International Sports Federations Research Articles

Ukrainians in Italy fight for ukraine’s participation in the Olympic Games

The article analyzes archival funds and primary sources to establish the peculiarities of the activities of the Ukrainian diaspora in Italy on the eve of the 1960 Olympic Games. Correspondence between Osip Zinkevich and Vasyl Fedorovych regarding the participation of Ukrainian athletes separately from the USSR in the Olympic Games in Rome was revealed. It was found that the Ukrainian Olympic Committee was active on the eve and during the Olympic Games, distributing memorandums to the International Olympic Committee, National Olympic Committees, International Sports Federations, etc., printing newsletters, opening an information bureau in Rome.
 The activities of the information bureau of the Ukrainian Olympic Committee contributed to the distribution in Ukrainian and English of the newsletter «For the participation of Ukraine in the Olympic Games», the organization of a press conference in Rome for the foreign press, the organization of an exhibition of Ukrainian publications in the countries of the free world, the establishment of contacts with Ukrainian (Soviet) athletes , re-presenting the issue of Ukraine's participation in the Olympic Games at the Rome session of the IOC, promoting the Olympic idea among the Ukrainian community in Ukraine and abroad, publishing the book «Ukrainian Olympic Champions» in English. The idea of local participation of the Ukrainian team in the Olympic Games has little global support.

Analysis of the interactions among core stakeholders of the Olympic media ecosystem: conditions for a value creation proposition of the Olympic Virtual Series

ABSTRACT One of the most visible examples of the disruptive nature of esports can be seen through its inclusion in the modern Olympic Games. Despite substantial initiatives deployed over the past ten years to strengthen ties between the Olympic Movement (OM) and the esports industry, research is still limited on the first edition of Olympic esports events. This study fills that void by investigating the conditions under which the relationships among Olympic Virtual Series’ (OVS) stakeholders can generate value for them. Using a qualitative approach based on the media ecosystem theory, we performed a thematic analysis of seven semi-structured interviews conducted with esports activities managers and marketers from International Sports Federations and one publisher. This work reveals how the inclusion of esports in the OM movement through the OVS reflects how esports’ increased popularity is disrupting modern media businesses. In addition, it demonstrates that the stakeholders involved in the first edition of the OVS faced many challenges in generating value. We identify key inhibitors, facilitators and challenges for OM stakeholders in the results.

What impact have the IOC medical consensus statements made on athlete health? A survey of medical commissions from National Olympic/Paralympic Committees and International Sports Federations

BackgroundThe International Olympic Committee (IOC) Medical and Scientific Commission has supported collating and sharing evidence globally by developing sports medicine consensus statements (‘Statements’'). Publishing the Statements requires substantial resources that...

Waiver to apply the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the resolution of disputes in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)

The subject. Sports legal relations, as having a private legal nature, and assuming “horizontal” inter-subject relations by default, do not imply the extension to them the guarantees provided by international acts in the field of human rights protection in order to protect the individual in “vertical” interaction with public subjects. However, this doctrinal approach is still questioned by sports actors, who make attempts to refute it through the involvement of certain norms of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) (Articles 6 and 8, mostly) as arguments in sports disputes. An additional incentive for this is the location of international and continental sports federations, their jurisdictional bodies and the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in the national legal orders that recognize the application of the mentioned ECHR.The purpose of the study. The prospects of arguments in the resolution of sports disputes based on the requirements of the literal use of the norms of the ECHR are considered in this article.Methodology. Methods of analysis and comparison based on the CAS practice.The main results of research and the field of their application. The use of only certain meanings of part 1 of Article 6 of the ECHR in sports justice is forced to be taken into account by CAS due to the prospect of appealing decisions to the Swiss Federal Tribunal.Conclusions. The norms of the ECHR generally do not apply in sports justice.

A Conceptual Model to Understand and Assess International Sport Federations’ Organizational Performance

While national sport federations’ organizational performance has received considerable academic attention both in terms of conceptual and empirical studies, organizational performance of international sport federations remains undefined and thus unmeasurable. Due to repeated governance scandals in international sport federations, stakeholders’ calls for greater accountability intensified, raising the question of what should be measured and monitored and how. Considering the important role of international sport federations from a social, economic, and environmental perspective, this paper tries to remedy the lack of a conceptual model to understand and measure their organizational performance holistically. To grasp the complexity of international sport federations’ activities and environment, definitions, performance dimensions and examples of appropriate measures were identified through a literature review and combined in the multi-dimensional process model. The proposed model includes four variables (input, throughput, outcome, feedback) and 12 dimensions. It addresses persisting theoretical, methodological, and empirical challenges in measuring international sport federations’ organizational performance. Several interviews with experts from within and outside international sport federations were conducted to test and adjust the conceptual model. The paper provides the first comprehensive analytical model that conceptualizes international sport federations’ organizational performance. It allows academics and practitioners to understand, monitor and manage international sport federations organizational performance holistically.

