On good governance in sport

(Published in the Slovak daily Sport)

Let me close the recent exchange of views among coaches sparked by the Slovak Football Association (SFZ) regarding coaching licenses with this: rules must be respected if they were adopted democratically and in accordance with statutes and proper procedures. If a rule is flawed in substance, it should be revised in the same proper way, following discussion. If it contradicts valid law, it must be changed immediately.

A proper rule-making process and decision-making in sports federations is part of what is known as good governance in sport, a broader topic that’s a key part of the European Union’s sports agenda. It includes principles such as transparency, accountability of elected bodies to their members, inclusion of stakeholders in decision-making, and the protection of vulnerable groups.

In recent months, SFZ has provided a textbook example of how to properly adopt new statutes. The association runs a functioning information system, maintains a well-managed website, streams press conferences live online, and has an active presence in public sports life. That’s all good, but it should be considered basic standard, not something exceptional.

On the other hand, when it comes to specific groups within football where a wide range of interests collide, it seems far harder to push through positive changes aligned with good governance principles. Take the case of players: their protection has long been weak. It remains a mystery why SFZ has still not clearly committed, even after a year and a half, to the agreement on minimum requirements for player contracts, signed in April 2012 by associations of clubs, leagues, players, and UEFA.

The reason is likely simple: many European norms don’t suit the dominant habits of Slovak provincial clubs. For example, the idea that both players and clubs should have equal rights when terminating a contract prematurely. Under longstanding FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber rulings, players become free agents if they miss two salary payments. In Slovakia? A drawn-out ordeal. One especially problematic issue is the requirement that players without professional contracts, but with football income exceeding their costs, must register with their original club within two years of returning from abroad, or seek that club’s permission to join another. This blatant violation of player rights persists in silence, even among those who’ve heard of the EU’s free movement rules or the Bosman ruling. Such obvious legal contradictions should never have made it into regulations, and if they’re there now, they must be removed immediately. The argument that we need to wait for a new comprehensive transfer code doesn’t hold up. I attended two expert meetings on the matter at SFZ in spring 2012, nothing has changed in a year and a half...

And a word about clubs. Let’s set aside the cheerful way licenses are handed out in Slovak football and especially in ice hockey effectively supporting a culture of non-payment. In England, the football association seriously investigates situations where a coach or club official directly contacts a player who’s under contract elsewhere. Or when a club negotiates a transfer with an unlicensed agent. The Slovak reality? Even the keyboard I’m typing this on is choking with laughter.

It’s not enough to co-organize a single annual conference. Good governance in sport also means a federation’s willingness as a regulator to face uncomfortable issues honestly and to uphold the principle of accountability, no matter who is affected. Only then can a sports governing body become a true example of best practice.