Brands and Football – The Perfect Match

The pulling power of the Premier League has attracted a portfolio of sponsors targeting global markets. With clubs battling for market share in the Far East and in a unique position to benefit from GDPR, there appears to be only one direction for the value of commercial partnerships. We share our perspectives in this video.

Football finance: Factoring in cash flow

Although it is trite to say that modern football clubs are very much run as businesses, there is often little consideration paid to the nuts and bolts of how these businesses work. As businesses, football clubs are not immune from the challenge of poor cash flow, which is prevalent across many industries. As such, clubs need to consider how best to leverage the financial tools at their disposal to improve their cash flow in order to maximise output both on the pitch and off it. One such tool is debt finance. While debt-finance comes in many forms, such as an overdraft, receivables finance has become increasingly prevalent in English football over recent years. Continue Reading

Three NBA players suspended for drug violations

The NBA commenced its new season on 22 October with the battle for Los Angeles, as Kawhi’s Clippers edged the Lakers this time. But, less than three weeks into the new season, attention has turned to off-the-court matters; three NBA players who were active on rosters last season have been suspended for testing positive for banned substances.

Wilson Chandler of the Brooklyn Nets tested positive for Ipamorelin, a growth hormone during the summer. The number 1 pick of last year’s draft, DeAndre Ayton tested positive for a diuretic whilst the Atlanta Hawks’ John Collins tested positive for Growth Hormone Releasing Peptide-2, a synthetic drug found to increase appetite and food intake.

The three players have been suspended without pay for 25 games for violations of the NBA/National Basketball’s Player Association (NBPA) Anti-Drug Program.

Continue Reading

HANDBALL!!! I think…


Sunday saw one of the most anticipated games of the 19/20 Premier League season as Liverpool FC hosted Manchester City at Anfield. Liverpool came away with the three points, however the victory was not without controversy. There were a number of decisions, which left Manchester City fans feeling aggrieved and the general football community becoming increasingly frustrated, and confused, with VAR and the new handball rule.

 After careful consideration of the law, it appears that the reason for the confusion stems from Premier League Guidance, which on its face contradicts The International Football Association Board’s (IFAB) Laws of the Game. The Laws of the game suggest that it should have been a penalty to Manchester City, albeit some discretion is reserved for the referee. The Premier League Guidance suggests that no penalty should have been awarded consequent upon the deflection from a player close by (and not by virtue of any alleged prior handball).

Continue Reading

The LeBron Effect, Grand Slams and Record Sales: Matching Rights in Football Kit Sponsorship Deals

On 25 October 2019 Mr Justice Teare handed down his judgment in the kit sponsorship dispute between New Balance Athletics (“NB”) v Liverpool Football Club (“LFC”). The dispute concerned whether NB had validly exercised its matching right set out in the contract between the parties entered into on 3 June 2011 (the “NB Agreement”) in the context of a competing offer from Nike (the “Nike Offer”).

The Nike Offer contained, inter alia, commitments in respect of distribution (the “Distribution Obligation”) and marketing (the “Marketing Obligation”). The key issues for the Judge to consider were: (i) was the matched distribution obligation in NB’s revised offer made in good faith; (ii) what was the Marketing Obligation in the Nike Offer and was it measurable and matchable; and (iii) whether the Distribution Obligation and Marketing Obligation in the Nike Offer were matched by NB.

Although a substantial portion of the judgment considered whether NB had complied with an implied duty to act in good faith in making its offer, the case turned on the Judge’s finding that the offer from NB was less favourable than the Nike offer because of the failure to name global stars “of the calibre of LeBron James, Serena Williams, Drake etc.” This decision is interesting, since the Judge accepted that the term in question did not commit Nike to using those specific celebrities. Rather, the Judge found that since the influence of those individuals could be measured, the clause contained a specific commitment which was not matched by NB. LFC was therefore free to enter into a new agreement with Nike.

Continue Reading

What’s in a name? Liverpool FC withdraw applications for “Liverpool” trade marks

Liverpool Football Club (“LFC“) have been unsuccessful in their attempts to register two trade marks for the word LIVERPOOL. LFC withdrew both applications after the UK Intellectual Property Office (“IPO”) refused the registration. While the IPO’s decision has not been published, it would seem that the IPO rejected LFC’s applications on the basis that such marks would consist exclusively of indicia of geographical origin. Continue Reading

RugbyX: Rugby’s answer to Twenty20?

When the Twenty20 (“T20”) concept was first proposed by cricket executives in 2002, as a means to freshen up the traditional game and boost viewing figures, it was met with a mixed response. However, almost 20 years on, T20 has revolutionised the game, dramatically boosting exposure to the game, both domestically and overseas.

By way of example, over a dozen domestic T20 competitions are contested globally, including in traditionally weaker cricket-playing nations such as Canada and Hong Kong. At the other end of the scale, the most popular T20 competition in 2019 – the Indian Premier League – attracted 462 million viewers in India alone. Continue Reading

Whose data is it anyway? Part 2 – does anyone actually own football data?

In part 1 of ‘whose data is it anyway’, we considered the position of Football DataCo and Betgenius, with particular reference to the experience of a Hull City fan who was questioned in relation to “unauthorised data gathering” during a match against Reading. In this, the final part of our two-part series, Sport Shorts considers whether anyone actually owns the data gathered at football matches and if Football DataCo is entitled to prevent people from collecting such data. Continue Reading

Whose data is it anyway? Part 1 – Hull City fan caught up in the tangled-web of football data

In the first of a two-part series, Sports Shorts looks at the ownership of data collected at football matches. With the new football season still in its infancy, fans of many clubs remain full of the optimism that comes with the sensation that anything is possible in the months to come. When Daniel Mawer arrived at the KCOM stadium to watch his team Hull City face Reading in their first home game of the season, he was likely full of that same positivity; he could not have predicted that he would be threatened with ejection from the ground simply for texting his friends and relatives updates from the game. Mr Mawer posted an account of his experience in a Twitter thread, which caught the attention of Match of the Day presenter Gary Lineker, amongst other high-profile figures. So why was Mr Mawer texting during the game a problem? Continue Reading