The Century-Long Struggle for the Leadership of World Sport

In less than a century, sport has evolved from a hobby for a few European gentlemen into a global phenomenon involving people from all walks of life and of all ages. Media coverage of large sport events, especially the modern Olympic Games, has contributed greatly to increasing and widening sport’s appeal and turning it into an activity enjoyed by countless millions of people of both sexes, whether grassroots participants, spectators or elite athletes. Three types of organizations have sought to lead world sport: (1) The International Olympic Committee, which awards Olympic Games to host cities; (2) international sport federations, each of which establishes universal rules for its sport and recognizes national federations; and (3) certain governments and intergovernmental organizations. The century-long geopolitical struggle for the leadership of world sport can be divided into five periods. Although the International Olympic Committee currently holds the upper hand, the emergence of new actors may threaten its dominant position.

Challenges and practices in international sport federations to gain and maintain legitimacy

Introduction International sport federations (IFs) are today part of complex ecosystems (Bayle, 2023). As governing bodies, they are regulators and define and sanction sporting and participation rules. IFs are further organizers of international sport events, some of which attract large audiences and investments. In this role, IFs have to satisfy diverging demands of multiple stakeholders (Chappelet, 2021). Additionally, IFs have become important social, economic and political actors. They are employers and as such contribute to the local economy and have a corporate social responsibility. And with sport being increasingly interwoven with money, power, politics and state interests, IFs also influence and are influenced by geopolitics. This has entailed corruption and self-enrichment on one side of the spectrum, and it enabled peace processes and development on the other side. In this complex web of mission, expectations and pressures, how do IFs gain/maintain legitimation? Methods Using literature research and desk research, we first focus on the role and mission of IFs since their creation and illustrate an overview of the changing expectations against which IFs sought/seek legitimacy (historical timeline). Reflecting the conceptual model of Bayle and Clausen (2023, under review) on IFs’ organizational performance and its operationalization, we then map explicit and implicit performance indicators that derive from IFs’ mission and the multiple social, economic and political activities they have embraced over the past decades. Based on this mapping, we discuss IFs’ strategies to meet expectations and pressures that result from these performance indicators. We conclude the presentation with an assessment of the interrelation between expectations towards IFs, strategies developed by IFs, and internal/external performance control mechanisms based on five interviews. Results The social, political, and economic influence of IFs is largely recognized today. Yet, their legitimacy as non-profit governing bodies of sport in the eyes of prominent stakeholders (e.g., IOC, governments, sponsors) is currently reduced to their ability to comply with dominant governance and sustainability frameworks. As a result of this narrow focus, academics and practitioners have developed a good understanding and monitoring mechanisms of IFs’ governance practices. On the other hand, IFs’ performance and legitimacy from a mission and purpose perspective is greatly understudied. Discussion/Conclusion One of the challenges in defining performance indicators for IFs is their broad societal mission. Firstly, the impact of IFs’ activities to contribute to some sort of societal betterment is difficult to measure. And secondly, the priorities of societal issues change (e.g., poverty, health, climate). Any performance measurement system for IFs therefore needs to be dynamic to address both IFs’ mission and evolving external expectations.

The Role of Sport in the Realization of the UN 2030 SDGs: A Review of World Sailing Sustainability Education Programme

World Sailing’s Sustainability Agenda 2030 outlines how the sport will contribute to the SDGs. The Agenda is split up into World Sailing’s six main operational areas with a total of 56 different targets. They are committed to youth education, reduce plastic use, equipment recycling, and marine protection through educational projects, public welfare activities, international forums. A single case study methodology was used in this study to provide an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon. In this study we found that the World Sailing and World Sailing Trust play an exemplary and leading role in the field of sustainable development. The Sustainability Education Program materials will ensure the next generation of sailors learn about wider environmental issues that can affect the sport as well as those areas where the sport can make a positive impact. However, it is obvious that the appeal and action of international sport federation is limited, and it is difficult to form a wider group of participants. More is to arouse people’s awareness of protecting the earth through sailing sport.

