’ve been having an even longer discussion about whether someone like Dave Portnoy, who just yesterday was joking about one of his employees going to rehab, should be the face of a legal sportsbook. Yeah, that’s also something that should be covered.

(05:53):

But there also was some, I’m going to say, not full information, in kindness, maybe misinformation, about the idea of pushing people into the black market, et cetera, et cetera. Go back to last week’s podcast if you want to get all that information. But what we’re saying is this. When you have the kind of scrutiny that The New York Times piece rightfully or wrongfully brought down on the industry, it just highlights things we’ve already been talking about in terms of self-regulation when it comes to advertising, when it comes to marketing, et cetera, et cetera, that the industry has, it doesn’t really feel like, paid full attention to yet, Dustin, that it could be doing a better job of.

Dustin Gouker (06:35):

Yeah. And again, I’ve said this on Twitter, and we’ve all seen evidence of this there. It’s just been a bad month for us as a sports betting industry, and I mean, us just covering it. Again, we’re not going to be inked to this PointsBet Drew Brees thing that I’m sure most of you have seen, but that’s part of it. Let’s just not bring unwanted attention on ourselves, like faking a lightning strike of a well-known person who’s your ambassador. I know most people didn’t fall for it, but in real time on Twitter, as we all know, this stuff gets circulated, and not everybody saw the video. They’re saying, “Oh, Drew Brees was struck by lightning.” OK, weird. And it’s then done to promote lightning bets at PointsBet. Come on, we just don’t need this attention, the relatively negative attention, I think.

(07:26):

My feed was filled with people who are just dunking on PointsBet for this ham-handed PR effort. Yes, I’m sure lots more people were talking about PointsBet. So, we’re really testing whether there is anything such thing as bad PR because a lot more people know who PointsBet is than they did last week. That’s for sure. So, I don’t know. We’ve been calling for some standards, right? Self-regulation is where it has, because if you don’t, then somebody’s going to regulate it for you, like this New York bill, in a way that you don’t like. The AGA has tried to bring everybody together to have standards on this, but I think, so far, we just don’t have enough of this. Let’s pump the brakes and not do this because you end up with, yeah, I mean, predatory bonuses is the language that they use because of coming out in The New York Times. Now the bonuses are what attract players.

(08:19):

If you’re trying to actually curb or get into the black market, you need to be able to give these kinds of offers. So, there’s a lot of discussion, I think, and a lot of soul searching. Because yeah, I think the knock-on effect of this is going to go into next year, and I’m not sure everyone’s going to like the outcome. Texas is going to address this. People are going to be using these as headlines. It was a talk about whether they should legalize it in Texas or any other state that has not yet. So, yeah, ignore all this at your peril and dismiss it at your peril because I just can’t believe this is going to be the end of this. This is a harbinger, I think, of things to come.

PointsBet PR stunt

Adam Candee (08:59):

I did some soul searching when putting together the rundown for this podcast about whether to give PointsBet any more oxygen on this asinine stunt, but we’ve already crossed that Rubicon. So, we might as well go into it here for a second. This is the single dumbest thing I have seen in the era of legal sports betting in the United States. Taking a Hall of Fame quarterback and making people think he was struck by lightning on a trip to Central America because you want attention is so far beyond the pale of what should qualify as a reasonable PR stunt to try to make your sportsbook more successful that it’s hard to quantify. I put it on Twitter as saying it was tasteless, it was sophomoric, it was insensitive to victims of lightning strikes. I don’t need to say that as someone trying to cross over into some holier-than-thou territory.

(09:59):

The actual organization for the victims of lightning strikes came out and said, “This is not something to joke about.” And I had someone push back on me on Twitter, someone who once did PR for sportsbooks, and say, “Yeah, but when was the last time you were talking about PointsBet Sportsbook?” OK. For a lot of people, this will be their first exposure to PointsBet. And one person on Twitter said it for me and said, “Wow, so you want me to trust you with my money, and you’re lying to me about Drew Brees as the first exposure that I have to you. Cool. Sounds good.” So, if you’re someone who says, “Well, any PR is good PR,” no. This is not good brand exposure. This is not good PR. This is an idea that should have been spiked at I can’t tell you how many points along the process, and it is not to be celebrated in any way.

(10:48):

This was horrible, awful, asinine. I don’t know how many other adjectives I can throw at it to tell you. Bad idea that should not be replicated. And Dustin already gave you his take. I don’t want to give any more oxygen to this than we just did because those are minutes of my life that I’m not getting back. And congratulations. Unless you’ve got us on one and a half speed, those are minutes of your life you’re not getting back either. Let’s move on. There are other integrity concerns beyond what we talk about with the overall industry self-regulating, right? There are some times that the industry is regulating. And in Ontario, what we’re seeing here is that there are some questions about UFC betting. UFC itself has some questions about one of its coaches after some very interesting betting patterns that resulted in an investigation by the Nevada State Athletic Commission. As you mentioned, Dustin, not, overall, the greatest optics month for the legal US industry, and this UFC story continues to add to that.

UFC Betting

Dustin Gouker (11:48):             

But at least it is an example of, OK, the regulated market is catching this and addressing it at the same time. It’s, yeah, really bad. The story about MMA coach James Krause and the betting patterns around a fight. There are terrible optics here that UFC probably should have addressed before. Yeah, Ontario banned UFC betting on the heels of this story, and then Alberta followed suit. We have not seen any US jurisdiction follow, other than New Jersey that said that any fight involving Krause should be off the board. And then, we have the Nevada State Athletic Commission coming in and suspending his license. We have UFC coming in and saying anybody who works with Krause moving forward is not going to be allowed to fight in the UFC while all of this is going on. He’s had his license pulled in Nevada. That is basically a death knell for working in regulated combat sports across the country.

(12:42):

So, yeah, there’s a lot going on here. The UFC, there’s been reporting that there’s a lot of people just sitting around the locker room, hear things, bet small amounts of money. This is not necessarily new, but it should have been stopped and cleaned up because we can talk bad things about other leagues. But they at least say this at the top, don’t bet on your sport. Stop. Stay out of it. And that has not always been the case, but they have at least taken that top line. And UFC, until recently, really didn’t try to take any kind of steps. They put out a memo saying that they should, but we’re really seeing we should be ahead of this instead of being reactive. And we’re getting, again, some pushback on regulated betting because part of this is regulation should catch this and stop this, because we caught this because of the betting patterns we saw in the regulated market.

(13:37):

So, yeah, good and bad optics here, I’d say. But, yeah, right now, UFC, people are calling into question its status as a product that should be being bet at regulated sportsbooks because of all of this around Krause. And we’ll see what the fallout is. Hopefully, at some point, it looks like UFC might have finally nipped this in the bud by basically cutting Krause out. It’s whether all of its fighters then follow suit and say, “I’m not going to work with Krause moving forward.” Basically, they have to, or they’re not going to be into UFC promotion.

Adam Candee (14:08):             

Of course, this is a subject that begs for the expertise of our friend, Matt Brown. We’ll dip back into it with him next week a bit to get his experience. Obviously, he knows UFC inside and out from many years of covering the sport, betting on the sport. In fact, Matt is producing the MMA awards this week, which is why he’s not joining us here on the podcast. So, we’ll get back into that. If you are a cheerier holiday person than Dustin and I, you want to hear something positive, right? You want to hear something good that’s going on. You guys have brought me, let me check the time, nearly 15 minutes of doom and gloom.

Caesars Sportsbook streaming in-app

(14:44):

Well, let’s talk about something very interesting, Dustin, that happened this past week. And it happened very quietly. Caesars Sportsbook, all of a sudden, had the Sunday Night Football game streaming within its app. This seems like major potential news. Obviously, we’re not going to judge all of the technical parts of this quite yet because there are serious questions about how latency of streams work and what the delay is, et cetera, et cetera. But let me just say, empirically, the idea is kind of cool that we might actually be able to pull this off in terms of getting sports that people pay attention to streamed within apps.

Dustin Gouker (15:22):             

Yeah. And I do this a lot. But let’s take a moment to think about the idea that NFL games are streaming on a sportsbook, right? That’s borderline crazy. Go back in time five years and say, “Oh, NFL’s going to be on legal sportsbooks. You can watch it on a sportsbook while you’re betting.” That’s just nuts. Again, I just think about it because I’ve been doing this long enough that it’s still wild to me that these things happen, and we’re just, “Oh, this is another thing that happened.” This one is super interesting, though. Yeah, Genius Sports teams up with Caesars Sportsbook. They have a deal with the NFL, and allow Caesars to stream the Colts-Cowboys game. They have, I guess, a handful of other games that they’re going to be allowed to stream. It’s a low-latency stream. So Pat Evans was, I know, watching it in real time on the Caesars app, and it’s well ahead of any stream that you’re going to get.

(16:11):

Probably not the same as network and cable perhaps, but it’s faster than streaming, which is how a lot of people consume TV content now. So, yeah, I’m not going to say it’s a game-changer. It’s just a small number of games. But man, that’s attractive. The big thing here is always in-game betting. You can’t really effectively bet in game on anything if you’re watching a stream that’s not low-latency in almost real time. It’s almost impossible. Or I mean, you can, but you’re going to be potentially a minute or more behind watching a stream on any of the current streaming services. So it’s super interesting. It’ll be interesting to see if other sportsbooks go to the NFL and Genius and say, “Hey, we want this, too.” How much of that they’re allowed because of, apparently, it’s low-latency and not the same.

(`17:04):

But I’d also wonder how much do people who are spending billions and billions of dollars on NFL. I mean they, they’ve said this could happen, but the more it gets adopted, the more I question like, oh, do they push back on that and say, “Man, maybe we shouldn’t be giving up these rights to all that.” So, there’s a lot to unpack. This is the first step, and we’ll see if there’s more adoption. And then, Caesars gets a pop out of this. It’s a good selling point. Say, you can bet on the game and watch it here on either two mobile devices. You can’t watch the stream on a TV. The Genius Sports deals are only for mobile devices. But to me, interesting. If I could watch a bunch of games on one screen, potentially a mobile device, and bet on another or on the same one, it’s a game-changer to me just as a consumer. I think it’s super interesting. And I’m curious what your thoughts as a regular sports bettor are, as well.

Adam Candee (17:51):             

It brings up a couple of interesting issues. First of all, the latency is, obviously, the primary issue with any of these streaming situations, right? And the wholly unscientific test that Pat Evans did showed that his Caesars Sportsbook stream was running about a minute in front of the Peacock stream from NBC. So, that, obviously, is significant. And when we talk about in-game betting in particular, that becomes very significant. And when we talk about what it means for betting inside that app, it raises the stakes quite significantly for Caesars. Think about it this way. If they have that stream inside the app, essentially what they’re trying to do is they’re trying to get you in there to watch the stream and bet on the game at the same time. Well, earlier this year, there were some product questions around Caesars when they launched in New York. And so, to me, this inherently at least should say that Caesars feels a bit more confident about its product than it did at the beginning of the year.

(18:50):

But what it definitely does say is that if you are going to pitch this as a reason for people to come bet in game with you because you have the stream of the game that they want to watch, and especially if they’re not near their TV, and they want to do this on the run. They’re out somewhere, they’re at the store, they’re in the car, whatever the case might be, I want to see delay and reject get a lot better when it comes to in game. Because, essentially, what they’re telling you is that it’s no longer a matter of, “Oh, well, you are seeing the game at X time, and we are setting the lines at X time. And the natural five- to 10-second delay and reject that’s built into most in-game bets accounts for the fact that not everybody is seeing it at the same time.” There’s an inherent message in the fact that you are streaming the game in-app.

(19:38):

That means that if you have a line that is available in-game on something that you are streaming, you better be able to get down on it what you want to get down on it within a reasonable amount of time. Yes, I realize that if someone’s betting live live, like between plays, then, obviously, there’s still going to be some measure of question about whether a bet will be rejected. But especially if we’re talking about during a timeout, or really even in the NFL where you have a 40-second play clock, if you’re betting at the beginning of the play clock for that next play, then you’d better be sharp on those in-game lines, you’d better be sharp on the product, and you’d better be working toward, at the very least, eliminating delay and reject.

(20:17):

And we know that PointsBet has talked a lot about the fact that they’re trying to get to that 100%. So, it’ll be interesting to see as you have that one sportsbook working on that part of the product, a different sportsbook that now has the ability to do this streaming. I think it brings up a lot of potential, but it brings up a lot of things where you say, “OK, if you’re going to do this, you got to get it right.” Because you’re only going to get so many chances before people say, “Eh, you know what? This isn’t worth it or it doesn’t work,” or et cetera, et cetera.

Dustin Gouker (20:43):             

Yeah. You have to have the UX of live betting dialed in or be on a path to doing that because I agree. If you’re watching it, and then you’re, yeah, you’re trying to bet over here and you get the spinning wheel or a bet rejected that, yeah, maybe you can still watch it, but that whole UX, then, just falls apart. So hopefully, yeah, you’re right. There’s a lot of proof in the pudding here of all this has to work together for it to really be a successful product. But we know from overseas that this is a game-changer, and if it gets widely adopted and other leagues and other things, yeah, sky’s the limit, for sure.

Adam Candee (21:19):             

No slight to our friends at IMG Arena who’ve had some tennis rights and some UFC rights and some golf rights and tried to work those around in-game products. But those aren’t the NFL. And the NFL will always be king when it comes to betting, especially when it comes to in-game betting when you have people engaged with that product that is the only thing that a lot of people are watching on a Sunday evening, in particular with relation to this.

A lot more over at legalsportsreport.com, on Twitter @LSPReport, on Twitter Dustin @DustinGouker. You can find me @AdamCandee, as Matt would say, two E’s, no Y. Subscribe, rate and review. I know we say it, but we really mean it. Those reviews help people find us. Those ratings help bring us up the charts when it comes to getting your news about the legal US sports betting industry. For Matt, for Dustin, I’m Adam. See you next week.

The post UFC Bans Working With Coach After Betting and Sportsbook App Streams NFL Game appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

In the study, published in International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance and titled Rapid Weight Gain and Weight Differential Predict Competitive Success in 2100 Professional Combat-Sport Athletes, the authors reviewed both MMA and boxing athletes. They looked how much weight gain each athlete had post weigh ins and the weight differential in the bouts. They then analyzed the bout results.

708 MMA athletes were included and 1,392 boxers. In short the data revealed that “each percentage body mass increase resulted in a 7% increased likelihood of victory in MMA and a 13% increase in boxing.“. The boxers and MMA athletes that outweighed their opponents won at a higher rate with weight differential being a useful predictor of victory.

The full abstract reads as follows:

Purpose: Combat-sport athletes commonly undergo rapid weight loss prior to prebout weigh-in and subsequently rapid weight gain (RWG) prior to competition. This investigation aimed to evaluate the effect of RWG and weight differential (WD) between opponents on competitive success. 

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed using data from professional mixed martial arts (MMA) and boxing events held between 2015 and 2019. The primary outcome was RWG (relative and absolute) between weigh-in and competition stratified by bout winners and losers. Binary logistic regression was used to explore the relationships among bout outcome, RWG, and WD between competitors on the day of their bout. 

Results: Among 708 MMA athletes included, winners regained more relative body mass (8.7% [3.7%] vs 7.9% [3.8%], P < .01) than losers. In 1392 included male boxers, winners regained significantly more relative body mass (8.0% [3.0%] vs 6.9% [3.2%], P < .01) than losers. Each percentage body mass increase resulted in a 7% increased likelihood of victory in MMA and a 13% increase in boxing. The relationship between RWG and competitive success remained significant in regional and male international MMA athletes, as well as boxers. WD predicted victory in international mixed martial artists and boxers. WD predicted victory by knockout or technical knockout in international MMA athletes and regional boxers. 

Conclusion: This analysis of combat-sport athletes indicates that RWG and WD influence competitive success. These findings raise fair-play and safety concerns in these popular sports and may help guide risk-mitigating regulation strategies.

New Players get up to $1,000 bonus at FanDuel Sportsbook

1

Visit FanDuel Sportsbook

$1,000

No Sweat First Bet

FanDuel Sportsbook Review

Up to $1,000 No Sweat First Bet

Available on Desktop, Android & iOS  

To Claim: Click Play Now

Play Now

FanDuel promo code for Monday Night Football

The no sweat first bet offers new FanDuel users a refund on their first wager if it loses. The offer is good for up to $1,000, and the refund comes in the form of free bet credits for use on FanDuel.

For example, if you created a FanDuel account and placed a $100 moneyline bet on the Patriots to beat the Cardinals, but instead the Cardinals came out on top, you would then receive $100 in free bet credits within 72 hours of your wager settling. You won’t be able to withdraw the credits as cash, and they expire if you don’t use them within seven days. The offer only applies to your first bet at FanDuel Sportsbook.

To claim this promo, you must be of legal betting age and in a state where FanDuel’s online sportsbook is available. To bet via the FanDuel app, you’ll need to enable geolocation on your mobile device. Claim the offer using a FanDuel promo code link.

FanDuel Monday Night Football preview: Patriots vs. Cardinals

The Patriots (6-6) have lost two straight and now sit in last place in the AFC East. The team has been relying on a strong defense and a special teams contingent capable of big plays, but offensive production has been a concern, with the team now nearing the bottom of the pack in the NFL for both points and yards per game.

This makes some fans hopeful that the Cardinals (4-8) have a decent shot to pull off the mild upset at home. While Arizona’s playoff hopes are slim, the team could regain a little bit of confidence with a win on Monday Night Football, especially with quarterback Kyler Murray back from injury.

The Cardinals defense hasn’t helped much lately, however, giving up 26.8 points per game, which is the second-worst in the NFL. If ever there was a week to improve that stat, it might be against the Patriots offense.

FanDuel currently has the Cardinals as 1.5-point underdogs in this Monday Night Football matchup. The moneyline has the Patriots at -130 and the Cardinals at +110, with the over/under line at 43.5. FanDuel also offers options to bet on first-half point totals, same-game parlays and more.

How to sign up with the FanDuel promo code

• Choose one of the FanDuel promo code links above and click it to access the online sportsbook.
• Click the green “Join Now” button and fill out the necessary personal information.
• Choose a deposit method and add money to your account (FanDuel has a $10 minimum initial deposit).
• Your first bet will then qualify for the “no sweat first bet” promo, good for a refund in free bets up to $1,000 if your first bet loses.

The post FanDuel Promo Code for $1,000 Bonus on Monday Night Football appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

To cap an exciting week of football, the New England Patriots are heading west to take on the Arizona Cardinals in a primetime matchup on Monday night. BetMGM is offering a variety of odds on this game, from standard moneyline and spread options to prop bets and parlay choices. Read on for details about how to sign up at BetMGM and redeem the new-user bonus ahead of placing your first wager. 

$1,000 Risk Free Bet + $50 Free After First Wager

1

Visit BETMGM Sportsbook

$1,050 Bonus

Exclusive Special

BETMGM Sportsbook Review

Exclusive BetMGM Promo: 

$1,000 Risk Free Bet 

PLUS $50 Free after First Bet

Use Bonus Code: PLAYBONUS50

PLAY NOW

BetMGM Bonus Code for Monday Night Football

You can sign up for a BetMGM Sportsbook account using the BetMGM bonus code PLAYBONUS50 to claim a risk-free first bet for up to $1,000 and receive a $50 free bet.

After you sign up for an account, deposit at least $10. Then place any type of wager on the Monday Night Football Patriots vs. Cardinals game. If your bet loses, BetMGM will provide a matching refund, up to $1,000, in free bets. You can use these to place wagers on future NFL games or any other sport of your choice. You’ll need to use them within seven days, as they expire after that. 

BetMGM Sportsbook Monday Night Football preview: New England Patriots at Arizona Cardinals

The Patriots enter this game as slim 1.5-point road favorites over the Arizona Cardinals. Their 24-10 loss to the Bills last Thursday marked the Patriots’ second straight defeat, and they now sit at 6-6 on the year, making this a crucial game to keep their playoff chances alive. The upside of playing last Thursday is that the team got a few extra rest days before descending into a difficult part of the schedule that includes the Bills, Bengals and Dolphins. 

The Cardinals are coming off a bye week that possibly nursed Kyler Murray back to full health after battling a hamstring injury in preceding weeks. The Cardinals have lost two straight and are 1-6 at home and 4-8 overall.

BetMGM has the over/under for this game at 43.5 points. You can bet on this total, the moneyline or the spread at BetMGM, in addition to prop betting and parlay options.

The post BetMGM Bonus Code for Monday Night Football: $1,000 Risk-Free & $50 Free appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Get Up to $1,250 + Credits at Caesars Sportsbook

1

Visit Caesars Sportsbook

Up to $1,250

On Caesars

Caesars Sportsbook Review

Stream NFL Games In App For Free

+ get 1,000 Caesars Reward Credits

+ also get 1,000 Tier Credits

Redeem for free bets, hotel stays, & more!

Use Promo Code: LEGALFULL

PLAY NOW

Caesars Sportsbook promo code

Use the Caesars Sportsbook promo code LEGALFULL when you sign up to qualify for the welcome bonus. When you do, Caesars will cover your first bet if it loses with a matching free bet of up to $1,250.

This means, for instance, that if you create an account ahead of this week’s Monday Night Football game and place a $100 moneyline bet on the Cardinals to beat the Patriots, Caesars will provide you with a $100 free bet if the Patriots win.

This offer is good for up to $1,250, and it only applies to your first bet at Caesars Sportsbook. The bet must be settled within 30 days of when you opened the account, and if you end up receiving a free bet, you will then have 14 days to use it before it expires.

You must be in a state where Caesars Sportsbook is available and of legal betting age in that state. To place your wager via the Caesar Sportsbook app, you must enable geolocation on your mobile device.

Caesars Sportsbook Monday Night Football preview: Patriots vs. Cardinals

The Cardinals (4-8) have watched their playoff hopes dwindle over the last few weeks, having lost four of their last five games. Still, after losing a 25-24 heartbreaker to the Los Angeles Chargers last week, this meeting with the Patriots at home on Monday Night Football might offer the best chance to regain some enthusiasm with a minor upset.

The Patriots (6-6) occupy the bottom spot in a highly competitive AFC East. New England’s offense is now in the bottom third of the league in both points and yards per game.

Caesars Sportsbook currently has the Patriots as 1.5-point favorites in this Monday Night Football matchup. The moneyline on the Cardinals is at +105, with the Patriots at -125, and the point total is at 43.5. Caesars Sportsbook also offers same-game parlays, odds on first-half point totals and more.

How to sign up at Caesars Sportsbook

• On the Caesars Sportsbook site, click the sign-up button and fill out the necessary personal information, using the Caesars promo code LEGALFULL.
• Choose a deposit method, and put money in your account (Caesars has a $20 minimum deposit).
• Place your first wager, which will then be eligible for a refund of up to $1,250 as a free bet in the event that your initial bet loses.

The post Caesars Sportsbook Promo Code for Monday Night Football: $1,250 Bet Insurance appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Multiple outlets reported Fanatics raised $700 million last week and now boasts a $31 billion valuation. That cash will reportedly be used for M&A. A Reuters source said the company should end the year with more than $2 billion in cash.

Whether that will go toward the US sports betting product is unknown, but it does not appear necessary at this point.

Rubin confident in market access

Fanatics CEO Michael Rubin made clear market access could still be found for the 15 to 20 states he wants to launch in by the time NFL betting rolls around for the 2023 season. It is cheaper now, too, Rubin said at the 2022 CAA World Congress of Sports:

“So people that think licensing is a problem – to be clear, it’s 30 to 40% cheaper today than it was a year ago. So our patience saved us money.”

Rubin said he would be open to acquisitions if needed, though. Fanatics was reportedly in discussions to buy Tipico, a brand with access to multiple states and an exclusive partner in USA Today owner Gannett, but has yet to garner much traction in the US. The two sides were reportedly at odds over a final price about six months ago.

Tipico offers tickets for sports betting signups

Tipico, meanwhile, signed an interesting partnership to try and gain an edge in the Ohio sports betting market opening Jan. 1.

The brand signed a multiyear deal with AEG Presents to be the exclusive sponsor of the sportsbook category of AEG-owned music venues in Ohio.

The “Best Bet Concert Series” includes 32 concerts annually where Tipico can sign-up sports betting customers on site.

MA sports betting … in a garage?

There were a few surprising notes that popped up last week during the Massachusetts Gaming Commission‘s review of three applications for retail Massachusetts sportsbooks:

• A surprising conversation with PENN about accountability for Barstool
• MGM Resorts constantly referring to an application not under review
• Missing pages from Wynn’s application. The MGC eventually did find Wynn suitable with PENN and MGM’s applications still pending

Nothing was as surprising as Wynn moving forward with its unusual parking garage mini-sportsbook, though. Commissioners were caught off-guard by the proposal in August, and it has been fleshed out to a room with 23 betting kiosks with 15-minute parking to let bettors get in and out quickly.

Commissioners showed concern over potential security issues, like moving money through the parking garage to get to and from the space. Wynn will provide more information on its plans in an executive session with the MGC.

Xpoint-GeoComply dates outlined

The US District Court of Delaware posted a two-year schedule for GeoComply‘s lawsuit against recently launched Xpoint for alleged patent infringement.

GeoComply has until Jan. 8 to specifically identify upon what Xpoint infringed. Xpoint then has until Feb. 7 to produce core technical documents and source code for any accused products.

GeoComply will have 30 days to tell Xpoint what the issues are. Xpoint then has another 30 days to counter those claims. The final claims are due to the court by Aug. 11 with Xpoint’s response due Sept. 22.

Should the issue go to trial, expert testimony is due in May and June 2024 with a five-day jury trial scheduled for Dec. 9, 2024.

Illinois latest $1B sports betting market

There are now four states that have taken $1 billion in bets in a single month as Illinois joined Nevada, New Jersey and New York in October.

Illinois sportsbooks took a record $1.03 billion in bets in October, which was 22.5% higher than last years $840 million in handle. Operators paid $16.5 million in taxes on $102.1 million in revenue, both of which were also records.

This milestone may have come sooner had Illinois been consistent with its rules on mobile registration. Signing up for player accounts outside of a casino only became permanently legal in March.

Operators can still buy their way into Illinois with the mobile-only licenses once again available after Tekkorp ended its talks to acquire Caliente.

The post Business By The Books: Is Fanatics Cash Raise For Sports Betting M&A? appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

DraftKings promo code for Sunday Night Football

There’s no promo code necessary to claim either of the DraftKings welcome bonuses. If you head to the DraftKings site from a DraftKings promo code link on this page and create an account, the welcome bonus that applies in your state will kick in automatically.

If you’re located in Maryland, the welcome bonus that you’ll receive is a “bet $5, get $200” promo. With this promo in play, your first wager, as long as it’s $5 or more, will automatically qualify you for $200 in free bets. It doesn’t matter if your first bet wins or loses; you get the $200 as long as your first wager is for a minimum of $5.

If you’re located in a state other than Maryland where DraftKings Sportsbook operates, you’re eligible for a matching bonus when you make a first deposit into your account. With this bonus in effect, DraftKings will match that deposit at a rate of 20% up to a maximum of $1,000 (for example, a $200 deposit would receive $40 in matching funds). You’ll also receive a $50 free bet when you make your first deposit of $5 or more, meaning you’re eligible for up to $1,050 in bonus funds.

To claim the DraftKings welcome bonus, you must be in a state where DraftKings is legal (MD included), and you must be of legal betting age in that state.

DraftKings Sunday Night Football preview: Dolphins vs Chargers

This week’s Sunday Night Football game sees the Miami Dolphins go up against the Los Angeles Chargers. The Dolphins were in Santa Clara this time last week, where they lost 33-17 to the San Francisco 49ers despite taking an early lead. That loss, coupled with the Bills beating the Patriots, saw Tua Tagovailoa and the Dolphins knocked off the top spot in the AFC East. Also second-place in their division are the Chargers, whose 6-6 record has them trailing the Kansas City Chiefs. The Chargers lost 27-20 to the Raiders in Las Vegas last week.

At DraftKings, the Dolphins are three-point favorites to win on Sunday night, with moneyline odds of Miami -155, Los Angeles +135. The over/under on the game is 52 points. You can also build single-game parlays with team props, game props and other options at DraftKings.

