Today, Sebastian Telfair's conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree was affirmed by the NY Appellate Division, Second Department. Telfair was originally arrested in 2017. According to court documents, after a search of his vehicle in the early morning hours of June 11, 2017, police recovered numerous items, including luggage, clothing, sneakers, jewelry, various bags, two small bags of marijuana, and cash. The officers also found a loaded 45-caliber gun in the center console of the truck, and three additional handguns and ammunition in the flatbed area. Telfair was charged with various crimes related to weapons and ammunition possession, as well as certain vehicle and traffic violations. After trial, the jury convicted Telfair of one count of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree in connection with the .45 caliber gun recovered from the center console of the truck. At issue on appeal was whether the prosecution was permitted to introduce evidence of prior firearm possession to prove that Telfair knowingly possessed firearms when he was arrested on June 11, 2017. The defense unsuccessfully argued that the evidence was too remote and that its probative value was outweighed by the potential for prejudice to Telfair. Telfair's 3.5 year sentence, first issued by NY Supreme Court, Kings County in 2019, is now affirmed. Earlier this year, Telfair's sister pled guilty to threatening his wife after his wife testified against Sebastian in court. Jason Morrin is a third-year law student at Hofstra Law School in New York. He is the President of Hofstra’s Sports and Entertainment Law Society. Additionally, he is a Law Clerk at Geragos & Geragos. He can be found on Twitter @Jason_Morrin.

BY: XANDER LANDY Are you ready for some football? For the last 20 plus years, DirecTV has been the exclusive provider of non-regional NFL games on Sundays. In order to watch those games, you must watch through DirecTV. Until now, or more specifically, in a couple years it will not be that way. The 27-year-old deal expires after the 2022-2023 season. Amazon is the front runner to acquire rights to NFL Sunday Ticket according to a CNBC report. The expected cost is somewhere around $2.5 billion per year. One reason for the change I personally think is that more and more younger people are cutting the cord. People are moving over to streaming games and other entertainment, rather than having a cable subscription. (Personally, I only have cable to watch live sports). While DirecTV allows streaming without a subscription, Amazon has a bigger streaming market. Roger Goodell echoed something similar, telling CNBC that the package may be “more attractive on a digital platform”. The Sunday Ticket provides a different problem for any buyer. Not only is it enormously expensive. There is current litigation on whether the package is in violation of the Sherman Act. The Sherman Act was created to break-up monopolies. It states that the there cannot be a concerted action to unreasonably restrain trade. That is the claim that customers have against the NFL and the 32 teams. The allegation is that the NFL’s 32 teams are colluding with each other instead of allowing members to sell competing streams. Part of this case is now going to arbitration, but there is a trial with a target for 2024. One of the most important aspects of an antitrust is defining the product. The customers are going to want to make the product defined as narrow as possible, non-regional NFL games. The NFL will try to define the product as broad as possible, entertainment across the globe. The reason for each side to define it as narrow or as broad as possible is to show market control, or lack thereof. If the product is defined as entertainment, then the NFL does not have control on the market, at least not the requisite control needed to be a monopoly. This definition is usually left up to the trier of fact. The next step for the plaintiffs is to prove anti-competitive effects. Because DirecTV is currently the only provider of NFL Sunday Ticket, and assuming there are no substitutes, then DirecTV is engaging in price fixing because they are subjective due to a lack of competition. Along with price fixing, reduced output is also anti-competitive. There is a restriction of output because there is no other way to watch the games. Xfinity cannot stream the games; Comcast cannot stream them. It is only through DirecTV. There appears enough to be a case against the NFL and the NFL Sunday Ticket Package. Amazon and others interested in the Sunday Ticket Package should be very wary of purchasing it. The deal could be worth significantly less if the exclusivity rights are deemed anti-competitive and in violation of the Sherman Act. This is just a brief introduction into antitrust. There are much more complications that go into antitrust cases. But in antitrust cases, violations can be costly. Damages are trebled. Something the future purchaser must keep in mind. Xander Landy is an Associate Attorney at Knight Hoppe, Kurnik, & Knight, he graduated as part of the Marquette Law School Class of 2021. He can be found on Twitter at @zoolandy.

