Athlete responsible to maintain weight, consequence of failed 2nd day weigh-in draconian: CAS

CAS rejects Vinesh Phogat's appeal, deems wrestler responsible for weight-limit, calls disqualification consequence "draconian."

The Court of Arbitration for Sport’s ad-hoc committee sitting in Paris for the Olympics has released a 24-page document detailing its verdict in Vinesh Phogat’s appeal.

An ad-hoc division of the CAS had on August 14 rejected her appeal against a gut-wrenching disqualification from the women’s 50kg final for being 100gm overweight, a decision that evoked a sharp reaction from the Indian Olympic Association (IOA).

1. The Applicant made detailed submissions in support of her contention that what occurred on August 6 and 7, 2024 were two separate competitions. She points to the fact that there are two weigh-ins, one on each day and that each weigh-in has effect for the whole day.

She also points out that when all rounds, including the final, are on one day, there is only a single weigh-in. In effect, her submission is that there are as many competitions as there are days over which rounds take place, with weigh-ins for each whole day. This argument is unpersuasive. It suggests that the finals are a separate competition if held on a different day to the qualifying rounds but the same competition if held on the same day. It is preferable, and in accordance with the Rules, to characterise this as separate rounds in a single competition. It is perhaps worth noting also that the ordinary meaning of a competition denotes a contest for a prize, or an act or process of trying to win something; that is, from the start to the result. Accordingly, elimination from the competition cannot be limited to elimination from the final round of the competition

2. The Athlete is asking, in effect, that the weight limit provided for in the Rules be varied to accommodate her personal circumstances of the day and that a tolerance be applied to that limit. No quantification of a permissible tolerance was suggested, simply that the Athlete’s weight at the second weigh-in was within a tolerance. The problem for the Applicant is that there is no basis in the Rules for such accommodation. To the contrary: the Rules are clear that the 50 kg weight limit is just that, a limit. There is no personal accommodation or discretion provided for.

3. It is also the case that the Sole Arbitrator does not have the power to award medals. That rests with the IOC. The silver medal and the bronze medals have been awarded. There is no provision in the Rules for the awarding of a second silver medal. The IOC pointed out that it awards medals based on rankings from the competition and that the Athlete was not ranked

4. The Sole Arbitrator observes that the Athlete entered the field of play and fought and won three rounds and reached the final of the 50 kg wrestling competition at the Paris Olympic Games before she failed the second weigh-in and was ineligible to compete in the final. There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing on her part.