How to sign up with DraftKings promo code

To make an account at DraftKings and claim the welcome bonus that applies in your state, follow the steps below:

• Click on one of the DraftKings promo code links on this page and head to the DraftKings Sportsbook site.
• Select the sign-up button and fill out the registration form with your personal details to make an account. You don’t need a promo code. 
• Choose a payment method, and make your first deposit (DraftKings has a $5 minimum deposit).
• Make any $5 wager, and receive $200 in free bets, regardless of how the bet turns out (MD only).

The post DraftKings Promo Code for Sunday Night Football: $200 Promo & $1,050 Deposit Bonus appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

New Players get up to $1,000 bonus at FanDuel Sportsbook

1

Visit FanDuel Sportsbook

$1,000

No Sweat First Bet

FanDuel Sportsbook Review

Up to $1,000 No Sweat First Bet

Available on Desktop, Android & iOS  

To Claim: Click Play Now

Play Now

FanDuel promo code for Sunday Night Football

You don’t need to enter a promo code when you sign up to qualify for the FanDuel welcome bonus. When you follow a FanDuel promo code link from this page to the FanDuel website and create an account, your first wager is automatically eligible for the no sweat first bet. This promo means that if your first bet at FanDuel loses, you’ll receive a refund in free bets.

The upper limit on the no sweat first bet is $1,000, and any refunds will show up in your account within 72 hours of your bet settling. You won’t be able to withdraw the free bets without wagering them, and any winning bets will get you just the profit; your stake won’t be part of the payout.

Users in Maryland who register for a new account from a link on this page will qualify for a different welcome bonus: $200 in free bets with a first bet of $5 or more, regardless of whether the bet wins or loses.

To claim the welcome bonus at FanDuel, you must be located in a state where FanDuel is legal (Maryland included) and be of legal betting age in that state.

FanDuel Sunday Night Football preview

This week’s Sunday Night Football game sees Tua Tagovailoa and the Miami Dolphins face a second California team in as many weeks, as they follow up a loss against the San Francisco 49ers with a trip to Los Angeles to face the Chargers. Last week’s loss, along with Buffalo’s 24-10 win over the Patriots, saw the Bills reclaim a one-game lead in the AFC East. Meanwhile, the Chargers stumbled against the Las Vegas Raiders last week, and at 6-6 on the season remain a distant second in the AFC West.

FanDuel has the Dolphins as 2.5-point favorites to win on Sunday night. The moneyline odds are Miami -154, Los Angeles +130, and the over/under is 51.5 points.

How to sign up with FanDuel promo code

To sign up for a FanDuel account and claim the no-sweat first bet, follow these steps:

• Click one of the FanDuel promo code links on this page to head to the FanDuel Sportsbook site.
• Click on the green join button in the top right of your screen, and fill in your personal details to make an account.
• Make your first deposit (the minimum at FanDuel is $10).
• Your first wager is eligible for a refund in free bets if it loses, up to a maximum of $1,000. 

The post FanDuel Promo Code for Sunday Night Football: Chargers-Dolphins appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Here’s a look ahead at odds for every upcoming game, including point spreads, moneylines, and totals at legal US sportsbooks.

Analysis will be added as news develops.

NFL Week 15 Odds

NFL Week 15 best odds and betting breakdown

San Francisco 49ers at Seattle Seahawks

• Spread: 49ers (), Seahawks ()
• Moneyline: 49ers (), Seahawks ()
• Total:

Even without Jimmy Garoppolo at quarterback, the 49ers smashed the Buccaneers for their sixth straight win, but suffered another major blow on the injury front when receiver Deebo Samuel had to be carted off with what looked like a serious leg injury. Samuel was quickly ruled out of the game, but his status going forward isn’t yet known. Backup quarterback Brock Purdy looked solid in his first full game taking over for the injured Garoppolo, and the 49ers are holding onto the top spot in the NFC West for now. Still, losing offensive starters to injury at this rate so late in the season is a worrying sign, especially with Seattle looking to gain ground at home.

The Seahawks got trampled by the Panthers running game in a 30-24 loss that handed Seattle its third defeat in four games. The Seahawks were without running backs Kenneth Walker and DeeJay Dallas, who had been listed as questionable, and ended up getting just 46 rushing yards from a hodgepodge of sources in the loss. The injuries to the 49ers should give the Seahawks a better chance than usual to close the gap in the NFC West, but this is a team struggling with injury woes of its own of offense, and with a defense that’s fifth-worst in the league for points allowed per game.

Indianapolis Colts at Minnesota Vikings

• Spread: Colts (), Vikings ()
• Moneyline: Colts (), Vikings ()
• Total:

The Colts are coming off a bye week, giving the team the extra time it may not have wanted to sit and think about the 54-19 beatdown it suffered at the hands of the Cowboys in Week 13. The Colts are almost mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, and with three straight losses the talk on the bye week mostly centered around who should be fired and hired to avoid a repeat performance next year. This feels like a team in shambles right now. The offense is near the bottom of the league in most categories, and the team has the worst turnover differential in the NFL. Not a great time to have to face the NFC North-leading Vikings on the road.

The Vikings had a chance to lock up the NFC North with a win or tie, but got neither as the Lions stunned them 34-23 in Detroit. The already-battered offensive line also suffered another blow as tackle Blake Brandel went off with an apparent knee injury, but the Vikings still got 425 yards through the air, including a monster day for Justin Jefferson, who had 11 catches for 223 yards. Minnesota may look at this one as a missed opportunity to wrap things up in the division, but a home game against the floundering Colts could be just what the team needs to wipe away that memory. The catch is that, despite all their other woes, the Colts are surprisingly strong against the pass, allowing just 188.6 yards per game, fourth-best in the NFL.

Baltimore Ravens at Cleveland Browns

• Spread: Ravens (), Browns ()
• Moneyline: Ravens (), Browns ()
• Total:

The Ravens pulled out a 16-14 win over the Steelers but may have lost yet another quarterback in the process. Tyler Huntley, playing as the replacement for starting quarterback Lamar Jackson, was knocked out of the Week 14 game with a concussion in the third quarter. That brought on Anthony Brown, an undrafted quarterback recently elevated from the practice squad. Here he went 3-for-5 for 16 yards and led a drive that set up the field goal that ultimately gave the Ravens the win, but losing quarterbacks with this kind of regularity isn’t making it easy to hold onto a lead in the AFC North. Huntley’s status isn’t yet known, but the Ravens might have to get creative at quarterback and make some more moves headed into another divisional rivalry game this week.

The Browns are coming off a loss to the Bengals that snapped the team’s two-game winning streak. Deshaun Watson threw his first touchdown in a Browns jersey and went 26-of-42 for 276 yards through the air and another 33 on the ground, but there’s clearly still some rust to shake off and in two appearances so far he’s yet to look like the difference-maker the Browns were hoping for. The team committed nine penalties for 98 yards in a game where Cleveland couldn’t seem to get out of its own way, and this loss might have finally turned the lights out on any playoff hopes. The Browns will need to win out and hope for the best, and a battered Ravens team that can’t keep a quarterback healthy could be just the help it needs.

Miami Dolphins at Buffalo Bills

• Spread: Dolphins (), Bills ()
• Moneyline: Dolphins (), Bills ()
• Total:

The Dolphins play on Sunday night on the road against the Chargers. The team is coming off a drubbing against the 49ers, but before that had won five straight to move into second place in the AFC East. This matchup with the division’s top team, which the Dolphins beat in Week 5, will be a vital one for Miami. It needs its defense to step up against a potent Bills offense, but it might also need a big day from Tua Tagovailoa if it turns into a shootout.

The Bills are coming off a win over the Jets at home in a largely defensive divisional battle. Josh Allen threw for 147 yards and a score, plus another touchdown rushing, and the Bills pash rush hammered Jets QB Mike White to force him from the game. Now Buffalo has the chance to put more space between itself and the Dolphins in the AFC East, and a lot could depend on the Bills’ pass rush. The defense is one of the best in the NFL, allowing just 17.4 points per game, which is good enough for fourth overall. The Bills lost the first meeting in Miami early in the season, but have only lost one game at home so far this year – and that was in overtime against the Vikings. If Allen can protect the ball and the defense can get to Tagovailoa, the Bills could move closer to sewing up this division.

Philadelphia Eagles at Chicago Bears

• Spread: Eagles (), Bears ()
• Moneyline: Eagles (), Bears ()
• Total:

The Eagles clinched a playoff spot with a 48-22 win over the Giants on Sunday. Jalen Hurts threw for two touchdowns, ran for another, while Miles Sanders added 144 yards rushing and two touchdowns of his own, as the Eagles jumped out to an early lead and then pounded any comeback hopes out of their divisional rivals. The focus for Philadelphia now is wrapping up the top spot in the highly competitive NFC East and securing a bye through the first week of the playoffs. The schedule offers some help in that regard, as two of the four remaining games are against teams currently at the bottom of their divisions, starting with the 3-10 Bears on the road this week.

The Bears are coming off a bye in Week 14, which might have been a welcome break from the six-game losing streak this team is currently on. Sitting at the bottom of their division, with the worst record in the entire NFC, the Bears have already shifted into a kind of postmortem phase of assessing strengths and weaknesses while thinking about next year. That’s a tough time to play the nearly flawless Eagles. The focus at this point may be on quarterback Justin Fields, a rare bright spot for Chicago this season, and the hope that he may build more of a reliable connection with receiver Chase Claypool, who the Bears gave up a second-round draft pick in 2023 to acquire earlier this season. With a lot of help from Fields, the Bears have established the league’s top rushing offense. But they’re dead last in passing yards per game, and that’s simply not sustainable when your defense is giving up 25.6 points per game.

Detroit Lions at New York Jets

• Spread: Lions (), Jets ()
• Moneyline: Lions (), Jets ()
• Total:

The Lions continue to show major signs of improvement and have now won four of their last five after beating the division-leading Vikings at home on Sunday. Jared Goff threw for 330 yards and three touchdowns, while the defense held the Vikings to just 22 yards rushing en route to a 34-23 victory. Rookie receiver Jameson Williams is also making his impact felt, scoring a touchdown on his first NFL catch after sitting out most of the season injured. These last few weeks the Lions have made it clear that they’re no longer the league laughingstock. The defense still struggles at times, especially against the pass, but this is a team with a lot of momentum. Now they have to show that they can carry that out on the road with them.

The Jets are coming off a loss to the Bills in which quarterback Mike White was knocked out of the game twice before being replaced for good by Joe Flacco. White wound up heading to the hospital for mostly precautionary reasons after one especially hard shot to the ribs, but coach Robert Saleh said he expects White to play against Detroit this week as long as his health holds up. The Jets have now lost three of their last four after relying heavily on a defense that’s been among the best in the league. Protecting White will have to be a priority, but facing a Lions defense that’s allowed a league-worst 402.2 yards per game should make for an easier week after going head-to-head with Buffalo in a bruising defensive battle.

Pittsburgh Steelers at Carolina Panthers

• Spread: Steelers (), Panthers ()
• Moneyline: Steelers (), Panthers ()
• Total:

The Steelers snapped a two-game winning streak in the loss to the Ravens, leaving the squad tied with the Browns for last place in the AFC North at 5-8. Pittsburgh also lost quarterback Kenny Pickett to a concussion early in the game, and though he briefly returned he was later ruled out and placed in concussion protocol. That left the Steelers with Mitchell Trubisky back under center, and after a touchdown pass in his first drive he ended up with three interceptions on the day. Pickett’s status for this week isn’t yet clear, but with just 17.8 points per game, the Steelers have one of the lowest-scoring offenses in the league. Another key injury on offense could be one obstacle too many for the struggling squad.

The Panthers have their first winning streak of the season after a 30-24 road win in Seattle in which the running game and clock control were key. D’Onta Foreman and Chuba Hubbard combined for 148 yards on the ground, and in total Carolina ran the ball 46 times for 223 yards on the ground. The win pulls the Panthers to within one game of the NFC South-leading Buccaneers. Now the team looks for a third straight win as Tampa Bay seems to be stalling, and it gets to put its rushing attack to work at home against a Steelers team that’s struggled to stop the run at times.

Kansas City Chiefs at Houston Texans

• Spread: Chiefs (), Texans ()
• Moneyline: Chiefs (), Texans ()
• Total:

The Chiefs shook off their loss to Cincinnati and rolled over the Broncos, despite some poor decisions by Patrick Mahomes later in the contest that threatened to let Denver back into it. Mahomes ended up with three interceptions and three touchdowns, but the Chiefs held on to win and Travis Kelce became the fastest tight end in NFL history to reach 10,000 receiving yards. The big concern for the Chiefs right now has to be defense. Giving up 28 points to the Broncos, a team that averages just 13.8 points per game, making it the worst in the NFL by a significant margin, has to be worrying. It’ll get another shot to prove itself against a basement-dwelling team when it travels to Houston, but this is a unit that has to show it can be better with playoffs looming.

The Texans surprised everyone by making a game of it against the Cowboys on Sunday, coming up just short of what would have been only the team’s second win all season. Alas, Dallas righted itself in the final few minutes and pulled off a 27-23 comeback win, but it’s still a long way from what was expected from the 16.5-point underdogs from Houston. That should be enough to show that Houston still has the power to shock some teams if they take this squad lightly. Still, offensive production remains minimal and as long as teams protect the ball against the Texans, prospects for high-scoring games from this offense that alternates between quarterbacks seem slim.

Atlanta Falcons at New Orleans Saints

• Spread: Falcons (), Saints ()
• Moneyline: Falcons (), Saints ()
• Total:

The Falcons had a bye in Week 14 and seemed determined to use that time to establish a new order. That started with benching starting quarterback Marcus Mariota, who’s been better with his legs than his arm this season, and naming rookie Desmond Ridder the new starter heading into Week 15. Ridder will take his first NFL snap in this game, and the Falcons need him to start producing right away. At 5-8, the Falcons are technically still in the playoff hunt behind the 6-6 Buccaneers in the NFC South, but this one against the last-place Saints is a win the team has to have.

The Saints also had a bye, but still managed to stumble into bad news on their week off, as the NFL handed out a half-million dollars in fines to the team, two of its coaches, and defensive end Cameron Jordan for what it deemed a “fake” injury to delay the game against the Buccaneers in Week 13. The Saints and Jones denied the accusations, and it feels like the last thing New Orleans needs while already sitting in the NFC South basement at 4-9. At least here the team will get to play at home, where all but one of its wins have come this season.

Dallas Cowboys at Jacksonville Jaguars

• Spread: Cowboys (), Jaguars ()
• Moneyline: Cowboys (), Jaguars ()
• Total:

The Jaguars kept a whisper of a playoff dream alive with a 36-22 win over the Titans to halt the five-game losing skid on a monster day for quarterback Trevor Lawrence, who threw for a career-high 368 yards with three touchdowns. Lawrence also ran for another score as the Jaguars beat the division leaders to stay alive in the AFC South. It was a breakthrough win for a team that’s struggled on the road in Tennessee, and now the Jags look to maintain that momentum as they chase the Titans from the second-place spot in the division in these last few games. Lawrence was questionable with a toe injury, but looked fantastic in his best game yet, and even got some help from a Jaguars pass rush that finally showed up with four sacks against the Titans. Jacksonville is still facing slim chances of making the postseason, but this home game against the Cowboys should be one of the toughest ones left on the schedule. If the Jaguars can get through that with a win, they might find a new well of optimism.

Arizona Cardinals at Denver Broncos

• Spread: Cardinals (), Broncos ()
• Moneyline: Cardinals (), Broncos ()
• Total:

The Cardinals host New England at home on Monday night, and they do it amid an atmosphere of doom. The season has been a disappointment and the finger-pointing has begun. A recent report attributed scathing criticism of GM Steve Keim to an unnamed personnel staffer, suggesting he’s more to blame for the team’s failures this year than head coach Kliff Kingsbury. The team is still hoping for some positives from quarterback Kyler Murray, who’s back from injury and seems to have something to prove. A road game against one of the worst teams in the NFL might be a chance to make good on that, if only for reasons of morale and momentum as the season winds down.

The Broncos lost their fifth straight and Russell Wilson was knocked out of the game with a concussion in the fourth quarter as things continue to go from bad to worse in Denver. Wilson’s status going forward isn’t yet known, but backup Brett Rypien did come on to throw one touchdown on fourth-and-goal before also getting picked off in the loss. The Broncos remain all the way at the bottom of the AFC West and may now be in loss-prevention mode, trying to keep key players healthy during what’s left of a dismal season.

New England Patriots vs. Las Vegas Raiders

• Spread: Patriots (), Raiders ()
• Moneyline: Patriots (), Raiders ()
• Total:

The Patriots are in the Monday night game against the Cardinals this week, where they’ll face some pressure to show that they can still threaten teams with their offense. Lately, the play-calling has come under scrutiny for being overly conservative, and there’s not much indication that the coaching staff really believes the team can play from behind when the defense and special teams don’t save the day. Wide receiver Jakobi Meyers was ruled out of the Monday night game with a concussion, and the team also had to do without two offensive linemen and cornerback Jalen Mills. Their status for this week against the Raiders isn’t yet clear.

Whatever momentum the Raiders might have had disappeared in a 17-16 loss to the lowly Rams on Thursday night. Despite leading 16-3 in the fourth quarter, the Raiders somehow let the Rams come back to pull off the upset with a quarterback who’d been claimed off waivers just a couple days prior. That’s a soul-crushing loss for the Raiders, who had been on a three-game winning streak and were closing in on the Chargers in the AFC West. A game against the Rams, who entered with one of the worst records in the NFL, should have been a great opportunity to gain ground and keep the roll going. Instead, the Raiders defense cracked under the pressure and Derek Carr threw two interceptions and zero touchdowns in a loss that likely ends any hope of making the playoffs.

The Raiders now seem to be in a crackdown phase in the wake of the loss. The team just waived guard John Simpson, and defensive end Clelin Ferrell, who was a healthy scratch a few weeks ago for disciplinary reasons and then committed a costly penalty against the Rams, is also rumored to be on the potential chopping block. That feels like a team that’s already decided the season was a failure and is now trying to figure out who to blame.

Tennessee Titans at Los Angeles Chargers

• Spread: Titans (), Chargers ()
• Moneyline: Titans (), Chargers ()
• Total:

The Titans are coming off a surprising loss at home to the Jaguars in which the defense was lit up by a strong passing game and the offensive line struggled in pass protection, handing the Titans their third straight loss. Now a team that previously seemed to be cruising to another division title finds itself in a battle to hold on atop the AFC South. Titans owner Amy Adams Strunk fired GM Jon Robinson just last week, adding to the sense of volatility, and on Sunday Titans running back Dontrell Hilliard was carted off the field with a neck injury and didn’t return. His status for this week isn’t yet known.

The Chargers host the Dolphins on Sunday night, and a lot of the focus will be on quarterback Justin Herbert. He’s produced enough flashy highlights to make fans hopeful, but the wins haven’t always followed and the Chargers are probably lucky to be 6-6 and still in the conversation. The good news is that the Titans have the second-worst pass defense in the NFL, so there should be a chance to make some plays.

Cincinnati Bengals vs. Tampa Bay Buccaneers

• Spread: Bengals (), Buccaneers ()
• Moneyline: Bengals (), Buccaneers ()
• Total:

The Bengals won their fifth straight with a 23-10 victory over the Browns on Sunday after getting some help from backup receivers Trent Taylor and Trent Irwin after injuries thinned out the receiving squad early in the game. Joe Burrow threw for two touchdowns and 239 yards, and the defense held the Browns to 71 yards on the ground for a little revenge over the last team to beat Cincinnati all the way back on Halloween. Receiver Tee Higgins tweaked his hamstring in warmups and didn’t play at all, while Tyler Boyd went out with a dislocated finger and didn’t return. There’s no update yet on either man, but the Bengals seemed hopeful that both would be ready to play this week.

The Buccaneers have now lost two of their last three after a lopsided loss to the 49ers on the road, and the NFC South still seems up for grabs. Tom Brady was picked off twice, and the defense – usually a strength for Tampa Bay – struggled mightily against the run. The good news is that the team still has a winning record at home, where it will return to lick its wounds this week before heading back out on the road for a Christmas day game in Arizona. That makes this a huge game for the Bucs to regain some momentum in the division before finishing the season with back-to-back games against divisional rivals looking for a late push.

New York Giants vs. Washington Commanders

• Spread: Giants (), Commanders ()
• Moneyline: Giants (), Commanders ()
• Total:

The Giants are coming off a blowout loss to the Eagles at home and are now just 0-3-1 in their last four. The team hasn’t won a game since November 13, and that came against the worst team in the league in the Texans. It’s a startling collapse for a team that won six of its first seven games, and now its season could hinge on this rematch with the Commanders just two weeks after the teams played to a tie. Running back Saquon Barkley was questionable for the game against the Eagles, but he did end up running for 28 yards on nine carries before being sat down once the score got out of hand. Barkley has brushed off neck injury concerns as nothing more than normal bumps and bruises late in the season, but the Giants will need the league’s fourth-best rusher against Washington after he provided 63 yards and a touchdown in the last meeting.

The Commanders are coming off a bye week, which means they’ll see the Giants in back-to-back games following their rare 20-20 tie in Week 13. That result was especially frustrating since the Commanders beat New York in just about every meaningful category – passing yards, rushing yards, time of possession – but it didn’t make the difference on the scoreboard. One area the Commanders will look to improve is in penalties. The team committed almost twice as many as the Giants and lost a total of 55 yards, which helped keep New York in it. Chances are that either the Giants or Commanders can make the playoffs, but not both, making this a critical game for both teams.

Los Angeles Rams at Green Bay Packers

• Spread: Rams (), Packers ()
• Moneyline: Rams (), Packers ()
• Total:

There was really no reason to think the Rams would snatch a victory from the jaws of defeat against the Raiders on Thursday. With Baker Mayfield fresh off waivers just a couple days before the game, it didn’t even seem like a given that he’d play. But he took over after the first series and wound up leading the Rams to an improbable comeback win, including a touchdown pass to Van Jefferson in the waning seconds. But before deeming Mayfield the Rams’ savior, fans might want to wait and see how the team does against opposition that doesn’t shoot itself in the foot as often as the Raiders did. The win salvaged a little bit of dignity and maybe some hope for next season, but the Rams are still a mess in most ways that count. Now they have to head to Lambeau Field in December, which is not known for being kind to struggling visitors.

The Packers had a bye in Week 14. With the added time to rest, the team is hoping that receiver Romeo Doubs will be healthy enough to return this week after spending the last month and a half on the shelf with an ankle injury. Adding him to an offense that’s been boosted lately by Christian Watson, who had one rushing touchdown and another receiving in the Week 13 win over the Bears, could be just the lift this struggling team has been looking for. But there are rumblings of dissension over the future plan at quarterback, with reports that Jordan Love will request a trade if this isn’t Aaron Rodgers‘ last season under center in Green Bay.

The post NFL Week 15 Odds: Opening Spreads, Moneylines, And Totals For Every Game appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The study, titled The impact of concussion on school performance in Australian children: a population-based matched cohort study, reviwed thousands of childreen who had concussions and compared them to a non concussed peer population. The groups were compared on how they peformed on standardized tests and also their risk of completing high school.

The study found that the group who had been hospitalized with concussion had

• significantly higher risk of not meeting minimum standards on educational standardized tests for reading and numeracy
• 64% higher risk of not completing high school grade 11
• 75% higher risk of not completing high school grade 12

Below is the full abstract of the study which shows that even a singular concussion (those that were severe enough to warrant hospitalization) can have significant negative repercussions on educational outcomes.

Introduction: School children who sustain a concussion may experience cognitive and behavioural changes that may impact on their ability to learn, which may lead to poorer educational outcomes. This study aimed to compare academic performance and high school completion of young people hospitalised with concussion and matched peers not hospitalised with concussion.

Methods: A population-based, matched case-comparison cohort study of young people aged ≤18 years hospitalised with concussion during 2005-2018 in New South Wales, Australia, using linked birth, health, education, and mortality records. The comparison cohort was matched on age, sex, and residential postcode. Multi-level generalised linear mixed modelling was used to examine risk of not achieving the national minimum standard (NMS) on standardised tests for numeracy and reading in school grades 3, 5, 7, and 9, and generalised linear regression was used to examine risk of not completing high school years 10, 11, and 12, for young people hospitalised with concussion compared to matched peers not hospitalised with concussion during the study period. The final models accounted for available covariates (i.e. sex, socioeconomic status, non-English language background status, comorbidity status, and parental education) to derive adjusted relative risks (ARR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results: The number of young people hospitalised with concussion where a matched peer could be identified was n=1,049 for school grade 3; n=1,035 for school grade 5; n=932 for school grade 7; n=689 for school grade 9; n=1,445 for high school year 10; n=1,366 for high school year 11; and n=1,182 for high school year 12. Young people hospitalised with concussion had 30% higher risk of not achieving the NMS for numeracy (ARR 1.30; 95%CI 1.05–1.62; p=0.0165) and 40% higher risk of not achieving the NMS for reading (ARR 1.40; 95%CI 1.17–1.67; p=0.0002) in school grades 3-9, compared to matched peers. Young people hospitalised with concussion had a 64% higher risk of not completing high school year 11 (ARR 1.64; 95%CI 1.38–1.94; p<0.0001) and 75% higher risk of not completing high school year 12 (ARR 1.75; 95%CI 1.48–2.06; p<0.0001), compared to matched peers.

Discussion: Young people hospitalised with concussion have higher risk of not achieving minimum standards for numeracy and reading and not completing high school compared to matched peers not hospitalised with concussion. There is a need to improve return to learning and recovery management for young people with concussion to mitigate adverse effects of concussion on education, including potential sequelae such as early school leaving and unemployment and poverty in adulthood.

Impact/Application to the field: This is the world’s first population-based study to estimate the impact of concussion on school children’s performance on national standardised tests for numeracy and reading and high school completion

Even after retirement from competition Kedzie continues to contribute to the sport working for leading women’s MMA promotion Invicta FC. It is no exaggeration to say Kedzie is one of the few athletes that helped put women’s MMA on the map leading the way to the mainstream success it enjoys today.

Now Kedzie is taking another pioneering step in combat sports. She is one of the first women to pledge her brain to CTE research.

Leading CTE researching studies desperately need female participants. Whether it is volunteering for medical imaging and cognitive testing with the Professional Athletes Brain Health Study, or donating your brain post mortem to the VA-BU-CLF Brain Bank, or other leading facilities (like Hall of Fame boxer Eder Jofre recently did) researchers have disproportionately few female participants.

Kedzie learned about this imbalance and did not hesitate to make this significant pledge for CTE research advancement. Kedzie was kind enough to give me some insight into her thought process behind this important donation and she sensibly noted “I just thought it was the right thing to do and wanted to know how to do it, and then did it!”

On behalf of myself personally, and on behalf of Fighting Foundation, a public thank you to Jule “Fireball” Kedzie. You are a one of a kind badass! Thank you for continue to blaze trials in this sport.

Jofre, who passed away in October 2022, is widely considered to be one of the best boxer’s of all time and the only Brazilian inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame. He retired with an incredible 72-2-4 record and held the world championship across two weight classes.

Jofre suspected he suffered from CTE and decided to donate his brain for CTE research.

Rose Gracie who launched the “Gracie Concussion Challenge” in collaboration with the Concussion Legacy Foundation and continues the drive with the combat sports specific charity Fighting Foundation has helped advocate for fighters like Jofre to make this significant scientific donation.

CTE and brain health researchers continue to look for athletes to donate their brains (not just combat sport and collision sport athletes, but athletes from across all sporting disciplines) to help build a more robust foundation for CTE research. Athletes looking to follow in Jofre’s footsteps can find more information here. I spoke with Dr. Bernick, one of the key researchers studying the disease, in recent weeks who emphasized both men and women’s donations are needed to continue to strengthen the existing database.

