More stories

  • in

    Brittney Griner’s WNBA Impact Is Clear As Fans Await Word from Russia

    Griner, one of the world’s best basketball players, was believed to have been detained in Russia on what customs officials described as drug charges. Fans are worried.When Brittney Griner is on the basketball court, everyone knows. At 6-foot-9, she towers over most other players. She snatches rebounds over her opponents’ outstretched arms, and her teammates know the surest way to score: Deliver the ball to her.Since the Phoenix Mercury drafted Griner No. 1 overall in 2013, she has become one of the most dominant players ever: a seven-time All-Star, a W.N.B.A. champion and a two-time Olympian with matching gold medals.But now Griner, 31, has become entangled in a geopolitical quandary. Instead of preparing for the W.N.B.A. season that’s less than two months away, she is believed to be detained in Russia on what customs officials described as drug charges, with little word on her case or her well-being during the war in Ukraine.“With all the problems with Russia and them attacking Ukraine, has Brittney become a political bargaining chip?” said Debbie Jackson, Griner’s high school basketball coach. “Is this part of politics? So much of it doesn’t make any sense to me that I find it hard to believe that this is really the true thing that happened.”Griner was in Russia playing for a professional basketball league, a common off-season practice for W.N.B.A. players, who can earn salaries in overseas leagues well beyond what their American teams pay. The date and circumstances of Griner’s potential detention were not known, and the W.N.B.A. said all of its players except for Griner were out of the country by Saturday.Griner is said to be facing up to 10 years in prison if convicted on the drug charges, based on accusations that she had vape cartridges containing hashish oil in her luggage. The Russian authorities, who said Saturday that they had detained an American athlete on these drug charges, did not name Griner, but the Russian news agency Tass did.On Monday, Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, said she had seen reports about Griner but that federal privacy law prevented the U.S. government from discussing a person’s detention without their written consent. American officials have repeatedly accused Russia of detaining U.S. citizens on pretexts.Representatives for Griner have declined to comment on Griner’s status beyond a statement that they were working to get her back to the United States. The uncertainty has caused an outpouring among fans and supporters of Griner, a groundbreaking player known for her unmatched blitz of dunks and her standing as one of the most prominent gay athletes.A congresswoman in Houston, Griner’s hometown, has demanded her release. W.N.B.A. players have posted “Free Brittney” messages on Twitter.“There are no words to express this pain,” Brittney’s wife, Cherelle Griner, wrote on Monday in an Instagram post addressed to Brittney. “I’m hurting, we’re hurting. We await the day to love on you as a family.”‘Nobody can do what she can do’Griner (42) during the 2012 N.C.A.A. national championship game against Notre Dame. Griner played for Baylor for four seasons.Justin Edmonds/Getty ImagesGriner was a 5-foot-8 freshman on the volleyball team at Nimitz High School in Houston when Jackson approached her about playing basketball.Griner initially laughed at the thought of trying out for a sport she’d never played and knew little about. But she quickly fell in love with it, Jackson said. It helped that she grew nearly a foot, to 6 feet 7 inches tall, by her senior year.“She wasn’t like a clumsy tall person that had to grow into her body,” Jackson said. “She was really quite gifted as far as coordination.”Griner earned a basketball scholarship to Baylor University, where for four years she performed with a combination of size, skill, fluidity and speed unlike any other women’s basketball player in the country. She could score at will under the basket, and highlight-reel dunks made her mesmerizing.“Nobody can do what she can do,” Nancy Lieberman, the first woman to play on a professional men’s team, said during Griner’s freshman season at Baylor. “Not Cheryl Miller. Not Lisa Leslie. Not Candace Parker.”Griner led Baylor to an undefeated record during the 2011-12 season, which the Bears capped with a win over Notre Dame in the national championship game. She won the Big 12 Player of the Year Award three times and made 18 dunks at Baylor. Before her, few women had dunked in a college game at all.