Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

To report, or not to report? From code of silence suppositions within sport to public secrecy realities

  • Published:
Crime, Law and Social Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the main obstacles to detect undesirable conducts such as manipulation of games and competitions, and to combat corrupt behaviour in the sports world is the existence of the so-called “code of silence” among the sport’s actors. Therefore, integrity educational campaigns, codes of conduct, ethics and disciplinary norms include the obligation to report any suspicion, approach, tentative or case of match-fixing. In some countries, such as Portugal, the obligation to denounce is incorporated into criminal law. Although several protected reporting channels have been implemented for sport institutions and federations to encourage whistle-blowing practices, the level of denouncement is still low. Through the analysis of official discourses, ethnography and interviews with key informants, this article demonstrates that despite the formal norms, reporting on corruption in sport, mainly match-fixing, is a dangerous practice that can have serious consequences for the athletes’ career. More than a code of silence within sports, what exist is a series of public secrecies that deliberately recognize the existence of informal institutions that create and materialize those dangers. However, while integrity actors show awareness of the situation, the official narrative and formal norms avoid considering these problems and, moreover, throw this evidence out of the integrity narrative framework. The result is a delegitimate and non-realistic narrative that pushes sports actors to keep quiet more than promoting ethical behaviours and whistle-blowing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Article 7.1.c, and Article 7.2.b and c.

  2. For low levels of reports see T-PREG Erasmus+ Program data collection reports (http://www.tpreg-training.eu/).

  3. The fact that the match-fixing countermeasures are created to fight the infiltration of organize crime in sport was confirmed in Interviews SGB1; SGB2; LFA1; BR1; BR3, GD1.

  4. SGB that have implemented and Integrity Unit or Department, mechanism for reporting, and education campaigns are, among others, IOC, UEFA, FIFA, Tennis Federation, Athletics Federation, ICC Cricket Council.

  5. https://www.interpol.int/es/Noticias-y-acontecimientos/Noticias/2018/INTERPOL-Match-Fixing-Task-Force-closes-ranks-on-organized-crime

  6. See Copenhagen Group created by the Secretariat of the Council of Europe (Sport Conventions Division, DGII): https://www.coe.int/en/web/sport/network-of-national-platforms-group-of-copenhagen-

  7. Project funded by European Commission through Erasmus + Sport Programme (590593-EPP-1-2017-1-PT-SPO-SCP). Previous projects include Staying on side: How to stop match-fixing (EAC-2012-0568) and Anti match-fixing Top Training (579736-EPP-1-2016-2-PT-SPO-SCP).

  8. The 3 players, that were sanctioned, are: Federico Coria, Nicolás Kicker and Patricio Heras.

  9. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAxrDaHzzhg min. 1:03.

  10. See http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20190410IPR37529/protecting-whistle-blowers-new-eu-wide-rules-approved

  11. The legal regime incorporates three different offences: corruption, influence peddling, and criminal collusion with a clarification between passive and active corruption. Sports actors are obliged to report any attempt or suspicion of involvement in match-fixing. Law 13/2017 has also introduced new offences such as unsporting bet, offering or receiving of undue advantage, and determined the first amendment to the online sports betting regulatory framework to ban any kind of betting in youth sport competitions. On the other hand, Law 101/2017 establishes obligations for beneficial ownership and shareholder base disclosure of sports companies; requirements on conflicts of interest; along with education, training, and capacity building programs on combating manipulation of sport competitions.

  12. This question becomes particularly serious in Portugal, where anonymous complaints quickly become public and there are even leaks of police information to public opinion (in some cases, of crucial evidence in the process of sports corruption, as was the case of the wiretaps of the Apito Dourado affair).

References

  1. Abbott, J., & Sheehan, D. (2013). The INTERPOL approach to tackling match fixing in football. In M. R. Haberfeld & D. Sheehan (Eds.), Match-fixing in international sports (pp. 263–287). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Albisu, I. (2018). Best practices for whistleblowing in sport. In anti-corruption helpdesk, transparency international. Retrieved https://knowledgehub.transparency.org/helpdesk/best-practices-for-whistleblowing-in-sport, from October 15, 2019.

  3. Aquilina, D., & Chetcuti, A. (2014). Match-fixing: The case of Malta. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 6(1), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2013.777938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baldwin, R. (1995). Rules and government. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barkoukis, V., Stanescu, M., Stoicescu, M., & Tsorbatzoudis, H. (2019). Tackling irregularities in sport through education on whistleblowing. Romanian Journal for Multidimensional Education/Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 11(1).