Fighting Foundation and the Concussion Legacy Foundation have published the below press release:

SÃO PAULO, BRAZIL. (November 30th 2022) –

Eder Jofre, who died October 2, 2022, chose to donate his
brain to studies on Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE), a pathology formerly known as dementia
pugilistica. The decision was honored by his family, who announced the donation at a press conference
held on Thursday October, 20th at the office of neurologist, Dr. Renato Anghinah, who managed Jofre!s
treatment. The studies will be performed by Dr. Roberta Diehl Rodriguez from the Biobank for Aging
Studies at University of São Paulo, the only lab in Brazil equipped to perform this exam.

“Donating his brain to research to advance CTE studies is one of the best things a fighter can do for the
combat sports family,” said Rose Gracie, co-founder of Fighting Foundation and director of the Gracie
Concussion Challenge, in collaboration with the Concussion Legacy Foundation. “He led an incredible life
and furthers it with this incredible legacy.”

Jofre’s determination to contribute to research was motivated by fellow boxer Muhammed Ali’s decision
not to donate his brain when he died. #Eder was very upset with Ali!s decision. That’s when he was sure
he would do it differently,” said Dr. Anghinah.

Jofre first began experiencing symptoms of CTE in 2010. The symptoms intensified over the years,
suffering from mood swings, tremors, and limited mobility. CTE is a progressive neurodegenerative
disease caused by repetitive head impacts. It has been diagnosed in nearly 1,000 contact sports athletes
and military veterans around the world. It was first seen in boxing, which is why it was first named
“punch drunk”.

In October 2018, Gracie advised the Concussion Legacy Foundation on its Global Brain Bank partnership
launch with the University of São Paulo (USP) in Brazil. She continues to serve as a liaison to support
development, recruitment, and media efforts for the CLF Global Brain Bank and the Biobank for Aging
Studies in Brazil. In January 2019, Gracie and the Concussion Legacy Foundation launched the Gracie
Concussion Challenge to accelerate research and awareness for brain injury and CTE in the combat sport
community. Gracie continues this important work through CLF and Fighting Foundation.

About The Concussion Legacy Foundation
The Concussion Legacy Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in the United States with
chapters in Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia. It was founded by Robert Cantu, MD, and Chris
Nowinski, PhD to support athletes, veterans, and all affected by concussions and CTE, to promote
smarter sports and safer athletes through education and innovation, and end CTE through prevention
and research. CLF is a proud supporter and collaborator with the Boston University CTE Center.

About Fighting Foundation
Fighting Foundation, a charitable organization launched in 2021, focuses on the well being of boxing,
MMA, Jiu-Jitsu, and other combat sports’ participants. Co-founders Rose Gracie and Carla Duran, along
with Lawyer Erik Magraken and with the guidance of Neurologist Dr. Renato Anghinah, were driven to
action after recognizing a noticeable void in the combat sports space. Providing education, research,
resources, and treatment around the world to those that need it within the combat sports community.

The NFL’s commissioner, Roger Goodell, has historically faced extreme criticism for relaxed disciplinary decisions.¹ In 2010, Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger received only a four game suspension for allegedly assaulting a 20-year-old college student.² Many argued Roethlisberger received a lenient punishment due to his stardom even though this was a serious domestic violence accusation.³ In 2014, former Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice was depicted in a shocking video knocking his fiancé to the floor of a casino elevator with a left-hand punch to the jaw; the NFL faced significant criticism for its original two-game suspension.⁴ The league extended Rice’s suspension to six games (later vacated on appeal) only after the video’s public release, and promised to impose harsher punishment to players involved in violence and sexual assault against women.⁵ The Ray Rice controversy led the league to amend its disciplinary procedures to address domestic violence more comprehensively.⁶ More recently, the NFL and its Players Association further revised the league’s disciplinary procedures in their 2020-30 Collective Bargaining Agreement.⁷ An examination of the recent punishment against ex-Texans and current Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson, along with the process undertaken to reach this decision, illustrates the NFL’s new disciplinary process in action.

2020 Changes to the NFL Personal Conduct Policy Process

The 2020-30 NFL CBA amended the Personal Conduct Policy’s disciplinary procedures to remove the Commissioner from the early stages of the process.⁸ Instead, a Disciplinary Officer (“Officer”), jointly selected by the NFL and NFLPA conducts an evidentiary hearing and makes the initial suspension decision.⁹ In rendering a decision, the Disciplinary Officer evaluates each situation deciding which circumstances depending on the individual facts of the case merit discipline.¹⁰ Prior to the hearing, the NFL has the opportunity to recommend the terms of discipline.¹¹ A first offense involving assault, battery, domestic violence, and sexual assault will typically result in a six-game suspension without pay.¹² Second offenses involving criminal assault, family violence, or sexual assault can result in permanent banishment from the NFL.¹³ However, the policy allows for discretion in imposing more significant penalties depending on the nature of the offense.¹⁴

Either party may appeal the Disciplinary Officer’s decision to the Commissioner, who may hear the appeal himself or delegate the matter to a hearing officer of his choosing.¹⁵ Appeals are limited to arguments that the amount of discipline should be modified, and may not revisit the evidentiary record.¹⁶ The Commissioner’s decision at this stage as to the appropriate punishment is final, binding, and unappealable.¹⁷ An important caveat here is that the NFL can institute discipline regardless of criminal or civil complaint status, a factor which often deterred harsh punishment in earlier cases.¹⁸ The NFL also now offers counseling resources to victims and families, as well as the player, in cases of domestic violence, child abuse, or sexual assault.¹⁹

Deshaun Watson: A Case Study

The wave of accusations alleging inappropriate sexual behavior by Deshaun Watson put the NFL’s new disciplinary procedures to the test. At the conclusion of the NFL’s investigation, conducted by two former sex crime prosecutors, the league proposed an indefinite suspension with leave for Watson to apply for reinstatement after appropriate behavioral therapy.²⁰ After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the Disciplinary Officer, former U.S. District Court Judge Sue L. Robinson, disagreed.²¹ Judge Robinson determined that Watson’s actions were nonviolent, unlike precedent cases, and she imposed only the baseline suspension of six games.²² Additionally, Judge Robinson directed Watson not to seek massages from therapists outside of his team’s staff for the rest of his career.²³ Many criticized Judge Robinson’s six-game punishment given that her 16-page decision acknowledged Watson’s extreme pattern of unwanted sexual conduct against the massage therapists, including forced oral penetration and other non-consensual relations.²⁴ The NFL objected to the “lenient discipline” and appealed the suspension, seeking to impose its initial disciplinary recommendation.²⁵ Goodell selected Peter Harvey, a former New Jersey attorney and participant in Ezekiel Elliot’s 2017 personal conduct investigation, to serve as hearing officer.²⁶ However, before Harvey could issue a ruling, the NFL and NFLPA settled the matter by agreeing to a suspension of 11 games and a fine of $5 million.²⁷ Watson’s $45 million signing bonus was not modified or witheld.²⁸ This settlement served as Goodell’s “full, final and complete disposition of the dispute.”²⁹ Watson has since settled 23 of the 24 civil lawsuits filed against him by the massage therapists he allegedly assaulted.³⁰ The NFL’s discipline remains fully in effect despite the fact that a grand jury in Texas decided not to indict Watson based on lack of evidence.³¹

Many have speculated as to why the NFL did not go forward with the appeal of Watson’s six-game suspension and instead opted for settlement. One possible reason is that the NFLPA had threatened to take the matter to federal court and seek to vacate any ruling by Peter Harvey that would have increased Judge Robinson’s punishment.³² Although based on past federal court decisions such a challenge is unlikely to succeed, the NFL may have wanted to avoid the optics of federal litigation of the newly-minted revised disciplinary process.³³ However, the settlement with the NFLPA has deprived the NFL of any leverage to insist that Watson take responsibility for his actions and make proper amends. In post-settlement statements, Watson continued to defend his actions and made only a half-hearted apology.³⁴

Conclusion

The NFL has mandated harsher player punishments in the years since the Roethlisberger and Rice incidents as evidenced by its initial request for an indefinite suspension for Watson.³⁵ Prior to Watson, the NFL rarely issued suspensions of more than six games for instances of sexual misconduct or domestic violence.³⁶ Today, these types of offenses are taken much more seriously by the NFL, even though it ultimately settled on an 11-game suspension for Watson.³⁷ Despite the settlement outcome, the NFL community remains divided: some believe the NFL was too lenient with Watson and should have pursued the greater punishment in consideration of the public outcry against him, while others believe the NFL was overly harsh against Watson given the lack of criminal charges. It is up to the NFL to continue to eliminate inconsistencies for similar behavioral misconduct in the future.³⁸

Written by: Samantha Schmitz
Samantha is a 2024 J.D. Candidate at Brooklyn Law School

The post Deshaun Watson: The NFL’s New Disciplinary Procedure Put to the Test appeared first on Brooklyn Sports & Entertainment Law Blog.

Privacy Law in the United States

The U.S. lacks universal and comprehensive privacy laws like the E.U.’s General Data Protection Regulation, and instead employs a patchwork approach depending on specific jurisdictions, industries, and populations.⁶ While there are federal privacy laws like the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”), most privacy laws are enacted by the states.⁷ California is the only state that recognizes privacy as an “inalienable” right in its constitution and is at the forefront of legislating strict state privacy laws.⁸ In addition to the CAADC, California has been regarded for its leading privacy legislation, including the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”) which amended the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”) and becomes fully effective on January 1, 2023.⁹ Since California has the largest economy in the U.S., and is often deemed the technology capital of the world, its privacy laws are highly influential.¹⁰

California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act

On September 15, 2022, California Governor Gavin Newsom enacted the CAADC, which becomes effective July 1, 2024.¹¹ It is modeled after the U.K.’s Age Appropriate Design Code.¹² The CAADC is the first law in the U.S. to require businesses that offer “online products, services, or features” that are “likely to be accessed by children” under 18 years old to consider the “best interests of children” in their design, development, and implementation.¹³ The CAADC is momentous legislation as it aims to protect children by forcing certain businesses to comply with new online privacy requirements.¹⁴

Businesses Likely to Be Accessed By Children Are Subject to the CAADC

The CAADC applies to businesses that have “online services, products, or features that are likely to be accessed by children.”¹⁵ Further, businesses that use “design elements” that appeal to children, or look substantially like businesses that are often visited by children, are considered “likely to be accessed by children.”¹⁶ Additionally, definitions under the CCPA apply to the CAADC unless otherwise clearly stated.¹⁷ When the CAADC becomes effective in 2024, the CCPA’s definition for “business” will have been replaced by the CPRA’s.¹⁸ Like the CCPA, the CPRA covers businesses that are for-profit, do business in California, collect personal information, and meet a certain threshold.¹⁹ The CPRA’s threshold requirement for applicability requires that a business either have an annual gross revenue greater than twenty-five million dollars, possess the personal information of at least one hundred thousand consumers, or earn more than half of their annual revenue from selling or sharing consumers’ personal information.²⁰ Therefore, some businesses that are “likely to be accessed by children” might be exempt from the CAADC if they are not considered a “business” under the CPRA’s definition.²¹

Privacy Requirements Under the CAADC

Businesses subject to the CAADC are required to take several proactive privacy measures including, but not limited to, filling out data protection impact assessments, estimating the age of child users, applying default privacy settings with the highest protections, and providing notice to children if their online activity or location is being tracked.²² Additionally, the CAADC restricts certain privacy actions such as implementing dark pattern designs to induce children to provide personal information, tracking a child’s precise geolocation, and using personal information beyond what is necessary or in a way that is “materially detrimental to the physical health, mental health, or well-being of a child.”²³ However, there are often exceptions to these restrictions if there is a business justification, or if there is a compelling reason in the best interests of children.²⁴

Enforcement under the CAADC

California’s attorney general has enforcement authority over the CAADC.²⁵ The statute offers no private right of action.²⁶ If a business violates the CAADC, it could be subject to an injunction or civil penalty up to $2,500 per child for a negligent act, and up to $7,500 per child for an intentional act.²⁷ Additionally, the California Children’s Data Protection Working Group has been established to advise the legislature on how to best implement the CAADC.²⁸

The CAADC’s Impact on Privacy Law

While both the federal COPPA law and California’s CAADC focus on protecting children’s privacy, there are several distinctions. COPPA was amended nearly a decade ago and the internet has since evolved.²⁹ The CAADC covers a wider range of businesses as it targets businesses that are “likely to be accessed by children,” while COPPA only applies to businesses “directed to” children.³⁰ The CAADC protects children under 18 years old, whereas COPPA only protects children under 13 years old.³¹ Additionally, the burden of protecting children online shifts from the parent, as seen in COPPA, to businesses under the CAADC.³²

Some experts claim that the CAADC’s standard to protect children online seems well-intended, but its actual application is questionable.³³ Requiring businesses to complete data protection impact assessments before releasing any product, service, or feature can be helpful for businesses to identify and mitigate risks of exposing children to harm, but it can also make compliance burdensome.³⁴ Although the CPRA defines “dark pattern,” there is still uncertainty on how to objectively determine what constitutes a dark pattern.³⁵ This might make it difficult to establish if a dark pattern is being used to induce children to provide personal information.³⁶ Moreover, there is concern about the broad range of businesses that are considered “likely to be accessed by children.”³⁷

The CAADC subjects businesses to “potentially over-broad compliance measures” which could create new privacy risks for children.³⁸ For example, the CAADC requires businesses to estimate the age of users visiting their site.³⁹ It is difficult to authenticate a user’s age without their personal information.⁴⁰ The age estimation requirement could lead to “invasive age verification” practices that involve interrogating the user for personal information or collecting biometric data for facial recognition.⁴¹ Both options are not only invasive, but also costly and not always accurate.⁴² As a result, the CAADC’s stringent yet vague compliance measures might be counterproductive to protecting children’s privacy and harmful for businesses.

Because of the lack of a comprehensive federal privacy law, the CAADC is a significant legislative attempt to expand online privacy protections for children in a patchwork privacy system.⁴³ Even though the CAADC applies only to California, when California “promulgates strict regulations,” those standards are often mimicked in other jurisdictions.⁴⁴ In fact, since the CAADC was enacted, New York introduced a similar bill in its senate.⁴⁵ While it is important to protect children’s online privacy, the CAADC’s actual implementation and repercussions remain to be seen.

Written by: Sara Sachs
Sara is a 2024 J.D. Candidate at Brooklyn Law School

The post Protecting Children Online: California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act appeared first on Brooklyn Sports & Entertainment Law Blog.

Defamation cases can be difficult to win, but legal scholars say Dominion Voting Systems has a compelling case against Fox News.¹ Dominion is seeking $1.6 billion in damages, alleging that Fox News harmed its reputation when its’ broadcast falsely claimed that the company was involved in rigging the 2020 presidential election against former President Donald Trump.² If the case goes to trial, the outcome may drastically impact the news media landscape.

For Dominion to prevail, the company must show that it was harmed by the false statements that were broadcast on Fox News.³ In an ordinary defamation case, a plaintiff must demonstrate the issuance of a false statement that subjects them to public contempt, hatred, or ridicule.⁴ Dominion is seeking $1.6 billion in damages for defamation under a per se analysis.⁵ Statements are per se defamatory when they harm one’s business or personal reputation, including claims of criminal conduct.⁶ Dominion will likely also have to prove that Fox News acted with “actual malice,” a high bar that public-figure plaintiffs must meet if the defendant’s statements touched on matters of public concern.⁷ To prove actual malice, a public figure plaintiff must prove that the defendant knowingly published a false statement or acted with reckless disregarded for the truth.⁸

In a 137-page complaint filed last year in Delaware Superior Court, Dominion alleged that Fox News “intentionally provided a platform for guests that Fox’s hosts knew would make false and defamatory statements of fact on the air.”⁹ Dominion also claimed that the network, through its hosts, “had repeated, republished, and endorsed” the election fraud accusations “numerous times on television, online, and on social media,”¹⁰ reaching millions of television viewers and social media followers.¹¹

Fox News hosts and guests repeatedly discussed allegations that Dominion is a subsidiary of a company affiliated with the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chaves to rig elections.¹² Dominion claimed that these statements “impute serious criminal conduct to Dominion and also malign Dominion in the conduct of its business or trade.”¹³ Dominion also stated that Fox News’ conduct resulted in lost profits and forced the company to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on on-site security to protect its employees from harassment and death threats.¹⁴

Fox News moved to dismiss the case last year, arguing that it is shielded from liability under the First Amendment, which “absolutely protects press reporting on allegations made by public figures of the highest order.”¹⁵ Fox contended that the fair-report doctrine protects a media organization’s reporting on judicial proceedings and government investigations.¹⁶ The news network also asserted that its news hosts and their guests’ opinions about election fraud allegations are protected by the opinion privilege.¹⁷ The court was not convinced.¹⁸ In December 2021, the court denied Fox’s motion to dismiss, concluding that Dominion sufficiently pled its claims, including that Fox acted with actual malice.¹⁹

The legal battle has been ramping up in recent weeks. Many of Fox’s top personalities have been deposed, including Tucker Carlson, Jeanine Pirro, and Sean Hannity.²⁰ Fox’s legal team has deposed several Dominion executives, including CEO John Poulos.²¹ Summary judgment briefings are due in February and a trial is scheduled for April.²²

Did Fox News Act with “Actual Malice”?

The “actual malice” standard for defamation cases was established in the landmark Supreme Court case, New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.²³ In 1960, L.B. Sullivan, a police commissioner in Alabama, sued the New York Times for defamation after the newspaper published an ad that criticized police conduct during civil rights protests.²⁴ The ad contained some false statements.²⁵ After Sullivan won in Alabama courts, the New York Times appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.²⁶

The Supreme Court found that the newspaper did not act with actual malice and reversed the Supreme Court of Alabama’s decision, calling it “constitutionally deficient for failure to provide the safeguards for freedom of speech and of the press that are required by the First and Fourteenth Amendments in a libel action brought by a public official against critics of his official conduct.”²⁷ Three years after Sullivan, the Supreme Court ruled that any public figure, not just politicians, must prove actual malice in a defamation suit against a news organization.²⁸ Under the standard set by Sullivan, a news organization acts with actual malice when it publishes false information with the knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth.²⁹

The Delaware Superior Court judge who denied Fox News’s motion to dismiss found that “the Complaint alleges facts that Fox made the challenged statements with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard of their truth.”³⁰ If this case goes to trial, Dominion will likely have to prove with clear and convincing evidence that Fox News knew or should have known the election fraud claims were false.³¹

Dominion cites several instances where they contacted Fox News executives, reporters, and producers, and circulated emails– titled “SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: FACTS & RUMORS”– that included links to independent sources with information disproving the false election claims.³² During discovery, part of Dominion’s focus has been on finding communications that reveal what Fox News hosts knew at the time the fraud accusations aired on their programs.³³

Defamation Lawsuits: Effective in Fighting Disinformation or a Threat to First Amendment Protections?

“I think we are at a time in U.S. history and world history of losing any ability as a civilization to distinguish between truth and falsity,” Rodney Smolla, a lawyer representing Dominion Voting Systems said in a recent interview.³⁴ “And one of the few legal avenues in which civilized countries have attempted to distinguish between truth and falsity is defamation law.”³⁵ This lawsuit could have broad implications for the news media and free speech, especially at a time when defamation suits are on the rise in the United States.³⁶ A win for Dominion and similar plaintiffs could further deter media organizations from peddling false information if they have to face legal and financial consequences.³⁷

Defamation lawsuits like Dominion’s can be a double-edged sword if they reach higher courts.³⁸ Dominion CEO John Poulos has emphasized that the company has “no secret endgame to limit anyone’s First Amendment right to free speech” with its defamation lawsuits against conservative media outlets.³⁹ Nevertheless, if Dominion’s lawsuit reaches the Supreme Court, it could change the long-standing press protections that were defined in Sullivan.⁴⁰

At least two Supreme Court Justices have voiced their skepticism of Sullivan.⁴¹ In 2019, Justice Clarence Thomas called for the court to “reconsider our jurisprudence in this area” because “[s]tates are perfectly capable of striking an acceptable balance between encouraging robust public discourse and providing a meaningful remedy for reputational harm.”⁴² Two years later, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that Sullivan “has evolved into an ironclad subsidy for the publication of falsehoods by means and on a scale previously unimaginable.”⁴³

Even if the case does not reach the Supreme Court, First Amendment advocates worry that a victory for Dominion and other similar plaintiffs could contribute to an increase in the weaponization of libel laws used to target political opponents, critics, or legitimate news reporting.⁴⁴ These fears may be overblown because the “actual malice” standard will continue to pose a serious hurdle for defamation plaintiffs.⁴⁵ Despite the concerns over the larger impact of Dominion’s case, First Amendment experts seem to agree on one fact: Dominion has laid out one of the strongest defamation cases they have seen in a long time.⁴⁶

Written by: Ali Rawaf
Ali is a 2024 J.D. Candidate at Brooklyn Law School

The post Defamation Suit Against Fox News Tests Limits of First Amendment Protections appeared first on Brooklyn Sports & Entertainment Law Blog.

In sports society, awareness of human rights protection has gradually developed and sports governing bodies, such as the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the Fédération Internationale de la Football Association (FIFA), have striven to commit the implementation of human rights guaranteed by internationally recognised human right treaties in the international community. However, human rights law cannot directly impose any legal obligations on sports governing bodies because they are non-state actors established by domestic private law. In this situation, how can international human rights law apply to the private relationship between non-state actors? According to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), state parties must implement positive obligations to protect individuals against any violations caused by non-state actors within the jurisdiction. To implement the positive obligations under the ECHR, it is necessary to identify which state parties should be held responsible for the implementation in sports-related disputes because, in Mutu and Pechstein v. Switzerland, athletes claimed a violation of the ECHR against Switzerland on the ground that the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) is located in Lausanne, Switzerland. However, it should be considered that Switzerland is not be liable for all violations of the ECHR’s rights caused by another state party. In light of this, the purpose of this article is to identify a hypothetical standard for determining which state parties should be held responsible for implementing the positive obligations under the ECHR.

The Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) is the body that governs European football. In 2010 it introduced its Financial Fair Play (FFP) Regulations with the main aim of bringing financial stability to European football. This article examines UEFA’s FFP Regulations from good governance and ‘best practice’ perspectives. It finds that the setting-up, implementation and monitoring of the FFP Regulations by UEFA generally adhere to ‘best practice’ principles. However, recent cases in the Court of Arbitration for Sport have revealed several areas where changes to the regulations would be appropriate. In 2021 UEFA made some changes to its Procedural rules governing its Club Financial Control Body, which address some of the outstanding issues but there are still a number of areas where changes would be beneficial as these would provide greater clarity and transparency to its operation and enforcement and thereby promote more timely and cost-effective regulation.

Manipulation of competitions has long plagued the sport industry, affecting almost every sport over time. While sharing certain common features, the regulatory provisions and procedural responses to this phenomenon by international federations (IFs), sports’ governing bodies, vary on many aspects, including the definition of the specific offence of “competition manipulation” itself, scope of application, especially in relationship to betting, categories of participants, mens rea elements such as recklessness and negligent behaviour, reporting obligations, aggravating and mitigating factors, and applicable sanctions across sports and within a sport/discipline. More nuanced items within internal disciplinary procedure also vary across federations, such as standard of proof and evidence. The purpose of this study is to offer a comparative synopsis of the regulations of 43 IFs governing Olympic and certain non-Olympic sports, to provide a critical overview of specific aspects of the above mentioned factors in the regulations and to identify areas of improvement for the future.

Wynn’s application for retail sports betting in Massachusetts was the only one of the three casinos to get commission approval this week. Votes on Penn National and MGM Resorts applications were deferred to a later date because of various questions that need to be addressed.

The commission’s approval does not mean sports betting can legally happen in Massachusetts yet. Retail sports betting is scheduled for a January launch. Mobile is expected to go live in time for March Madness betting.

Minor hangups in Wynn sports betting application

As it turns out, the 367-page application from Encore Boston Harbor was not long enough. A small portion of the application was realized to be missing mid-meeting.

The MGC voted unanimously to accept the missing section, though, after Commissioner Jordan Maynard pointed out that clerical mistakes can happen with such large documents. The commission also allowed MGM Springfield to submit its retail application late after it mistakenly submitted its mobile application instead.

There was another question about whether commissioners needed clarification from a WynnBET representative, with Chair Cathy Judd-Stein even wondering if that would be allowed under the scope of the review. Commissioner Nakisha Skinner said was concerned about some items marked confidential in the WynnBET application, but the commission agreed to hold those issues until the mobile application review.

Wynn advances with garage kiosk idea

When the three retail casinos met with the commission in August, there was one proposal that surprised commissioners.

At the time, Wynn said it was considering adding sports betting kiosks to its parking garage for bettors that simply wanted to place a bet and not go into the casino. That proposal is still alive and well, though, with details outlined on page 32 of the application:

B1 Express Sportsbook: Given that Encore Boston Harbor will open as Greater Boston area’s only legal option to place a sports wager until the launch of mobile and category 2 venues, subject to the approval of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, we are preparing a convenient and quick way for sports wagerers to place their wager without having to enter the casino. The B1 Express Sportsbook, to be located in the parking garage, would include twenty-three (23) sports betting kiosks with convenient 15-minute parking. This “Express Sportsbook” will enable guests to place their wager quickly and then watch the game in the comfort of their own home.

Commissioner Eileen O’Brien expressed concern over security issues, such as when money needed to be transferred to or from the betting room. Wynn said it considered many potential security issues and would be happy to discuss those topics in a closed executive session.

More MA sports betting meetings Monday

There are two key sessions about MA sports betting coming up for the MGC Monday.

The first session starting at 10 am is the public comment period on five tethered mobile applicants:

• Barstool Sportsbook
• BetMGM
• Caesars
• Fanatics
• WynnBET

At 1:30 pm, the MGC will discuss and vote on whether operators can deduct promo dollars from taxable revenue or not.

The post One Down: Wynn Found Suitable For Retail MA Sports Betting License appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

And with Prochazka expected to be out for an extended period of time, the title has been declared vacant and up for grabs in this new main event between two top-ranked light heavyweights. Read on for a look at the betting odds from all the main markets on this 205-pound matchup.

UFC 282 Main Event Odds

Magomed Ankalaev () vs. Jan Blachowicz ()

Ever since he embarked on his current nine-fight winning streak in the UFC, Magomed Ankalaev (18-1 MMA, 9-1 UFC) has been talked about as a potential future champ in the light heavyweight division. His only professional loss came in his UFC debut, as often happens, and it came in the very last second of a fight he was otherwise winning right up until he got caught in a Hail Mary submission by the wily grappler Paul Craig. Since then, Ankalaev has sliced through the 205-pound class, facing bigger name competition as he climbs closer to the top.

In his last fight, he beat former title challenger Anthony Smith via second-round TKO. Before that, he went five full rounds for the first time in his career to win a unanimous decision over another former title challenger in Thiago Santos.

And while many fans see a first name like “Magomed” and a birthplace somewhere in Dagestan, Russia, and are quick to assume they’re looking at a guy who’s all grappling and no striking, Ankalaev has shown a real range of skills in the UFC. His straight left hand has become an especially dangerous tool in recent years, and his head kicks have been a consistent threat when it comes to setting up finishes.

That said, Ankalaev may not want to get into a long-range kickboxing match with Blachowicz (29-9 MMA, 12-6 UFC). The former champ doesn’t have all that many advantages over the younger Ankalaev, but his kicking game is likely one of them. Blachowicz also has one-punch power in his hands, though here he’ll be the slower fighter by a considerable margin, so the challenge will be finding openings to land without spending all night waiting for that one perfect shot.

The big question is how much wrestling Ankalaev will look to do in this fight. He’s got a solid grappling base, even if he hasn’t built his game around takedowns and top control the way many Dagestani fighters have. Blachowicz is a better grappler than he often gets credit for, but that’s not where he’s most likely to win this fight. He has to avoid getting caught in a spin cycle of takedown attempts if he’s going to have a chance to get his own offense working.

The problem is that Ankalaev has more tools at his disposal for both setting the pace of the fight and deciding where it takes place. Blachowicz, on the other hand, needs Ankalaev to make a mistake in order to find his opening. The good news is, with his punching power, he really only needs that mistake to happen once.