BY: DAN WALLACH AND STEPHANIE WEISSENBURGER Conduct Detrimental has obtained copies of pertinent court documents filed in relation to Dallas Cowboys starter La’el Collins’ lawsuit against the NFL. Collins is seeking to block the rest of his NFL suspension with a temporary restraining order and permanent injunction. While the lawsuit was initially filed in Texas state court, the NFL and Roger Goodell opted to remove the lawsuit to federal court and now may be regretting that decision. In a crazy turn of events, La’el Collins’ federal court case has been assigned to the Honorable Amos Mazzant III -- the same federal judge who granted Ezekiel Elliott a preliminary injunction blocking the NFL from suspending him in 2017 (before the case got transferred to New York). In his 2017 #Zeke ruling, Judge Mazzant recognized "fundamental fairness" as a ground for vacating a labor arbitration award. With Judge Mazzant officially assigned to the case, it is almost definite that Collins’ legal team will not be seeking a remand to state court. A copy of the Notice of Removal is below. So, how did we get to this point? On January 6, 2021, Dallas Cowboys right tackle La’el Collins was suspended for five games without pay for violation of the NFL’s substance abuse policy. The suspension stems from Collins missing seven mandatory drug screenings since 2020 and allegedly trying to bribe the test collector. Collings timely appealed his suspension on January 7, 2021, and at one point, the NFLPA negotiated his suspension down to two games. Collins nevertheless continued pursuing the appeal, and the arbitrator ultimately reinstated his initial five-game suspension on September 9, 2021. Collins, however, is clearly not giving up without a fight. On Wednesday afternoon, Collins’ attorneys, Scott J. Becker and Levi G. McCathern, filed a request for a restraining order and immediately injunctive relief to reinstate Collins from league suspension. A copy of the Original Petition and Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Temporary Injunction and Permanent Injunction is below. The petition alleges that the NFL “failed to follow the National Football League’s Policy and Program on Substances of Abuse 2020 (the “Policy” or the “2020 Policy”) and wrongfully suspended Mr. Collins by making material misrepresentations to the tribunal.” In citing immediate and irreparable harm caused by such “wrongful actions”, it is revealed that Collins has already lost over $182,352. (2/17’s of Mr. Collins $1,550,000 base salary for 2021) from missing two games. Collins highlights important changes to the Policy pursuant to the 2020 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA. Most importantly, the changes made regarding the kinds of discipline players may face for violations of the Policy. A copy of the Policy attached to the Petition as Exhibit 2 is below. In Paragraph 1.5.2(c), the 2020 Policy sets forth the sole and exclusive disciplinary measures that the NFL may impose on a player already in the Intervention Program based upon the number and kind of Policy violations shown to have occurred: Collins argues that, “In both its plain text and in the structure of the permissible penalties it provides, the 2020 Policy thus makes clear that positive tests or unexcused failures to appear for testing are never grounds for suspension or banishment, no matter how many violations occur and regardless of the player’s status in the Intervention Program.” Collins alleges that at the Hearing, on two separate occasions, the NFL intentionally mislead the arbitrator by stating Mr. Collins had previously received a four (4) game suspension from the NFL. First, in its opening statement, the NFL stated: “Mr. Collins was written up for a four-game suspension. And Mr. Collins was warned that any future failures to cooperate would result in a suspension. So here we are again with another failure to cooperate, and the NFL has suspended [Mr. Collins] for five games. That is progressive discipline, four to five.” Second, in its closing statement, the NFL stated: “Mr. Collins is only suspended for five games, and that is not outrageous, especially since we warned him after the four-game suspension.” A copy of Exhibit 1, the pertinent portions of the Hearing transcript, is attached below. Furthermore, Collins cites to the fact that the arbitrator stated in the Award that “Mr. Collins previously had received a four-game suspension based on prior conduct, and the discipline imposed, a five-game suspension, is ‘additional’ to that and is the next logical progression from prior discipline. It is proportional and reasonable.” A copy of the relevant portions of the Arbitral Award is below. This story will be updated as more details are provided. Be sure to follow us on Conduct Detrimental. You can find us on Twitter: Dan Wallach @WallachLegal and Stephanie Weissenburger @SWeissenburger_.