‘She was absolutely a force’Griner has been one of the W.N.B.A.’s best scorers throughout her career. She averaged 20.5 points per game in the 2021 season.Cooper Neill for The New York TimesThe Mercury drafted Griner in 2013, in the hope that she would rejuvenate their franchise. The turnaround was swift with Griner playing alongside Diana Taurasi, the W.N.B.A.’s career scoring leader. The Mercury made the playoffs during Griner’s rookie season and won a championship in her second. Last season, she was key to the Mercury’s run to the W.N.B.A. finals, where they lost to the Chicago Sky.“In terms of talent, she was absolutely a force and continues to be a force,” said Pamela Wheeler, a former head of the W.N.B.A. players’ union. “I think that everyone was looking for her to help guide the league, which she did, into a new era.”The year Griner was drafted, the league rebranded, changing its logo and focusing on promoting three rookies: Griner, Skylar Diggins-Smith and Elena Delle Donne.Griner seemed to be a good fit, with an engaging personality, a willingness to laugh at herself and a passion for calling out bullying. She was also open about being gay, which has become more common in sports, in part because of her.“I’m up for the challenge,” Griner said at the time about being part of the rebranding. “I changed stuff in college basketball, I guess you could say, so I’m up for it. I never shy from anything. Whatever’s thrown at me, I’m ready for it.”As she elevated her game domestically, Griner also made a name for herself in international basketball. She won two Olympic gold medals with the United States women’s national team, in 2016 and 2021, and started playing for teams in Russia and China during W.N.B.A. off-seasons.‘For the money’ and ‘For the love of the game’Griner has played for UMMC Ekaterinburg, a professional women’s basketball team in Russia, for several years during the W.N.B.A. off-season.Erdem Sahin/EPA, via ShutterstockNearly half of the W.N.B.A.’s 144 players were believed to be playing for international teams this off-season, including more than a dozen in Russia and Ukraine. Griner has played for the Russian team UMMC Ekaterinburg for several years.“While a number of players are doing it for the money as well,” said Wheeler, the former union leader, “they’re also doing it for the love of the game and continuing to be able to play and continue to keep themselves in playing shape.”The maximum base salary for W.N.B.A. players is about $228,000, but international teams have been known to pay several hundred thousand dollars, and even more than $1 million. Griner is set to earn just under the W.N.B.A. max in the 2022 season. With the W.N.B.A.’s minimum salary around $60,000, many players earn the bulk of their income by playing abroad.But playing overseas is not a “tourist opportunity” for most players, said Courtney Cox, an assistant professor at the University of Oregon, who said she traveled to Russia in 2018 to do research for a book about women’s professional basketball around the world.“There’s this whisper network of where is it safe to play, where players are sharing information: where you get paid on time, where they look out for you, the better trainers, all this information,” Cox said. “There’s kind of a trauma bond, I think, that happens, when you play in some of these spaces where you might be one of the only American players, depending on the policies of the league.”After Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, W.N.B.A. players in both countries fled.‘She pushes back on gender roles’Griner kissed her wife, Cherelle Griner, in the stands after the Mercury defeated the Las Vegas Aces in the semifinals of the 2021 W.N.B.A. playoffs.Ethan Miller/Getty ImagesPlaying in the United States can come with its own issues. In her memoir “In My Skin,” Griner wrote about her time at Baylor, a Baptist-­affiliated school that had an official policy against homosexuality at the time. In the book, Griner said that Kim Mulkey, her coach, had warned Griner to “keep your business behind closed doors” and told her to cover her tattoos and delete social media posts about her girlfriend and L.G.B.T. issues.What to Know About Brittney Griner’s Detention in RussiaCard 1 of 4What happened? More