UFC 282 Props And Rounds Betting

Against lesser competition – or against more aggressive fighters who force the action right out of the gate – Ankalaev has shown the ability to start fast. But that’s not necessarily his own natural inclination, and in a big fight like this, especially after he started out preparing for a three-round co-main event rather than five-round championship bout, he may look to control his energy early on while he gets a feel for Blachowicz’s approach.

The line on Ankalaev to win via KO/TKO could be seen as a good choice for a few different reasons, but I wouldn’t expect it to happen in the first round. Blachowicz is a tough, well-rounded fighter, and Ankalaev will probably need to stop him with volume and pace rather than one big shot. A TKO prop bet in rounds 3 or 4 might be a good chance to get long odds on the likely winner. At the same time, Ankalaev can sometimes be too patient while he waits for counter-striking opportunities. It’s not out of the question that these two could mostly nullify each other and end up going the distance, at which point the +215 odds on Ankalaev via decision look pretty good.

If Blachowicz is going to win this fight, he needs to sting Ankalaev early. He doesn’t always have the same pop in his punches later in a fight, especially if his arms get heavy from too much grappling. If he lets Ankalaev lead the dance and find his rhythm, the former champ could be in for a long night.

Full UFC 282 Fight Card

Main Card

Jan Blachowicz () vs. Magomed Ankalaev ()
Paddy Pimblett () vs. Jared Gordon ()
Alex Morono () vs. Santiago Ponzinibbio ()
Darren Till ()vs. Dricus du Plessis ()
Bryce Mitchell () vs. Ilia Topuria ()

Prelims

Jairzinho Rozenstruik () vs. Chris Daukaus ()
Raul Rosas Jr. () vs. Jay Perrin ()
Edmen Shahbazyan () vs. Dalcha Lungiambula ()
Chris Curtis () vs. Joaquim Buckley ()

Early Prelims

Billy Quarantillo () vs. Alexander Hernandez ()
T.J. Brown () vs. Erick Silva ()
Vinicius Salvador () vs. Daniel da Silva ()
Cameron Saaiman () vs. Steven Koslow ()

UFC 282 Sportsbook Promos

How to Watch UFC 282

• Early prelims on UFC Fight Pass & ESPN+, 6 p.m. ET

• Prelims on ESPN 2 & ESPN+, 8 p.m. ET

• Main card on ESPN+ pay-per-view, 10 p.m.

The post UFC 282 Betting Odds And Main Event Preview: Blachowicz vs. Ankalaev appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Week 14 of the NFL season kicks off this week with a Thursday Night Football matchup between the Las Vegas Raiders (5-7) and the Los Angeles Rams (3-9.) The Raiders are looking to extend their three-game winning streak, while the Rams are attempting to break a six-game losing streak. FanDuel Sportsbook is offering odds on this game and the rest of Week 14. Read on for details on how to sign up and start betting. 

New Players get up to $1,000 bonus at FanDuel Sportsbook

1

Visit FanDuel Sportsbook

$1,000

No Sweat First Bet

FanDuel Sportsbook Review

Up to $1,000 No Sweat First Bet

Available on Desktop, Android & iOS  

To Claim: Click Play Now

Play Now

FanDuel Sportsbook Thursday Night Football promo code

When you create an account at FanDuel Sportsbook, it will offer a “no sweat first bet” for up to $1,000. No code is necessary to receive this promo; click the FanDuel promo code link here to claim it. 

Then, place your first bet (minimum of $5) on the Week 14 Thursday Night Football game (or any other Week 14 game). If that bet loses, FanDuel will refund the full amount, up to $1,000. The refund will be in the form of free bets. This offer is available to new users only. 

Note that for FanDuel Maryland users, the FanDuel Maryland promo code link only offers a “bet $5 and get $200” bonus. That $200 free bet is rewarded win or lose on your first bet of $5 or more.

FanDuel Sportsbook Thursday Night Football preview: Las Vegas Raiders at Los Angeles Rams

The Raiders are six-point road favorites in this primetime matchup. Moneyline odds for this game have the Raiders at -255 and the Rams at +210. 

Just two weeks ago, these teams had the same 3-7 record after Las Vegas topped the Denver Broncos in overtime. Since then, the Raiders have won twice more, with victories over the Seattle Seahawks and Los Angeles Chargers. Their 5-7 record puts them on the edge of the AFC Wild Card mix, something that seemed unlikely just a few weeks ago. 

Injuries for the Rams continue to pile up, as do the losses. They certainly did not roll over against the Seahawks, who won on the last drive last week, but their offense has a lot of holes in it with Cooper Kupp, Matthew Stafford and Allen Robinson all on the sidelines. 

The Raiders are on a roll offensively, boasting a balanced attack between Davante Adams and Josh Jacobs. The Rams offense, meanwhile, is averaging 16.8 points per game, fourth-fewest in the NFL. FanDuel has the over/under for this game at 44.5 points. 

The post FanDuel Promo Code for Thursday Night Football: $1,000 Bonus for Raiders-Rams appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The College Football Playoff  (CFP) Board of Managers decided in September 2022 that they will expand the playoff from 4 teams to 12 teams as early as the 2024 season. Fans and teams alike welcomed the adoption of the current 4-team playoff, as it was seen as more equitable than the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) model, which pitted the top two ranked teams in one winner-takes-all game for the championship. Still, the playoff has been dominated by the college football “blue bloods.” Every champion has come from either the SEC, ACC, or Big Ten, and until the 2021-2022 season, every participant in the playoff had been a member of a Power 5 conference, aside from independent Notre Dame. The new 12-team model will include automatic bids for the six highest-ranked conference champions and the six highest-ranked teams who did not win a conference championship. A postseason system with guarantees of non-traditional powerhouses having a shot at the title is a win for all parties involved. Fans receive more postseason games. Media companies, schools, and locales profit, as more games mean more revenue. Players from smaller programs now have a greater chance at the ultimate prize.

While this seems like a deal where nobody loses, there are points of conflict that parties should consider when implementing the expanded playoff. One potential criticism is that non-playoff bowl games will be cast further into irrelevance. It’s clear from fans and commentators alike that these games lack luster. This problem emerged at the inception of the College Football Playoff, and may be emphasized as the playoff is expanded. Those concerned about the culture of college football fear that many programs and fans will perceive a non-playoff bowl game “as a failed season entirely.”

College football fans care significantly about the culture of the sport, and while a fear of a culture shift is widely held, the playoff committee can do little to save the remaining bowl games. With the exception of the coveted New Years’ Six Bowls, most bowl games rarely sell out their stadiums, and this was true in the BCS era. The committee, media and advertisement, venues, and the colleges themselves, will all financially benefit from expanding the playoff. Unlike the status quo of the 4-team playoff, where only three postseason games “matter,” now we will have a system where eleven postseason games matter. Playoff expansion offers additional high stakes games for fans, and revenue increases for all stakeholders.

Talks of revenue bring in another criticism—the balancing of the athletic conferences. Over the past few years, it has become more apparent that the SEC and the Big Ten are the kings among the other Power 5 conferences. Both conferences will soon expand to 16 teams each, reducing the numbers in the Pac-12 and Big 12 conferences. These expansions already have major implications in the competition for media deals, and may even alter the landscape of the NCAA. Pursuant to the current contract, the CFP distributes 80% of its revenue to the Power 5 conferences. However, with the predominance of two conferences over the remaining three, there is the lurking concern the Big Ten and SEC will ask for a larger share than the others. Although college football will not be destroyed by the emergence of “superconferences,” they will certainly have an impact on the discussion on how the sport operates.

Parties should also consider the impact an expanded playoff will have on the players. Because the playoff has rendered other postseason games meaningless in the eyes of many, athletes who are NFL bound have been opting out of bowl games to protect their bodies. “At least twenty-nine star players” opted out of bowl games in the 2021-2022 season to prepare for the NFL draft. It is possible that expanding the playoff will result in fewer opt-outs, since no player has yet to voluntarily sit out the playoff. But this doesn’t render the phenomenon impossible. Last year, four players on Ohio State’s team opted out of the heralded Rose Bowl—a bowl game nicknamed the “Grandaddy of Them All.” Given the prestige and historic significance of a game like the Rose Bowl, potential profits in professional football may leave even the playoff vulnerable to losing star players.

Given the nomenclature “student-athlete,” many may fear that additional play on the field means even less time focused on academics.  In theory, college football is a sport for amateur student-athletes. Many observers believe college football has overtaken academics as the primary mission of many schools, and an additional 2-3 weeks of games and practice do no help that image. The proposed schedule would end at roughly the same time as the current playoff schedule, around mid-January, but now the first two rounds plus the conference championship games will encompass all of December. A team that loses in their conference championship game, but obtains an at-large bid into the playoff, could conceivably play 17 games in the fall and winter months on the road to winning the national championship.

Lastly, there are concerns about player profit-sharing stemming from the projected increase in revenue. Prior to 2021, students couldn’t profit from their status as a collegiate athlete. They receive athletic scholarships, often have paid meals, receive paid travel, but could not receive payment for play. The Supreme Court’s decision in NCAA v. Alston permitted athletes to receive compensation for their names, images, and likenesses (NIL). However, except for the biggest stars, NIL deals are not typically massive payouts, and the wealth is not evenly shared among players or across teams. Players who do not receive lucrative NIL deals are typically not the most sought-for athletes, which means they likely will not be strong draws for the NFL. Therefore, many players, will never receive compensation for additional labor.

The NCAA and many schools have maintained that it is impossible to pay athletes and for college football to remain financially solvent. There is truth to this, as most other collegiate sports operate at a loss, and are subsidized by college football. Furthermore, smaller athletic programs already operate on razor thin margins or at a loss. However, in a league where a majority of players are non-white, and many come from low-income backgrounds, it is difficult to justify additional hours of work with no guarantees of payment.

Nevertheless, there is still great optimism among fans, players, and the media alike. More teams and players will receive a more equitable shot at achieving a national title, and colleges, media, and locales stand to make large sums of money from the expansion. Despite potential obstacles, an expanded playoff is expected to receive a warm welcome.

Fans of radio personality Howard Stern and legendary rapper 50 Cent had reason to rejoice in 2013 when the two sat down for an interview on The Howard Stern Show. After discussing rap feuds and the joys of meeting Oprah, the celebrities parted ways for nearly a decade. However, last month brought the stars together once again in a starkly different context: central figures in a burgeoning legal conundrum concerning the power of the federal Copyright Act. The issue of copyright preemption poses questions of fairness for artists and consistency for the federal court system. Don’t hold your breath, though. A combination spoken word and hip hop project by the duo has not yet been announced.

The US Copyright Act of 1976 affords protection against infringement for creators of artistic works. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, and creation of derivate work is prohibited under §106 of the federal law. State law – developed through both statutes and judicial decisions – has established a similar, but distinct, protection: the right of publicity. The right of publicity protects the use of a person’s name, image, and likeness from appropriation without consent. Each state has a unique approach. A state may protect different dimensions of identity, extend protections only during life or for a fixed postmortem period, and assign different elements of proof for a lawsuit. Copyright and publicity work in tandem for artists: the Copyright Act imposes a national rule for permissive use of creative work and the right of publicity creates a state-by-state safeguard against the misappropriation of identity. The rights, however, can clash with each other. In the event of conflict, federal laws are given priority over state laws. The Copyright Act includes a specific provision about its supremacy: §301 of the Act declares that no person is entitled to an equivalent right under the laws of any state. When a court finds that a federal law is equivalent to a state law, the state law is “preempted.”

The issue of preemption in copyright arose last month, when a Second Circuit court adjudicated a lawsuit about the right of publicity in California. Melendez v. Sirius XM Radio, Inc. concerned longtime radio personality John Melendez, who appeared frequently on The Howard Stern show under his stage name “Stuttering John.” In 2006, Sirius XM contracted with the show to re-air archival episodes and to release new content. That contract also transferred the copyright to all existing episodes of the program to Sirius XM. Sirius then used recordings of Melendez from his previous appearances in its advertising for new episodes. California protects the right of publicity in both common law and its Civil Code Section 3344, which states that a company may not knowingly using a person’s “name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness” for purposes of advertising without consent. Melendez brought a lawsuit claiming that his right of publicity had been exploited by the radio company in its promotional material.

The lawsuit was dismissed because the court found that Melendez’s publicity claim was preempted by the federal Copyright Act. The Second Circuit court applied a two-part test to determine if the right of publicity claim was equivalent to the rights within the Copyright Act: it evaluated (1) a subject matter requirement and (2) a general scope requirement. The first element considers whether the work in question is also subject to copyright protections. In this case, a voice recording falls within copyright’s list of protected materials. The second part of the test asks if the state law includes additional elements that make it distinguishable from the areas covered by the Copyright Act. There is an additional requirement in CA’s right of publicity statute: a commercial purpose for the derivate use. However, the court explained that copyright has traditionally involved commercial interests and, therefore, the claims are not qualitatively distinct. Melendez’s claim was preempted by the Copyright Act and dismissed.

The ruling left Melendez with few legal options because Sirius XM owns the copyright to the shows that contain his voice recordings. This is the first problem of copyright preemption. It’s not uncommon that an artist no longer controls the underlying copyright for a particular work. The artist may have waived their claim to copyright when contracting with a company or have sold the right. Without a right of publicity claim, the artist may then be unable to defend against derivative use. The same problem appeared in Jackson v. Roberts, which the Melendez court relied on heavily in its recent decision.

Jackson v. Roberts concerned a claim brought by Curtis James Jackson III, known to most as 50 Cent, against fellow rapper Rick Ross. Ross used a sample of 50 Cent’s famous song “In Da Club” for a promotional mixtape ahead of his album release. Jackson claimed that the use of his recording and stage name in the track’s title constituted a violation of his right of publicity under Connecticut’s common law. His claim was dismissed under the preemption doctrine. As in the Melendez case, Jackson didn’t own the copyright to the underlying work. The copyright was owned by the record label that published “In Da Club.” Jackson’s right of publicity claim stalled, and the Copyright Act left him no recourse.

The other problem with copyright preemption is in its inconsistent application. The aforementioned cases are only part of a sprawling preemption web that reaches across the US federal courts. In the Ninth Circuit, a court declined to apply the preemption doctrine when a famous surfer alleged a publicity violation after Abercrombie & Fitch used their licensed image in a marketing campaign. The Fifth Circuit similarly allowed a publicity claim to proceed after a musician’s name and likeness were used in connection with marketing for a CD containing their songs. The Third Circuit court allowed a publicity claim to be heard when an NFL broadcaster’s voice was used in an advertisement for a video game. The Seventh Circuit, however, chose to apply the preemption doctrine when baseball players brought a lawsuit for the rebroadcast of their games, but declined to do the same in a case involving a model’s photograph in a marketing campaign. Courts have taken inconsistent approaches when choosing whether the use of copyrighted material invokes the relevant person’s identity, rather than just their copyrighted work. Questions of implied endorsement and commercial exploitation have shaped the two-factor test in respective jurisdictions and left competing frameworks across the court system.

The Melendez and Jackson cases may have seen opposite results if the Second Circuit court found that the use of their voices was an appropriation of their identity, rather than solely a reproduced recording. That determination may have depended on which Circuit heard their claims. This unequal administration of federal law based on geographic jurisdiction is called a “circuit split.” These splits are ripe for the Supreme Court, which grants certiorari to create a consistent legal approach that all federal courts must adopt.

The Copyright Act and the right of publicity are fundamentally concerned with fairness: allowing artists to benefit fully from their creative work and to protect themselves from misappropriation. Yet, the two laws have now clashed in such a way that leaves artists powerless to pursue legal action depending on which Circuit hears the case. The time has come for the Supreme Court to establish a consistent framework that all federal courts can apply. Artists should be able to know where they stand when it comes to their right of publicity.

Click here to read the full article.

The opening days of the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 have already resulted in a number of issues of interest to sports lawyers and human rights lawyers, with FARE’s Piara Powar claiming that this is the most political major sporting event that he has attended. Both FIFA and the local organisers have been active in their suppression of expressions of support for LGBTQIA+ rights by players, fans and journalists alike, calling into question once again the legality of restricting free speech by sporting rules and regulations.

There have been two major flashpoints to date. First, seven European federations had asked FIFA for permission for their captains to wear armbands supporting the ‘OneLove’ campaign. FIFA’s response was to refuse, resulting in the German players covering their mouths for their pre-match photographs in protest at their being silenced. There are several grounds on which FIFA would seek to support its position:

•  Law 4.5 of the Laws of the Game prohibits any playing equipment from carrying any political, religious or personal slogans, statements or images.
• Regulation 4.3.1 of FIFA’s Equipment Regulations and Regulation 27.1 of the FIFA World Cup 2022 Regulations prohibits clothing or equipment that includes political, religious, or personal slogans, statements, or images, or otherwise does not comply in full with the Laws of the Game.
• Regulation 33.3 of the FIFA World Cup 2022 Regulations prohibits the display of political, religious or personal messages or slogans of any nature in any language or form by players and officials.
• Regulation 13.8.1 of FIFA’s Equipment Regulations states that for FIFA Final Competitions, the captain of each Team must wear the captain’s armband provided by FIFA (all Regulations available in the FIFA Legal Handbook 2022).

Although the DFB is considering a challenge to FIFA’s refusal to allow its captain to wear the OneLove armband, which would ultimately be heard before CAS, it is unlikely to succeed in the face of the strict requirements of the above Laws and Regulations. However, what could cause more difficulty for both FIFA and CAS is if the DFB frames its case as a challenge to the compliance of the rules that restrict players’ freedom of expression with Article 3 of FIFA’s Statutes, which states that ‘FIFA is committed to respecting all internationally recognised human rights.’ Article 3, together with the additional detail provided by FIFA’s Human Rights Policy, ensures that freedom of expression as defined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights are limitative rules that can be applied directly to FIFA’s activities, as has been argued by Bützler and Schöddert. Further, if the affected players and associations can define themselves as human rights defenders, then Article 11 of FIFA’s Human Rights Policy states that, ‘FIFA will respect and not interfere with the work of … human rights defenders who voice concerns about adverse human rights impacts relating to FIFA.’ Any challenge using this approach would be the first real test of the enforceability of the human rights protections to which FIFA claims to be committed. It would also be a test of CAS’s ability to require adherence to the human rights commitments made by ISFs and to prove that they are more than simple window-dressing.

Secondly, members of The Rainbow Wall, a contingent of LGBTQIA+ rights-supporting Welsh fans, were prevented from entering the Ahmed bin Ali stadium whilst wearing bucket hats incorporating a rainbow into its design. No explanation for why was given, however, FIFA and the local organisers would argue that openly supporting LGBTQIA+ rights with the aim of promoting legal change in a country where homosexuality is illegal is a political statement on apparel and therefore entry into the stadium wearing the rainbow hat is in breach of the Regulation 3.1.23 of the Stadium Code of Conduct. A similar argument could be used to justify preventing US journalist Grant Wahl from entering the stadium wearing a t-shirt incorporating a rainbow into its design and Danish journalist Jon Pagh from wearing the OneLove armband. However, it must be stressed that no such explanation for the prohibitions applied to these garments was provided to any of the affected fans or journalists. It must also be recognised that the opinion that promoting LGBTQIA+ rights is a political expression is highly contested. In a statement from FIFPRO, the opposing view was stated succinctly: ‘We maintain that a rainbow flag is not a political statement but an endorsement of equality and thus a universal human right.’

It is clear that, as with Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter, the chilling effect that FIFA’s Regulations have on players’ and fans’ freedom of expression is likely to be unlawful, as has been discussed at length both on this blog and on the Verfassungsblog Debate on Freedom of Expression in the Olympic Movement. Instead of revisiting these arguments, which are taken to apply to FIFA’s actions at Qatar 2022, two additional issues related to the FIFA Statutes are explored here.

Articles 3 and 4 of FIFA’s Statutes state that:

3 Human rights

FIFA is committed to respecting all internationally recognised human rights and shall strive to promote the protection of these rights.

4 Non-discrimination, equality and neutrality

4.1 Discrimination of any kind against a country, private person or group of people on account of race, skin colour, ethnic, national or social origin, gender, disability, language, religion, political opinion or any other opinion, wealth, birth or any other status, sexual orientation or any other reason is strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion.

FIFA is a long-time supporter of pride events and in its press release for Pride Month 2022 stated:

[The] FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022™ will be a celebration of unity and diversity – a joining of people from all walks of life – regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, age, disability, sex characteristics, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression – everybody will be welcome.

Claims that all staff involved in the Qatar 2022 including public and private security forces, would be trained on how to accomplish their tasks in a non-discriminatory manner, seem not to have been operationalised effectively.

This begs the question whether FIFA is in breach of its own Statutes by refusing to allow players to express themselves freely on armbands and failing to protect fans’ freedom of expression by wearing rainbows. At the very least, FIFA should have ensured that a protective LGBTQIA+ regime in the stadiums and the fan zones during the World Cup was implemented to enable the ‘celebration of unity and diversity’ it claims that Qatar 2022 should be. FIFA’s actions in Qatar call into question its claims to be an inclusive and supportive leader on anti-discrimination and human rights, and is likely to see a backlash from the LGBTQIA+ community that it claims to support when it engages with Pride 2023; accusations of hypocrisy and virtue signalling are guaranteed.

With no resolution to the debate at the time of writing, Articles 3 and 4 could provide players and fans with the opportunity to demonstrate their support for human rights and anti-discrimination causes. At the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics, Athlete Ally developed the ‘Principle 6 Campaign.’ Instead of criticising directly Russia's so called anti-gay laws, which are currently in the process of being extended, athletes promoted Principle 6 of the Olympic Charter, which at the time stated that, ‘Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement.’ The eventual outcome of this campaign was the addition of sexual orientation to the list of characteristics protected by Principle 6. Unlike at Sochi 2014, there is no need to campaign for a change to either of Articles 3 or 4 of the FIFA Statutes; instead, activists want to ensure that they are being applied. An immediate response for both players and fans would be for them to quote specifically from Articles 3 and 4, as it would be extremely difficult for FIFA to claim that they are making political or personal statements when promoting FIFA’s own foundational values. A creative reminder of what FIFA claims to stand for could enable player and fan activism to continue throughout the tournament, and beyond, whilst affected players and associations can develop a compelling case for the restrictions on freedom of expression to be struck out by CAS, the Swiss Federal Tribunal and/or the European Court of Human Rights.

In spite of the fact that this issue continues to play a major role in the transnational public discourse, it received until now relatively scant attention in the academic literature, specifically in the international/transnational legal field. Yet, the debates around the Qatar 2022 World Cup are in practice mobilizing a range of legal arguments connected to the interpretation and application of international human rights law and international labor law, as well as activating international (at the ILO) or transnational (at the Swiss OECD National Contact Point) legal processes. Furthermore, they raise well-known questions regarding the compliance of states with international legal commitments and connect with debates on the universality of human rights and their translation in particular social contexts. In short, we believe there is room for a multi-disciplinary engagement with the legal processes and social mobilizations triggered by Qatar’s successful bid to host the FIFA World Cup 2022 and their impacts on local social and legal rules and institutions. Hence, Qatar’s journey towards the FIFA World Cup 2022 constitutes an interesting case study to investigate more generally the transnational social and legal mechanisms which underpin the concretization of international (human rights/labor) law in a particular context and give it a specific reality.

We invite paper submissions from different methodological backgrounds (e.g. law, anthropology, sociology, history, public policy) which engage with the many entanglements of Qatar with international (human rights and labor) law in the context of the organizing and hosting of the FIFA World Cup 2022. The papers will be first discussed in a digital workshop that will take place on 15 and 16 February 2023. Please note that we have an agreement with the German Law Journal (Open access journal on comparative, European and international law published by Cambridge University Press) to publish a selection of the papers.

If you wish to participate in the workshop and the ensuing publications, please send an abstract of max. 300 words and a CV to [email protected] by 6 January 2023. The selected participants will be informed by 9 January 2023. Extended abstracts (2000 words) will be due on 6 February 2023.

Supported by

In 2021, the announcement of the creation of a breakaway European Super League (ESL), as well as the drama of its early demise, stunned the world.  Since then, the company behind the ESL and UEFA (as well as FIFA) are locked into a legal battle that will soon come to an end at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Following the preliminary questions raised by a Spanish court, the CJEU will weigh in on whether UEFA and FIFA breached EU competition law with their attempts to thwart the emergence of the ESL. It will not be the first time that the governing bodies of football, both Swiss associations, face scrutiny before the EU courts - many will remember the 1995 Bosman ruling. However, this time around various stakeholders and observers are calling for the EU to not only referee this particular dispute, but to as well start playing a stronger governance role by regulating European football.

Programme:

15:00 – 15:05 Opening: Mariolina Eliantonio (Maastricht University)

15:05 – 16:30 - Roundtable: Governing European Football: What role for the European Union?
Moderator: Carlo Colombo (Maastricht University)

•        Antoine Duval (Senior Researcher at the Asser Institute)
•        Benoit Keane (Keane Legal)
•        Alexander Bielefeld (Director Global Policy and Strategic Relations at FIFPro)
•        Arnout Geeraert (Assistant Professor, Utrecht university)

16:30 Reception

This is an In-Person event only and will take place at the Campus Brussels of the Maastricht University (Avenue de Tervueren 153, 1150 Brussels). If you wish to attend, please register HERE.

Supported by

Among the presentations at the 2022 British Neuropsychiatry Annual Meeting was one about screening boxers for possible CTE and recommended practices. Titled “An evidence based screening protocol for chronic traumatic encephalopathy” the author reviewed data collected from the British Boxing Board of Control. The author noted that boxers are unique compared to the general population and that comparing their baselines of various medical measurements to that of the public does not always translate well. The author suggested that instead it would be better to take various baseline measures of professional boxers and subsequent licencing decisions can be made based on these showing concerning deviations from the initial baseline.

The author presented the below flow chart and the full abstract from the presentation reads as follows:

Abstract

Introduction Repeated head injury is unequivocally associated with brain damage, and an increased risk of Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) dementia. From 1928 until 2005 CTE was a diagnosis exclusively associated with pugilism but is now postulated to be associated with other sports such as rugby and football. For over twenty years the British Boxing Board of Control (BBBoC) has run a neurological screening programme. There are approximately 1000 licenced boxers who undergo a MRI cerebral angiogram on initially licencing with a MRI brain which is repeated annually. This was devised to screen for abnormalities, such as arterio-venous malformations which might predispose to catastrophic bleeding following occupational trauma. A ‘neuro panel’ consisting of one neurologist and three neurosurgeons, was setup to manage abnormal scan findings.

Rationale The BBBoC puts boxer safety as the top priority. Using the latest, best available evidence we have modified the neurological screening programme to proactively assess for CTE in evolution. The clinical presentations of CTE are not well understood and may include a broad range of cognitive, neurobehavioural and motor abnormalities. It is therefore rational to align a CTE screening programme to evaluate for neurodegenerative diseases broadly rather than narrow the focus to features highlighted in retrospective studies.

Conclusion Professional boxers are a self-selecting group of individuals and many of these athletes will fall outside of normative data e.g. in neuropsychology but be normal within themselves. The screening programme is designed to look for serial change within an individual rather than compare their results to the general population, which replicates best clinical practice.

Our recommendations are based on our cumulative experience both in professional boxing and clinical practice. The screening protocol is devised to balance the cost of an effective test battery against management of incidental findings and false positive errors. If this protocol is proven effective it can be adapted and extended to amateur and professional athletes of any sport where there is the potential for CTE.

These are free for anyone to use. Tailored to combat sports. These should be hanging in every gym.

Traumatic brain injury is probably the biggest occupational hazard in combat sports. Understanding the basics is a vital step to informed participation in sport.

Thank you Rose Gracie, Carla Duran, Dr. John Neidecker, Dr. Andrea Hill, Dr. Louis Durkin and everyone else who collaborated to make this a reality.

We have much more come!

Today the commission approved their official rule set for the ‘sport’. I put sport in quotations because it involves two people willingingly taking a full hit to the head with an open hand. Defence is not allowed. Often ending with unconsciousness due to a traumatic brain injury. A ‘sport’ that removes all the skill but keeps all of the brain trauma of combat sports. A ‘sport’ that already has a death on its hands in Europe.