Tom Winter, NBC News Correspondent for Investigations, and Jonathan Dienst, WNBC Chief Investigative Reporter and NBC News Contributing Correspondent, broke the news on the morning of October 7th that 18 former National Basketball Association (“NBA”) players had been arrested.[1] The NBA players were arrested, per Winter’s reporting and law enforcement officials, and charged federally for allegedly defrauding the NBA’s Health and Welfare Benefit Plan, which provides certain health and welfare benefits to certain former NBA players as well as their spouses and eligible dependents. Among the players that were arrested were Terrence Williams, the player whom the indictment states “orchestrated” the scheme, Sebastian Telfair, Darius Miles, Tony Allen, Shannon Brown, and Glen “Big Baby” Davis. According to the indictment[2], Williams allegedly worked with the other players to conduct a scheme whereby Williams would supply false invoices for medical services received to a group of former players in exchange for kickback payments to Williams. The alleged kickback payments were made to Williams by the other NBA players after they were reimbursed for their allegedly fraudulent schemes. In total, the indictment states that nearly $3.9 million in fraudulent claims were submitted, nearly $2.5 million in fraudulent payments were received, and Williams netted nearly $230,000 in kickback payments from the other NBA players. While the case against Williams and the other NBA players is not one brought under The False Claims Act, The Physician Self-Referral Law, or the Anti-Kickback Statute, the regulatory scheme created by these laws provides a helpful understanding of the reason for increased scrutiny on billing in the healthcare context and may also be implicated by the doctors who were involved in this alleged scheme. The False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 – 3733, in relevant part, prohibits anyone from “knowingly present[ing] or caus[ing] to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval” or from “conspir[ing] to commit a violation” of The False Claims Act. A “kickback,” while the term may be familiar from popular parlance (e.g., the kickbacks Williams received from the other NBA players would be an example of a kickback in the popular parlance) and may be allowable in some business contexts, is defined and specifically prohibited (unless certain exceptions apply) in the healthcare context in relation to the Physician Self-Referral Law (42 U.S.C. § 1395nn), commonly known as the Stark Law, and the Anti-Kickback Statute (42 U.S.C. § 1320(a)-7b(b)) (“AKS”). The Stark Law and AKS, working together with The False Claims Act, other federal laws, and similar state laws and regulations, seek to prevent the payment of remuneration[3] to induce or reward patient referrals in the healthcare industry unless, as mentioned previously, certain exceptions apply and to prevent the submission of false or fraudulent claims for payment to Medicare or Medicaid. Simply put, the government has an interest in ensuring i) that patients are referred from one doctor to another because of the level of care they will receive, not because of a financial arrangement between the two doctors, and ii) that the government is not defrauded through false claims submissions – these losses due to fraud are in the tens of billions of dollars per year according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York’s press release regarding this indictment.[4] AKS is a criminal statute that carries an intent requirement – “knowingly and willfully.” A violation of AKS is a felony and liability may attach for both those offering the kickback and those receiving kickbacks. Those violating AKS may face fines of up to $25,000 for each violation and prison terms of up to 5 years. AKS also carries civil penalties including potential fines of up to $50,000 per violation and civil assessments of up to three times the amount of the kickback. What is interesting in this case, however, is that despite a chiropractic and rehabilitation office, two dental offices, and other doctors and doctors’ offices being referenced in the indictment, the indictment was not brought against these persons. It is unclear what role these offices and doctors had in the ultimate scheme, and if they also received kickbacks in violation of AKS and The False Claims Act, or to what extent they knew of and participated in the fraudulent scheme, but it appears based on the indictment that some of these offices and doctors may have aided Williams in perpetrating the alleged scheme by providing false invoices for Williams to then provide to the other former NBA players. It is possible that an indictment against these offices and doctors for violations of AKS could be coming next. According to the indictment and the reporting of Winter and Dienst, Williams allegedly orchestrated the fraudulent scheme from 2017 to 2020 that allegedly involved, among other alleged acts, Williams helping other players obtaining fake medical letters to support false invoices, Williams impersonating an individual who processed plan claims, and filing for chiropractic and other services that were allegedly never received. The charges brought against Williams and the other NBA players are for conspiracy to commit health care fraud and wire fraud, as well as a charge of aggravated identify theft against Williams, not the potential violations of AKS as described above which the doctors involved may face. If found guilty, Williams and the other players allegedly involved in this scheme could face significant fines and even prison time of up to 20 years. [1] Further reporting on this situation from Winter and Dienst can be accessed here, here, and here. [2] The indictment can be found here: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1440076/download. [3] Remuneration in this context might be in the form of cash or other items or services of value. [4] 19 Defendants Charged With Defrauding The National Basketball Association Players’ Health And Welfare Benefit Plan | USAO-SDNY | Department of Justice.