  6. Beckert, J., & Dewey, M. (Eds.). (2017). The architecture of illegal markets: Towards an economic sociology of illegality in the economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bleich, E., & Pekkanen, R. (2013). How to report interview data. Interview Research in Political Science, 1, 84–105.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Boniface, P., Lacarrière, S., & Verschuuren, P. (2012). Paris sportifs et corruption. Comment préserver l’intégrité du sport. Paris: Éditions Armand Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Carpenter, K. (2012). Match-fixing—The biggest threat to sport in the 21st century? International Sports Law Review, 2(1), 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Castoriadis, C. (1987). The imaginary institution of society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chappelet, J. L. (2015). The Olympic fight against match-fixing. Sport in Society, 18(10), 1260–1272. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2015.1034519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cooper, J., Lewis, R., & Urquhart, C. (2004). Using participant or non-participant observation to explain information behaviour. Information Research, 9(4), 9–4.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Council of Europe. (2014). Council of Europe convention on the manipulation of sports competitions. Retrieved https://rm.coe.int/16801cdd7e, from October 8, 2019.

  14. Di Ronco, A., & Lavorgna, A. (2015). Fair play? Not so much: Corruption in the Italian football. Trends in Organized Crime, 18(3), 176–195.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2001). Participant observation and fieldnotes. Handbook of Ethnography, 352–368.

  16. Erickson, K., Backhouse, S. H., & Carless, D. (2017). “I don't know if I would report them”: Student-athletes' thoughts, feelings and anticipated behaviours on blowing the whistle on doping in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 30, 45–54.

    Google Scholar 

  17. EUROPOL. (2017). Serious and organized crime threat assessment (SOCTA). Brussels: European Union. Retrieved https://www.europol.europa.eu/activities-services/mainreports/serious-and-organised-crime-threat-assessment, from October, 7th 2019.

  18. Federação Portuguesa de Futebol (FPF). (2019). Regulamento disciplinar 2019/2020. Lisbon: FPF.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Feltes, T. (2013). Match fixing in Western Europe. In M. R. Haberfeld & D. Sheehan (Eds.), Match-fixing in international sports: Existing processes, law enforcement, and prevention strategies (pp. 15–30). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  20. FIFA. (2017). Code of conduct: Playing by the rules. Zurich: FIFA.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Foucault, M. (1984). La verdad y las formas jurídicas. México: Gedisa.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Garcé, A. (1999). Ideas y competencia política: revisando el ‘fracaso’ de la CIDE. Revista Uruguaya de Ciencia Política, 11, 59–81.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gardiner, S., Parry, J., & Robinson, S. (2017). Integrity and the corruption debate in sport: Where is the integrity? European Sport Management Quarterly, 17(1), 6–23.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Goldstein, J., & Keohane, R. (1993). Ideas and foreign policy. Ithaca/Londres: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Haberfeld, M. R., & Sheehan, D. (Eds.). (2013). Match-fixing in international sports: Existing processes, law enforcement, and prevention strategies. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hall, P. (1986). Governing the economy. The politics of state intervention in Britain and France. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Henriques, T. R. C. (2014). Jornalismo desportivo em Portugal: notícia ou especulação?: análise das fontes nos diários" O Jogo"," A Bola" e" Record" (Doctoral dissertation).

  28. Horn, E. (2011). Logics of political secrecy. Theory, Culture and Society, 28(7–8), 103–122.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ings, Richard (2005). ‘Report on Corruption Allegations in Men’s Professional Tennis’ (June 2005). Retrieved http://www.tennisirp.com, from September 25, 2019.

  30. International Centre for Sport Security (ICSS). (2014). Protecting the integrity of sports competition: The last bet for modern sport. Paris: International Centre for Sports Security. Retrieved http://theicss.org/2019/02/20/protecting-the-integrity-of-sport-competition-the-last-bet-for-modern-sport/, from October 5, 2019.

  31. International Olympic Committee (IOC). (2018). Ethics. Laussane: IOC.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Interpol and IOC. (2015). Handbook on protecting sport from competition manipulation. Lausanne: IOC.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ivković, S., Haberfeld, M., & Peacock, R. (2018). Decoding the code of silence. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 29(2), 172–189.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kalb, C. (2011). Integrity in sport: Understanding and preventing match-fixing. SportAccord, Discussion Report.

  35. Keating, S. (2019, April 26). Match-fixing not doping poses greatest risk to sport. In Reuters on line. Retrieved https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sport-matchfixing/match-fixing-not-doping-poses-greatest-risk-to-sport-idUSKCN1S12UR, from July 18, 2019.