Sexual harassment and abuse in sport: some legal and criminological considerations

Sexual harassment and sexual abuse are not uncommon in the world of sports. Many athletes, especially female athletes, have been victims of violence, intimidation and abuse. For many years, victims remained silent and hid their experiences for fear of condemnation by society and the media, but recent trends show that the situation is improving. More and more athletes are speaking out against sexual harassment and abuse in the world of sport. From a legal point of view, the main feature of sexual harassment cases is that the burden of proof can be shifted to the accused. In criminal law, this mechanism raises concerns about a possible violation of the presumption of innocence. However, as international sports federations apply a lower standard of proof in disciplinary cases, this procedural feature is viewed favourably. At the same time, it should be noted that a lower standard of proof does not in any way mean that sexual harassment and abuse cases can be investigated with less responsibility or sensitivity. On the contrary, the legal and criminological specificity of this phenomenon implies that the boundaries between sexual abuse, sexual harassment, unprofessional conduct, and mere flirting must be clearly defined. Appropriate delimitation ensures, on the one hand, that perpetrators do not escape responsibility, even if it is relatively minor, and, on the other hand, protects the innocent against unfounded accusations.

S8-1 Health Promoting Sports Federations: theory, tools, case studies and future directions

Abstract Purpose Beyond promoting their sports and contributing to elite success, sports federation have a broader health and sport for all promoting role, to include everyone in sport. The symposium has as objective to showcase theoretical grounds, case studies and tools to support health and physical activity promotion among international and national sports federation. Methods The symposium will entail four presentation reflecting on different aspects of health and physical activity promotion. The first presentation will focus on theoretical grounds and guidelines created by 15 researchers and in collaboration with the World Health Organisation. The second presentation describes a case study among 51 national sports federation in France, to explain how they promote health and showcase the use of the indicators of health promoting sports federation indicators created by authors of the first presentation. The third presentation will describe a World Athletics project on the promotion of physical activity through competitions organisation and its stakes, as a practice-oriented example. The fourth presentation offer insights on the development and use of the “International and European Sport Organisations Activate Citizens” Capacity Building Framework, created through an Erasmus+ project, which entails a set of tools to empower international sports federation to promote sport for all. Results After the four presentation, an open discussion will be engaged with the audience on the success and challenges, as well as a small interactive session on future directions for international and national sports federation to consider their health enhancing physical activity potential and fully exploit it. Conclusions The symposium will equip the audience with theory, tools and example of practice, as well as reflect on how to move the research and practice agenda for health promoting sport federation.

S8-4 Reaching beyond competitive sports. How International Sports Federation can use their main competitions to promote physical activity. A World Athletics pilot project

Abstract Purpose International Sports Federations (IF) are global governing bodies for each respective sport and their main duties are to organize international competitions, regulate and promote their sport. Despite their objective of promoting sports participation, their activity mostly focused on competitive/elite sports so far. International competitions not only represent the epitome of each sport but could also be used as an opportunity to improve the health of those living in the hosting city or the staff working for the local organising committee (LOC). The purpose of this pilot project was to measure the benefits of active commuting (AC) and leisure time physical activity (LTPA) of the staff involved in the World Athletics Championships Oregon22 during the two weeks of competition. Project description World Athletics partnered with StravaMetro□ to measure AC between official accommodation and competition venues, as well as the staff LTPA, during the Championships. Before the event, World Athletics staff was briefed on the project purposes and given information on AC options available in Eugene (pedestrian and cycling paths, bike rental). Staff members were encouraged to record their AC and LTPA through the Strava App. During the 2 weeks, a total of 18,656 walking/running trips (both AC and LTPA) were recorded in Eugene. This represents a 225.4% increase compared to the same period of the previous year. Furthermore, 2690 cycling commuting trips were recorded, representing a 143% increase. Conclusions This pilot project demonstrates that IF can efficiently use their main events to promote AC and LTPA to their staff and the workforce involved. Encouraging AC, improves the health of those active, reduces traffic related air pollution, road traffic, and transportation costs for the LOC. An upscaled approach adopted in the early phase of the event planning, involving spectators would amplify observed results and their health-related benefits. The post analysis by StravaMetro□ of the walking and cycling routes used by staff and spectators can also allow the host city to better define and create protected routes which represent a tangible legacy. These objectives require a strong collaboration between the IF, LOC, city government and the national institutions promoting AC and HEPA.

The status of transgender and intersex athletes in international sports federations

This contribution is the fruit of numerous discussions with several practitioners and legal advisors within sports organisations in Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States, and aims to guide sports federations in the internal rules they must put in place following the recommendations of the International Olympic Committee in November 2021, with a reminder of the various regulations adopted in this area over the last 60 years.

The plausible effects of wearing face masks on sports performance-A scoping review.