  • in

    FIFA Will Allow Foreign Players in Russia to Break Contracts

    The move is expected to be temporary, and less than player advocates had demanded, in hopes of not setting a precedent.Having decided that Russian teams cannot play international soccer for an indefinite period because of the country’s invasion of Ukraine, soccer’s governing body is now planning to announce that foreign players contracted by Russian teams can suspend their contracts and move elsewhere — at least temporarily.The decision will affect about 100 players, who will be able to set aside their Russian contracts and sign with new clubs through to June 30. The measure stops short of what groups representing players and worldwide leagues had requested. In a joint letter, reviewed by The New York Times, FIFPro, the largest players union, and the World Leagues Forum, an umbrella organization for more than 40 competitions, had asked FIFA, soccer’s global governing body, that athletes be allowed to leave Russia permanently.The request has created an awkward situation for FIFA. The organization had broken precedent when it moved to punish Russia for its actions in Ukraine — including barring Russia’s national team from qualifying matches for this year’s World Cup — but allowing players to break their contracts, especially outside of soccer’s traditional winter and summer windows, was potentially far more problematic.Talks over the weekend between the player groups and FIFA, which also included lawyers for European soccer’s governing body, UEFA, and club representatives, failed to reach a consensus, with officials said to be concerned about setting a precedent. Instead, FIFA has decided that players who want to leave Russian teams can do so but must return after June 30.An official statement is likely to come as soon as Monday. In their letter, FIFPro and the leagues group suggested that some players were no longer comfortable playing for Russian teams after the invasion of Ukraine.“These foreign players may rightfully consider that they are not willing to represent any longer a Russian team and should be able to immediately terminate their contract with their employer without facing any sanction whatsoever from international bodies and to be registered in a new club without being restricted by transfer period regulations,” the letter said.Under local rules, Russian clubs can have as many as eight foreign players, known as legionnaires, on their rosters. The current Russian champion, Zenit St. Petersburg, has five Brazilians, a Colombian, a Croatian and a player from Kazakhstan on its squad.At least one club, Krasnodar, announced last week that it would allow its foreign players and coaching staff to suspend their contracts. Its German coach, Daniel Farke, the former manager of the English Premier League club Norwich, quit less than two months into his contract without overseeing a single game. But foreign players continued to suit up for Russian teams in the most recent round of domestic league games over the weekend.Russia’s declaration of war has exposed gaps in the statutes under which sporting organizations like FIFA are organized. After the invasion began, and drew worldwide condemnation, FIFA lawyers and officials scrambled to find a way to take action that could be justified under its regulations. At first, officials proposed measures that stopped short of an outright ban: Russia was to be prohibited from playing on home soil and barred from using its flag and even its name. But that punishment unraveled within 24 hours when Russia’s opponents — and about a dozen other countries — announced that they would refuse to share a field with Russia wherever, and whenever, games were to be played.A day later, FIFA threw Russia’s teams and its clubs out of world soccer. But its lawyers are already bracing for a fight over the decision. Russia’s soccer federation has called for an expedited hearing at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in order for a decision to be made before March 24, the date when it was supposed to host Poland in a World Cup qualification playoff.Russia-Ukraine War: Key Things to KnowCard 1 of 3Evacuation efforts under attack. More