On Thursday, October 7, 2021, an indictment listed 18 ex-NBA players charged in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) for an alleged $4 million health care fraud scheme. Allegedly led by Terrence Williams, picked 11th by the Nets in the 2009 draft, this scheme was a way to defraud a supplemental health plan for active and retired players, roping in several others to submit false claims for “reimbursement of expenses for medical and dental services that were not actually rendered.” One of the false reimbursements claims that was described in the indictment is a $19,000 claim filed by Williams for chiropractic services that never happened and gave a $7,672.55 reimbursement. In furtherance of this scheme, Williams also allegedly used a template for a fake invoice designed to make it look as though these invoices were official and issued by an office. Other players involved with this scheme include, Darius Miles, Alan Anderson, Tony Allen, Desiree Allen, Shannon Brown, Will Bynum, Glen “Big Baby” Davis, Christopher Douglas-Roberts, Marvin Ely, Milton Palacio, Ruben Patterson, Eddie Robinson, Greg Smith, Sebastian Telfair, Charles Watson, Antoine Wright, and Tony Wroten. Members of this fraud scheme were also charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud as a part of what New York prosecutors call a “widespread scheme to defraud” the NBA benefit plan. This scheme was carried out from at least 2017-2020, though it could have gone over a longer time frame. In running this alleged ruse, the plan received false claims of approximately $4 million and the defendants received approximately $2.5 million in fraudulent proceeds. Per court documents, several of the fraudulent invoices and medical necessity forms drew attention due to their lack of consistency. These documents were not on letterhead, contained grammatical errors and had logistical errors, i.e. being sent on the same date but from different offices. While some players were told to repay the money they received, this was not required of all involved players. As this is just breaking, developments are still forthcoming. Stay locked in with Conduct Detrimental for developments as this action progresses. Stephon Burton is a 3L at Duquesne University School of Law in Pittsburgh, PA. He obtained his undergraduate degree from Washington & Jefferson College in 2019. He can be contacted via email at burtons2@duq.edu, on twitter @stephonburton3 and LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/stephon-burton-7abb06125/

A recent lawsuit filed against the Tennessee Titans could offer the latest interpretation of the rights and obligations of parties to a PSL Agreement. Professional sports teams began selling PSLs, Personal Seat Licenses, to offset new stadium construction costs in the 1980’s. Today, PSLs or some equivalent are sold by nineteen out of thirty-two NFL teams and numerous other major league sports organizations. For a one-time fixed fee, a buyer may purchase a PSL for an extended period of time, often as long as thirty years. The PSL gives the holder certain rights to specific seats in a stadium. Generally, the PSL holder has the right to purchase season tickets for those seats before the season begins and, depending on the language of the agreement, the right to sell or transfer the rights to the seats. As first reported by Paul Kuharsky, in March of 2021, a group of “Permanent Seat License” owners (PSL equivalent) filed suit against Tennessee Football, Inc. (the Tennessee Titans) and Cumberland Stadium, Inc. (Nissan Stadium). The complaint alleges that the Titans, through ticket transaction data, determined the plaintiffs to be “ticket resellers.” Although all of the plaintiffs are PSL holders, six of the eleven plaintiffs are not residents of Tennessee and Kuharsky stated that it was his “sense that the franchise sought to identify ticket buyers who have not attended a game themselves for multiple years.” The complaint alleges that the Titans limited the sale of tickets, “grossly inflated” ticket prices, limited the amount of time to purchase season tickets, limited relocation options, eliminated season ticket member perks and gifts, and did not allow for the standard six-month payment plans to those deemed “ticket resellers.” The complaint further alleges that this treatment of “ticket resellers” was a large departure from the Titans course of dealing with its PSL holders in the past. One plaintiff claimed that the resale, transfer, and/or purchase of additional PSLs was traditionally encouraged. The same plaintiff stated that, based on the suggestion of a Titans’ ticket representative, he purchased approximately eighteen PSLs, in contradiction to the publicly stated policy that PSL holders could hold no more than four PSLs. Ultimately, the plaintiffs claim that the Titans and Nissan Stadium violated their duty of good faith and fair dealing under the PSL Agreement and “have substantially and negatively impacted the value of all PSLs,” resulting in a breach of contract and a violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. Section 3(e) of the most recent Titans PSL Agreement states the Titans, “in its sole discretion and without regard to good faith or any other standard,” may limit the number of seats, prohibit any transfer/sale of seats, or terminate PSLs for any individual or entity determined to be a “ticket reseller” or “ticket broker.” Although the PSL agreement does not cover price increasing, payment plans, relocation, or timing to purchase season tickets, it appears that the Titans expected and addressed such a scenario within the agreement. Does a PSL holder have the right not to attend a single game, while selling each ticket for personal profit? Does an NFL team have the right to inflate pricing and treat ticket resellers differently than the average fan who attends each game? Absent a settlement, these questions will likely be determined by the court’s interpretation of the PSL Agreement. Courts generally do not want to reshape or reconstruct contractual agreements among private parties. Rather, the court will look to the intent of the parties, evidenced by the words within the agreement. Here, the interpretation of Section 3(e) will be crucial to the court’s decision. New stadiums are being built. More teams are relocating and rebranding. The professional sports landscape is everchanging. It will be important for teams, stadiums, and fans to monitor cases such as this one to better understand their rights and obligations regarding their Personal Seat Licenses.