The objectives of this scoping review are to discuss, firstly, the positive aspects of wearing face masks during training (such as a barrier to COVID-19 transmission, air pollutant exposure, and adding load on respiratory resistance flow); secondly, the negative aspects (adverse effects on body temperature and hypoxia risks); and thirdly, the training responses of wearing face masks on aerobic and anaerobic performance. Besides social distancing and hand hygiene, wearing a face mask is proposed to be the prime advocacy for virus containment. During the period of high risk of contamination, the return to sport guidelines proposed by international and national sport federations included wearing face masks during training sessions. However, it is necessary to discuss the pros and cons of wearing face masks during exercise. Although it was essential to wear a face mask during exercise or sport-specific training, there is conflicting evidence on the implications of the use of face masks on physical, physiological as well as psychological well-being or performance. Based on the conflicting empirical findings and anecdotal evidence, certain recommendations have been made for adequate use of face masks during exercise; both to break the chain of transmission and prevent the physiological compromise expected from wearing face masks during exercise. The present review can help stakeholders balance sport guidelines in the event of a respiratory virus pandemic with athlete safety. Conflicting evidence of mechanistic links between the dose of exercise and the possible adverse effects associated with exercising with face masks is available. Adequately powered studies with strong methodological quality on appropriate selection of masks and usage based on the intensity, duration, and type of sport, age, and gender is needed now for the stakeholders to make informed decisions with respect to exercising with face masks.

The Issue of Voluntariness of Consent to Refer Disputes to the Court of Arbitration for Sport based on the Analysis of Its Status and Principles of Functioning

The article is devoted to the study of institutional and procedural problems related to the resolution of conflicts arising in professional and Olympic sports (elite sports). Modern sport seeks to isolate itself from state and international legal regulation, to create its own system of corporate standards, the subjects of which are sports organizations and athletes. In order to impart stability to the introduced system of corporate rules, international non-governmental organizations leading the world sports and Olympic movement also create their own jurisdictional bodies (arbitration courts, the so-called sports tribunals), the purpose of which is to resolve disputes between athletes, sports organizations on corporate rules established by international sports federations and the International Olympic Committee. The central part of this system of sports arbitration courts is the Sports Arbitration Court in Lausanne (Switzerland), whose status is analyzed in detail in this paper.One of the main problems to which the author pays attention, is the non-consensual, in fact forced nature of the spread of the jurisdiction of the sports arbitration courts on athletes, often combined with a prohibition (established in the corporate act — for example, the regulations of sports federations) to appeal to the state courts under a threat of lifelong disqualification. Thus, the structures that govern the world professional and Olympic sports require athletes to refuse to exercise their constitutional right to access to justice. But could an arbitration clause be considered valid if the athlete did not give consent to the consideration of his disputes in the arbitration court (arbitration) and to the choice of arbitration jurisdiction, which in fact was forced? Unfortunately, practice shows that in most cases, when athletes ignore this ban and apply to national courts, appealing against the decisions of the sports arbitration court in Lausanne, the latter make “political” decisions that take the interests of the leading forces in the world sports movement into account.

Something’s Gotta Give: Bent Rules, Breached Bottom Line, and the International Amateur Athletics Federations’ Handling of the “China Question”

International Sport Federations, as part of the Olympic network, have different organizational structures and decision-making mechanisms from the International Olympic Committee. The authors, in examining the history of the International Amateur Athletics Federations’ (IAAF) handling of the “China question” in international sport, probe how these differences translated into the IAAF’s organizational politics and power dynamics in face of governmental interference. Primarily examining archival documents obtained from the IAAF Archive and the International Olympic Committee Historical Archives, the authors particularly follow how the self-governing IAAF upheld, bent, and modified its statutes during its engagement with the People’s Republic of China from the 1950s to the 1970s and around its eventual admission of the People’s Republic of China’s Athletics Association in 1978. It is also argued that the IAAF’s engagement and inclusion of the People’s Republic of China allowed the consolidation of its monopolizing power in global athletics governance.

Who Is to Blame and What Is to Be Done? The Rise and Fall of Russian Authority in the Olympics