  • in

    Russia, Soccer and a Line Drawn Too Late

    Soccer did not have to allow itself to be the field in which geopolitical rivalries played out, or the stage on which oligarchs sought power and prestige.Listen to This ArticleTo hear more audio stories from publications like The New York Times, download Audm for iPhone or Android.The troops were already over the border, the fighter jets screaming low through the skies, smoke billowing from the airfields when Schalke decided to act. The sound of the air raid sirens wailing, the sight of families huddled in subway stations, the images of thousands desperately fleeing Kyiv, a full-scale invasion: That was where it drew the line.Everything else, Schalke had been prepared to swallow. It did not bat an eyelid during the brief, brutal war with Georgia in 2008, or at Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, or at the downing of a passenger jet the same year, or at the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in 2018, or at Vladimir V. Putin’s longstanding support for and arming of Bashar al-Assad’s murderous regime in Syria.Throughout all of that, Schalke’s royal blue jerseys were proudly adorned with the logo of Gazprom, the energy giant that is majority-owned by the Russian state and has, variously, been described as a “geopolitical tool” and a “politicized weapon” wielded by Putin and a handpicked cadre of his cronies.That has been the case for 15 years — making it one of the longest-running sponsorship arrangements in European soccer — ever since Gerhard Schröder, the former German premier who now works with Gazprom, suggested the firm might like to invest in Schalke.That many of the club’s fans have long been uneasy with the relationship — warning more than once about the team being seen as the “lap dogs of an autocrat” — made no difference. The $17 million or so the company paid the club every year for its prime advertising space, even as it slipped from Champions League contention to relegation from the Bundesliga, was enough to override any such qualms. The old line, trotted out yet again this week by Sergey Semak, the coach of another Gazprom-backed team, Zenit St. Petersburg, that sport and politics should not be allowed to mix was the only justification anyone needed.Schalke was fine with Gazprom’s name on its shirts and Gazprom’s money in its accounts, until suddenly it wasn’t.Martin Meissner/Associated PressUntil, Thursday afternoon, that is, when Schalke suddenly discovered its moral compass. Gazprom’s logo was being removed from its jerseys, a statement on the club’s website read, because of the euphemistically-titled “recent developments” in Ukraine. Instead, when its players take to the field against Karlsruhe this weekend — and for the foreseeable future — their jerseys will simply read: Schalke 04.It is, though, somewhat churlish to focus exclusively on Schalke. Better late than never, after all: The club has done what it can, in some small way, to highlight its objection to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. There are plenty of others who have yet to meet even that bar.Everton and Chelsea, for example, have significant financial ties to Russian oligarchs who were named by a British lawmaker this week as suitable targets for sanctions; or Manchester United, studiously quiet on its sponsorship deal with Aeroflot, the state-backed Russian airline, until suddenly dropping it Friday.Still, what do you expect, when the very bodies who are supposed to represent the game have been so acquiescent? UEFA has, at least, stripped St. Petersburg of this year’s Champions League final, something it has found easier than annulling its own, lucrative sponsorship agreement with Gazprom.And then, of course, there is FIFA. Oh, FIFA, whose president once accepted a friendship medal from Putin and claimed that the 2018 World Cup had highlighted how wrong the Western perception of the ruthless kleptocracy he presided over had been. On Thursday, that president, Gianni Infantino, did condemn Russia’s “use of force in Ukraine,” though there were times when outright criticism did not seem to come easily.Even placing those teams, those bodies under scrutiny, though, may still be a touch unfair. The idea that any of these institutions should be expected to have a cogent, considered reaction to a major, unfolding global crisis is, at heart, faintly absurd.The issues that have driven the world to this point, their underlying causes, their long-term ramifications, are way beyond not only the scope of their expertise — let’s go live, now, to Frank Lampard, for his take on the Minsk accords of 2014 — but the limits of their world.The Krestovsky Stadium, known as Gazprom Arena but no longer the host of this year’s Champions League final.Anton Vaganov/ReutersIf the British or American governments cannot muster a convincing, unified policy in response to Putin’s aggression, why should we expect Everton, a middling Premier League team whose main concern is not being relegated, to do so? Why should UEFA, an organization which seems to find it hard to stop people being actively racist at public events, be expected to take decisive action before the European Union and the United Nations? What core competencies does FIFA, stocked as it is by the self-interested and the chronically mediocre, have to understand the tectonic shifts in geopolitics?At what point did we decide that any of this was within soccer’s wheelhouse? At what point did soccer become a lightning rod for international diplomacy? Why would an issue this serious be refracted through the lens of something as inherently trivial as sport?The answer, of course, is because soccer wanted it this way. Or, rather, because this is a price that soccer long ago decided was worth paying, when it elected to pursue money and glamour and influence at all costs, when it chose to open its doors to anyone who wanted a part of it, regardless of their morals or their motives, as long as they were good for the money, when it allowed itself to be hijacked by those who saw it not as an end but a means, not as a sport but as a vehicle.Soccer has not just welcomed them all in — the politicians and the oligarchs and the tycoons and the nation states — but actively courted and feted and celebrated their contributions. It has transformed them from parasites, hoping to attach themselves to the world’s great, unyielding passion to serve their own interests, into saviors and heroes and idols, conferring upon them not just legitimacy but adoration.And it has done so because they have helped to turn the game into what the historian David Goldblatt has referred to as the greatest cultural phenomenon in history, a world of untold riches and unlimited promise, one that knows no borders and recognizes neither its horizons nor its hubris.That is not the worst of it, though. The worst of it is that it has sold not only its morals and its right to innocence, to simplicity, but a part of its soul to anyone who could afford it not for any grand vision of what it might be, of what it might do, but simply to bankroll the endlessly spiraling inflation of transfer fees and wages, to support an economy that is bloated beyond all recognition, one so engorged and distorted that it calls into question the very integrity of the sport itself.Soccer did not have to do any of that. It did not have to allow itself to be the field in which geopolitical rivalries played out, or the stage on which oligarchs sought power and prestige. It did not have to choose a path in which one of Germany’s grandest clubs, owned by its fans, was a pawn in the politicking around the construction of the Nord Stream II gas pipeline.It could, instead, have looked at its popularity around the globe and wondered how that might be protected from — rather than sold to — the speculators and the opportunists, how the clubs that comprise its fabric might be safeguarded rather than hawked by organizations eager to monetize it, the ones that might have designed rules to prevent a gold rush but chose simply to grab its pickax and start mining.But it did not, and so this is where it finds itself: stripping sponsors from its jerseys as the air raid sirens wail and the fighter jets scream low over the skies, way out of its depth and way beyond its limits, trying desperately to do what it can to make a stand, knowing full well that it is all far too little, far too late.A Fight Worth WinningJohannes Eisele/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIt is extraordinary, really, that it has taken six years of negotiation and ill-feeling and controversy for U.S. Soccer to formally pledge to fulfill the simplest principle: that its men’s and women’s players should be paid the same amount of money — and given the same access to the same resources — to do the same job.That does not feel like an especially complicated issue to resolve. It certainly does not seem like the sort of issue on which anyone would willingly take the contrary position.It is not necessarily something that warrants the most lavish praise, then, that U.S. Soccer has agreed to a settlement that will see several dozen women, both current and former players, share $24 million, largely in back pay, in a belated attempt to right a historical wrong. But as noted elsewhere in this newsletter: better late than never.Russia-Ukraine War: Key DevelopmentsCard 1 of 3A new diplomatic push. More