  36. Kelly, D., & Jones, A. (2013). When care is needed: The role of whistleblowing in promoting best standards from an individual and organizational perspective. Quality in Ageing and Older Adults, 14(3), 180–191.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Laclau, E. (2002). El análisis político del discurso: entre la teoría de la hegemonía y la retórica. In DeSignis2. Federación Latinoamericana de Semiótica: Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Leicester, John (2019, April 17). Tennis whistleblower who exposed crooks in the sport is being rejected by other players, from Associated Press published in Business Insider. Retrieved https://www.businessinsider.com/whistleblower-spurned-by-players-for-exposing-tennis-crooks-2019-4, from June 22, 2019.

  39. Lewis, A., Wilkinson, B. & Henzelin, M. (2018). Independent review of integrity in tennis: Report 2018. Retrieved https://tennisirp.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Final-Report_191218.pdf, from September 22, 2019.

  40. Lilley, E. (2015). A review of the recommendations of the 'Report of the sports betting integrity Panel' in assessing the progress towards tackling match-fixing in sport. Laws of the Game, 1(1), 37.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Lusa (2019a, June 6). Diretor da PJ pede fim de ‘cinismos’ no combate à corrupção. In Diario de Noticias on line. Retrieved https://www.dn.pt/pais/interior/diretor-da-pj-pede-fim-dos-cinismos-sobre-o-estatuto-do-arrependido-10983883.html, from June 15, 2019.

  42. Lusa (2019b, June 6). Procurador Amadeu Guerra sugere alterações ao direito premial. In Diario de Noticias on line. Retrieved https://www.dn.pt/lusa/interior/procurador-amadeu-guerra-sugere-alteracoes-ao-direito-premial-10985162.html, from June 17, 2019.

  43. Mansbach, A., Ziedenberg, H., & Bachner, Y. (2013). Nursing students' willingness to blow the whistle. Nurse Education Today, 33, 69–72.

    Google Scholar 

  44. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2006). The logic of appropriateness. In M. Rein, M. Moran, & R. E. Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public policy (pp. 689–708). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Mayntz, R. (2017). Illegal markets: Boundaries and interfaces between legality and illegality. In J. Beckert & M. Dewey (Eds.), The architecture of illegal markets: Towards an economic sociology of illegality in the economy (pp. 37–47). Oxford University Press.

  46. Menary, S. (2016). For the good of the game? Governance on the outskirts of international football. In Global corruption report: Sport, Transparency International, Berlin, Retrieved https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/sport_integrity, from June 17, 2019.

  47. Platini Michel (2014) Testimony before the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, September, 2011. Retrieved http://www.uefa.org/stakeholders/european-union/index.html, from October 18, 2019.

  48. Misra, A., Anderson, J., & Saunders, J. (2013). Safeguarding sports integrity against crime and corruption: An Australian perspective. In M. R. Haberfeld & D. Sheehan (Eds.), Match-fixing in international sports (pp. 135–155). Switzerland: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Moriconi, M. (2011a). Retórica, política y administración pública. Por qué fallan las reformas administrativas. Mexico City: UAM-CLASCO.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Moriconi, M. (2011b). ¿Ilegalidad justificada?: clientelismo controlado en la administración chilena. Perfiles latinoamericanos, 19(38), 227–247.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Moriconi, M. (2018a). The official football match-fixing prevention discourse as a cognitive limitation (the cases of Iberian countries). Soccer and Society, 19(2), 271–287.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Moriconi, M. (2018b). Reframing illegalities: Crime, cultural values and ideas of success (in Argentina). Crime, Law and Social Change, 69(4), 497–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-017-9760-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Moriconi, M., & Almeida, J. P. (2019). Portuguese fight against match-fixing: Which policies and what ethic? Journal of Global Sport Management, 4(1), 79–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/24704067.2018.1493357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Nawawi, A., & Salin, A. (2019). To whistle or not to whistle? Determinants and consequences. Journal of Financial Crime, 26(1), 260–276.