Who is Eligible for Salary Arbitration? The way the Major League Baseball (“MLB”) compensation system is structured, a player is paid the minimum salary until they accrue three years of MLB service time. The Basic Agreement (“CBA”) between the Owners and the Players states that “[a]ny Player with a total of three or more years of Major League service… but with less than six years of Major League service” may be eligible for salary arbitration.[1] During the offseason after three, four, and five years of service a Player is eligible for a raise, and after six years of service, a Player is eligible for free agency. However, there is an additional group of players who are eligible for salary arbitration after their second year of Major League service; those players are called “Super Two” players.[2] What is a Super Two Player? The CBA dictates that an additional group of players can be eligible for salary arbitration after their second season if they meet two key criteria: (i) The Player has at least 86 days of service during the platform season (the season immediately prior); and (ii) The Player ranks in the top 22% in total service in the class of Players who have at least two but less than three years of Major League service. “If two or more Players are tied at 22%, all such Players shall be eligible.”[3] Each year at the end of the season, the Major League Baseball Players’ Union announces the cutoff for players to achieve Super Two status.[4] It generally falls in between 2.125 (2 years and 125 days of service) and 2.140 (2 years and 140 days of service), although it could be more or less days. After the 2020 season, the Super Two cutoff was set so that there were 19 players who were Super Two eligible, including Walker Buehler (who signed an extension), Mike Soroka (who won his arbitration case), and Juan Soto (who settled before trial). Each of these players will be eligible to go through arbitration again, and get a raise, for each of the next three seasons. What is the Point of the Super Two Process? The Super Two criteria was amended prior to the 2012-2016 CBA to increase the number of eligible players from the top 17% to the top 22% starting in 2013, which is how the system remains today.[5] This was bargained for by the Union in the negotiations in response to a growing trend of MLB organizations intentionally delaying the promotion of top prospects in order to avoid paying young players raises an additional year prior to free agency. The cutoff date for Super Two eligibility is also announced after the end of the season, which makes it harder for teams to try to work around it to save money with their young players. However, this ultimately leads to teams being extra cautious promoting their top prospects. This is one explanation for why baseball fans generally have to wait until the beginning of June to see their favorite team’s top prospect, and why some financially constrained teams (like the Rays) may wait even longer. MLB’s top prospect in 2021, Wander Franco, wasn’t called up until the end of June, virtually guaranteeing he will not be Super Two eligible after the 2022 season, despite strong performance in the Minor Leagues from the start of the year. The Super Two process is certainly to be among the structures discussed in the upcoming CBA negotiations; when top prospects are intentionally kept in the minor leagues when they have earned a spot on the big league roster it hurts clubs, players, fans, and ultimately is not good for the game. Dean Rosenberg is a 2L student at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York City. He can be found on LinkedIn and Twitter @deanrosen7. [1]​​https://d39ba378-ae47-4003-86d3-147e4fa6e51b.filesusr.com/ugd/b0a4c2_95883690627349e0a5203f61b93715b5.pdf [2]Id [3]Id [4]https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/10/super-two-cutoff-mlb-2018-2019.html [5]https://www.federalbaseball.com/2020/10/1/21454026/washington-nationals-juan-soto-could-receive-super-two-designation-2020-2021-offseason

In the 1950s and 1960s, after decades of failed attempts, players from the four major sports leagues successfully founded the players associations that unionized American professional sports. In doing so, the players guaranteed themselves some bargaining power in the wildly lucrative world of sports. With the players associations came collective bargaining agreements, leading to revenue sharing. The players in the four major sports leagues are now entitled to large portions of their league’s revenues: 48.5% in the NFL, 49-51% in the NBA, 48.5-51.5% in the MLB, and 50% in the NHL.[1] Professional tennis’ governing body, the ATP, is not as well-developed. At the top of the ranks are a few of the highest paid athletes in the world. However, some players have been less satisfied during the last few years. In 2019, the players received just 17.5% of the $2.2 billion in revenue generated from the Grand Slams and the larger ATP and WTA events.[2] Comparing that percentage to the major sports is a bit off-putting, and while several players are pushing back, the ATP pushes forward. Founded in 1972, the ATP was founded by a top player in the world with the goal of protecting the players. It has since grown into the world’s main tour. In 2019, world #1 Novak Djokovic and Vasek Pospisil, a Canadian player, founded the Professional Tennis Players Association. They created the PTPA with a goal that is ironically aligned with that of the players in 1972: to protect the players. Djokovic has repeatedly voiced concerns about the conflicts of interest within the governance of the ATP.[3] Currently, ATP policy changes need a majority vote of the seven voting board members: three player representatives, three tournament representatives, and the ATP Chairman.[4] A PTPA objective is to bring the players out of the minority. Though the PTPA was founded in 2019, it made its most prominent headlines this past summer. The ATP introduced their “30-Year Plan” which, beginning in 2023, would lock in media deals, prize money distribution, and tour structure until the 2050s.