The NCAA operates along a series of bylaws that govern the areas of ethical conduct, amateur eligibility, financial aid, recruiting, gender equity, championship events, and academic standards.
The NCAA has enforcement power and can introduce a series of punishments up to the death penalty, the company term for the full shut-down of a sporting activity at an offending college.
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Brown University v. Cohen, is an important aspect of litigation for women's sports.
A critical piece of federal legislation, the Amateur Sports Act of 1978 guarantees certain due process rights including hearings and appeals for U.S. athletes under the governance of the USOC and its NGBs.
It is now common for professional athletes to organize into associations or unions in order to negotiate collective bargaining agreements' (CBAs) with their sport's owners.
Under federal labor law, players and owners must negotiate mandatory issues, those relating to hours, wages, and working conditions, in good faith.
In 1994, Major League Baseball lost half its season and the playoffs because ballplayers went on strike over the issue of a salary cap.
The BALCO controversy involving high-profile professional athletes and coaches highlights the allegedly widespread use of performance-enhancing drugs in different sports.
Super agents like baseball's Scott Boras and football's Drew Rosenhaus are frequently the subject of media profiles.
[3] These "reserve clauses" were upheld because courts found that these sports leagues did not operate in interstate trade or commerce, meaning they did not fall under antitrust laws.
It is important to note that the formation of players unions for the purpose of negotiating contracts with management is exempt from antitrust scrutiny under labor law.
The by-product of good faith negotiations between management and players unions in the form of a CBA is also exempt from antitrust scrutiny.
Negligence torts are typically harder to prove in contact sports, where violent actions and injuries are more common and thus more expected ("assumption of risk" or "self-defense").
A player who purposefully causes bodily harm to another athlete, coach, or spectator may be guilty of committing an intentional tort along with a criminal act of assault and battery.
In fact, a recent study conducted by Boston University's school of medicine claimed that 99% of the "brains obtained from the NFL" tested positive for CTE.
The NFL uses this doctrine as a defense, stating that the plaintiff (players) knew the risks of their job prior to when the injuries occurred.
Australia The capacity for the law of assault to intervene in contact sports is limited by the athlete's willing participation.
[32] Similarly, issues also arise where conduct can be characterised to fall "outside the scope of the Plaintiff's consent to degree of physical contact during the game",[33] thus invoking compensation.