  • in

    Chelsea Is for Sale as Pressure on Roman Abramovich Mounts

    As British lawmakers take aim at wealthy Russians, Roman Abramovich confirmed he was seeking to sell the Premier League team he has owned since 2003.LONDON — Roman Abramovich, the Russian oligarch whose vast fortune transformed Chelsea into a global soccer powerhouse, confirmed Wednesday that he is actively seeking to sell the team. He has set a deadline of Friday for interested parties to submit “indicative offers” for the club he has owned for almost two decades, and is said to be seeking at least $2.5 billion for the club.Only days ago, Abramovich, 55, had announced his intention to transfer the “stewardship and care” of Chelsea to members of its charitable foundation. The move — in which he notably did not suggest he would surrender ownership of Chelsea — was seemingly designed to distance the club from the impact of any possible sanctions levied by the British government against him as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.Britain this week proposed new legislation targeting wealthy Russians like Abramovich, many of whom amassed their fortunes through cronyism or ties to Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, and then shielded it overseas behind shell companies and opaque investment deals.But on Wednesday, in confirming his decision to sell the team, Abramovich framed the sale as a painful and personal sacrifice, but one from which he would not profit. Abramovich said he would not seek the repayment of the roughly $2 billion of his personal fortune he had invested in Chelsea over the two decades he had owned it, and also said he had instructed his representatives to set up a charitable foundation to receive the net proceeds of the sale “for the benefit of all victims of the war in Ukraine.”The comments about Ukraine were his strongest yet addressing the impact of Russia’s invasion, and its effects on its neighbor and its residents. His words, however, stopped short of condemning President Putin, or Russia, for launching military action.“Please know that this has been an incredibly difficult decision to make, and it pains me to part with the club in this manner,” Abramovich said. “However, I do believe this is in the best interest of the club.”Though Abramovich had suggested in a rare public statement on Saturday that the Chelsea foundation trustees were best placed to “look after the interests of the club, players, staff and fans,” he has in recent days tasked the Raine Group, a New York advisory firm, with identifying a new owner for the team. Prospective investors have been informed they must have prepared an outline of their bid by the end of this week.Their number includes Hansjörg Wyss, a Swiss billionaire noted for his support for progressive causes, who told the Swiss newspaper Blick that he was among a group of four people to have “received an offer to buy Chelsea” on Tuesday. Wyss insisted that he would not buy the club alone, and would prefer to be a part of a consortium of “six or seven investors.”“Abramovich is trying to sell all his villas in England; he also wants to get rid of Chelsea quickly,” Wyss told Blick. “Abramovich is currently asking far too much. You know, Chelsea owe him £2 billion. But Chelsea has no money. As of today, we don’t know the exact selling price.”Abramovich’s wealth has produced five Premier League titles, two Champions League crowns and a talent-rich roster to rival any club in the world.David Klein/ReutersAnother contender, Todd Boehly, a billionaire investor and a part-owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, reportedly offered Abramovich $2.9 billion for Chelsea in 2019. The current price is believed to be around $2.5 billion, though there is speculation that it will fall lower still if Abramovich’s urgency to part with the team grows.Chelsea had been directing interested parties toward Raine whenever groups attracted by the glamour of owning the London team made contact. But until this week, Abramovich had shown little appetite for selling.That has changed with notable speed. Abramovich has been named on several occasions as a suitable target for sanctions in Britain’s parliament since Putin commanded Russian forces to attack Ukraine last week.Chris Bryant, a lawmaker for the opposition Labour party, this week claimed that Abramovich was hastily trying to sell off his British property portfolio in anticipation of his assets being frozen, and asked if he should be allowed to continue owning a soccer team. On Wednesday, Keir Starmer, the Labour party leader, directly asked the prime minister, Boris Johnson, why Abramovich had not yet been targeted.Abramovich has always claimed, often with the support of lawyers, that he has no connection to Putin and nothing to do with politics. On Monday, his private representative was reported to have suggested — without evidence — that he had been asked to try to negotiate a peace settlement in Ukraine. The comments came only days after officials close to Abramovich suggested the billionaire had no role in politics or close ties to Putin.Abramovich has owned Chelsea since 2003, having bought the team seemingly on a whim — negotiations, the story went, took place over a single weekend — and for reasons that have remained opaque. He had previously considered moves for Arsenal, Tottenham and Fulham, as well as examining the possibility of buying teams in Spain and Italy, but why he settled on soccer at all has never been adequately explained. Abramovich does not give interviews.He arrived at Chelsea when it was at a comparatively low ebb, struggling to qualify for the Champions League and without a domestic championship in half a century. But the infusion of his personal fortune, amassed through his stake in the Russian oil giant Sibneft and his interests in the country’s aluminum industry, changed that almost immediately.Abramovich bankrolled some of the most lavish spending in soccer history, attracting a rotating cast of stars to Stamford Bridge and kick-starting a decades-long inflationary spiral that only a handful of other clubs have been able to match. Under his ownership, Chelsea has won five Premier League titles, two Champions League crowns — most recently last May — and, only a few weeks ago, the Club World Cup.Roman Abramovich turned up in Abu Dhabi in February to watch Chelsea win the Club World Cup.Hassan Ammar/Associated PressHe was on the field last May in Portugal, too, after Chelsea won the Champions League.Pool photo by Michael Steele/EPA, via ShutterstockAbramovich, who has rarely seen his team in England over the last few years after withdrawing his application for a British visa in 2018, joined his players on the field in Abu Dhabi to celebrate their most recent trophy, just as he had when it won the European title in Portugal last May.The team’s most recent accounts provided a clear illustration of how Abramovich’s wealth has been able to subsidize huge losses in order to keep the team successful: Chelsea lost more than $200 million on its way to that second Champions League title last season. Abramovich is estimated to have invested something in the region of $2 billion in the club — interest-free loans worth about 10 times the price he paid for the team — since acquiring it in 2003.His announcement on Saturday that he intended to hand the “care” of Chelsea to the trustees of its charitable arm indicated that he was sufficiently worried by the prospect of the freezing of his assets in Britain to try to limit its impact on the club. The move was so surprising to those trustees that several are believed to have expressed their concerns to the Charity Commission, Britain’s charity regulator, which confirmed that it had opened a “serious incident report” in the aftermath of Abramovich’s unilateral announcement. Staff members are similarly bewildered at the pace of events.Russia-Ukraine War: Key DevelopmentsCard 1 of 4A new diplomatic push. More

