THE REGULATION OF SPORT IN THE UNITED KINGDOM
There is a long-standing tradition and general rule in the United Kingdom (UK) for the government and also the courts not to intervene in sport, but to leave the regulation of sport to the sports governing bodies themselves.
However, more recently, there has been more involvement by the UK government in the governance of sport. A prime example of this is the Football Governance Act of 2025, which was passed on 21 July 2025 and under which an Independent Football Regulator (IFR) has been established.
The IFR will oversee the top five tiers of English football, implementing one of the core recommendations of the 2021 Fan-Led Review of Football Governance. The IFR is intended to safeguard the stability and heritage of football clubs; give fans a greater say in decision-making; implement stricter owner/director tests; reallocate the financial distributions across the football pyramid; and prevent “breakaway” leagues. See further our previous Post on our website of 18 October 2025 on Football Regulation in the United Kingdom.
This innovation, not surprisingly, has met with mixed reactions from football and wider sporting and political circles. It will be interesting to see, therefore, how this novel form of state regulation works out in practice. Particularly in view of the widely and generally held view that sport and politics do not – and should not – mix, but, in fact, are intertwined in many respects.
The UK Government has also intervened with legislation on some other sporting matters. These include stadium safety; public order; free-to-air broadcasting ‘listed events’; the hosting of major events; and abuse of positions of trust. As regards the latter, it is now illegal for certain adults, including sports coaches, to engage in sexual activity with 16/17-year-olds, who are under their care or supervision, under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act of 2022.
There have also been some UK Treasury proposals to introduce a single remote gambling tax, which would increase the 15% rate paid by bookmakers on horseracing to 21% and align this tax with the current rate applied to online gaming.
Furthermore, there have been instances of non-legislative interventions in sport. For example, in January 2025, nearly 200 Members of Parliament issued a cross-party letter to the English Cricket Board, calling upon the Men’s England team to boycott an ICC Champions Trophy fixture against Afghanistan, due to the “insidious dystopia” and “unconscionable oppression” in this Taliban-run country, where women and girls are banned from participating in any kind of sport. Although this fixture went ahead, the letter drew this political issue to the attention of a wider public.
The UK government also indirectly intervenes in sport by making public funding available to only sports organisations, which comply with government policy. For example, the Code for Sports Governance (the Code) sets out the levels of transparency, diversity and inclusion, accountability and integrity required from over 4,000 organisations, who apply for and obtain UK government and National Lottery funding from UK Sport and/or Sport England. The Code, which was launched in 2016 and revised in 2021, applies a tiered approach to funding, with different requirements depending upon the size and funding level of the organisation.
Sports organisations, which fail to comply with these requirements, can suffer quite substantial financial consequences. For example, in August 2025, the Rugby Football League risks losing its next instalment from its government funding package, which is worth around £16 million (around Sw. Frs. 16.9 million) over five years, due to changes in the composition of the Board which may have infringed the Code.
Also, strategic investments by the UK government in grassroots sport and major events has been a part of its so-called “Plan for Change”. In June 2025, the Secretary of State for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) announced an allocation of (i) over £500 million (around Sw. Frs. 529 million) to support delivery of world class events, including the UEFA Euro 2028 and the Tour de France Grand Départs, and (ii) at least £400 million (around Sw. Frs. 423 million) in new and upgraded grassroots sports facilities intended to “promote health, wellbeing and community cohesion”.
Furthermore, the UK Government, through the Secretary of State for DCMS, appoints to and removes key individuals from publicly funded sports bodies, such as UK Sport and Sport England, but that does not extend to traditional national governing bodies (NGBs). In fact, International Federations, for example the IOC and FIFA, require NGBs to be independent of government, although the degree of adherence varies from country to country.
One sporting area that the UK Government has avoided is “on-field” matters. Issues relating to officiating, particularly in football, have remained immune from Government intervention. In addition to having no power over on-pitch or sporting rules, the IFR must not have any impact upon sporting competitiveness and growth and must work with existing football industry processes and league rules.
To sum up, it may be said that, in the UK, the involvement of the government in sport is limited, in line with the general policy of allowing sports governing bodies a high degree of autonomy to organise and regulate their sports and events themselves.
We advise on all aspects of sports governance, especially disputes, in the UK and further information is available from our International Sports Law Consultant, Prof Dr Ian Blackshaw, by emailing him at blackshaw@valloni.ch.