In February, I sat riveted as the Russian women's singles figure skating team imploded during the final free skate at the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing. I witnessed the despair of the gold medal favorite, Kamila Valieva, as her dreams evaporated in repeated (and highly uncharacteristic) falls. I was fascinated by the anger and frustration of the silver medalist, Aleksandra Trusova, who seemed angrier at losing the gold than happy about her own success at making the podium. I felt the insecurity and vulnerability of the gold medal winner and Olympic champion, Anna Shcherbakova, as she clutched her stuffed animal, alone in the kiss and cry area, her coaches preoccupied with her teammates’ breakdown and tirade. All three Russians’ performances were shadowed by positive drug tests and palpably abusive coaching. A week later, as Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine, the drama of the Olympic figure skating final appeared as another symptom of Russian president Vladimir Putin's quest to reconstitute the Russian (Soviet) empire and recapture the glory days of Russian (Soviet) dominance in Olympic sport.Russia's efforts to recapture lost glory have not exactly gone to plan. As I write this, Ukraine is retaking territory, the Russian army is in disarray, and Russian men are fleeing the country rather than be drafted to fight. Russia has been hit by an array of economic sanctions by Europe and the United States, and American and European weapons and money have been flowing into Ukraine. Since 2014, revelations of the state-run doping system and repeated and recurring cover-ups of it, internal crackdown on dissent, and especially the invasion of Ukraine in February have seen Russia's place in international sports unravel. Since the current war in Ukraine, Russians have been voted out or pressured to step down from leadership positions in international and European sports federations. Although the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has not called for such action and has not suspended its Russian members, the IOC has withdrawn Olympic honors from Russian officials, including Putin, and has called upon international sports organizations to move events out of Russia and ban Russian and Belarusian athletes and officials from competitions. As qualifiers for the Paris 2024 Olympics are getting underway, questions abound over whether Russian and Belarusian athletes will compete at those Games.This presumably was not how Putin planned Russia's return to the world stage after the break-up of the Soviet Union and Russia's “great depression” of the 1990s. Soon after coming to power, the Russian president set out to restore the Russian economy, reestablish influence in the former Soviet sphere, and reassert Russia as a global power. At the same time, Russia sought to recapture its reputation as a sporting force. In 2003, Moscow bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games. Having lost out to London, Russia set its sights on hosting the Winter Games in the Black Sea (summer) resort town of Sochi. Putin took a personal interest in expanding Russia's sports reputation, schmoozing and bribing his way into hosting large-scale international events.1 The apex of Russian power, influence, and reputation in international sport was the period between 2007 when Sochi won the bid to host the 2014 Winter Olympics and 2018 when Russian cities played host to the FIFA World Cup. During this time, several Russians were elected to boards and leadership positions in international federations. Mostly close allies of Putin, they represent a mix of former Olympic champions, sports functionaries, and oligarchs. These include billionaire Alisher Usmanov, who was elected president of the International Fencing Federation (FIE) in 2008 and who bankrolled the bid for the 2018 World Cup. There is also Sergey Soloveychik, who was elected president of the European Judo Union (EJU) in 2007.2 In 2016, the European Fencing Confederation (EFC) elected Stanislav Pozdnyakov, the five-time Olympic medalist, as its president. The steel tycoon Vladimir Lisin was appointed to the International Shooting Sport Federation (ISSF) executive committee in 2013 and elected president of the organization in 2018. A career sports bureaucrat who served on the organizing committee for the 1980 Moscow Olympiad, Alexander Ratner, became general secretary of the European Shooting Confederation (ESC) in 2013 and served as a member of the ISSF council from 2014 before being elected its president in 2018.3 In 2021, Ratner was elected president of the ESC.4 Russian sports functionary Umar Kremlev became general secretary and member of the executive board of the International Boxing Association (IBA) and has served as president of the organization since 2021. These individuals promoted Russian power and influence in international sports, using their connections and money to help secure international competitions in Russia and ensure the dominance of Russian athletes.These efforts invite parallels with the Soviet push to assert power and influence in international sport. When they first entered the Olympic Movement in 1951, Soviet sports officials studied carefully the mechanisms of power and authority within the IOC. They noted the relationship between the IOC and the National Olympic Committees (NOCs) who organize Olympic sport in their own countries and the International Federations (IFs) who govern the individual sports. They saw in the convoluted system of international sports a way to break through the “Anglo-American” faction that dominated the IOC by bringing more Soviet-friendly NOCs into the movement and gaining leadership positions for Soviet and other socialist officials within the IFs. This was all designed to gain maximum cultural capital in international sports which could be used to pressure the IOC to accept proposals that would work to the Soviet advantage. They even went so far as to propose a radical reorganization of the IOC that would give NOCs and IFs a direct role in IOC decision-making. That proposal failed, but Soviet sports administrators achieved some success in stacking the IOC and