[5] Djokovic and Pospisil displayed public outrage with the ATP Chairman, and the PTPA publicly launched their “Delay the Vote” campaign. The PTPA argued that the ATP had formed a backroom deal, trying to streamline a deal that would put players’ concerns in the backseat if the decades-long deal were voted in.[6] The PTPA website outlines the organization’s disagreement with the ATP’s 30-year plan, and how the lack of transparency within the plan’s details is not benefiting the players. It seemed suspicious that the ATP would not release all the plan’s details, and the ATP actually stated that “the plan will inevitably benefit some more than others” at the beginning.[7] Eventually, the “Delay the Vote” campaign ended successfully for the PTPA and its 500+ members, announced by Pospisil on July 2.[8] Though the dust has settled for now on the disagreements from the summer, future disputes between the two organizations create an interesting thought. Up until now, discussions have been run by the players and advisory board that the PTPA put together and the ATP board. However, if legal battles were to ensue, the venue is quite unclear. The PTPA is a Canadian non-profit, and the ATP is headquartered in London. If the new organization were to seek help from the NLRB—which has issued injunctions against the MLB, NFL, and other minor league teams for undermining collective bargaining agreements—it would be interesting to see if the NLRB could establish jurisdiction over the ATP, or if they would even try to. To check all the boxes, the PTPA put together a team of board members and directors with expertise in American as well as EU sports law. Part of growth of the PTPA is the formation of their management team. Adam Larry, the Executive Director of the PTPA, has consulted for or negotiated the collective bargaining agreements for the NBA, NHL, and CFL.[9] Notable members on the PTPA advisory board include Dr. Katarina Pijeltovic, a sports law expert in the EU, and Michael Hirshfeld, the head of the NHL Coaches’ Association who also manages international relations for the Association.[10] So, while the PTPA seems to have a big hill to climb in terms of its goals, the team it has put together has the experience, and the Association is clearly trying to get a seat at the table for a very long period of time. Carson Howard. Current 2L and Masters of Sports Law and Business student at Arizona State University. Undergraduate degree in Finance from the University of Oklahoma. Can be reached at chowar25@asu.edu or on LinkedIn. [1] https://www.sports-king.com/revenue-split-sports-leagues-2771/ [2] https://ptpaplayers.com/faq/ [3] https://theracquet.substack.com/p/ok-but-i-could-set-the-building-on [4] Id. [5] Id. [6] https://ptpaplayers.com/faq/ [7] Id. [8] https://www.sportskeeda.com/tennis/news-vasek-pospisil-announces-novak-djokovic-s-ptpa-acknowledged-says-atp-delayed-vote-30-year-plan [9] https://ptpaplayers.com/team/ [10] Id.

“18 NBA veterans were arrested by federal authorities and are named in the indictment, and all are facing a count of conspiracy to commit health care and wire fraud,” reported Jonathan Dienst of NBC New York. The players allegedly defrauded the NBA’s Health and Welfare Benefit Plan of nearly $4 million. The list of players includes Terrence Williams, Alan Anderson, Anthony Allen, Shannon Brown, William Bynum, Ronald Glen "Big Baby" Davis, Christopher Douglas-Roberts, Melvin Ely, Jamario Moon, Darius Miles, Milton Palacio, Ruben Patterson, Eddie Robinson, Gregory Smith, Sebastian Telfair, Charles Watson Jr., Antoine Wright, and Anthony Wroten. Terrence Williams is reportedly in charge of the operation and is accused of having impersonated an insurance plan employee as part of the scheme. Also, Tony Allen’s wife, Desiree was indicted. “Terrence Williams recruited NBA players by offering fabricated invoices to be used in false claims in exchange for a kickback. He received at least $230,000 in kickbacks from players.” Williams is also accused of impersonating an individual who processed the health care plan claims. The fake invoices and medical necessity forms had unusual formatting and grammatical errors which made them stand out. The ex-players were told to repay the money they received from the health-care plan once they were told that the claims were false. Some players paid it back and others did not. Many of these NBA players have faced criminal charges in the past. Sebastian Telfair was sentenced to 3.5 years in prison on gun charges yesterday, Shannon Brown was arrested in 2020 after he was accused of firing a rifle at two people who were looking at homes for sale in suburban Atlanta, Glen “Big Baby” Davis faced 5 years in prison after being arrested with 126 grams of marijuana but paid the $15k fine to avoid jail time in 2019, Terrence Williams was arrested and accused of brandishing a gun at the mother of his 10-year-old son during a visitation exchange in 2013, Ruben Patterson plead guilty of attempted rape in 2001, convicted of misdemeanor assault in 2001, arrested for felony domestic abuse in 2002, and arrested for DUI charge in 2010, and Darius Miles arrested on gun charges in 2011. Williams and the other ex-players that helped in this operation could be facing up to 10 years in prison for health care fraud and up to 20 years for wire fraud. Sebastian Telfair could have years added to his 3.5 sentence. The other players that have a record could also face harsher penalties. CJ McCollum was elected President of the NBA Players Association (NBPA) in August and already will be facing a major issue before the season even starts. As more information comes out it will be interesting how it affects the NBA, NBPA, and the other programs that they have in effect. Chris D'Avanzo is a 2L at Hofstra Law School and can be found on Twitter @_chrisdavanzo