  • in

    Tennis Suspends Russia and Belarus but Will Allow Their Players to Compete

    The move will allow stars like Daniil Medvedev of Russia and Victoria Azarenka of Belarus to participate in tournaments but as neutral players with no national identification.The organizations that oversee professional tennis will prohibit Russia and Belarus from competing in team events but will allow players from those countries to participate in tournaments without any national identification.The announcement on Tuesday came one day after the International Olympic Committee recommended that sports organizations bar Russian and Belarusian athletes from events. Other groups, including FIFA, soccer’s international governing body, have also imposed penalties following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a deployment that has been assisted by Belarus.“The International Tennis Federation condemns Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its facilitation by Belarus,” a statement said. “In addition to the cancellation of all I.T.F. events in those countries, the I.T.F. Board has today announced the immediate suspension of the Russian Tennis Federation and Belarus Tennis Federation from I.T.F. membership and from participation in I.T.F. international team competition until further notice. The I.T.F. remains in close contact with the Ukraine Tennis Federation and stands in solidarity with the people of Ukraine.”In a joint statement from all the governing bodies for the sport, organizers said the events of the past week had caused “distress, shock and sadness.”“We commend the many tennis players who have spoken out and taken action against this unacceptable act of aggression,” the statement continued. “We echo their calls for the violence to end and peace to return.”The men’s and women’s professional tours also suspended a tournament scheduled for Moscow in October.Enforcing penalties on countries is a complicated issue for tennis, especially because seven organizations oversee the sport and its major events. For much of the year, players operate as independent contractors who compete for themselves rather than their countries. Most have only limited interaction with the national federations that run tennis in their homelands and work with private coaches and managers.The initial announcement Tuesday from the I.T.F. amounted to an attempt to separate players born in Russia and Belarus from their nations, a move that Elina Svitolina, Ukraine’s top-ranked professional, had urged her sport to pursue.Svitolina, the top seed this week in a tournament in Mexico, on Monday announced that she would not play her first-round match against Anastasia Potapova of Russia unless Russian and Belarusian players competed only as neutral athletes.In a Twitter post, Svitolina said that her fellow tennis players were not to blame for the Russian invasion, but that the world had to send a message to Russia through every possible channel.In recent years, Russia has become the world’s leading tennis nation. It won the major national team tournaments for both the men and the women last year. Belarus is the home of the third-ranked women’s player, Aryna Sabalenka, and to 16th-ranked Victoria Azarenka.The I.O.C.’s recommendation came on the same day that Daniil Medvedev of Russia took over the No. 1 ranking on the ATP Tour, which oversees the men’s professional game.Medvedev is the first player who is not a member of the game’s so-called Big Four — Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray — to become the world No. 1 since 2004. Also on Monday, Andrey Rublev, another top Russian player, rose to No. 6.Russia-Ukraine War: Key Things to KnowCard 1 of 4Civilians under fire. More