IFs with friendly functionaries, eventually using their networks to secure the bid to host the 1980 Olympic Games in Moscow.5These efforts raised the profile of Soviet sports officials and gave them influence within the Olympic Movement. Historically, the IOC has been resistant to boycotts and bans, and Soviet administrators exploited this reality for their own purposes. When many called for boycotts or bans after the Soviet invasion of Hungary, the IOC adopted a unanimous resolution expressing its “sorrow and regret” as “an organization concerned solely with sport” over the decision by “a small number of nations” to pull out of the Games for reasons “not in keeping with the Olympic ideal.”6 The IOC's myopic insistence that it represents sport outside of politics allowed Soviet officials to deflect their own actions and accuse others of bringing politics into the Games. When similar appeals were made after the 1968 invasion of Prague, the Czechoslovak member of the IOC, F. Kroutil, asked Soviet officials, “How will your sportsmen and athletes of other socialist countries that take part in the occupation of our country be received at the Olympic Games?”7 While they “lost” to the US on the medal podium, those athletes were received very well in Mexico City, where the Games went on despite the Mexican government's brutal massacre of student protestors weeks before the Opening Ceremonies.There is one major exception to this trend: the exclusion of South Africa and Southern Rhodesia because of their policies of segregation in sports.8 While the movement to ban South Africa from international sports achieved success thanks in-part to the contributions of newly independent states in Africa, Soviet representatives in the IOC and IFs were vocal supporters of that movement, because it lent credence to Soviet claims to support anticolonial movements at a time when the Cold War competition had moved to the “Third World.” Support for the anti-Apartheid movement also helped ensure that African nations would not boycott the 1980 Olympics. In arguing for South Africa's exclusion, Soviet representatives could couch their appeal within Olympic ideals that everyone should have the right to participate in sport free from racial discrimination. The Soviet reputation within the IOC had grown so much by the 1970s that when various groups around the world threatened to boycott the 1980 Summer Olympiad in Moscow, the IOC stood firmly behind the organizers. Even after the invasion of Afghanistan convinced Western nations to boycott the Games, the IOC blamed the US for bringing politics into their sacred movement and praised the Moscow Olympics as a triumph. In the 1980s, the relationship between the IOC and the Soviet Union grew under the presidency of Juan Antonio Samaranch, despite the boycott by the Soviet bloc of the Los Angeles Olympiad.Unlike their Soviet predecessors, Russian sports officials have not been able to maintain their influence and reputation, but until 2022 they were able to retain their participation in the Olympic Movement. From winning the bid to host the 2014 Winter Olympics to the 2022 Winter Games in Beijing, Russia behaved as if its twin goals of reconquering the former Soviet Empire and reestablishing Russian dominance in the Olympics worked hand in hand. In 2008, while the opening ceremonies were going on in Beijing, Russian troops entered Georgia, and in 2014 before the Olympic cauldron in Sochi had been extinguished, they appeared in Ukraine. Russia was able to annex Crimea and conduct war in the Donbas seemingly with no consequences. That Russia went unpunished by the sports community makes sense given the IOC's historic propensity to award the Games to authoritarian governments despite their breaches of international conventions. The IOC let the “Nazi” Olympics go on, and the Winter Games in Beijing were held after revelations of Uighurs being forced into labor and reeducation camps. And of course, the Sochi Winter Olympics were held against a backdrop of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and brutal government crackdown on Muslim territories under the guise of securing the Games against possible terrorist threats. All of this must have convinced Putin that invading Ukraine again would likewise bear no consequences for Russia in the sporting world.The reaction by the IOC and international sports community to the February 2022 invasion defied those expectations. When IOC president Thomas Bach issued a statement calling for Russian and Belarusian athletes and officials to be barred from sports events and international competitions to be relocated from Russia, most European and international sports organizations complied. The International Ice Hockey Federation stripped Kazan, Russia of the right to host the 2023 World Championships, and nearly all the Olympic sports federations excluded Russian and Belarusian athletes from competitions. The treatment of Russian officials, however, has varied. Bach's recommendation specifically excluded Russian IOC members from the ban, and the IOC has deferred to the IFs on how they might deal with Russian and Belarusian sports functionaries in their organizations. As of early May, only seven IFs that govern Olympic sports had suspended Russian and Belarusian officials and/or their national federations.9 Some IFs and European federations have removed Russian officials from their governing boards and leadership positions, but others have not. Alisher Usamanov stepped down as president of the FIE after the European Union hit him with sanctions and is now facing a German fraud investigation.10 The FIE is now confronting severe financial pressures due to the absence of Usamanov and his yearly multimillion-dollar donation to the organization which historically covered the bulk of their budget in non-Olympic years.11 Steel magnate Vladimir Lisin remained president of the ISSF despite calls for him to step down until suffering a narrow defeat in the federation's November election.12 The International Boxing Association (IBA), already on the ropes with the IOC, having been suspended pending reforms to address financial and governance issues, remains under