Earlier this week, the PGA TOUR and the sports betting operator, PointsBet, announced they were signing a three-year extension to their current content and marketing agreement. The agreement will, among other things, result in the integration of live betting odds onto viewers’ screens for all linear and streaming PGA Tour broadcasts on NBC, GOLF Channel, and Peacock, NBC’s over-the-top streaming service. The deal will first allow for exclusive PointsBet odds integrations to be displayed on both NBC Universal’s platforms, GOLF Channel and Peacock. The PGA Tour’s press release also said that there are plans to include the live betting odds integrations on NBC’s golf broadcasts in the near future. PointsBet is already NBC’s official sports betting partner, having signed a $500 million deal with NBC Sports last year, so the implantation of PointsBet’s live odds on NBC’s broadcasts should be seamless. And live odds integration on NBC’s platforms is nothing new – this season, NBC has already integrated sportsbook betting lines into its Football Night in America program and Peacock’s Sunday Night Football Final postgame show. So far, however, NBC has yet to do live odds integration during the broadcasts of the competition itself. That will change when it debuts during its golf coverage. The PGA Tour’s live betting odds integrations will include such bets as odds for the lowest score by group, total leaderboard odds, and hole-by-hole odds. The PGA Tour says that these integrations will be featured during GOLF Channel’s coverage of the upcoming FedExCup Regular Season. The agreement will also bring about a “free-to-play” game, scheduled to debut earlier next year, which the two entities say “is designed to enhance fan engagement with live in-play games with weekly prizes.” A PGA Tour official told The Wall Street Journal earlier this year that a typical PGA Tour season typically produces around 1.2 million golf shots. That type of statistic is sure to do well with in-play betting. This news comes on the heels of an experiment conducted at The Fortinet Championship in Napa last month, which was broadcasted on the GOLF Channel and NBC and featured intermittent live odds integration during the weekend, displaying live odds on groups and individual leaders. Following that experiment, NBC Sports and the PGA Tour now seem to be all -in on odds integration. And viewers can likely expect this type of integration set up to be the norm for golf broadcasts moving forward, if the last several years are any indication. The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Professional Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) in 2018 has been gangbusters for professional golf betting. Golf Digest has a weekly gambling podcast, for instance. And The Washington Post reported last year that DraftKings golf handle, as of November 2020, the month of the Masters, had increased tenfold compared to 2019. (It’s no surprise the DraftKings’ logo is displayed so prominently on Bryson DeChambeau’s hat.) And, next week (October 15), sports gambling is about to launch in America’s most golf-rich state: Florida. The future of gambling on professional golf will only continue to get brighter. John Rigby is an Associate Attorney at Venable LLP in Los Angeles. He is a graduate of the UCLA School of Law and the University of Iowa. He’s broken 100 in golf only once.

Last week, news broke the members of the National Women’s Soccer League had been secretly tolerating abuse for years. Fearful that their accounts of abuse would ruin the only U.S. League, the athletes remained quiet. However, the time to remain in silence was up. Women’s pro soccer players took a stance to not accept the current state of their sport. In an investigation published last week by the Atlantic, both current and former players accused North Carolina Courage manager, Paul Riley, of emotionally abusing the athletes and forcing them to have sex.[1] In response, the N.W.S.L. announced that they had hired a law firm to review policies at all levels, and to make recommendations of reforms. In addition, the firm will reopen the 2015 investigation into Riley. On Sunday, the U.S. Soccer Federation announced the hiring of Sally Q. Yates to also lead an independent investigation of abuse in women’s professional soccer. [2] The league’s players rose in unison last weekend by canceling all previously scheduled games and demanded real change from a league that has truly failed to protect them. Last Friday, N.W.S.L. Commissioner Lisa Baird, resigned after truth came to light that she had done little to protect the women on the field, and was complicit in protecting the men who run the N.W.S.L. As is true in the world of sports, men are in the seat of power and control. However, the N.W.S.L’s athletes have bravely shown that they are unafraid to take a stance and demand the respect they deserve. On Wednesday night, Gotham FC, Washington Spirit, NC Courage, and Racing Louisville FC players collectively stopped playing six minutes into the match, and linked arms at midfield. The N.W.S.L. later released a statement stating “#NoMoreSilence. Tonight, we reclaim our place on the field, because we will not let joy be taken from us…But this is not business as usual.”[3] Following Wednesday’s games, the Players Association stated “The reckoning has already begun. We will not be silent. We will be relentless in our pursuit of a league that deserves the players in it.”