    Google Scholar 

  55. North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  56. North, D. (2003). Instituciones, ideología y desempeño económico. Washington: Cato Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Nowy, T., & Breuer, C. (2017). Match-fixing in European grassroots football. European Sport Management Quarterly, 17(1), 24–44.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Numerato, D. (2016). Corruption and public secrecy: An ethnography of football match-fixing. Current Sociology, 64(5), 699–717.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Panizza, F. (2002). Discurso e instituciones en la reforma de la administración pública uruguaya. Revista Uruguaya de Ciencia Política, núm., 13, 59–93.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Panizza, F. (2004). A reform without losers: The symbolic economy of civil service reform in Uruguay. Latin American Politics and Society, 46(3), 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Paoli, L. (2003). Mafia brotherhoods: Organized crime, Italian style. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Philips, L., & Jorgensen, M. (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Rehg, M. T., Miceli, M. P., Near, J. P., & Van Scotter, J. R. (2008). Antecedents and outcomes of retaliation against whistleblowers: Gender differences and power relations. Organization Science, 19, 221–240.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, irony and solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Skolnick, J. (2002). Corruption and the blue code of silence. Police Practice and Research, 3(1), 7–19.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Tak, M. (2018). Too big to jail: Match-fixing, institutional failure and the shifting of responsibility. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 53(7), 788–806.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Tak, M., Sam, M. P., & Jackson, S. J. (2018). The politics of countermeasures against match-fixing in sport: A political sociology approach to policy instruments. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 53(1), 30–48.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Taussig, M. (1999). Defacement: Public secrecy and the labour of the negative. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Tennis Integrity Unit (2019). Tennis Anti-corruption Program (2019). TIU. Retrieved http://www.tennisintegrityunit.com/storage/app/media/Education/Rules/TACP_2019_Rules_English.pdf, from June 15, 2019.

  70. Tolich, M. (2004). Internal confidentiality: When confidentiality assurances fail relational informants. Qualitative Sociology, 27(1), 101–106.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Torok, Sebastián (2019, February 10). Marco Trungelliti: ‘No soy topo ni buchón; no aguanto más’. en La Nación On line. Retrieved https://www.lanacion.com.ar/deportes/tenis/marco-trungelliti-no-soy-topo-buchon-no-nid2218721, from June 18, 2019.

  72. UEFA. (2017). UEFA disciplinary regulations. Nyon: UEFA.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Villeneuve, J. P., & Aquilina, D. (2016). Who’s fault is it? An analysis of the press coverage of football betting scandals in France and the United Kingdom. Sport in Society, 19(2), 187–200.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Vitorino, Sergio (2019, June 7). “Polícia Judiciária exige proteção para arrependidos”. In Correio da Manhã on line. Retrieved https://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/policia-judiciaria-exige-protecao-para-arrependidos, from June 20, 2019.

  75. Westmarland, L. (2005). Police ethics and integrity: Breaking the blue code of silence. Policing and Society, 15(2), 145–165.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Whitaker, L., Backhouse, S. H., & Long, J. (2014). Reporting doping in sport: National level athletes' perceptions of their role in doping prevention. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, 24(6), e515–e521.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Wittgenstein, L. (1988). Investigaciones filosóficas. Mexico: UNAM.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Authors would like to thank the European Commission for funding, through the Programme Erasmus + Sport, the project Training for Protected Reporting System (T-PREG) (590593-EPP-1-2017-1-PT-SPO-SCP). The data collection process of this project was crucial for the development of this research. The authors thanks all the informants that were interviewed and all the stakeholders that give inputs to this work during meetings, workshop, and focus groups frameworks within T-PREG project and AMATT and WHISTLE project as well. Their insight information was crucial for this research. They also want to thank the anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on early drafts of this paper. The contents of this article reflect only the view of the authors.

Funding

This publication was developed in the framework of the international project Training for Protected Reporting System (T-PREG), funded by European Commission Programme Erasmus + Sport (590593-EPP-1-2017-1-PT-SPO-SCP). The article was also supported with funding from the strategic programme of the Centro de Estudos Internacionais ISCTE-Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (with the reference UID/CPO/03122/2019).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Center for International Studies (CEI-IUL), Lisbon, Portugal

    Marcelo Moriconi & César de Cima

  2. Center for International Studies (CEI-IUL), Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Ed. ISCTE, Avenida das Forças Armadas, 1649-026, Lisbon, Portugal, Portugal

    Marcelo Moriconi

Authors
  1. Marcelo Moriconi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. César de Cima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcelo Moriconi.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

The authors declare no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authorship and/or publication of this article.

Research involving human participants and/or animals and informed consent

Authors have conducted their research in accordance with principles detailed by professional associations and treaties other than the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki such as the International Sociological Association’s (ISA) Code of Ethics.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moriconi, M., de Cima, C. To report, or not to report? From code of silence suppositions within sport to public secrecy realities. Crime Law Soc Change 74, 55–76 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-019-09875-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-019-09875-0

Search

Navigation