The Latvian – Estonian basketball league project’s 4th season has ended with the victory of “Prometey”. For the first time in 4 years a game was declared “technical loss” to a team not appearing in a scheduled game, and the Final was played without any Latvian club. Unless you consider Prometey to represent Latvia, since their home games take place in Riga.
The exceptional Champions
The league regulations state that the tournament is for clubs of both Baltic states, with one exception for one team only. And this year it turned out not to be the single exception.
According to Wikipedia, Prometey Slobozhanske, is a Ukrainian basketball club based in Slobozhanske, previously based in Kamianske. It played in the Ukrainian Basketball SuperLeague, the highest tier of basketball in Ukraine, from 2019 to 2022.
So what are they special with?
Special League Regulations for Prometey
Prometey enjoys special treatment by the Latvian-Estonian league, and rightfully so, having such club on board offers something new for the fans on regular basis. It is believed that Prometey might be the richest club in this year’s tournament, and likely the richest club ever to be based in Riga (many rich clubs have played in Riga, but that is another story).
Tournament – Joint league containing Estonian and Latvian Clubs that has its
Definition of the “Tournament” in the regulations
own entity and budget. As a exception on 2023/2024 basketball season containing also BC Prometey team from Ukraine.
Infamous no-show on 9 march 2024 in Tartu
Apart from the Riga-based club taking away the spot in finals for one of the Latvian clubs, it made most noise also during the regular season. Prometey made the history books by becoming first club in the league to be disciplined for not coming to an away match in Estonia.
Club team that does not show up for a scheduled game without announcing
and without a justified cause will lose the game by forfeit and the score will
be 0:20. In addition there shall be a fine of 5000 EUR...
The team that receives a second forfeit during the season shall be disqualified from the Tournament competition. All the game results of the respective team are annulled. In addition, there shall be a fine of 20400 or
40800 EUR (Article 7.6.)...
The Boards of National Federations can decide the additional punishments (e.g. starting the next season from the lower league).
League regulations Section 11.3. Forfeit
It was reported in media that the team had injury problems. Although Prometey had objective reasons to ask for the match to be re-scheduled, the Tartu team did not accepy any of the proposals. Prometey claims that they approached the Latvian Basketball federation (“LBS”) with their issue.
Representatives of other clubs claimed for removal of the Ukrainian club from the competition at all, some called them names, etc.
Obviously, some club managers cited the financial power of Prometey to dismiss the injury list as a real problem.
Could Prometey avoid the Forfeit?
According to the public information, Prometey had approached LBS and Tartu club to ask for game date change, and their doctor would allow only 6 players to participate in that match.
So why the forfeit still?
- Whom to ask?
- How to properly document?
What is striking from the public information – the club tried to speak with LBS and Tartu club. However, as much as the officers of LBS might believe in their authority to decide all basketball related matters, LBS does not have any decision powers in these situations for this joint League. Directly approaching Tartu club remains at Prometey’s own risk, as it turned out that Tartu was not at all motivated to agree on a date change.
Correct Answer to question 1: Tournament Regulations govern the Latvian-Estonian Basketball League 2023/2024, along with any other rules, regulations, manuals, circulars and decisions referenced to herein or adopted by the Management Board of the Latvian-Estonian Basketball League (EST-LAT BL OÜ); matters which are not regulated with the regulations or other regulations and principles which are approved by Management Board of Organizer shall be conducted according to Official FIBA Rules.
Why? Definitions of the regulations stipulate the following:
- Management Board – Executive body of the Company and of the Tournament.
- Company – The legal entity EST-LAT BL OÜ established jointly by Latvian and Estonian Basketball Association
- Organizer – Management Board, Tournament directors and administration workers
There is an obvious error in definitions, evidently, however it cannot lead to think that LBS might have rights to adopt or approve the game date change.
Although the club’s doctor had likely made certain recommendation, there is no mention of the fact being properly documented with sick leaves, etc. If an employer is short-handed on staff, usually any absence can be justified only with doctor’s prescription. Employers may excuse their players without demanding sick leave at all times, however, in relation to third parties this might have been a crucial proof of an objective situation.
Correct Answer to question 2: hard to tell… it depends if the arguments were true at all. Meaning that simple arguments of difficult situation is not a proof, unless it has some documentation under the claims.
Other legal highlights
From legal standpoint, interesting topics as to the sponsors and nationalities of players can be highlighted.
Prohibited or limited advertising
The Latvian law on gambling prohibits advertising the gambling product outside of gaming places. The title sponsor of the league has traditionally been a sports betting company. Per Law, betting is a sub-type of gambling. Therefore, such questionable practice, although tolerated by the Law enforcement officers, remains beyond the Law.
There are also regulations as to the advertising of credits and loans in the Consumers’ protection Law. One of the banners shown among the league’s sponsors is exactly operating in this business field, however, it remains a matter of law enforcement officers accepting that such practice can be tolerated, being favourable towards the sports industry.
Nationality related limitations
In Case C‑680/21 the European Court of Justice analysed the rule of minimum/maximum number of players based on their nationality in national leagues. Since the Latvian – Estonian league is hardly a professional league, this rule might not be against the EU Law. However, it is more likely than not that this tradition which has started in the 90s before Latvia and Estonia joined the EU, is actually illegal.
Leave a Reply