In the aftermath of Vinesh Phogat’s controversial disqualification from the Paris Olympics, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruling has raised questions about the fairness and validity of the United World Wrestling (UWW) rules.
CAS arbitrator Annabelle Bennett acknowledged the “cryptic” nature of the second-day weigh-in list that disqualified Vinesh and criticized the “infelicitous” language of the UWW rules. She also deemed the consequences of the failed weigh-in as “draconian,” suggesting a more equitable solution could have been to eliminate Vinesh from the round she was ineligible for, rather than punishing her for rounds she had already competed in.
However, Bennett noted that the validity or reasoning behind the UWW’s rules was not challenged before CAS. This raises concerns about the lack of scrutiny given to the rules that ultimately led to Vinesh’s disqualification.
The UWW’s rules have been criticized for being loosely drafted and inconsistent. At the Paris Olympics, the team leader guide cited outdated rules, highlighting the need for clearer and more transparent regulations.
The article also questions the delayed legal response from Indian authorities to Vinesh’s disqualification. Despite the urgency of the situation, it took over eight hours for the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) to file a legal protest. This raises concerns about the effectiveness of the support system for Indian athletes at major sporting events.
Furthermore, the official Paris 2024 website and UWW’s final results book offer conflicting information about Vinesh’s absence from the brackets ladder. This lack of clarity adds to the confusion surrounding her disqualification.
The CAS ruling and subsequent analysis have highlighted the need for a thorough review of the UWW’s rules and the support mechanisms for Indian athletes. It remains to be seen whether the IOA or the Ministry of Sports will pursue further legal recourse or take steps to address the concerns raised by Vinesh’s disqualification.