the leadership of Russian oligarch Umar Kremlev. Having reversed course to allow Russian athletes to compete under their own flag, the organization suspended the Ukrainian national federation and briefly signaled it would exclude Ukrainian athletes from competitions. The IBA later clarified that the suspension was only targeting the national federation and that athletes would not be excluded; however, the organization did so while arguing that Russian and Belarusian athletes should be allowed to compete as well. Under Kremlev, the association seems unlikely to address the corruption that led to their suspension in the first place.13The war has sparked debate throughout the Olympic Family over how to deal with Russian athletes and officials, and all arguments draw upon the same set of Olympic principles, demonstrating the ambiguity and malleability of Olympic ideals. The IOC stripped Russian political leaders, including Vladimir Putin, of the Olympic Order, because the invasion of Ukraine represented a “blatant violation of the Olympic truce.”14 Insisting that the ban on athletes and officials from competition constitutes “protective measures, not sanctions,” Bach asserted that the ban was necessary to safeguard the “integrity of competitions” during a time when “deep anti-Russian and anti-Belarusian feelings in so many countries following the invasion” threatened the safety of those athletes. When asked why Russia's IOC members were not suspended, Bach responded, “This war has not been started by the Russian people, the Russian athletes, the Russian Olympic Committee or the IOC members in Russia,” who, according to the convenient and obtuse Olympic maxim, serve as representatives of the IOC in their respective countries and not the other way around.15 At the meeting of the general assembly of the Association of National Olympic Committees (ANOC), the head of the Danish NOC, Hans Natorp, criticized what he sees as an “unbalanced” position of the IOC “sanctioning the athletes and allowing the politicians” to participate.16 Natorp represents one of a handful of NOCs who want to see Russia completely excluded from international sport. Others, like head of the United States Olympic Committee Sarah Hirshland, think “individual athletes should not be victims of whatever their individual government's, political or other, intentions are around the world” and that a way can be found for Russian and Belarusian athletes to eventually return to competitions.17 Bach has recently expressed the desire to find a way for those athletes who do not support the war to compete as neutrals.18 He has not speculated on how an athlete might express their opposition to the war at a time when even describing the “special military action” as a war could earn you a fine or jail time. Perhaps they could follow the example of former Russian Olympic Committee (ROC) secretary Anastasia Davydova, who decided to leave Russia for Dubai.19 It seems doubtful that many athletes would have the resources to leave Russia and still remain competitive in their sport.For their part, Russian officials see the sanctions, bans, and boycotts not as a response to Russian malfeasance but as evidence of Russophobia among western sports representatives. Denouncing the sanctions, they have been working to get themselves and their athletes reinstated. Having been removed as president of the European Fencing Confederation, Russian NOC president Stanislav Pozdnyakov called it “very regrettable that the European hysteria led to abolishing everything in regard to Russia, even such [a] noble sport as fencing.”20 Umar Kremlov's IBA issued a statement calling on international sports organizations to “keep sports and athletes away from politics,” allow Russian and Belarusian athletes to compete, and allow “no discrimination based on nationality.”21 Russian officials have also been establishing bilateral sports ties with non-Western nations and continuing to hold competitions to prepare for when they can “triumphantly return to the world stage.”22 Long-serving Russian IOC member Vitaly Smirnov expressed certainty that international sports could not do without Russian athletes for long. When Natorp walked out on Pozdnyakov's presentation at the ANOC general assembly, Smirnov remarked, “Where is Denmark in the table of the Olympic Movement and where is Russia?” He mused, “The Olympic Movement and the Olympic Games would calmly survive the absence of Denmark but the absence of the Russian Federation would be a blow.”23As members of the IOC, NOCs, and IFs debate the return of Russia and Belarus as full-fledged members of the international sporting community, the fate of their athletes remains up in the air. Right now, the big question is whether their athletes will be able to compete in the 2024 Paris Olympics. As qualifying competitions for those Games are soon to get underway, the continued absence of Russian and Belarusian athletes from those events could jeopardize their ability to make it to Paris. For those athletes in winter Olympic sports, there is a bit more breathing room, so could there be a “triumphant return” to the Olympic stage for the Russian women figure skaters? Having already missed out on the world championships in March, the three Olympians are entering new phases in their careers. Anna Shcherbakova had surgery earlier this year on her knee. Aleksandra Trusova, who took the silver in Beijing, has recently split from Eteri Tutberidze's controversial coaching group. Awaiting the verdict in the Russian Doping Agency's own investigation into the positive drug test from Beijing, Kamila Valieva captured victory at the Golden Skate of Moscow Grand Prix in October. Perhaps the Russian figure skaters can redeem the Russian system that broke down so spectacularly in Beijing and finally realize their Olympic dream in 2026. Perhaps, though, they will have aged out by then and will have to pass the torch to a younger generation. It seems that any Russian return to the Olympics would require an end to the war and massive changes in how the Russian sports system operates. I hold out hope for the former, but the latter seems a bridge too far in Putin's Russia.