Not to worry, though, Nevada asked politely that the promoter please make sure no one dies. I’m not kidding.

Nevada law, specifically NRS 467.075 requires the proposed rules to be published on their website at least 45 days before approval reading “At least 45 days before the Commission adopts, revises or repeals a rule, the Executive Director of the Commission shall: (1) Publish notice of the proposed action by posting on the Internet website maintained by the Commission a copy of the text of the proposed adoption, revision or repeal of any rule“

At the time of the hearing the rules were nowhere to be found on the commissions website.

In any event Nevada has now adopted formal rules for this spectacle. I am working with sources to obtain a full copy and will share these here when I do.

Week 11’s slate of matchups kicks off with the Green Bay Packers hosting the Tennessee Titans at Lambeau Field for Thursday Night Football. Caesars Sportsbook is offering new users a bonus of up to $1,250, plus other perks, ahead of the game and the rest of the Week 11 schedule.

Get Up to $1,250 + Credits at Caesars Sportsbook

1

Visit Caesars Sportsbook

Up to $1,250

On Caesars

Caesars Sportsbook Review

Up to $1,250 On Caesars

+ get 1,000 Caesars Reward Credits

+ also get 1,000 Tier Credits

Redeem for free bets, hotel stays, & more! 

Use Promo Code: LEGALFULL

PLAY NOW

Caesars Sportsbook promo code for Thursday Night Football bonus

Sign up at Caesars Sportsbook using the Caesars Sportsbook promo code LEGALFULL to redeem a welcome bonus of up to $1,250 on Caesars. Then, deposit money into your account and place any type of wager on the Titans vs. Packers game tonight. If your bet loses, Caesars will refund you an equal amount, up to $1,250, as a free bet. 

You will also receive 1,000 tier credits and 1,000 reward credits when you use the code above. The credits apply to the Caesars Rewards program, and you can redeem prizes on the sportsbook or experiences at Caesars Entertainment venues.

Caesars Sportsbook Thursday Night Football preview: Titans vs Packers

The Green Bay Packers enter as three-point favorites in this TNF matchup, and the Tennessee Titans are at +135 on the moneyline as a road underdog. The over/under is 42 points. 

The Packers broke a five-game losing streak with last week’s overtime win over the Dallas Cowboys to bring their record to 4-6 on the year. The Titans are also coming off a Week 10 win, where they took down the Denver Broncos, 17-10, and further established their lead in the AFC South. They are 6-3 on the year.

Oddsmakers still favor Aaron Rodgers and the Packers. The look-ahead lines for this game had the Packers as one-point favorites, though this shifted to a three-point spread in favor of the Packers following their win over Dallas.

The post Caesars Sportsbook Promo Code for TNF: $1,250 Bonus & Caesars Rewards appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The FanDuel Capital Markets Day in New York broke down almost every area of the business with a 113-page presentation and 40-minute Q&A session.

FanDuel expects to hit profitability in 2023 and, based on its scale advantage, expects revenue at maturity to be 4.5 to 5 times higher than 2022 revenue.

Based on guidance, that implies annual revenue of $13.3 billion on the low end and $16 billion on the high end. FanDuel also expects long-term EBITDA margins of 25% to 30%, or between $3.3 billion and $4.8 billion in annual EBITDA.

CA tribes not always against mobile?

FanDuel President Christian Genetski hit on the regulatory side of the business during his portion of the presentation and used part of the time to talk about the defeat in California.

“2022 would have been by anyone’s measure audaciously ahead of schedule,” Genetski said. He would not have thought there was a chance to even have mobile CA sports betting on the ballot 18 months ago, he added.

But there was enough support to give it a run and give Californians an option other than the tribal-only retail referendum, he said. The tribes worked to defeat Prop 27, but that was not necessarily the plan from the beginning, Genetski explained.

FanDuel benefits from scale

Flutter CEO Peter Jackson said FanDuel has never had a market share target in mind. Instead, the focus has been to invest hard and focus on customer acquisition costs in relation to long-term value while taking as much share as possible.

Whether it was the plan or not, FanDuel is the market-leading sportsbook in 12 of its 15 online sports betting states based on the first nine months of the year. Those early and continued investments into building a large customer base are paying off as FanDuel can take advantage of its scale.

FanDuel predicts its cost of sales will hover between 47%-52% of net gaming revenue moving forward with 50% expected for this year, FanDuel CFO David Jennings said. That is a plus for larger operators, as not all sportsbooks will be able to afford that kind of cost structure, he said.

High costs are starting to make their impact across US sports betting this year. So far, Churchill Downs, FuboTV and MaximBet have shuttered their online sports betting operations this year, citing profitability as a main concern.

Scale brings customer acquisition opportunity

Between the expansion of sports betting in the US and FanDuel’s growing customer base, the brand is seeing a big benefit to national marketing over local marketing.

In 2020, it was about 53% more expensive to buy national ad space during NFL games. But in 2022, national advertising costs were down 29%.

That meant despite spending 27% less on TV marketing in existing states, activations during the first week of NFL betting jumped 23% in those states.

Despite the improvements from scale, customer referrals remain the biggest source of new customers at 25%. That cost is 60% lower than other channels and could become more efficient as the company’s scale grows.

Influencer effect on FanDuel

Management also highlighted its many influencers, showing classic NBA on TNT banter between partner Charles Barkley and his cohosts Shaquille O’Neal and Kenny Smith while discussing a FanDuel parlay.

Another influencer, Pat McAfee, led to what FanDuel believes is the largest communal parlay bet in history. McAfee promoted a Same Game Parlay for this year’s Super Bowl, which drove more than 200,000 bettors to tail the bet as well.

FanDuel app leads to crossover

FanDuel’s single nationwide app for its products is driving cross-sell by having everything in one spot, it says.

In FanDuel’s five states with iGaming, 56% of its customers have engaged with two or more products from January 2018 through October 2022.

One out of four sportsbook customers have been active in two or more states through October.

iGaming has room to grow

FanDuel CEO Amy Howe was clear there is still room to grow on the iGaming side.

FanDuel implemented some of Flutter’s promotional mechanics that drive engagement, leading to better month-over-month retention rates, she said.

When asked about potential acquisitions, though, Howe was not sure where the fit would be. Typically an acquisition is for a brand, database or loyalty program, but FanDuel feels good about its current path.

NY tax changes coming?

FanDuel does not ignore a state from a lobbying perspective once it goes live, President Christian Genetski said.

That work is often defensive in those live states but can also be offensive, such as looking for lower tax rates.

Genetski expects to see proposals submitted in New York that would add more mobile NY sportsbooks while lowering the tax rate from its current US-high 51%.

Smaller sports streaming with FanDuel

There are better homes than FanDuel for major US sports leagues in the medium term, Chief Commercial Officer Mike Raffensperger said.

That may not be true for smaller leagues, though.

Secondary and tertiary leagues that are having trouble finding a home for their games and securing a fanbase could benefit from a FanDuel integration though, he said.

The post FanDuel Capital Markets Day Top Takeaways appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

New Players get up to $1,000 bonus at FanDuel Sportsbook

1

Visit FanDuel Sportsbook

$1,000

No Sweat First Bet

FanDuel Sportsbook Review

Up to $1,000 No Sweat First Bet

Available on Desktop, Android & iOS  

To Claim: Click Play Now

Play Now

FanDuel promo code for Thursday Night Football

You don’t need to use a promo code to get the FanDuel “no sweat first bet.” All you have to do is sign up on the FanDuel website, which you can get to from any of the links on this page, like the FanDuel promo code link here. Once you’re on the FanDuel site, select the join button and register for an account, and once you deposit funds into that account, you’ll be all set.

The way the FanDuel welcome bonus works is that if your first wager at the sportsbook loses, you get a refund in free bets (maximum of $1,000). So if your first wager was $50, and it lost, you’d receive $50 in free bets.

Free bets are not withdrawable as cash, and you must wager them within seven days or they expire. When you do wager them, any winning bets do not return your stake — they only pay out the profit (i.e., $100 at +120 would net $120, not $220 as it would if it were a cash wager.)

To be eligible to claim FanDuel’s no sweat first bet for TNF, you must be of legal age to gamble and located in a state where FanDuel is legal, and use a FanDuel promo code link.

FanDuel Thursday Night Football preview

It’s a trip to Wisconsin for the Tennessee Titans this Thursday night, as the NFL week gets underway at Lambeau Field. Awaiting them will be the Green Bay Packers, who sit second in the NFC North, with a 4-6 record after defeating the Dallas Cowboys in overtime last weekend. The Titans are 6-3 so far, firmly in the driver’s seat in the AFC South, and they’re coming off a 17-10 win over the Denver Broncos last week.

Currently, FanDuel has Green Bay as a three-point favorite, with moneyline odds of Packers -168, Titans +142. The over/under on the game is 41 points, and bettors can also find plenty of prop bets and single-game parlay options for the game.

How to sign up with FanDuel promo code

If you want to sign up for a FanDuel account and claim the welcome bonuses, here’s what to do:

• Click a FanDuel promo code link on this page and head to the FanDuel Sportsbook site.
• Click on the join button in the top right of your screen, and fill in your personal details to make an account.
• Make your first deposit (the minimum is $10).
• Your first bet is eligible for a refund in free bets up to $1,000 if it loses.

The post FanDuel Promo Code for Thursday Night Football: $1,000 Bonus For Titans & Packers appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

A study was published this month finding that there was a high rate of cardiovascular disease in individuals who had a past traumatic brain injury.

The study, titled Association Between Traumatic Brain Injury and Subsequent Cardiovascular Disease Among Post-9/11-Era Veterans, was large in scope and included over 2.5 million veterans. After exclusions over 1.5 million veterans were left. Of this group over 300,000 had a history of traumatic brain injury.

The group with a history of brain injury was compared to the group without. In analyzing the rates of cardiovascular disease in groups the researchers concluded that those with history of brain injury were more likely to develop CVD compared to those without. They observed that “these results suggest that there may be an increased burden of CVD as these veterans age and develop other CVD risk factors.”

The study can be accessed here. The full abstract reads as follows:

Abstract

Importance: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) was common among US service members deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Although there is some evidence to suggest that TBI increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), prior reports were predominantly limited to cerebrovascular outcomes. The potential association of TBI with CVD has not been comprehensively examined in post-9/11-era veterans.

Objective: To determine the association between TBI and subsequent CVD in post-9/11-era veterans.

Design, setting, and participants: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted from October 1, 1999, to September 30, 2016. Participants were followed up until December 31, 2018. Included in the study were administrative data from the US Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense from the Long-term Impact of Military-Relevant Brain Injury Consortium-Chronic Effects of Neurotrauma Consortium. Participants were excluded if dates did not overlap with the study period. Data analysis was conducted between November 22, 2021, and June 28, 2022.

Exposures: History of TBI as measured by diagnosis in health care records.

Main outcomes and measures: Composite end point of CVD: coronary artery disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease, and cardiovascular death.

Results: Of the 2 530 875 veterans from the consortium, after exclusions, a total of 1 559 928 veterans were included in the analysis. A total of 301 169 veterans (19.3%; median [IQR] age, 27 [23-34] years; 265 217 male participants [88.1]) with a TBI history and 1 258 759 veterans (80.7%; median [IQR] age, 29 [24-39] years; 1 012 159 male participants [80.4%]) without a TBI history were included for analysis. Participants were predominately young (1 058 054 [67.8%] <35 years at index date) and male (1 277 376 [81.9%]). Compared with participants without a history of TBI, diagnoses of mild TBI (hazard ratio [HR], 1.62; 95% CI, 1.58-1.66; P < .001), moderate to severe TBI (HR, 2.63; 95% CI, 2.51-2.76; P < .001), and penetrating TBI (HR, 4.60; 95% CI, 4.26-4.96; P < .001) were associated with CVD in adjusted models. In analyses of secondary outcomes, all severities of TBI were associated with the individual components of the composite outcome except penetrating TBI and CVD death.

Conclusions and relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that US veterans with a TBI history were more likely to develop CVD compared with veterans without a TBI history. Given the relatively young age of the cohort, these results suggest that there may be an increased burden of CVD as these veterans age and develop other CVD risk factors. Future studies are needed to determine if the increased risk associated with TBI is modifiable.

The second panel of the day, “Athlete Publicity Rights: College & Beyond,” provided insightful discussion on prevalent topics in today’s sports law field. Dan Lust (Sports Law Attorney at Moritt Hock & Hamroff; Sports Law Professor at New York Law School; Podcast Host at Conduct Detrimental) moderated the panel and was joined by Arun “A.T.” Thottakara (NIL Legal Coordinator at Excel Sports Management), Medhi Ansari (Partner and Co-Head of the IP and Technology Group at Sullivan & Cromwell), and Robert Boland (Sports Law Professor at Seton Hall Law; Former Athletics Integrity Officer at Penn State University).

The panel began with a discussion on college athlete NIL (Name, Image, Likeness), and the lack of consistency in state laws, compliance, and governance. While the panelists all agreed that college athletes have, and likely should have had for a long time, a right to exploit opportunities arising out of their NIL, the state-by-state framework and inconsistent enforcement and rules lead to challenging legal issues. Given that the NCAA has ultimate control over college athlete eligibility, schools, conferences, and states have a duty to ensure that their student-athletes are complying with NCAA rules. However, as the panelists discussed, this duty may be overlooked. Overall, the career risks associated with athlete eligibility would be benefitted by a uniform, federal framework and investment into compliance measures.

Dan then went on to ask the panelists about their opinions on the various forms of NIL opportunities that college athletes are being granted. Specifically, the panelists discussed the issues and benefits arising out of the NIL collectives being formed by alumni and boosters. Although the collectives provide a great source of funds and opportunity for college athletes to benefit from, there are issues such as fair market value for services, pay-for-play, combatting bad actors, and policing the work of collectives. Since the schools have no control over the collectives and the NCAA has been stripped of much of its enforcement power in recent court rulings, duty to abide by NIL rules likely falls on the collective itself. However, with boosters seeking to recruit top athletes to their school and athletes hoping for a pay-day, these motives likely lead to harmful effects on competitive balance, fairness, and the future of amateur sports.

The panel concluded with a discussion on the future of athlete publicity rights in college sports: how to police collectives, what a uniform federal law should look like, will the NCAA’s governance structure survive this NIL revolution? Overall, there are a lot of questions and a lack of concrete answers, which is why AT highlighted the need for new attorneys in the field. The panelists agreed that since these issues are so new, nobody is really an expert in the field. The future experts and leaders will be us students!

BESLS, IPLA, and everyone in attendance would like to thank the panelists and moderator for an insightful conversation on the evolving world of athlete publicity rights.

Written by: Daniel Erber
Daniel is a 2023 J.D. Candidate at Brooklyn Law School

The post Athlete Publicity Rights: College & Beyond appeared first on Brooklyn Sports & Entertainment Law Blog.

The third panel of the day, “The Future of Sports Broadcasting,” provided insight into streaming services, creative development, and broadcast licensing. Anthony Iliakostas (Manager of ABC News Rights and Clearances; Adjunct Professor at New York Law School) moderated the panel and was joined by Michelle Torres (Senior Counsel at NBC Sports), Bretta Oluyede (Counsel at Youtube), and Laurie Curnes (Senior Director in ESPN’s corporate strategy group).

The panel was kicked off with a general discussion on the business of sports content licensing, and Anthony highlighted consumer frustrations with blackouts and geographical limitations. Despite the clear frustration and harm to consumers, the panelists articulated how such constraints are vital for content quality and the industry’s survival. Without blackouts, exclusive licenses, and geographical limitations, the networks and streaming services would not be able to extract the necessary advertising revenue to keep producing and purchasing high-quality content for consumers.

Next, the panelists discussed the relationship between sports leagues, production companies, and broadcast networks. Since leagues own the copyright to essential footage but lack the production and broadcasting capabilities, they need production and networks to further their product. Overall, networks need the league’s intellectual property, and the leagues need the producer’s expertise and the network’s content outlet. This working, mutually beneficial relationship is the behind-the-scenes to the many sports documentaries we are seeing today.

Lastly, the panel concluded with a discussion on the evolution of the sports broadcasting industry. While the industry and content licensing are still dominated by rights to game broadcasts (NFL Sunday, NBA on TNT, College Gameday, etc.), there has been an increase in alternative forms of sports television entertainment. From Netflix’s “Drive to Survive” to HBO’s “Hard Knocks,” fans and networks are not just seeking the games being played. Such unique broadcasts provide leagues and teams with increased revenue stemming from their intellectual property. Further, networks and streaming services no longer need to rely on live game rights as their sole sports content. This evolving industry has provided new forms of business for leagues, teams, networks and streaming services, and new forms of entertainment for sports fans.

BESLS, IPLA, and everyone in attendance would like to thank the panelists and moderator for an insightful conversation on the world of sports broadcasting.

Written by: Daniel Erber
Daniel is a 2023 J.D. Candidate at Brooklyn Law School

The post The Future of Sports Broadcasting appeared first on Brooklyn Sports & Entertainment Law Blog.

The day of panels concluded with a keynote conversation between Professor Jodi Balsam and Tim Slavin (Managing Director and Chief Legal Officer of OneTeam Partners). Tim provided great insight into his career, the work of OneTeam, and the future for athletes and sports lawyers.

Tim Slavin is the Managing Director and Chief Legal Officer of OneTeam Partners, LLC. OneTeam was formed in 2020 by the National Football League Players Association, Major League Baseball Players Association and RedBird Capital Partners. In less than three years, Redbird exited with the business valued at $1.9Billion. OneTeam has become a leading global sports licensing, marketing, media and investment company representing the commercial interests of more than 10,000 players of the NFLPA, MLBPA, MLSPA, U.S. Women’s National Team PA, WNBPA, NWSLPA, U.S. Rugby PA, and the LCSPA, as well as college athletes.

A founding executive, Tim leads various initiatives to develop existing and new revenue opportunities and manages company-wide legal matters. Prior to his current position, he was the President of MLB Players, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the MLBPA. In that role, he guided players in their commercial relationships with Major League Baseball, licensees, sponsors, agents and other strategic partners. Tim has been recognized as a member of the Sports Business Journal’s Forty Under 40 and was also featured in a leading sports magazine as a “rising executive helping to shape the next era of baseball business.”

After discussing Tim’s impressive experiences and how he got where he is today, the conversation continued with some insight into the world of group licensing and athlete publicity rights. Given a rise in opportunities (media, merchandise, memorabilia, fan experiences, etc.), Tim highlighted how important it is that athletes have a real seat at the negotiating table. While in the past athletes were often left to focus on their sports career and were overlooked in the business world, the increased power of player unions, the work of OneTeam, and the accessibility of information has propelled athletes into a powerful role in negotiations about their rights. By providing athletes and unions with resources, uniting the goals of athletes across various leagues, and exploiting new revenue opportunities, Tim and OneTeam are not only getting athletes a seat at the table, but a substantial voice as well.

Overall, Tim explained how the increase in opportunities for athletes will also lead to opportunities for attorneys in the field. By uniting forces, embarking on creative initiatives, and understanding the evolution of the sports business, the future for athletes and sports lawyers is bright!

BESLS, IPLA and everyone in attendance would like to thank Professor Balsam and Tim Slavin for such an interesting conversation to conclude a great day of panels.

Written by: Daniel Erber
Daniel is a 2023 J.D. Candidate at Brooklyn Law School

The post Keynote Conversation: Professor Jodi Balsam & Tim Slavin appeared first on Brooklyn Sports & Entertainment Law Blog.

Match manipulation, as one of the most common types of sports fraud, constitutes a significant threat to the integrity of sport and those involved. This paper aims to provide an image of the legal and regulatory framework currently in place to tackle match manipulation in sport against the background of the topics dealt with by the Council of Europe Convention on the Manipulation of Sports Competitions of 2014 (Macolin Convention). The paper, firstly, observes that, over the course of the past decade, several European states have introduced specific anti-corruption laws to deal with the phenomenon. In addition, multiple initiatives that were taken with the intention of improving national and international cooperation in relation to the topic of match manipulation are considered. At national level, numerous states have created multi-stakeholder platforms, so-called national platforms. At international level, cooperative initiatives exist as well. For example, organisations such as INTERPOL and Europol facilitate cooperation between police authorities and law enforcement agencies. Furthermore, the Group of Copenhagen, created against the backdrop of the Macolin framework, brings together representatives of the various national platforms. Last, the paper discusses multiple actions taken at the level of sports organisations in order to strengthen their regulatory framework with the aim of preventing, detecting and sanctioning match manipulation.

Sport is a microcosm of society. In this connection, in as much as there are reasons to celebrate individual athletic prowess and the undeniable contribution of sport to the maturation of communities, sport, like the broader society, contends with many ills, not least sexual violence. Although various sporting organizations and governments have, in the last 2 decades, adopted legislative instruments and Codes of Ethics and established various institutional mechanisms to combat the scourge of sexual violence, sport remains a hot bed for sexual violence, intimidation, reprisals and indignity in many jurisdictions. This article accordingly interrogates, from a Feminist Perspective, recently decided cases to illustrate how sexual violence committed against women and girls in the sporting context reflects a broader deeply entrenched system of patriarchy, characterized by a culture of silence, indifference, and abuse of authority. It concludes by calling on all concerned in the governance, administration, and practice of sport to redouble their efforts to address the growing problem of sexual violence in sport.

In the study, titled Head Trauma Exposure in Mixed Martial Arts, the authors reviewed all numbered UFC events from the year 2000-2021. They reviewed the number of head impacts received and then analyzed these based on different factors such as sex and weight class. They found the average fighter absorbed almost 2.5 significant head strikes per minute of competition and that women absurd more head strikes than men. Addressing the difference the authors noted as follows:

Women’s fights were on average one and a half minutes longer. Over thirty percent of all fights (31.6%) ended due to knockout with a head injury (32.2% of female and 23.1% of male fights)

They found significant exposure to head trauma overall and cautioned competitors to be well versed in the risks of competing and minizine overall damage absorbed in the profession with these comments:

Professional fights in mixed martial arts involve high exposure to head trauma. During combat, a fighter receives 2.41 significant head strikes per minute on average—2.95 ± 3.94 in female fights and 2.37 ± 3.06 in male fights. There were also 7.73 ± 6.63 total head strikes in female and 6.2 ± 5.34 in male fights. The number of head punches (total and significant) in male fights was higher in the lower weight categories—such as bantamweight and featherweight. In women’s fights, such differences between divisions were not found. When comparing equivalent male and female divisions, there were statistically significant differences in total and head strikes (more performed by women) in the featherweight category. For all types of strikes, females had more significant punches in clinch, distance and on the ground in the male and female flyweight divisions, and in body strikes and those in distance and clinch in the male and female bantamweight divisions….Careful evaluation of the risk involved in training for such a discipline is necessary to provide adequate prevention methods.

The full study can be found here and the abstract reads as follows:

Combat sports training involves a high risk of head injury. Previously published research on head trauma exposure in MMA evaluated only the knockouts (KO), without calculating all head strikes. The aim of the research was to evaluate the total head trauma exposure during MMA competitions among male and female fighters. Two thousand four hundred and eighty-eight MMA fights from all numbered UFC events between 2000 and 2021 were analyzed. A database containing the results from officially published scorecards with information such as the outcome of a fight, its duration, number of strikes (significant and total amount of hits) depending on location and knockdowns was created. Additional video verification of the knockout technique was carried out. The athletes received an average of 2.41 significant head strikes out of a total of 6.30 head strikes per minute. Head strikes were more common in female fights than in male. Women executed more total and significant head strikes per minute than men. Head trauma caused the ending of 31.6% of all fights—more often in male fights (32.2%) than female (23.1%). It was the most common cause of knockouts—88.1%. Professional fights in mixed martial arts involve high exposure to head trauma. A careful evaluation of the risk involved in training in such a discipline is necessary to provide adequate prevention methods.

In Wednesday‘s trading update, Flutter CEO Peter Jackson said FanDuel Sportsbook is averaging 1 million players for NFL betting on Sundays in the US.

Jackson said he is “really pleased” with the performance of the US segment in an interim trading update:

“In addition, we are seeing an increase in customer retention rates as our parlay products continue to grow in popularity, boosted by the start of the NBA season. The ongoing momentum in our US division has led to an upgrade to our outlook for the year, underpinning our confidence that we will be profitable for 2023.”

FanDuel success leads to revenue upgrade

FanDuel now expects US revenue to fall between $2.95 billion and $3.2 billion for all of 2022. That is an additional $100 million of upside from the prior range of $2.85 billion to $3.1 billion.

That is after generating $700 million in third-quarter revenue. That makes the US Flutter’s largest business division, with its sportsbook taking a leading 42% market share in the quarter.

Adjusted EBITDA loss from the US should still be between $300 million and $360 million. That range is inclusive of the costs of an earlier than expected Maryland sports betting launch.

The continued US momentum underpins Flutter’s confidence in profitability for 2023, the company said. FanDuel will continue to push to acquire “as many customers as we can” to support the push to profitability, Jackson said.

Few specifics offered with presentation next week

Flutter’s management team did not share many specifics on the analyst call, with the FanDuel Capital Markets Day scheduled for next Wednesday.

Jackson and CFO Jonathan Hill did give some additional insight not found in the trading update:

• The rational promotional environment is allowing FanDuel to continue to invest aggressively in existing states. About 40% of new customers in the quarter were from states that launched last year or earlier.
• Racing segment TVG and the daily fantasy sports business both saw flat revenues compared to last year. There is some cannibalization of players in those segments as recreational players are switching to sports betting when available.
• iGaming share may have slipped a “tiny fraction” because of the lighter sports calendar in the quarter, Jackson said. This could imply a strong cross-sell correlation from sports betting into iGaming for the company.

Flutter takes victory lap on FanDuel valuation

The long-standing disagreement between Flutter and Fox is mostly over after an arbitrator found FanDuel should be valued at $20 billion. That puts Fox’s option for an 18.6% stake at $4.1 billion today.

“This vindicates our position on the matter, with FanDuel valued at $20 billion based on its fair market value at 3 December 2020 and provides important clarity on the significant cost required to buy into the number one US gaming business.”

Still up in the air is whether Fox has any right to participate in a Flutter IPO. That should be decided early next year, but do not expect FanDuel to spin off any time soon.

Jackson said it is “very difficult” to picture an IPO in the current market.

The post Flutter CEO: More Than 1 Million FanDuel Players On Average NFL Sunday appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Crafted during the 1950s and then pushed over the finish line by Robert F. Kennedy’s Department of Justice, the law was an effort to go after nationwide bookmaking syndicates by targeting their means of communication. It did not really work.

Organized crime is still here, still making money, still taking bets. We have also seen the rise of offshore betting in addition to unregulated bookmaking unconnected to organized crime.

Prohibitions on vice products have tended not to work and the Wire Act is no exception. Nonetheless, like the federal marijuana laws that remain in spite of widespread legal and medical marijuana, federal laws like the Wire Act continue to hang over the sports gambling market, both regulated and unregulated.

A pretty big threat

The Wire Act is an often misunderstood statute. In fact, the Trump Administration’s Justice Department found the statute so confusing, they wrongly believed it applied to all online gaming activity. This was contradicted by both the legislative history of the statute and by a plain reading of the statute’s text.

Ultimately, the First Circuit Court of Appeals would correct the Justice Department’s incorrect view. However, the decision meant little for the world of sports betting.

The operational text of the Wire Act contained in 18 U.S.C. 1084(a) states:

Whoever being engaged in the business of betting or wagering knowingly uses a wire communication facility for the transmission in interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers or information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers on any sporting event or contest, or for the transmission of a wire communication which entitles the recipient to receive money or credit as a result of bets or wagers, or for information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

In plain English please

While this is hardly an English teacher’s dream sentence, over the years the federal courts have helped break this down.

Principally, the Wire Act applies to those in the business of betting and prohibits the interstate transmission of information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers. Historically, this has meant the supplying of betting line information if done on a substantially ongoing basis.

The Wire Act does contain a safe harbor provision in section (b) whereby if the information is transmitted between two states where the activity is legal in both jurisdictions, it does not offend the Wire Act.

How safe is safe harbor in Wire Act?