[4] Triggered by Sports’ latest #MeToo movement domestically, professional female soccer players in both Australia and Venezuela have also come forward with allegations of sexual abuse and harassment. Atlètico Madrid forward Denya Castellanos, one of Latin America’s best known soccer stars, and twenty-four of Venezuela’s top soccer players came forward alleging “years of abuse and harassment, physical, phycological and sexual”[5] abuse by their former coach Kenneth Zsermeta. The letter Castellanos posted on social media stated that her teammates had been sexually abused from 2013 to 2017, and some players since the age of 14 by their coach. Castellanos, who played college soccer at Florida State University, wrote that she had stayed silent out of fears of retribution, she continued: “The injustices that our teammates are experiencing in the United States are issues that all professional players (regardless of gender or league) should be paying attention to and taking seriously.”[6] In Australia, Lisa de Vanna, reported to Australia’s Daily Telegraph newspaper that she had also experienced abuse and harassment when she joined Australia’s national team at 17 years old. Lisa De Vanna wrote “Have I been sexually harassed? Yes. Have I been bullied? Yes. Ostracized? Yes. Have I seen things that make me uncomfortable? Yes.”[7] Current and former female soccer players across the globe are all currently calling for a reform to a system and a league that has greatly failed to protect its members. Hannah is a 2L at Elon University School of Law and host of Podcast “Bars to the Bar” from Hoboken, New Jersey. Hannah graduated from Providence College where she was a four-year manager for the Men’s Basketball Team. She can be found on Twitter @hannahjane503. [1] https://theathletic.com/2857633/2021/09/30/this-guy-has-a-pattern-amid-institutional-failure-former-nwsl-players-accuse-prominent-coach-of-sexual-coercion/ [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/03/sports/soccer/women-soccer-league-abuse.html [3] https://www.si.com/soccer/2021/10/06/nwsl-gotham-spirit-players-pause-game-after-six-minutes-link-arms [4] Id. [5] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/10/06/women-soccer-abuse-castellanos-nwsl/ [6] Id. [7]https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=DTWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailytelegraph.com.au%2Fsport%2Ffootball%2Fmatildas-star-lisa-de-vanna-details-horrific-abuse-and-bullying-in-footballs-toxic-culture%2Fnews-story%2Fb2e11f790faa63f24a47d1ad90b1709c&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21=dynamic-cold-test-noscore&V21spcbehaviour=append

It’s Hail Mary time! Well legally speaking for Rams owner Stan Kroenke and his constituents as they continue to fight their legal battle with the city of St. Louis. The team has now filed a writ of prohibition under seal to the Missouri Appellate Court to have the trial moved out of the plaintiff’s hometown. The trial, which is set for January 2022 had an appeal already seen by Circuit Judge Christopher McGraugh. The motion set forth by the Rams and the NFL to move the trial location back in September was denied. Now the writ of prohibition that was filed is a last ditch effort by the defendants to block McGraugh’s actions and prove that he exceeded his authority. Since the writ of prohibition was filed under seal, it is unclear exactly what evidence was given to the Appellate Court. Attorneys familiar with the case have speculated that an opinion poll/survey gauging the residents disdain for Kroenke and the NFL would have been presented. Hoping with the results of dramatic unpopularity and anger would be able to sway the Appellate Court to rule that the location had “actual prejudice” towards the defendants in the trial. It is not just Kroenke whose feet are being held to the fire in this lawsuit. Of course he is the face on the dartboard for the fans in the St. Louis area, but Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones has also been linked in the conspiring plans of moving the Rams back to LA. CNBC.com reported that Jones and Kroenke had talks to move the team back West as early as 2013 and the lawsuit states that Jones was key in flipping the other core member owners into approving the move. Now that the city of St. Louis and the long suffering fans finally have Kroenke and his conspirators pinned down; it would be unjust to move the trial outside of the place where the damage was done. Tom Hartbach, a former season ticket holder for the Rams and avid St. Louis sports fan had this to say when asked what his thoughts were on Kroenke trying to move his hearing to higher ground. “I don’t think he should be able to, he flat out lied to us. He tried to portray this good ol’ Missouri boy but he was 100 percent just a businessman.” said Hartbach. The story has begun to gain national attention but in St. Louis the fans’ disgust for Kroenke has been around for years. “Oh yeah, this is a regular topic on the St. Louis radio talk shows and it has been for years. Former players will call in and reflect on what they believed was going on, I’m positive (Jeff) Fisher knew about it when he took the job.” Hartbach brings in yet another interesting dynamic and potential witness to be called to the stand under oath during the impending trial. Former head coach Jeff Fisher could be called to testify about if he had any knowledge of Kroenke’s intentions to move the team out to Los Angeles while they were “still negotiating a compromise in St. Louis.” Another set of eyes that should pay close attention to the pending legal battle in St. Louis is those of the Pegula family, the longtime owners of the Buffalo Bills. Cities such as Austin, Texas and San Diego have been floated as potential new landing spots for the team but one can be certain that the folks in “Bills Mafia” would put up the fight of their life to keep the team in Orchard Park, NY. There has been some speculation that since the team’s contract with their stadium is up in 2022 a move could be on the horizon. “I believe they thought money and power would take care of the entire thing," remarked Hartbach when asked about if he thought Kroenke had any remorse for his lies to the fan base and the city. If he didn’t he sure does now because the fury of St. Louis faithful will be alive and well in that courtroom come January.