‘Pommel Horse Rebels and Apartheid’s Friends’ – American Gymnasts and the International Anti-Apartheid Sports Boycott Against South Africa, 1970–1990

Following the global rejection of apartheid, from 1970–1990, South Africa was both expelled and suspended from membership from a significant number of international sports federations, including the International Gymnastics Federation. Confronted with isolation from the international arena, the South African Gymnastics Union initiated a series of unsanctioned ‘rebel tours’ involving both leading and emerging countries. The United States of America (USA) proved to be one of South Africa’s most loyal friends and allies over the period in question. Unfazed by their listing on the blacklist of the United Nations Centre against Apartheid and the unsavoury title of being a collaborator of apartheid, this relationship survived until two years after the passing of the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 by the USA Congress. The extent, form, implications, and interlinkages of this relationship are part of both countries’ hidden history and deserve to be foregrounded with a view to its insertion into a larger transnational narrative.

Analysis of the features of olympic qualification systems in combat sports

The article is devoted to the analysis of the features of current qualification systems in combat sports. It was established that the International Sports Federations (ISF) develops the Olympic qualification systems and specific criteria for athletes to obtain licenses. The structure and content of these systems may differ in each Olympic cycle. In 2021-2024 cycle, qualification at the Olympics in combat sports is possible in two ways: through the athlete's position in the official ISF ranking or by demonstrating a certain result at qualifying tournaments.
 In taekwondo, judo and fencing it is possible to obtain "direct" qualification for the Olympic Games through the official ISF ranking or demonstration of a certain result at the qualifying tournament ("tournament of last hope" for participants from NOCs who have not yet obtained an Olympic license). The possibility of qualifying in team depends on its high place in the official ISF team ranking. If a certain team could not qualify through to the world ranking, its members are able to do it only in individual events (by individual qualification).
 For boxing and wrestling, qualification to the Olympic Games is possible by certain result in special tournaments or "tournaments of last hope" (for participants from NOCs who have not yet obtained an Olympic license). The range of weight categories in which athletes may participate is almost equal for men and women.
 The differences in the Olympic qualification systems for the 2024 XXIII Games in Paris are its duration, the ownership of the obtained license (personal or for the NOC), the number of types of competitions, the presence of different rankings (world, continental, Olympic, individual, team).

ATHLETES HEALTH IN INTERNATIONAL SPORT FEDERATIONS MAIN DOCUMENTS PARTICIPATING AT 2021 OLYMPIC GAMES IN TOKYO

The International Olympic Committee sets the direction for the development of sport, and international sports federations are responsible for incorporating that direction into their rules to maintain their presence at the Olympics. At the 2021 Tokyo Olympic Games, 33 international sports federations represented with their sports. We have analyzed the statutes of 33 international sports federations based on the keywords "health", "medicine", "doping" and "injuries". Doping is mentioned in all major documents, health is omitted by 30% of federations, medicine is not mentioned by 21% of federations, and only eight international sports federations mention injuries, representing 24% of federations. From the data on doping and injuries in sports, we can conclude that doping is a minor problem compared to injuries. The main reason for acute and chronic injuries could be related to the technical rules for practicing the sport, not to the constitution. If the number of injuries is to be reduced, the technical rules should be changed first, as the injury statistics per sport show.

Current issues of the implementation of the right to protect state symbols in sports activities

This article is devoted to current problems of protecting the right of the state to use state symbols (anthem, flag) within the framework of international sports and other events. The subject of the research is to consider the right to perform the national anthem, display the national flag and other symbols through the prism of the state’s intellectual property. The current position of the Russian Federation on the international sports and political arena raises the question for the legal community of the need for legislative regulation of the state's intellectual property rights to state symbols. The authors analyzed the current positions of international organizations in the field of sports regarding the participation of athletes from the Russian Federation in international sports events. The subject of the study is also international legal acts related to the holding of international sporting events and regulations of international sports organizations and federations (IOC, FIFA, UEFA). The legal system, both at the national and international levels, should be structured in such a way that international sports organizations do not have the right to ban the performance of the national anthem and the using of the national flag by a country participating in international sports competitions, because such a ban is a violation of the state's right to identity. The bans imposed by foreign organizations and judicial institutions on the Russian Federation as sanctions are presented by the international community as a compromise for the admission of Russian athletes to participate in international sports competitions in a neutral status, however, from a legal point of view, this approach requires reconsideration. The authors proposed amendments to a number of regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation: the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.