  • in

    FIFA Will Ban Russia, Ejecting It From World Cup Qualifying

    World soccer’s global governing body suspended Russia and its teams from all competitions on Monday, ejecting the country from qualifying for the 2022 World Cup only weeks before it was to play for one of Europe’s final places in this year’s tournament in Qatar.The suspension, which was announced Monday evening in coordination with European soccer’s governing body, also barred Russian club teams from international competitions. The decision came a day after FIFA was heavily criticized for not going far enough in punishing Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, and amid mounting demands from national federations for stronger action.The initial pressure for an outright ban of Russia came from soccer officials in Poland, Sweden and the Czech Republic, whose national team faced the prospect of games against Russia in a World Cup playoff in March. Other countries and officials, including the federations representing France, England and the United States, quickly said they would not play Russia under any circumstances.England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿, Albania 🇦🇱, Czech Republic 🇨🇿, Denmark 🇩🇰, Ireland 🇮🇪, Norway 🇳🇴, Scotland 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿, Switzerland 🇨🇭, Sweden 🇸🇪, Wales 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿… football Europe follows the Polish path. Together we are stronger! #SolidarityWithUkraine 🇺🇦Dziękujemy! | Thank you!— Cezary Kulesza (@Czarek_Kulesza) February 28, 2022
    FIFA and its European counterpart, UEFA, said the ban on Russia would be in place “until further notice.”“Football is fully united here and in full solidarity with all the people affected in Ukraine,” FIFA said in a statement. Ukraine’s team, which is set to play Scotland in its own World Cup playoff in March, will remain in the competition.UEFA then went a step further in breaking its deep ties to Russia: It announced that it had ended a sponsorship agreement with the Russian energy giant Gazprom. The deal was worth a reported $50 million a year to European soccer.UEFA had last week stripped St. Petersburg, the home of Gazprom, of this year’s Champions League final. The game will be played in France instead.Ukraine will take part in the playoffs for the final European World Cup places next month. Russia, now, will not.Fehim Demir/EPA, via ShutterstockFIFA and UEFA decided to bar Russia only hours after the International Olympic Committee called for international sports federations to prohibit Russian athletes and teams from all global sporting events where possible. The Olympic officials said Russia had breached a commitment — known as the Olympic Truce, and signed before the start of the Beijing Winter Games and scheduled to run through the Paralympics that open this week — when it invaded Ukraine.The immediate consequence of soccer’s ban on Russia is that it will lose its place in a four-team group for one of Europe’s final places for the World Cup. Poland, which was scheduled to play Russia in March in Moscow, had said flatly that it would refuse to take the field for the game, a stance it repeated after FIFA announced its initial slate of penalties on Sunday night.Cezary Kulesza, the president of Poland’s soccer federation, called FIFA’s initial decision not to eject Russia “totally unacceptable.” In a post on Twitter, he added: “We are not interested in participating in this game of appearances. Our stance remains intact: Polish National Team will NOT PLAY with Russia, no matter what the name of the team is.”Sweden and the Czech Republic, the teams that could have met Russia — also in Moscow — if the Russians beat Poland, said that they, too, would refuse to play, even at a neutral site.Russia-Ukraine War: Key Things to KnowCard 1 of 4On the ground. More