Of course there are open questions about intermediate routing, where information passes through a third state on its path between two states, but that is a whole other article.

But the safe harbor only applies to the information part of the Wire Act, and not the transmission of the bets themselves. Federal courts have held that the first prong of the Wire Act prohibits the interstate transmission of bets or wagers and the safe harbor provision does not save that activity.

Cases in the case

In United States v. Lyons, the First Circuit Court of Appeals said:

the safe harbor provision only applies to the transmission of “information assisting in the placing of bets.” The safe harbor provision does not exempt from liability the interstate transmission of bets themselves.

The Fifth Circuit in United States v. McDonough even cited the House of Representatives report regarding the safe harbor provisions, stating:

Nothing in the exemption, however, will permit the transmission of bets and wagers … from or to any State whether betting is legal in that State or not. (The Fifth Circuit added emphasis that has been removed).

The question is, does this prohibition still serve its purpose?

Calls for feds to use power to stop unregulated competition

The American Gaming Association has made several public calls for the federal government to use its powers under the Wire Act (and other statutes) to clamp down on unregulated operators who are competing with the regulated market.

In theory, this sounds like a great idea for the regulated market, but the reality is that the federal government is not especially adept at playing offshore whack-a-mole to knock down every site that serves Americans, same with targeting onshore operations.

The Department of Justice could exercise a show of force, and perhaps seize the domains of several high-profile operators, but even that would be unlikely to have much of a deterrent effect. This leaves open, what is the Wire Act doing?

Wire Act threat to innovation?

As much as the investment bankers might not like to hear it, the US gambling market is concentrated amongst about a half-dozen operators and there seems to be little that would indicate others are about to make a breakthrough.

We are already seeing operators like theScore and Unibet give up in some jurisdictions because the economics do not make sense anymore. A part of what is contributing to costs hindering smaller operators (not that Unibet or the Score were small) is the costs of needing to build redundant processes in every state that they operate as a result of the Wire Act.

What to do about Wire Act

The Wire Act was built before a time when legal sports gambling across the United States was fathomable. Now, the statute serves primarily as an obstacle to legal businesses that are obligated to follow the law.

Like the prohibitions on alcohol, marijuana, and drugs, the Wire Act has been a failure at stopping unregulated sports betting. It is time for Congress to get together and reconstitute the Wire Act such that it is not primarily hurting small regulated businesses.

The post Opinion: Does Wire Act Still Serve A Purpose In Regulating Sports Betting? appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

As expected, tribal-backed Proposition 26 and sportsbook-backed Prop 27 both will fail to gain enough votes for passage in Tuesday’s election. NBC News called the races early Tuesday evening on the West Coast.

Prop 27, which would have legalized online CA sports betting, has just 16% of the vote with about a third of precincts reporting. Meanwhile, Prop 26, which would have opened up retail CA sports betting on tribal lands and significantly expanding casino gaming, has just less than 30% support.

“We thank the voters of California for overwhelming rejecting Prop 27,” Agua Caliente tribal chairman Reid Milanovich told LSR. “The defeat of 27 is not just good for my tribe or tribes in general, but for the state of California as a whole. So we would like to thank the voters for that.”

No on Prop 27 statement

Dan Little, chief intergovernmental affairs officer the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, put out a statement on behalf of No on 27:

“California Tribes are thankful that voters have defeated Prop. 27 and affirmed the mutually beneficial relationship enjoyed by Tribes with the State of California. The sovereign right of Tribes to exclusively operate casino-style gaming in California, as originally confirmed by the State’s voters over two decades ago, has been preserved from the incursion of out-of-state corporations.

Those corporations should be aware that California Tribes will always protect their people and their sovereignty, as well as work with the people of California to improve our collective well-being, now and into the future.”

Yes on Prop 27 statement

Yes on 27 spokesperson Nathan Click issued the following statement after the election results came out:

“Our coalition knew that passing Prop 27 would be an uphill climb, and we remain committed to California. This campaign has underscored our resolve to see California follow more than half the country in legalizing safe and responsible online sports betting. …

Californians deserve the benefits of a safe, responsible, regulated, and taxed online sports betting market, and we are resolved to bringing it to fruition here.”

Tough path to legal California sports betting

A pathway to regulating and legalizing California sports betting is difficult to envision at the moment, especially given the animosity between tribes and commercial operators. 

A legislative pathway appears unlikely given past failures, while another trip to the ballot would need significant reimagining.

The tribes, led by San Manuel and Pechanga, view Prop 27’s failure as a significant victory. It maintains the status quo, while keeping online operators like FanDuel Sportsbook and DraftKings Sportsbook at bay. Tribes ultimately do not want commercial operators to have access to CA’s robust online casino market. 

Why Prop 27 failed

The sides spent more than $400 million in a heated Prop 27 advertising campaign battle. It left voters to sort through an influx of ads and a mass of misinformation.

“I don’t think anybody believes either side,” an industry insider told LSR . “You’re not going to solve homelessness, and this isn’t really about protecting tribal sovereignty.”

Prop 27 performed poorly in multiple independent polls, and Yes on 27 pulled its TV ads in major CA markets last month as a result. That left FanDuel CEO Amy Howe and DraftKings CEO Jason Robins to all but concede on 2022, and turn their attention to 2024 and beyond. 

Tribes control future of California sports betting

There was also no executive support for Prop 27. Gov. Gavin Newsom came out against the legalization of online sports betting in late October, though at that point the battle was already lost anyway.

Any chance for online sports betting passage in California clearly hinges on the tribes, who want to be in the driver’s seat.

Mark Macarro, Tribal Chairman of the Pechanga Band of Indians, said in a statement:

“It’s clear voters don’t want a massive expansion of online sports betting, and they trust Indian tribes when it comes to responsible gaming. As tribes, we will analyze these results, and collectively have discussions about what the future of sports wagering might look like in California.”

A tribal-led online sports betting initiative could be the way to go for California, assuming no legislative solution in 2023. For now, CA bettors are left with options like going to neighboring states, wagering with a bookie, or using an unregulated offshore site.

The post California Sports Betting Measures Prop 26, 27 Strongly Rejected appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Despite missing revenue projections in Q3 by 6% and lowering full-year revenue guidance from between $600 million and $630 million to between $580 million and $600 million, RSI executives are still optimistic they have the right plan to achieve profitability in the online gaming industry, according to executives during its earnings call last Wednesday.

RSI shares hit a five-week peak of $4.55 Wednesday following the call before dipping to $3.74 at market close Friday, well below the 52-week high of $21.70. CEO Richard Schwartz and team are optimistic about the future of RSI and its app, BetRivers. Here are the main reasons why:

BetRivers doubles down on iCasino markets

Rather than join the market-share rat race, RSI is focusing on maximizing revenues from loyal customers in specific markets with what they believe is better marketing efficiency. Schwartz said BetRivers was profitable in five US sports betting markets, all of which are more profitable iCasino states except for its home market of Illinois.

“It remains a simple fact about our business, the online casino vertical is significantly larger and more profitable than sports betting in the markets where we are operating both,” Schwartz said. “This is why our business model, including our platform design, functionality and our approach to marketing and operations is driven first and foremost by our deep understanding of digital casino customers.”

BetRivers holds approximately 4.4% market share in states where data is broken down by operator. That includes Illinois, where it has approximately 12% market share. The five profitable markets:

• Illinois
• Michigan
• New Jersey
• Pennsylvania
• West Virginia

More iCasino markets coming?

Chief Financial Officer Kyle Sauers said they expect to spend more on casino opportunities during the fourth quarter this year. RSI executives expect some of those markets, like Michigan, will continue to grow. They also believe multiple states could legalize iCasino in 2023:

• Illinois
• Indiana
• Iowa
• New York

BetRivers revenue up, losses down

Overall, RSI posted year-over-year revenue growth of 20% for the quarter, up to $148 million.

That resulted in an EBITDA loss of $12.5 million, “a considerable improvement” from a $18.6 million loss in the second quarter, according to Schwartz.

In BetRivers’ nine sportsbook-only markets, the company posted an aggregate loss of less than $5 million. Schwartz said he believes sports betting-only markets can be profitable, with “many headed in that direction.”

Focus on key customers

In talking about new markets like Ohio and Maryland, Schwartz said the operator continues to refine its overall marketing approach. Compared to the same quarter last year, RSI’s cost-per-player is down 50%, he said.

“Our approach remains data-driven as we are investing in customers at what we believe to be viable levels,” Schwartz said. “In other words, we look hard at what we spend and what we get. We won’t target market share.”

In the fourth quarter, Schwartz said marketing allocation has moved toward casino markets. That includes New Jersey, where the company rebranded PlaySugarHouse to BetRivers.

BetRivers progresses in Ontario

Schwartz said Ontario having both online sports betting and iCasino bodes well for BetRivers.

Through the first two quarters of action in Ontario, BetRivers’ market share is approximately 7% for iCasino and 2% for sports betting, according to Schwartz.

“Given the number of competitors in the market and the advantage some of our competitors began with in terms of existing high brand awareness and access to line player databases, we are pleased with the success and hope to continue to build upon that in the quarters to come,” he said.

Expanding bet menus

Schwartz also highlighted expanded bet menus that launched with the NFL betting and NBA betting seasons. That includes single-game parlays in basketball for the first time and new player props.

He hopes there is a Super Bowl betting bump with a new “patent pending squares game.”

“Even if you’ve never placed a sports bet in your life, you’ve probably participated in a squares pool game in conjunction with watching the Super Bowl,” he said. “We talk all the time about how we find ways to delight players and give them unique ways to engage, win and have fun with our platform. Players will be awarded squares based on their actives and bets and will win prizes when their numbers hit.”

More investments coming from RSI?

Rush Street executives seem bullish on their opportunities for the future as they further refine their plans.

“We have almost $200 million of cash on the balance sheets, no debt and very little in the way of long-term marketing commitments,” Sauers said. “This gives us significant flexibility to make investments where we see the best returns and pull back where we don’t.

“All this gives us a continued clear path to profitability at a market level and from an overall business perspective.”

The post BetRivers Focuses On iCasino: Six Takeaways From RSI Q3 Earnings Call appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

While Prop 26 and Prop 27 for California sports betting drew almost $500 million in one of the most expensive ballot measure races in history, both efforts are almost guaranteed to fail, according to polling.

However, outside of California, multiple elections Tuesday could have an influence on the future of US sports betting.

Could Texas join legal US sports betting?

With California’s doomed efforts likely pushing any legalization potential out to 2026 or beyond,  the industry will shift attention to another giant: Texas. The Texas Sports Betting Alliance is already bullish on its chances next year.

SBA spokesperson Cara Gustafson told LSR the organization is not focused on any races but will continue to have conversations with legislative leadership. The session starts Jan. 10, 2023, so Gustafson said new freshman members will be a priority for educational conversations.

The governor’s race also could be less pivotal than before, as Republican incumbents Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick would be past any reelection concerns and might soften their opposition of sports betting, according to an industry source. Democratic candidate Beto O’Rourke is a supporter of sports wagering.

Minnesota might have a shot

Minnesota came close to legalizing in 2022 with legislation thwarted at the end of the session. A bill from the Democratic-held House was derailed by the Republican-controlled Senate. The Republican legislators in Minnesota appear less worried about working with the state’s 11 tribes.

“There was a belief the House will switch to Republican control, and they’ll be more open to a more competitive industry than exclusivity to the tribes,” an industry source said. “Their bet was to push it into next year to see what the election looks like.”

All 201 legislative seats are up for election, as well as Democratic Gov. Tim Walz, a sports betting supporter. The issue in Minnesota is fairly split, with 48% in support and 20% undecided about sports betting, according to a poll by the Star Tribune, MPR News and KARE 11.

Georgia on my mind

In Georgia, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams has put legalizing sports betting among her top issues. Along with legalizing casino gaming, Abrams hopes the revenues could provide Georgians free technical college schooling.

Incumbent Gov. Brian Kemp has not taken a stance on the issue but has said he would work with legislators to implement the best model possible.

Sports betting bills stalled in Georgia for the past two years, and the best bet might be a 2024 ballot initiative. However, recent polling by the Georgia News Collaborative found just 45.6% of voters approve of sports betting, while 59.7% support casino gambling in the state.

Tough sell for Missouri sports betting

Missouri came close to passing legislation this year but failed to get it across the line, while neighboring rival Kansas finished the job.

That might not change anytime soon, as one of the main obstacles remains in office. While a supporter of sports betting, Sen. Denny Hoskins also is the main proponent of expanding video lottery terminals in the state – a hindrance to casino support.

“Missouri is more show than substance, and honestly I don’t see a clear pathway yet,” an industry source said. “[The VLT issue] will continue to be an end around the success of the bill. There needs to be some sort of agreement by the casinos to accept some VLTs or the Senator not to push for it.”

Status quo in North Carolina

North Carolina has legal retail sports wagering at tribal casinos, and past online efforts did gain some momentum. This year, a Senate bill died in the House where a representative essentially equated sports betting to monetizing human trafficking.

Lobbyist Ches McDowell said this week’s results will not influence future efforts too much.

Earlier this year, a poll from WRAL News found 52% support online sports betting. Sitting Gov. Roy Cooper said he would sign any passing sports wagering legislation.

Kentucky hopes to keep momentum

This year, a bipartisan bill pushed through the House in Kentucky but failed to rally enough support from the dominant Republican caucus in the Senate. Leading House sponsor Rep. Adam Koenig lost his primary battle, which could limit any new efforts in a short 2023 session.

Half of the Senate and the entire House is up for election this year.

Sitting Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear is a supporter of sports betting, but is up for reelection in next year.

The post Election Day 2022: How Could It Affect US Sports Betting? appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

The dispute stems from a deal that originated in late 2020, whereby Fox gained an option to acquire an 18.5% stake in FanDuel. As part of the deal, the parties agreed to opt into binding arbitration, which is how this dispute ended up at JAMS as opposed to a New York courthouse.

A breakdown took place in April 2021, prompting Fox to initiate the arbitration provision contained within the deal. The dispute centered on FanDuel’s value for exercising the acquisition option. Ultimately, the arbitration decision sets FanDuel’s value as of December 2020 at $20 billion, plus a 5% annual escalator calculation.

The decision clears the path for both Fox and FanDuel (and its parent company, Flutter) to move forward.

Breaking down the decision for Flutter, Fox

The decision saw both Fox and Flutter claim that they were pleased with the outcome, and this is ultimately a win for the arbitration system.

The key terms include:

• Fox Corporation has the option to acquire 18.6% of FanDuel at a $20 billion valuation
• The valuation is based on the fair market value of FanDuel as of December 2020
• The valuation is subject to a 5% annual compounding value adjustment
• This translates to a current valuation for FanDuel of $22 billion
• The cost to acquire 18.6% would be $4.1 billion

Why December 2020?

The valuation is based on the value of FanDuel in December 2020, which is when Flutter struck a deal to acquire an additional 37.2% stake in FanDuel from Fastball Holdings, LLC. This followed Flutter’s initial acquisition of 57.8% of FanDuel in May 2018. The deal was structured so Flutter could acquire 18.6% of FanDuel in July 2021 and then the remaining 18.6% in July 2023 (the remaining 5% stake in FanDuel was to be held by Boyd Gaming, who acquired the stake via a market-access deal.)

How does Fox get involved?

As part of the 2020 deal, Fastball’s interest in FoxBet was scheduled to end, but Flutter intended:

to offer to FOX Sports the option to purchase 18.5% of FanDuel at fair market value in July 2021, with substantively the same terms and valuation mechanism that FOX Sports and Flutter previously agreed would have applied to the Fastball put and call options.

This set the stage for the arbitration proceedings that resulted in a decision on November 4, which will create added clarity in the sports betting market moving forward as additional pieces begin to fall into place.

What is in the arbitration award

The arbitration process took place under the New York JAMS alternative dispute resolution services group beginning in April 2021.

According to Flutter’s press release, Fox filed two supplementary items to be considered as part of the arbitration in addition to the debate over the valuation. The first item related to whether “Flutter had failed to provide commercially reasonable resources to the operation of Fox Bet.” The tribunal ultimately rejected that claim finding that the support provided by Flutter had satisfied their obligations.

The second aspect worth noting is that Fox maintains the right to acquire up to 50% of The Stars Group US, which contains the Fox Bet operations, Super6, and PokerStars US brands. Fox, however, must be licensed in order to exercise this option, and both parties can terminate their agreement as it relates to Fox Bet in August 2023 should either party so desire.

According to the press release, a termination could result in the end of the Fox Bet business. Flutter would retain PokerStars US and Super6, but the Fox Bet brand would return to Fox.

Matters still to be considered

While the tribunal’s decision seems to have cleared a lot of room for moving forward, the Flutter press release noted that there remains at least one issue to be resolved at a later date, probably early in 2023.

The remaining question centers on whether Fox would get to participate in an initial public offering of a FanDuel parent company should one ever take place.

In the interim, Flutter has agreed not to proceed with any such offering until the tribunal reaches its binding decision on the matter.

What to make of all this?

Arbitrations are often seen as friendlier alternatives to litigation . While both sides have been able to claim they are happy with the result, there are definitely questions about what this means for the market moving forward.

While we likely will not have a clear picture until August 2023 just what this means for Fox Bet, FanDuel and Fox Bet have been two companies that have had divergent paths in the still-early days of the regulated US market.

As it stands, FanDuel is the biggest brand in the market and Fox Bet, despite the powerful brand, has struggled to gain a foothold in the states that it is operating. The decision leaves Fox with a decision to make ahead: whether to spend exercising its option or to perhaps move on to a different area.

The post Analysis: Inside Ruling On Fox Option To Buy FanDuel Stake From Flutter appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Fighting is dangerous. In many ways obviously so. In some ways the dangers are hidden. CTE is one of the hidden dangers which can creep up quietly many years after the damage is done. Repeated hits rattling the brain give rise to the disease. Both the CDC and the NIH have finally made this admission.

With reputable health agencies acknowledging cause and effect its past time for those in the fight business to be honest about brain trauma and CTE. Enter Fight Circus.

Full Metal Dojo is the biggest MMA promotion in Thailand. Among their products is a show which embraces the odd and bizarre in combat sports, Fight Circus.

Last night Fight Circus IV aired and the show started with Fighting Foundation’s brain health basics video. Telling athletes to take concussions in training seriously. And telling athletes to minimize the amount of brain trauma they expose themselves to, particularly in training, given its link to the incurable and deadly brain disease CTE.

Thank you Fight Circus. To my knowledge you are the first fight promotion in history to give a Public Service Announcement about CTE/Concussions and fighting.

Other promoters should follow suit. Don’t be outdone by Fight Circus when it comes to brain health education.

Over the past two decades, several states have enacted legislation criminalizing the use of performance-enhancing drugs in sports, otherwise known as doping. The decision to criminalize doping raises an important question: ‘Is the criminalization of doping use justifiable?’ In an attempt to justify a criminal response, proponents of the criminalization of doping use have advanced various arguments such as arguments from fraud, health risk, and protection of the integrity, image and value of sports. This paper presents counter-arguments that plead against the criminalization of doping and critically evaluates whether any of the said arguments justifies the criminalization of doping. It is argued that none of the proposed justifications provides sufficient reason, let alone a compelling case, to criminalize doping use. It is also concluded that a criminal response is disproportionate, unnecessary, and impractical. If sound, this implies that the criminalization of doping use is unwarranted and potentially contributes to the crisis of ‘over-criminalization.’

This study aims to examine the legal order of the Olympics by providing a comprehensive but self-limited literature on global constitutionalism. It provides a thorough understanding of the varied perspectives of global constitutionalism, by presenting a rich seam of a combination of the different global constitutionalist stances that are grouped by similarities concerning their line of thought. By focusing on the representative of various camps of global constitutionalism, the study applies these perspectives to the system of the Olympic Movement prescribed by the Olympic Charter. The study, initially, has the purpose of presenting the perspectives of prominent global constitutionalist scholars in relation to the main discussion points of global constitutionalism. After establishing the meaning and requisites of a global constitutionalist order, its ultimate aim is to provide the constitutionalist reading of the law of the Olympics concerning its legal framework and actors and determine the extent of constitutionalisation of the Olympic Movement.

DraftKings promo code for NFL Week 9

You don’t need a code to claim the bonus at DraftKings. All you need to do is head to the website via a link on this page, make an account, add some money to it, and you’ll be all set to start wagering. Click the DraftKings promo code link here or “play now” above to get started.

Any deposit of $5 or more into a new DraftKings account automatically nets you a $50 free bet. There’s also a deposit bonus in effect: DraftKings will match 20% of your first deposit at the sportsbook, up to a maximum of $1,000 in bonus funds. So a $100 first deposit would net you $70 in bonus funds ($50 free bet plus $20 from the 20% matching bonus.)

Then, if you place an NFL moneyline bet of $5 or more this weekend and it wins, DraftKings will provide you with $200 in free bets. To claim the bonus, you must be in a state where DraftKings Sportsbook is legal, and you must be of legal betting age in that state.

DraftKings is also running pre-launch promotions for Ohio and Maryland bettors. If you sign up now using the DraftKings promo code link, you can receive a free $200 bonus on top of the deposit bonuses at launch.

DraftKings Sportsbook NFL Week 9 preview

NFL Week 9 action on Sunday has a number of interesting games in store, like the Los Angeles Rams (+3 on the spread, +135 on the moneyline) at the Tampa Bay Buccaneers (-3, -155), the Green Bay Packers (-3.5, -190) at the Detroit Lions (+3.5, +160) and the Tennessee Titans (+12.5, +430) at the Kansas City Chiefs (-12.5, -560). Monday Night Football is the Baltimore Ravens (-2.5, -140) at the New Orleans Saints. (+2.5, +120).

Along with spreads, moneylines and totals for these games, DraftKings is offering an array of props and parlays, including various bets on who will score a TD and when, the race to X points and plenty more.

How to sign up with the DraftKings promo code

To make a DraftKings account and claim the promos this week, follow these steps:

• Follow a DraftKings promo code link from this page to the DraftKings Sportsbook site.
• Click on the sign-up button and fill in the details on the form to make an account.
• Make your first deposit (minimum $5 to claim the $50 free bet).
• Make a $5 wager on an NFL Week 9 moneyline, and receive $200 in free bets if you win.

The post DraftKings Promo Code Launches $1,250 in Bonuses For NFL Week 9 appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

We are at the halfway point of the NFL season with Week 9 play, and competition is heating up. Sunday’s slate of games ends with a Sunday Night Football matchup between the Tennessee Titans and the Kansas City Chiefs. Caesars Sportsbook is offering new users a bonus of up to $1,250 ahead of all Week 9 games, plus other perks.

Get Up to $1,250 + Credits at Caesars Sportsbook

1

Visit Caesars Sportsbook

Up to $1,250

On Caesars

Caesars Sportsbook Review

Up to $1,250 On Caesars

+ get 1,000 Caesars Reward Credits

+ also get 1,000 Tier Credits

Redeem for free bets, hotel stays, & more! 

Use Promo Code: LEGALFULL

PLAY NOW

Caesars Sportsbook promo code for NFL Week 9 & SNF

Sign up at Caesars Sportsbook using the Caesars Sportsbook promo code LEGALFULL to redeem a welcome bonus of up to $1,250 on Caesars. After you do that, deposit money into your account and place any type of wager on the Titans vs. Chiefs game this week. If your bet loses, Caesars will refund you the full amount as a free bet, up to $1,250. So, if your first bet is for $50 and it loses, Caesars will provide a $50 free bet that you can use at the sportsbook.

You will also receive 1,000 tier credits and 1,000 reward credits for Caesars Rewards when you use the code above. With those credits, you can redeem prizes at the online sportsbook or experiences at Caesars Entertainment venues.

Caesars Sportsbook NFL Week 9 Sunday schedule

Find lines for every NFL Week 9 game on Caesars Sportsbook. (all times Eastern):

• Los Angeles Chargers at Atlanta Falcons, 1 p.m.
• Miami Dolphins at Chicago Bears, 1 p.m.
• Carolina Panthers at Cincinnati Bengals, 1 p.m.
• Green Bay Packers at Detroit Lions, 1 p.m.
• Las Vegas Raiders at Jacksonville Jaguars, 1 p.m.
• Indianapolis Colts at New England Patriots, 1 p.m.
• Buffalo Bills at New York Jets, 1 p.m.
• Minnesota Vikings at Washington Commanders, 1 p.m.
• Seattle Seahawks at Arizona Cardinals, 4:05 p.m.
• Los Angeles Rams at Tampa Bay Buccaneers, 4:25 p.m.
• Tennessee Titans at Kansas City Chiefs, 8:20 p.m. (SNF)
• Byes: Cleveland Browns, Dallas Cowboys, Denver Broncos, New York Giants, Pittsburgh Steelers, San Francisco 49ers

Caesars Sportsbook preview of Sunday Night Football: Tennessee Titans at Kansas City Chiefs

The Titans will enter this game following a win over the Houston Texans that bumped their record to 5-2, securely at the top of the AFC South. The Chiefs are coming off a week of rest after taking down the 49ers in dominant fashion in Week 7. They are also 5-2. A win for either team gives that squad sole possession of second place in the AFC.

This line saw some movement following Week 8 results. The Chiefs opened as 10.5-point favorites but are now a more comfortable 12.5-point favorite. This is one of a few games that has a double-digit spread in Week 9.
The Titans are +460 moneyline underdogs, and Caesars Sportsbook has the over/under at 46.5 points. There are also parlay and prop bet options available on the sportsbook.

The post Caesars Sportsbook Promo Code for SNF & Week 9: $1,250 First Bet on Caesars appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

New Players get up to $1,000 bonus at FanDuel Sportsbook

1

Visit FanDuel Sportsbook

$1,000

No Sweat First Bet

FanDuel Sportsbook Review

Up to $1,000 No Sweat First Bet

Available on Desktop, Android & iOS  

To Claim: Click Play Now

Play Now

FanDuel promo code for Sunday Night Football

FanDuel’s promo for new users provides you with a refund in free bets if your first bet with FanDuel loses, up to a maximum of $1,000. Click the FanDuel promo code link here to claim the bonus.

For example, if you made your first FanDuel bet a $100 wager on the Titans to cover the spread, and they didn’t end up covering, you’d receive $100 in free bets to use on other FanDuel wagers. To claim the FanDuel welcome bonus, you have to be of legal betting age and located in a state where FanDuel is legal.

You can claim this bonus for Sunday Night Football or any NFL Week 9 game.

FanDuel Sunday Night Football preview: Titans vs Chiefs

The Tennessee Titans travel to Missouri on the heels of five straight wins, having most recently dispatched the Houston Texans 17-10 last Sunday. They’re 5-2 overall for the season so far, and they’re first in the AFC South as it stands. They’ll be in for a fight on Sunday night, however, with the Kansas City Chiefs also 5-2 so far and fresh off a win over the San Francisco 49ers last week, 44-23.

Right now, Kansas City is a 12.5-point favorite, with moneyline odds of -700, compared to +500 on Tennessee to win. The over/under for total points in Sunday night’s game is 44.5. There are also parlays and prop bets available, such as betting on the result of each team’s first drive (punt, touchdown, field goal attempt, etc.) or whether the game will go to overtime.

How to sign up with FanDuel promo code

Here are the steps to signing up at FanDuel’s online sportsbook and claiming the FanDuel new user bonus:

• Select one of the FanDuel promo code links on this page to access the FanDuel homepage.
• Click on the green “Join Now” button and fill out the necessary personal details on the registration form.
• Pick a deposit method and add money to your account (minimum deposit of $10).
• Your first bet will then qualify for FanDuel’s promo.

The post FanDuel Promo Code: Grab $1,000 No Sweat Bet For NFL Week 9 & SNF appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

On October 12th, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc v. Goldsmith. Litigants traded arguments scrutinizing the boundaries of artistic license while Justices lobbed hypotheticals that probed the nature of book-to-film adaptations and the boundless creative implications of color. The hearing was a departure from the court’s recent spate of highly politicized cases. Laughter echoed in the chamber as Justice Thomas hinted at his waning fandom of Prince and lawyers admitted their insufficiently intimate knowledge of Lord of the Rings. It was a humorous proceeding that belied the truth of this case: the future of artistic expression had just been placed in the hands of the Supreme Court.

The Warhol case is a story about artists using each other’s work. Lynn Goldsmith is a photographer known for her portraits of musicians and, in 1981, she was hired to photograph Prince. The pictures that Goldsmith took didn’t appear in print. Instead, she saved them in her personal files. It is one of those images – a black and white close-up of Prince, adorned with lip gloss and gazing softly to camera – that has become the core of this case.

Fast-forward three years: Prince had grown into an international superstar. Vanity Fair magazine commissioned Andy Warhol, a creative juggernaut in his own right, to create a cover image for an issue celebrating the musical icon. The magazine paid Goldsmith four hundred dollars for the right to license her image: it would be used as reference for Warhol’s creation and would appear only in the magazine issue. Warhol had other designs. He used Goldsmith’s image to create sixteen works of silkscreen and pencil drawings. His creation didn’t just appear in the Vanity Fair issue; the works became seminal pieces in his collection and have earned hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue.

Following Prince’s death in 2016, another magazine published a commemorative issue that featured one of Warhol’s iconic images. It caught Goldsmith’s eye. She recognized the image of Prince that she’d taken over thirty years prior. The realization prompted Goldsmith to bring a lawsuit for copyright infringement against the Warhol foundation that has now reached the chambers of the country’s highest court.

Copyright law serves two aims: to protect artists’ right to control and profit from their works and to create a legal environment that fosters creativity. The Copyright Act of 1976 establishes the exclusive rights of the copyright holder, including the sale, reproduction, display, and derivative development of the work. These are the artist’s protections: a legal moat that ensures they can control and benefit from their work. Section 107 of the Copyright Act supports the other goal of copyright by carving out the Fair Use exceptions to copyright. Copyrighted work can be legally used for purposes of “criticism, comment, news, [and] reporting” among other aims. The Fair Use exception employs a four-factor test that interrogates the purpose, nature, market effect, and degree of similarity of the work. It is the Supreme Court’s role, ultimately, to decide whether Warhol’s creation fell within the scope of the Fair Use exception.

The Warhol foundation benefits from another case that came before the Supreme Court. In Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, the court was presented with the question of copyright infringement in a case of musical parody. The music group 2 Live Crew has substantially borrowed from another artist to create their song “Pretty Woman.” The court held that the use was permissible under the Fair Use doctrine. It successfully passed the first factor, which considers the “purpose and character of the use.” Specifically, Justice Souter held that the parody had “transformative value.” The parodic song had substantially altered the original work and it was, effectively, new art.

Roman Martinez, on behalf of the Warhol foundation, argued that Warhol’s creation was an analogous transformation of Goldsmith’s original work. He pointed to the difference in artistic expressions between the two pieces: the former a photoreal image carefully designed to highlight the gentle humanity of a young artist and the latter stylized pop-art casting its subject as equal parts image and icon. The judges pressed Martinez on his reading of the first factor of the Fair Use test. The law’s complete language may suggest that “purpose and character” is about the intended commercial distribution of the work, not its artistic meaning. Martinez pointed to the Acuff-Rose ruling that supports an interpretation that includes broader creative considerations. The judges also homed in on ramifications of a decision in his favor. The ruling could be understood to confer full legal rights to any work that substantially changes the original. Justices asked Martinez whether a film adaptation of a book would avoid the original copyright under such a framework. He suggested that such an adaptation wouldn’t be sufficiently different from its predecessor and, importantly, that other factors in the Fair Use test would guard against these problematic results. Martinez urged for a ruling that would protects artists’ ability to build creatively from existing works.

Lisa Blatt, on behalf of Goldsmith, argued that Warhol’s creation was an unnecessary infringement on Goldsmith’s work and that the petitioner’s definition of transformation is “too easy to manipulate.” Blatt pointed to the similarity of the two artworks and dismissed the supposed transformation as a consequence of Warhol’s famous style. In her view, there will always be grounds to argue a new meaning in derivative works. Art criticism is simply too subjective. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals had adopted a similar stance when it refused to attempt any interpretation of artistic novelty and ruled in favor of Goldsmith. Yaira Dubin, also in support of Goldsmith, focused on the role of necessity. In her view, the original work must be “necessary or at least useful” to the subsequent creation. Artists can’t borrow from each other without reason. Warhol could just as easily have used another reference image of Prince, but he instead chose to draw directly from Goldsmith’s protected work. Their arguments made a pointed defense of artists’ rights and the ability to protect one’s creative output.

The case’s implications are far-reaching. An opinion in favor of the Warhol foundation upholds the rights of artists to build on each other’s creations, but it steps into dangerous territory: expanding the Fair Use doctrine to any allegedly transformative work and potentially depriving original artists of their fair share.

A ruling for Goldsmith is a victory for artists’ lawful right to profit from their creation. It also creates a worrisome precedent not only for creative responses to existing art, but for the publication and display of artwork itself. The Supreme Court’s decision will be a seminal case for copyright law and – no matter the result – the case will echo across artistic industries for years to come.

Alec Winshel is a first-year law student at Harvard Law School, where he works at the Recording Artist Project. He can be reached at [email protected].

Click through below to read about what is commonly referred to in the sports world these days as “name, image, and likeness”!

Coming up next time, we will look at some real-world applications of this legal concept…

Wow. Just… wow.

This feels like a weird time to be discussing college athletes’ right of publicity with everything else going on in the world, even from my perspective as a college athlete rights advocate. At the same time, what better time to have this conversation since we may finally be at the tipping point that the sports law community has been alluding to for decades. Admittedly, this is only one of numerous social inequities that needs to be addressed in the college athletics business, and while it is an area that should be addressed as soon as possible, it feels less urgent than addressing a college athlete’s health, safety, and well-being in a COVID-19 world full of unknowns, or their lack of benefits and a bargaining unit from not being recognized as an employee despite physical demands and potential physical injury in a multi-billion dollar industry, or the racial undertones common in the model.

Well, the NCAA stubbornly refused to change its ways and actively opted for inaction, governing bodies with true legal function began to recognize the inequities and opted to act themselves, and now we are here.

We had the opportunity to watch and listen to a second Senate Committee hearing on college athlete name, image, and likeness earlier in July (“Exploring a Compensation Framework for Intercollegiate Athletics”), and we have another opportunity to hear legislative discussion with a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on this conversation this Wednesday, July 22. This hearing will be in two parts, covering NIL and sports betting, but it would not be surprising if the witnesses testifying have to weigh in on other conversations earlier mentioned in this article just like at the previous hearing.

Anyone who knows me understands I have more thoughts and emotions about college athletes’ rights than what I can write. Sometimes on this blog, we have fun with writing, but this topic demands a more sober tone. In writing these segments, I aim to be concise, informative, serious, and stimulative. In this multi-part series, I will do the following:

• Paint a picture of what the right of publicity is, legally speaking;

• Explain how it operates in real-world applications outside the college athletics business;

• Review legal precedent concerning college athletics;

• Objectively analyze proposed regulations and arguments for a college athletics NIL model; and

• Provide my own subjective opinion, discussing why a free market could work and should be allowed.

Stay tuned, y’all, & read the “Power 5” Summary of the “Student Athlete Equity Act of 2020” in the meantime.

Last week, Representatives Brandt Iden (R-Oshtemo) and Joe Tate (D-Detroit) presented bipartisan legislation that would allow college athletes to be compensated for their name, image, and likeness under certain circumstances in the State of Michigan.

So, let’s get to dissecting this sucker and perform a legal analysis!

House Bill No. 5217 Section-by-Section

Intro

The bill’s introduction is very brief and summarizes the legislative purpose main points using the particular phrases defined in the bill. Notably, this bill uses the phrase “college athlete” rather than the NCAA-preferred term “student-athlete” seen in some other states’ bills like New York and California (but consistency with its current legislation, the Student Athlete Bill of Rights, may have affected California’s language choice). What effect does this difference have on the bill’s application? No matter what the current or any potential future definition of “student-athlete” exists in intercollegiate sports, this bill would apply for all college athletes. The difference may be minimal, but it could make a big difference in the long run. Also, it helps move past the archaic notion of how a “student-athlete” is currently defined as a progressive statement.

Section 1

The first thing I notice here is that there is an expressed definition for “postsecondary educational institution,” which is important so that we know which institutions fall under the bill’s reach. This bill includes both public and private institutions offering a degree or course of study beyond twelfth grade in its definition of “postsecondary educational institution”. So, as its currently written, House Bill No. 5217 captures community colleges that offer associate’s degrees, any vocational school, any college or university that is an NCAA member institution, and any college or university that is a member of the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA). The NAIA changed its amateur status rules in 2014 to allow its college athletes to be compensated for “use of their picture or for a public or media appearance if no reference is made to the student’s collegiate institution or participation in intercollegiate athletics” without fear of losing eligibility,” but as we will see later in this piece of legislation, the name, image, and likeness compensation would expand NAIA athletes’ rights as well.

Furthermore, Michigan does not have a bill that parallels California’s Student Athletes Bill of Rights. Therefore, Michigan legislators have nothing stopping them from expanding the scope of its “postsecondary educational institution” definition as much as it deems equitable. For comparison, California already required that “intercollegiate athletic programs at 4-year private universities or campuses of the University of California or the California State University that receive, as an average, $10,000,000 or more in annual revenue derived from media rights for intercollegiate athletics to comply with prescribed requirements relating to student athlete rights,” and Senate Bill 206 expands its reach beyond that to include almost all California postsecondary educational institutions, but it excludes community colleges.

The very last sentence in Section 1 mirrors almost ver batim other bills, prohibiting NIL compensation from being a basis for modifying or losing college athlete eligibility status.

Section 2

In drafting legislation, authors have to make a decision whether to use express or implied language. Here, I believe individually identifying the NCAA is a smart move because it removes any potential confusion as to one expressed organization, and preceding the expressed organization with “including, but not limited to” gives a reasonable picture of the types of authoritative organizations this bill speaks to directly. Also, not to jump to any conclusions, but this phrasing prospectively can apply to any organization that may exist in the future, not just the current NCAA and its member institution conference structcure. For instance, this would apply to the Historical Basketball League, which identifies itself as “[t]he First College Basketball League To Enable Athletes To Directly Benefit From Their Talent, Marketability, and Hard Work By Offering An Education and Compensation.” It will make its debut in June 2021 after House Bill No. 5217 could be enacted, but even so, this bill would pose no issue for the HBL because its whole raison d’etre is to fairly treat its basketball players and allow them to seek compensation.

Subsections (a) and (b) cover two distinct matters: (a) what cannot happen to the student when they receive compensation for their own NIL or athletic reputation (which is a phrase I absolutely love); and (b) what cannot happen to the institution when the student uses their own NIL or athletic reputation. Both are critical pieces in order to protect the athletes individually & their schools from the conference’s or NCAA’s (or future organization’s) iron fist.

Section 3

Section 3 is all about what these schools and athletic organizations cannot do, and these two things are biggies. First, they cannot give prospective college athletes compensation for their NIL or athletic reputation. Thus, this would apply until the athlete is no longer a prospect, i.e., the athlete committed in whatever fashion is fully sufficient at the time (e.g., a signed National Letter of Intent is sufficient for Division I and II whereas a verbal commitment is not). This, in theory, would prohibit schools from tempting or bribing star recruits into choosing to come play for them.

The important key here is the focus on prospective college athlete. This bill does NOT prohibit schools and athletic organizations from compensating college athletes - once committed to playing sports for a postsecondary institution and officially a college athlete - for their name, image, and likeness or athletic reputation.

Next, this section prohibits schools and athletic institutions from interfering with college athletes residing in Michigan who want to obtain professional representation related to contracts or legal matters. Contracts is a general term covering a broad area that the average person may not appear to rise to the level of legal matters, but trust me, every contract entered into is a legal matter. Again, we see the “including, but not limited to” language that gives us an idea of what the legislative intent is behind this section, and the fact that it expressly states college athletes may hire “athlete agents”, which would cause a college athlete to lose NCAA eligibility altogether under current rules, is huge. (NCAA rules do allow them to have legal representation in certain circumstances to counsel and coach them, but the athlete is still their own primary advocate in front of the NCAA itself.)

I would revise this section slightly. This representation factor in Section 3(b) has popped up in other states’ legislation, generally, but relative to others, it is a bit brief here and does not really try to accomodate for the oppositions’ alleged argument. First, it does not define what an “athlete agent” is, exactly, which creates two problems. It presents the possibility that a college athlete could be represented by someone who is not licensed in some respect since the NCAA marginally altered its restrictions and added requirements for basketball players’ agents only, and, more importantly, because Michigan’s current definition of “athlete agent” would conflict! Under Michigan law, “athlete agent” means “a person who, directly or indirectly, recruits or solicits a person to enter into an agent contract or professional sport services contract, or who procures, offers, promises, or attempts to obtain employment for a person with a professional sport team or as a professional athlete. Athlete agent does not include a member of a person's immediate family.” [emphasis added] I applaud Rep. Tate for his sponsored bill that repeals this section! Nevertheless, there still should be something more to explain the type of person who qualifies as an agent for professional representation here in this bill.

Second, “legal representation provided by an attorney” may infer that the attorney is licensed to practice law. Ethically speaking, the attorney would likely be licensed in the State of Michigan or could get licensed through reciprocity, but that may not necessarily be the case.

This section could largely benefit from briefly explaining in more detail who may provide professional representation with phrases such as “provided by an attorney licensed by the state” and “athlete agent who complies with state and federal law in their relationship with the college athlete.”

Section 4

As my boyfriend Bryan would say, “This is fine.” It covers whathever may constitute grant-in-aid from the institution under the NCAA rules currently and moving forward and also whathever stipends or other scholarships that do not total to a full athletic scholarship for an entire college athletics career. Moreover, it expressly acknowledges that money received from the institution is NOT compensation for use of college athletes’ NIL. Why is this important? Before coming to college, college athletes sign away their right to use their NIL for compensation when they sign their National Letter of Intent to receive an athletic scholarship for attending that school and playing said sport for that school. This would legislate away any attempted argument that the NCAA or any institution in Michigan to squeak in about the scholarship being a reasonable part of the quid-pro-quo for their NIL in the market. After all, an athletic scholarship plus any stipend is about being a “student-athlete” and covers educational costs, right? *insert major side eye*

In my opinion, I would add something to protect those college athletes who initially walk on to a team and receive an athletic scholarship later in their college career as well as high school athletes who have not had their “amateur status” cleared yet. Some of those college athletes begin building value around their NIL and athletic reputation before they receive an athletic scholarship but while they are playing college sports. Technically, the only thing holding this class of college athletes back from utilizing their right of publicity (i.e., the fancy intellectual property legal term for these NIL rights) are the NCAA Bylaws. What if they do something violative during that time and do not get caught until they try to get the athletic scholarship? It is inevitable that some athletes will receive compensation for their NIL. It is a question of whether they get caught, and if so, when they get caught.

Some highly rated high school athletes may do something under the radar to make money off their NIL, too, like sign autographs for a price or endorse a service or product for an under-the-table payment. Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA) Handbook Section 11 covers “Amateur Status/Awards” and states once a student has represented any MHSAA member school in any of its tournament sports, they lose eligibility if they “received gifts of material or money and have not received other valuable considerations, including special considerations for loans, because of athletic performance or potential.” Included in this broad violation are appearing in advertisements promoting commercial enterprises or businesses and posing in the school’s athletic uniform for a non-school commercial enterprise (whether non-profit or for-profit), even if they are not paid! If you read between the lines in the MHSAA Handbook, there is no broad provision making it a violation for a high school athlete to use their name, image, or likeness for commercial gain paralleling what is expressed in the NCAA Bylaws and policies. So, if a student who played a sport for a MHSAA member school signed autographs or never signed a contract (e.g., entered into a verbal agreement) to conveniently wear or use and tag a product brand in his Instagram feed or stories for a stipend after purchasing the product themselves, in theory, that student may not necessarily be violating the MHSAA interpretations on amateur status but, indeed, would likely not pass the NCAA’s current athletic amateur eligibility status clearance. What if the athlete was flagged sometime during the amateur status clearance procedures and was denied because of it?

Therefore, a provision expressing that institutions shall not use a student earning compensation for their NIL as a basis for denying amateur status clearance and, thus, an athletic grant-in-aid or stipend scholarship application would enhance this bill to better protect the various types of situations prospective athletic scholarship-receiving college athletes may be in.

Section 5

Here, we see what the schools (in subsection 1) and the associations and organizations (in subsections 1 and 2) cannot do when the athlete gets professional representation for contracts and the like in a pretty straightforward manner, aside from my earlier critiques, which mirrors Section 2.

Will this bill pass as-is? I like that it does not expressly limit the athletes’ market to third parties, which allows it to fit whatever structure of pseudo-amateurism the future of college sports holds since it could include something from the schools themselves down the road. I appreciate that it does not place additional requirements on the athletes, but drafting laws involves zealous advocacy with realistic negotiation and compromise in mind. In order to appease the pro-“amateurism” crowd and NCAA lobbyists, I would not be surprised if requirements such as informing the institution when the athlete obtains professional representation, who that representation is, what are the types and terms of NIL compensation so that (a) we as market players can better understand the existing market for college athletes’ publicity and see where it can go for their best interests, and (b) the governing bodies can reasonably anticipate and identify with proof any actcual red flags of people taking advantage of athletes to act in the athletes’ best interests (while, let’s face it, probably finding a way to profit itself).

Like any bill, it will likely get revised as it moves through the legislative process, but considering both republicans and democrats are behind this bill’s purpose, I believe Michigan will have a law protecting college athletes’ right of publicity allowing them to seek compensation for their name, image, and likeness in the near future.

Well, I think that completes my thoughts… for now! Let me know yours!

You can listen to this podcast at the bottom of this blog post or through iTunes or Stitcher. Make sure to subscribe to it on either iTunes or Stitcher so that you’ll never miss a future episode. If you enjoyed the podcast, please leave a review on iTunes, as it is very helpful to increase the reach of this podcast. And I’d love to hear your feedback. You can reach me on twitter.

You can listen to this podcast at the bottom of this blog post or through iTunes or Stitcher. Make sure to subscribe to it on either iTunes or Stitcher so that you’ll never miss a future episode. If you enjoyed the podcast, please leave a review on iTunes, as it is very helpful to increase the reach of this podcast. And I’d love to hear your feedback. You can reach me on twitter.

You can listen to this podcast at the bottom of this blog post or through iTunes or Stitcher. Make sure to subscribe to it on either iTunes or Stitcher so that you’ll never miss a future episode. If you enjoyed the podcast, please leave a review on iTunes, as it is very helpful to increase the reach of this podcast. And I’d love to hear your feedback. You can reach me on twitter.

In a situation that looked like a goal-scoring opportunity, soccer’s governing body opted to kick the ball out of play.

That’s essentially the result of a two-year investigation by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) into the issue of Israeli soccer teams playing in Palestinian settlements along the West Bank.

The FIFA Council decided on October 27 not to intervene and “refrained” from placing any sanctions on the Israeli Football Association or the Palestinian Football Association over six Israeli football clubs playing Israeli league matches in the West Bank.

FIFA’s statement about the decision rests on the idea that “in line with the general principle established in its Statutes, (FIFA) must remain neutral with regard to political matters.” [1]

FIFA President Gianni Infantino spoke of “issues which are there since 10,000 years and have not been solved yet and football is not going to solve them either I am afraid.” [2]

Background

The problem concerns six Israeli teams that play in Jewish settlements within in the physical borders of the West Bank—Kiryat Arba, Givat Ze’ev (Beitar Givat Ze’ev Shabi), Ma’aleh Adumim (Beitar Ma’alel Adomim), Ariel, Oranit (Hapo’el Oranit) and Tomer (Hapo’el Jordan Valley). [3]

All six of these teams play in the lowest three leagues within Israeli football (A, B and C) and are considered semi-professional. Clubs within Leagues A and B give adult players a small part-time salary while League C teams pay coaches but most players are not paid. Although small, these settlement clubs can act as feeder teams for larger Israeli clubs that compete in Europe, such as Hapoel Be’er Sheva or Maccabi Tel Aviv—both of whom are recent participants in the UEFA Champions League.

These small clubs operate without economic benefit to Palestine and only play matches against Israeli league teams.

What are the issue at hand?

I think there are four points worth looking at in this decision:

1. Viewing the situation depends on a simple question with a complex answer–is Israel one state? Two states? Multi-state?
2. FIFA has not proven itself to stay neutral in all political situations.
3. The issues in play are not 10,000 years old–take a couple of zeros off and one gets closer to the heart of the issue.
4. Keeping the status quo only kicks the can down the road.

Viewpoints change and frame the answers

This is a bit tricky, but I’ll try to distill the arguments I made in my seminar paper as best I can. How one looks at and defines the situation largely depends on how you view the state of Israel. Is is one state, two states, or something more?

At a simplistic level, the one-state versus two-state construct focuses on whether the territories of the West Bank and Gaza are an independent Palestinian nation or part of a larger and unified Israeli state. A larger issue within the same prism focuses on the questions of self-determination and nationalism.

This matters because FIFA itself (whether formally or tacitly) recognizes two states. The heart of the current controversy is FIFA’s own rulebook under Article 72.2 that states football clubs which are FIFA member affiliates, such as the Israel Football Association (IFA), may not play on the territory of other football associations without the other association’s permission. [4]

Further, FIFA was one of the first international organizations to recognize the state of Palestine in any context, having done so since 1998. [5]

If one views this issue from a one-state solution and suggests that Israel is not violating international law nor the bylaws of FIFA, there are some strong arguments available.

Israel argues that the settlements are built in Area C of the West Bank where Israel has full security and administrative control under the Oslo Accords. The clubs within the West Bank also claim they are not discriminatory or racist. [6] [7]

Additionally, the Israeli Football Association has attempted to distance itself from any political stance regarding the Israeli teams in Jewish settlements, noting it wants to use football as a “bridge connecting people and not as a wall that divides them.” [8] Overall, around 250,000 Israeli Jewish settlers live in 150 settlements within the West Bank. [9]

This viewpoint falls in line with Israeli one-state political thinking regarding the West Bank. Israel disputes the land in the West Bank defined as “occupied Palestinian territory.” [10] Israel’s government contends that it entered the West Bank only after Jordanian artillery fire and movements across the previous armistice line into the territory. [11] The crux of this international legal argument centers on “[if] the prior holder of territory had seized the territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.” [12]

Conversely, if one looks at the situation through a two-state solution lens, Palestine not only has a sporting right, but a political right to exist without external interference, which I’ll touch on in a bit.

This private matter, which was under dispute within FIFA, became public when the United Nations Security Council approved Resolution 2334 without opposition just before Christmas in 2016. [13] This Resolution stated that Israel’s settlements in Palestinian territory have no legal validity and are a flagrant violation of international law. Although Palestine has not been recognized as a state by the United Nations (it is a recognized by 70.5 percent of the 193 UN Nations), it maintains non-member observer status within the U.N. [14]

Does FIFA remain ‘neutral’ in all political situations?

The broader and more accurate question is whether politics and football can co-exist without infringing upon one another.

The answer is no.

The Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA) chose to keep Crimea as a “special zone for football purposes” until the conflict is resolved. [15] Further, UEFA made a special rule for European championships stating Ukrainian and Russian teams will not play against one another. FIFA also refused to recognize Northern Cyprus, which declared itself independent in 1974. [16]

In this case, the Palestinian Football Association counters the IFA’s argument by noting there is no difference between football’s role in the settlements and the settlement’s political and legal meaning. Further bolstering that statement, PFA Chairman Jibril Rajoub noted that any negotiated or mediated settlement must start with an acknowledgment that the settlement clubs violate FIFA statutes, human rights and international law and that “there will be no compromise on this issue.” [17] This position is consistent with the PFA’s initial position that Israel’s Football Association acts as a political tool to maintain power within the West Bank, noting:

The IFA has been acting as a tool of the Israeli occupation. While it is true that they haven’t ordered the killing, injuries and/or arrests of PFA members, or the storming of PFA stadiums and football association, they have never condemned such actions. In fact, they have justified the military actions in Palestine. [18]

At the same time, the PFA called upon Israel to recognize the PFA as the sovereign governing body within Palestine based on the FIFA statute, ban football teams from illegal Israeli settlements from participating in the IFA and the right to free movement between the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Israel. [19] Finally, the PFA wanted the violations to be known and to bring recognition to the incidents of racism that were happening within the Israeli league against Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims. [20]

Issues at play are not 10,000 years old

Infantino’s suggestion that the issues facing Israel and Palestine are long-standing and likely unresolvable obscures the problems and potential solution.

Based on my research, my conclusion is that the British Mandate may have more to do with the “problem” than anything occurring 10,000 years ago.

Through the latter stages of the Ottoman Empire, the area known as Palestine was undefined administratively or politically and its inhabitants rarely defined themselves as Palestinians. [21]

With the British Conquest and the Palestine Mandate after World War I and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, Great Britain displayed a sovereignty over the area which did not allow for indigenous self-determination. [22] Meanwhile, the lack of statehood by Palestine during the British occupation is due to the commitment Great Britain had to the Balfour Declaration and the creation of a Jewish homeland.

This led to a political road block: either fulfill the mandate for a Palestinian state and not follow the Balfour Declaration or deny the declaration and execute the Palestine Mandate. [23]

In my mind, this is what intertwines politics and football–a promise to both sides. The issue of Jewish settlements in the West Bank  and the settlement teams speaks to the very issue of national identity. This is a relatively new phenomenon (100 years) and not something inexorably linked to the ancient past (10,000 years).

Kicking the can down the road does no one good

Maintaining the status quo does nothing for either side and only perpetuates the underlying issues at hand.

Tokyo Sexwale, who headed the FIFA investigation, noted that the lack of a decision left Palestine football “in limbo” and without answers. Further, I suggested in my paper that doing nothing may leave the Palestinian state:

disillusioned over what they fear is an “illusion of accountability . . . under the premise of an endless ‘dialogue.’”

Palestine is likely to take the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport and attempt to get a judgment in its favor. FIFA said it would honor the decision made by the arbitrators. However, the three-panel tribunal has the same basic issue confronting it–is this one state, or two states?

Conclusion

It is important to recognize that any ultimate decision made in the West Bank is not made within a bottle, nor does it only affect only Israel and Palestine. Any decision made by the Court of Arbitration for Sport makes will affect as many as five current situations and one FIFA may be forced to revisit in Ukraine-Crimea and Russia.

The plight of soccer teams in Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Republic, the view of the people in the Nakhichivan enclave and Azerbaijan’s relationship with them both demonstrate how sport, political and ethnic polarity is not the sole province of Middle Eastern states.

Historical narratives and the viewpoint from which we perceive them can greatly aid or limit our understanding in resolving conflicts through mediation or negotiation as FIFA demonstrated throughout this process.

Ultimately FIFA officials, CAS arbitrators, Israelis and Palestinians on both sides of the wall or fence and within Jewish settlements are finding out that “many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.” [24]

Endnotes

[1] Nigel Wilson, FIFA delay on Israeli settlement decision fuels concern, Al Jazeera, Mar. 19, 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/03/fifa-delay-israeli-settlement-decision-fuels-concern-170317080253187.html.

[2] Israel/Palestine: FIFA Sponsoring Games on Seized Land, Human Rights Watch (Sept. 25, 2016), https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/09/25/israel/palestine-fifa-sponsoring-games-seized-land.

[3] Israel ‘Lobbying FIFA’ to Prevent Settlement Teams’ Ban, Al Jazeera, Apr. 20, 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/04/israel-lobbying-fifa-prevent-ban-settlement-teams-170420105045514.html.

See Ligat Ha’al, Soccerway, http://us.soccerway.com/national/israel/ligat-haal/20162017/championship-round/r36478/ (last visited Nov. 16, 2017) (Current standings and what teams are in European competitions).

[4] FIFA Statutes art. 72(2), May 2008.

[5] Peter Beaumont, FIFA Urged to Kick Out Israeli Football Clubs Located in West Bank, Guardian, Sept. 25, 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/25/fifa-kick-israeli-clubs-west-bank-palestinian-football-human-rights.

[6] Rory McCarthy, Area C Strikes Fear into the Heart of Palestinians as Homes Are Destroyed, Guardian, Apr. 15, 2008, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/15/israelandthepalestinians (noting that 60 percent of the West Bank falls within Area C).

[7] See generally Human Rights Watch, supra note 2.

[8] FIFA Delays Decision on Israel’s Settlement Soccer Clubs, Times of Israel, Oct. 14, 2016, http://www.timesofisrael.com/fifa-delays-decision-on-israels-settlement-soccer-clubs/.

[9] David Morris Phillips, Jewish Settlements in a Palestinian State, 25 Penn St. Int’l L. Rev. 75, 77–78.

[10] Occupied Territories or Disputed Territories, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (Sept. 2, 2001).

[11] Id.

[12] Id. quoting former State Department Legal Advisor Stephen Schwebel’s legal analysis on Israel’s case.

[13] S.C. Res. 2334 (Dec. 23, 2016).

[14] Louis Charbonneau and Michelle Nichols, Palestinians Win De Facto U.N. Recognition of Sovereign State, Reuters, Nov. 30, 2012, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-palestinians-statehood-idUSBRE8AR0EG20121201. See Ali Al-Airan and Mohsin Ali, Palestine: Growing Recognition, Al Jazeera, Jan. 15, 2017, http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2017/01/palestine-growing-recognition-170115201330185.html.

[15] James M. Dorsey, Israeli-Palestinian Struggle Returns to the Soccer Pitch, International Policy Digest, Sept. 26, 2016, https://intpolicydigest.org/2016/09/26/israeli-palestinian-struggle-returns-soccer-pitch/.

[16] Id.

[17] Adam Rasgon, Jibril Rajoub: No Compromise on Settlement Clubs in FIFA, Jerusalem Post, Jan. 15, 2017, http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Jibril-Rajoub-No-compromise-on-settlement-soccer-clubs-in-FIFA-478435.

[18] Questions & Answers Palestine Football Association’s Initiative 65^th FIFA Congress, Palestine Football Association, (Zurich 28-29, 2015), https://palaestina.org/uploads/media/Q_A_PFO_s_Initiative.pdf.

[19] Id.

[20] Id.

[21] Id. at 31–32.

[22] Winston P. Nagan and Aitza M. Haddad, Recognition of Palestinian Statehood: A Clarification of the Interests of the Concerned Parties, 40 Ga. J. Int’l & Com. L 341, 349 (2012). The authors note the differences between Palestine and neighboring countries such as Syria and Iraq where statehood was more likely to occur in.

[23] Id.

[24] Return of the Jedi (Lucasfilm 1983).

The topic of how to fix the USSF has been wide-ranging, fiercely discussed and bitterly divisive ever since Sunil Gulati stepped down after the U.S. men’s national team crashed out of 2018 World Cup qualifying at Trinidad & Tobago.

On one side of the equation stood those who did not want to shake things up too much. Change had to come, but it could not come at the expense of what was already in place. Those following this line of thinking generally backed either Soccer United Marketing president Kathy Carter or, to a lesser extent, USSF vice president Carlos Cordeiro.           

In contrast, six other candidates saw opportunity to dramatically shake up the system or, better yet, completely overhaul it and start over.  Television analysts Eric Wynalda and Kyle Martino spoke of transparency and openness and building a grassroots campaign through state federations. Soccer outsiders Steve Gans and Michael Winograd had business credentials to run organizations, even if they did not have the specific soccer chops. Hope Solo and Paul Caligiuri added their voices to the conversation, but many considered their bids longshots at best.

Many national federations that miss out on soccer’s crown jewel event go through an evaluation process. Italy and the Netherlands certainly had its fair share of hand-wringing and fallout from failed bids this winter.

However, the U.S. fallout seems much different than what those European powers went through. The total amount of voices trying to be heard in the U.S. made anyone standing out difficult to a soccer public that really wants a full autopsy into the wreckage that was the failed USMNT bid. Further, the conversation is not focused on just the men’s national team. When it comes to the discussion of U.S. soccer, there is no off-topic angle–men’s versus women’s national team pay, pay-for-play, Major League Soccer vs. European players, youth development, etc.

Given the cacophony of voices trying to passionately make their case, it’s little wonder that the rhetoric became fierce and the campaign at times downright nasty. Instead of change being something to work toward, the tone at times became that of a scorched earth approach–burn it all down and start over.

What’s led the USSF to this reckoning and inflection point? I can think of three reasons:

Keeping up with the Joneses

At first blush, this is just a natural process any national federation goes through once failure occurs. If the bar is that of Germany or Brazil, look at what they did in overhauling their systems to be more competitive. If that’s too high a bar, look at England or France when they failed to qualify for the World Cup and/or Euros and how quickly they recovered.

There’s a natural hunger to change anything that fails and the desire to see the men’s national team back at the level it was just a few years earlier fuels this passion.

Yet, all this desire for change tends to obscure the numerous positives about the USSF.  The women’s national team is in a pretty good spot at the moment. Although some of the old guard that won an Olympic medal and a World Cup are gone, the youth movement throughout has the USWNT still at or near the top of the sport. Also, the youth teams are starting to develop talent that’s ready to take the next step for the senior national teams.

And there’s Christian Pulisic.

Fans let their voices be heard

There was plenty of dissatisfaction with the Hexagonal campaign even before the men’s team lost to T&T. Early losses to Mexico and Costa Rica put the U.S. in a hole and led to the dismissal of Jurgen Klinsmann and the retread of Bruce Arena to try and save qualification.

Instead, the fans became more irate with curious playing decisions and the absence of certain team members. As the fan base continued to be restless, hope still remained for qualifying. After a convincing 4-0 performance against Panama in Round 9, the U.S. appeared all but in the World Cup.

Once the USMNT dropped its match at T&T, U.S. soccer fans raised their already loud voices and demanded something be done. The deafening roar on social media eventually helped put pressure on the USSF to remove Arena and eventually Gulati from their respective posts.

In an ironic way, the loss was perhaps the best thing to happen in showing that the U.S. is a passionate soccer nation.

A rotting system finally exposed

Perhaps the loss to Trinidad & Tobago finally was the band-aid that needed to be ripped off to fully display the issues underneath the surface.

Many of these issues needed to be addressed much earlier, but got put on the back burner. Breezing through qualification the previous three cycles kept things status quo on the outside while underlying issues festered or were simply pushed aside. Even watching Mexico struggle but still qualify for Brazil in 2014 did not register as a warning shot that something like this could happen to the U.S.

Without the men’s World Cup as a distraction, all the ancillary issues that were pushed aside now came to the forefront as a tidal wave. The fractures that had been papered over are now full display. Those issues now found voices and people willing to listen to them.

What now?

With the election of Cordeiro, U.S. soccer is in a tough spot. Those who sought change or transparency find it difficult to trust Cordeiro to make the kind of alterations they desire. If their candidate did not make it, it’s almost a “to hell with the system, then” approach.

For those that elected Cordeiro, he represents an opportunity to be an insider while making incremental process toward some kind of change, especially if the U.S. intends to co-host the 2026 World Cup with Mexico and Canada.

I tweeted this about the election once it was over (forgive the incorrect spelling on Cordeiro in the tweet).

If Cordiero was the candidate you supported for #USSF President, great…hold him accountable for what he does going forward. If he wasn’t your candidate..still hold him accountable. Good governance doesn’t end after an election. Push for transparency and accountability.

— James Wold (@jameswoldbdc) February 10, 2018

But I think good leadership is respected when a person or entity owns up to a problem and seek advice from others to take corrective action. If USSF and the new pres does that, it will go all long toward an open, honest and healthy dialogue.

— James Wold (@jameswoldbdc) February 10, 2018

Honesty and transparency will go a long way in bridging the divide that consumes USA soccer. If Cordeiro is smart, he will hold himself accountable to the stakeholders of U.S. soccer.

Because they will be watching.

The report had some positives as DraftKings Sportsbook outperformed in terms of revenue and cut its quarterly adjusted EBITDA loss by 15.7% to $264.2 million. The company also raised its revenue and adjusted EBITDA goals for this year and introduced 2023 guidance suggesting about a 33% improvement at the midpoint.

Investors clearly wanted more, though. The past week has included both Caesars and PENN Entertainment boasting sports betting and iGaming profitability in October 2022 with a potential to turn a profit for the fourth quarter.

DraftKings, however, did not join that profitability parade. The company maintained its expectations that profitability will first come in the fourth quarter of 2023 with the potential for a break-even full year in 2024.

DraftKings stock falling on high volume

DKNG was down more than 17% when the earnings call started at 8:30 am Eastern, eventually opening down 15.4% at $13.25.

The stock is still tumbling as of this writing, hitting $12.00 at its lowest so far.

DKNG’s volume was up more than a third compared to its 30-day average by 10:30 am.

New DKNG guidance for this year and next

DraftKings raised its 2022 revenue guidance midpoint by $45 million to $2.175 billion while adjusted EBITDA loss improved $10 million to $790 million.

The higher revenue came from a better mix of high-margin parlays following the addition of new products in time for NFL betting. Parlays as a percentage of handle grew 5 percentage points to 28% compared to last year.

Adjusted EBITDA expectations improved despite the addition of launch costs for Kansas and Maryland, as well as pre-launch costs for Ohio now included in the full-year guidance.

DraftKings is guiding to midpoints of $2.9 billion in revenue and $525 million in adjusted EBITDA loss for full year 2023.

The post DraftKings Stock Hammered On Third-Quarter Earnings Report appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

That is according to CEO Jay Snowden, who had plenty of positives to say about PENN’s interactive segment on Thursday‘s third-quarter conference call. PENN closed trading for the week Friday at $32.49, off its weekly high of $34.66.

The segment reported an adjusted EBITDA loss of $49.3 million for the quarter. That is up 54.1% over last year’s $32 million loss, though this year included $12.5 million in lobbying expenses for California sports betting and a $7.9 million payment processing fee adjustment.

Can Barstool Sportsbook stay profitable in Q4?

Snowden noted the segment’s profitable month came amid an average hold month for sports betting. He praised interactive’s strong revenue growth and PENN’s disciplined approach to marketing for turning the corner.

While Snowden anticipates being profitable for the quarter, there are a few outside factors that could change that. There will be some investments into new launch states Maryland and Ohio that will hurt EBITDA.

Barstool would also be on the hook for a $10 million payment to Mattress Mack if the Houston Astros beat the Philadelphia Phillies in the World Series, Snowden said. The interactive segment would be around breakeven for the quarter if the bet wins, he added.

Profitability for Caesars digital segment also hinges on a Mattress Mack bet.

Kansas launch hits PENN record

The Barstool Sportsbook launch in Kansas had PENN’s highest-ever level of first-time deposits on a per-capita basis, Snowden said.

The company also saw more than 45% of its online handle coming from players in PENN’s loyalty program, mychoice. The program now has a database of more than 25 million. 

“Beginning with the Hollywood 400 presented by Barstool Sportsbook and continuing with coordinated joint marketing efforts, our omni-channel approach there has delivered one of our most successful launches to date when you combine both retail and online sports betting results,” Snowden said.

Barstool Sportsbook integrated with theScore app

PENN is picking up where theScore Bet could not quite make an impact in the US.

The company integrated betting capabilities with the Barstool Sportsbook app into theScore’s media app in the US. It works similar to how theScore Bet did before that brand was shuttered in the US: bettors can create their bet slips in theScore app and then push them over to the Barstool Sportsbook app to actually place the bet.

TheScore Bet struggled to gain market share in any of its US jurisdictions before shutting down over the summer, but that is not stopping PENN from trying the integrated approach again. The results have been positive so far in the Ontario sports betting market, as a bettor that uses both theScore media app and theScore bet is worth 80% more gross revenue than a bettor that does not use the media app.

Still room for Barstool Sportsbook to grow in Ontario

Even though PENN is touting its success in Ontario, it still is “sort of fighting with one arm tied behind the back,” Snowden said.

The proprietary platform has only been live for football season, so it does not have as many offerings as other sportsbooks. Already, though, PENN is reporting “really, really strong parlay play,” he added.

More in-play markets and a better target for parlay bettors will help down the road, Snowden said. PENN continues to grow daily actives, monthly actives, handle and gross revenue with a gross revenue chart included in the earnings presentation.

“We’ve got great momentum in the business there, and you should assume that that’s all happening, that that market share is continuing to grow and that we’re doing that in a profitable way.”

Barstool platform switch still scheduled for mid-2023

Part of PENN’s confidence in the interactive segment turning positive for all of 2023 is the switch to its proprietary platform.

Barstool Sportsbook currently operates with third-party supplier Kambi, but the two recently outlined terms for the transition.

PENN will save cash and improve its marketing abilities once the sportsbook is on the proprietary tech, Snowden said. The in-house player account management system is already driving results in Ontario, he added.

“Through our experience in Ontario, we’ve identified some real opportunities to build market share once we migrate to our own tech stack in the US in Q3, and of course, we’ll do that profitably. And we will be prepared to invest in those markets where we see attractive returns while maintaining a disciplined approach.”

PENN finally prepared to market in the US?

PENN basically relied on its database of Barstool Sports users up to this point in the US, but that should change when the new tech is live next year.

The company supplemented its Ontario launch with additional marketing and will continue to do so as long as it pays off, Snowden said. As long as cost per acquisition is attractive in the US, PENN will take a similar approach.

“We’ll do all of this in a thoughtful way. We’ll be judicious in how much we spend and where we spend. We’re not looking to grow market share if we can’t do it profitably, but we’re seeing in Ontario that we believe we can once we’re on our own tech stack and have great promotional and bonus engine capabilities that we didn’t have previously that we can acquire customers, retain them and continue to grow our market share.”

Cost per acquisition is better in Ontario than it was in the early stages of US sports betting, Snowden said. Those costs are lower in the US than they were a year ago, though, he added.

Sports betting bringing in younger customers for PENN

PENN is getting close to 20% of its revenue coming from 21-to-44 year olds, Snowden said. It was a little more than 10% of revenue a few years back.

Snowden says there is two reasons for that. The first is because casinos were some of the first entertainment venues to re-open following Covid lockdowns in the spring of 2020.

The bigger factor is online sports betting, though. That 21-to-44 age segment accounts for 90% of online sports betting revenue and 80% of online casino.

The post Will Mack Knife Profitable Third Quarter For PENN, Barstool Sportsbook? appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

Largely an afterthought in the US marketplace to date, Fox can become a major shareholder in FanDuel at what appears a reasonable price for the dominant sportsbook of the first half-decade of legal sports betting across the United States.

The Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS) ruling in the case against FanDuel parent company Flutter gives Fox “a 10-year call option that expires in December 2030 to acquire 18.6% of FanDuel for $3.72 billion, with a 5% annual escalator,” according to Fox.

That escalator moves the current-day price on the equity stake to about $4.1 billion.

What Fox said about right to buy equity stake

Equally important is Fox’s disputed contention that Flutter must receive Fox’s consent or arbitrator approval for a potential FanDuel IPO in the US for at least the next few months. Flutter disagrees with that claim, saying it agreed to shelve any action toward an IPO until a final decision on Fox’s rights comes in early 2023.

A statement from Fox called the arbitration ruling “fair and favorable:”

“FOX is pleased with the fair and favorable outcome of the Flutter arbitration …

“FOX has no obligation to commit capital towards this opportunity unless and until it exercises the option. This optionality over a meaningful equity stake in the market leading U.S. online sports betting operation confirms the tremendous value FOX has created as a first mover media partner in the U.S. sports betting landscape.”

Flutter pleased as well

A statement from Flutter CEO Peter Jackson also praised the ruling:

“Today’s ruling vindicates the confidence we had in our position on this matter and provides certainty on what it would cost FOX to buy into this business, should they wish to do so.

“FanDuel is winning in the US market and the clear #1 operator, a position driven by its exceptional market leading betting product and efficiency in acquiring customers at scale. The team remain focused on maintaining our leadership position and we look forward to updating the market on our progress at our US capital markets day on November 16.”

History of lawsuit between Fox, FanDuel

The origins of the dispute stretch back to the infancy of legal US sports betting in 2019; Flutter acquired The Stars Group that year. TSG operated Fox Bet in partnership with Fox.

The terms of the deal allowed Flutter full ownership of Fox Bet in exchange for Fox receiving options to purchase 50% of Fox Bet, in addition to the 18.6% stake in FanDuel. Fox filed suit in 2021 over the valuation of FanDuel as it relates to its right to buy the 18.6% equity stake.

Flutter’s transaction to complete a nearly whole acquisition of FanDuel placed the sportsbook’s value at more than $11 billion. Fox wanted that valuation applied to its option, but Flutter countered by asserting “fair market value” would apply at the time of purchase.

What’s a market leader really worth?

In 2021, a heated environment created industry speculation of a FanDuel valuation north of $30 billion. The operator controls more than 40% of US market share through nearly five years since the fall of PASPA.

Fox Bet, meanwhile, appeared to take a backseat among Flutter brands during the dispute. Despite the reach of Fox Sports, the sportsbook routinely ranks at less than 1% share in markets where it operates.

Fox claimed Flutter denied it the necessary resources to operate Fox Bet. Flutter’s press release indicates “the tribunal has denied FOX’s claim in its entirety and has ruled in favour of Flutter holding that commercially reasonable resources have been provided to FOX Bet.”

The post Arbitrator Rules Fox Can Buy Major FanDuel Stake From $20 Billion Valuation appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

An important aspect of procedure and practice before the CAS, relates to the ability of applicants to seek urgent protective measures, in the form of an application for a Stay of execution of the appealed decision. The legal basis for such application can be identified in Article 183 of Swiss Private International Law and R37 of the CAS Code. The latter, provides that the CAS may, upon request of a party, order preliminary or protective measures.

According to CAS practice and jurisprudence (See CAS 2003/O/486; CAS 2013/A/3324; CAS 2013/A/3199; CAS 2010/A/2071. CAS 2001/A/329; CAS 2001/A/324), there is a three-stage test that needs to be satisfied for a successful application on such protective measures (provided that the issue of jurisdiction has been settled):

1. The requested measures must be necessary to protect the Applicant from irreparable harm;

2. There must be a likelihood of success on the merits of the claim;

3. The interests of the Applicant in the requested measures must outweigh those of the opposite party.

The above stated criteria are cumulative (CAS 2013/A/3199; CAS 2010/A/2071; 2007/A/1403) and are also clearly set forth in Article R37 (5) of the CAS Code.

In terms of the first criterion and in accordance with CAS jurisprudence (and as a general rule), when deciding whether to grant a request for a Stay, CAS considers whether the measure sought is useful to protect the Applicant from substantial damage that would be difficult to remedy at a later stage. This is the so called 'irreparable harm' criterion: "The Appellant must demonstrate that the requested measures are necessary in order to protect his position from damage or risks that would be impossible, or very difficult, to remedy or cancel at a later stage." (CAS 2007/A/1370-1376; CAS 2008/A/1630).

The first criterion cannot be satisfied with submission of financial and reputational arguments. The reason for this is that such arguments relate to the award of damages that cannot constitute irreparable harm, as they can always be compensated/remedied at a later stage. In addition, while, according to CAS case law (CAS 2008/A/1569), it is not in itself sufficient a participant is prevented from competing in sport events to justify a Stay in itself, the CAS has consistently recognised that a suspension from participating in a major sport event, such as the Olympic Games, which subsequently found to be unjustified, can cause irreparable harm (CAS 2008/A/1453; CAS 2014/A3571; CAS 2016/A/4710).

In relation to the second criterion, when deciding to grant provisional measures, the Applicant "must make at least a plausible case case that the facts relied upon by him/her and the rights which he/she seeks to enforce exist and that the material criteria for a cause of action are fulfilled" (CAS 2000/A/274; CAS 2004/A/578; CAS 2014/A/3751).

The second criterion gives rise to a fact/evidence based exercise, although the general rule is that each case shall be reviewed on its own merits. Whether an Applicant's arguments will prevail can only be addressed in the final award, it is important for the Applicant that, at the time of the Application for a Stay, his/her arguments must be sufficient to satisfy the second criterion.

Finally, the third criterion is the most difficult for the Applicant to satisfy, and from experience, many Applicants fail solely on this final criterion. In accordance with CAS jurisprudence, when deciding whether to grant protective measures, the President of the Division (or the Panel if it has been constituted), must consider whether the interest of the Applicant outweigh those of the opposite party and of third parties ('balance of convenience' test): "It is then necessary to compare the disadvantages to the Applicant of immediate execution of the decision with the disadvantages for the Respondent of being deprived such execution." (CAS 2008/A/1453; CAS 2008/A/1630; CAS 2008/A/1677).

This final criterion is extremely subjective and in general terms it can be viewed under a different light where different Panels are concerned. This is because, when examining a request for a Stay, it is important for Panels to compare the risks incurred by the Applicant in the event of immediate execution of the application, with the disadvantage for the other party from the non-immediate execution. Thus, the interest of the Applicant to obtain the protective measure must be assessed in comparison to the interest of the other party, or other persons, who may be affected by the measure (CAS 2015/A/4259).

In summary, it is worth noting that advisers must be very careful in the preparation of an Application for protective measures. The analysis above clearly demonstrates the difficulty in persuading a Panel that the three cumulative criteria for a successful application have been met and that a plausible case has been made. The outcome of such Application tends to determine, to a very great extent, the final conclusion of the matter in question, and, therefore, caution must be applied in the preparation of the Application.

It is also important for us to remember that provisional measures do not qualify as arbitral awards and they, therefore, cannot be appealed to the Swiss Federal Tribunal. Although parties usually tend to respect and follow CAS decisions on applications for protective measures, it is submitted that CAS does not have the power to enforce such measures against the parties, nor does it have the power to sanction non-compliance.

Dr Gregory Ioannidis

* Gregory Ioannidis is a sports lawyer and an anti-doping litigation expert. He has represented over 100 athletes on allegations of anti-doping rule violations. He is also a former The FA registered lawyer and has acted for and represented many players and clubs around Europe, Africa and Asia on matters of football law. He is currently the Course Leader of the Master's Programme LLM International Sports Law in Practice at Sheffield Hallam University and an academic associate at Kings Chambers in Manchester.

** The views and opinions expressed on this site are those of its author. Nothing on this site should be construed as constituting legal advice, nor should it be relied upon in place of legal advice properly obtained. The reproduction of or reference to any material contained within this site should be attributed to the author and, where possible, a link to this site should be provided.

Five online Ohio sportsbooks, six retail sportsbooks and three mobile and retail proprietors were approved at Wednesday’s Casino Control Commission meeting.

There are still plenty more licenses to be awarded before the market goes live at midnight on Jan. 1.

Approved Ohio sports betting operators

The five approved operators include some of the biggest names in US sports betting:

• BetMGM: Mobile for MGM Resorts’ Northfield Park and retail for the Cincinnati Reds, Northfield and Cedar Downs OTB
• BetRivers: Mobile for PENN Entertainment‘s Hollywood Dayton and retail for Pro Football Hall of Fame Village
• DraftKings: Mobile for PENN’s Hollywood Toledo
• Hard Rock: Mobile and retail for Hard Rock Cincinnati
• Tipico: Mobile and retail for Columbus Crew SC

Hard Rock Cincinnati was one of the three proprietors approved on Tuesday as well. Joining them is the Pro Football Hall of Fame Village (partnered with Betr for mobile) and Miami Valley Gaming (partnered with Gamewise for mobile and retail).

Sports betting suppliers approved, too

Four sports betting suppliers also received their Ohio licenses:

• Internet Sports International
• SBTech Malta
• Stadium Technology Group
• Xpoint Services

StatHero loses Ohio fantasy license

After all of Tuesday’s license approvals, regulators decided to end the meeting by taking one away.

StatHero agreed to give up its fantasy sports license and not reapply for one for three years after the company offered fantasy contests that were against the house and not other players.

Sportshub, meanwhile, was granted a fantasy contest operator license.

More type C approvals as power switches to executive director

Another seven type C hosts were approved, bringing the total to around 880 so far.

The Ohio Lottery pre-approved 1,412 businesses through last Friday, though. That leaves more than 500 to apply still.

CCC Chairwoman June Taylor urged those businesses to do so at Tuesday’s meeting. In order to make sure those approvals can be in time for the Jan. 1 launch date, the CCC gave Executive Director Matt Schuler the authority to approve those licenses.

The post DraftKings, BetMGM Among New Licensees For Ohio Online Sports Betting appeared first on Legal Sports Report.

14 Sports Law is the first highly specialised sports law boutique based in Portugal, focusing on all things legal in the world of sports. Their work includes international and national dispute resolution before sports’ arbitration bodies, advising on compliance, disciplinary, contractual and regulatory matters, as well as assisting investors in the business of sports.

The Firm has a long-standing involvement with academia. Lawyers at 14 Sports Law regularly lecture at some of Europe’s leading graduate and post-graduate programs, such as CBMA, European University (Real Madrid), Lusiada University, among others.

Now, 14 Sports Law has launched an initiative to promote greater inclusion of women in the industry, in partnership with some of the leading figures in European sports law. 

“The Knock-Out: 14 Sports Law Award for Women” will give the opportunity to a female law graduate to get an in-depth experience in the sports law industry. The winner of the award will receive a cash prize of 1,000 Euros, a 3-month internship at 14 Sports Law, and sports law training at the Leadership Woman Football Academy.

To apply, candidates must be in the last year of their law degree, or have completed it within the last two years. They must also submit an article, in Portuguese or English, on a topic of their choice directly related to sports law, with a maximum of fifteen thousand words. Applications must be submitted by email to [email protected] by November 1, 2022.

For Matilde Costa Dias, –

“the Knock-Out for Women in Sports Law award is our contribution to increase awareness of the career opportunities that exist within sports law. We want to open the door to more and more women lawyers who are interested in sports and who may have, with this award, the opportunity to start a successful career in this industry that is as passionate as it is challenging.”

The jury of the Knock-Out for Women in Sports Law award is made up of some of the leading female figures in Sports Law:

Matilde Costa Dias

Matilde Costa Dias is a licensed lawyer in Portugal, member of the Portuguese Bar, with specific knowledge and experience in Arbitration and Litigation within the Sports Law field. She started her career in sports law back in 2014 where she collaborated directly with a Portuguese CAS Arbitrator and moved to Barcelona in 2015 where she joined the prestigious firm Pintó Ruiz & Del Valle.

After almost 6 years working in Barcelona, she joined the Portuguese Boutique Law Firm 14 Sports Law, where she currently coordinates the Litigation & Arbitration Department, providing legal advice to the different agents in the sport industry in contractual and disciplinary and regulatory matters, frequently participating as lawyer in the sport arbitration proceedings, particularly in front of the Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAS-CAS).

She is a member of the Board of Directors of APDD (Portuguese Association of Sports Law), President of the Appeals Committee of the Portuguese Surfing Federation and has also several publications related to sports law, having in recent years given lectures in several international Masters in Sports Law.

Reyes Bellver Alonso

Founder and Attorney-at-Law at Bellver Sports, a legal boutique (Madrid, Spain). Master in International Relations (San Pablo CEU University), Master of Business Taxation (ICADE) Master in Sports Law (University of Lleida 2009-2011) FIFA/CIES Programme in Sport Management (RFEF, 2015) and Certificate in Sport Management by Columbia University in 2019. Reyes started her legal career at EY, but since 2009 she has been working in Sports Law, focused on football issues, defense of players, coaches and clubs before the dispute resolution bodies of FIFA and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), as well as in advising intermediaries and other sports agents. She is also certified by the FIFA Female Leadership Development Programme in 2018. As of 2020, she is an external consultant for FIFA ́s Professional Football department. 

Founder and President of a platform called Leadership Woman Football, founded in 2018 to promote the leadership and the visibility of women in football. Embracing all fields and areas of sports, Bellver is committed to gender equality and diversity in football. She won a Miki Roqué Prize “Peace Through Sport” in 2017 for her associative work with a focus on gender issues and the defense of equality in sports. Bellver is part of Who’s Who Legal (WWL: Sports & Entertainment) as an expert in Sports Law since 2018. She is currently the president of the Sports Law Association of Madrid. 

Alejandra Gomez Bruinewood