  • in

    Champions League Final Will Be Played in Paris, Not Russia

    European soccer’s governing body on Friday voted to move this season’s Champions League final, the showcase game on the continent’s sporting calendar, to Paris as punishment for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.The game, on May 28, had been scheduled to be played in St. Petersburg, in a stadium built for 2018 World Cup and financed by the Russian energy giant Gazprom, a major sponsor of the governing body, UEFA. It will take place instead at the Stade de France, in the northern Paris suburb of Saint-Denis. It will be the first time France has hosted the final since 2006.UEFA said it had made the decision as a result of “the grave escalation of the security situation in Europe.”The 2021/22 UEFA Men’s Champions League final will move from Saint Petersburg to Stade de France in Saint-Denis. The game will be played as initially scheduled on Saturday 28 May at 21:00 CET.Full statement: ⬇️— UEFA (@UEFA) February 25, 2022
    UEFA also said it would relocate any games in tournaments it controls that were to be played in Russia and Ukraine, whether involving clubs or national teams, “until further notice.”At the moment, that affects only a single club match: Spartak Moscow’s next home game in the second-tier Europa League. But UEFA’s move to punish Russia will put new pressure on world soccer’s governing body, FIFA, to move a World Cup qualifying match set for Moscow next month.On Thursday the soccer federations from Poland, Czech Republic and Sweden wrote to FIFA calling for Russia to be banned from hosting playoff games for the 2022 World Cup that are scheduled for next month. Poland is scheduled to play Russia in Moscow on March 24. If Russia wins that game, it would host the winner of the game between the Czechs and Sweden in a match to decide one of Europe’s final places in the World Cup in Qatar later this year.“The military escalation that we are observing entails serious consequences and considerably lower safety for our national football teams and official delegations,” the federations wrote in a joint statement. They called on FIFA — which has authority over the games — and UEFA to immediately present “alternative solutions” for sites that were not on Russian soil.Russia’s soccer federation, known as the R.F.U., reacted angrily to the decision to move any matches.“We believe that the decision to move the venue of the Champions League final was dictated by political reasons,” said the federation’s president, Alexander Dyukov. “The R.F.U. has always adhered to the principle of ‘sport is out of politics,’ and thus cannot support this decision.”“The R.F.U. also does not support the decision to transfer any matches involving Russian teams to neutral territory as violating the sports principle and infringing on the interests of players, coaches and fans.”Russia-Ukraine War: Key Things to KnowCard 1 of 4On the ground. More

  • in

    FIFA Proposes Penalties for Russia but No Ban, Yet

    The restrictions proposed by soccer’s governing body for a World Cup playoff next month stopped short of the all-out ban Russia’s opponents have demanded.Under mounting pressure to take action against Russia after its invasion of Ukraine, the leadership of world soccer’s governing body on Sunday agreed on a range of measures that would take effect for Russia’s crucial World Cup qualifying playoff next month. But the proposals — a ban on Russia’s name, flag and anthem and a neutral site for its games — do not include the all-out ban on Russia’s national team that its opponents are demanding, making it unclear if the punishments will resolve the confrontation, or if the games will be played at all.Russia was drawn against Poland in March as part of a four-team group for one of Europe’s final places in the World Cup in Qatar later this year. If Russia were to win its game against Poland, it would meet Sweden or the Czech Republic for a place in Qatar when the tournament opens in November. Russia’s first playoff match and the potential second game had been scheduled to be played in Moscow.Bureau of the FIFA Council takes initial measures with regard to war in Ukraine ▶️ https://t.co/JoHzwIajiX pic.twitter.com/BarqeIDYaP— FIFA Media (@fifamedia) February 27, 2022
    The three other countries involved in the battle for the World Cup place — Poland, Sweden and the Czech Republic — have all refused to play Russia under any circumstances as a protest against Russia’s invasion of neighboring Ukraine.Several top players, including Poland’s Robert Lewandowski, FIFA’s reigning world player of the year, have backed the decision to boycott any games involving Russia. Those statements, and similar ones by other players, have created intense pressure on FIFA to remove Russia from the competition.Other soccer bodies have already taken action against Russia: European soccer’s governing body last week stripped St. Petersburg of this year’s Champions League final, and on Sunday England’s soccer federation said it would not play Russia in any international games for the foreseeable future “out of solidarity with Ukraine and to wholeheartedly condemn the atrocities being committed by the Russian leadership.”Earlier Sunday, a group of FIFA top leaders sought to find a way out of the simmering confrontation by agreeing to penalize Russia: It ordered that its team would be allowed to play only in neutral venues and in empty stadiums; that it must play without its flag or national anthem, and only if its team agreed to be known as the Football Union of Russia, rather than Russia.Cezary Kulesza, the president of Poland’s soccer federation, called FIFA’s decision “totally unacceptable.” In a post on Twitter, he added: “We are not interested in participating in this game of appearances. Our stance remains intact: Polish National Team will NOT PLAY with Russia, no matter what the name of the team is.”Karl-Erik Nilsson, the president of Sweden’s soccer federation, also said it would not play Russia, and urged FIFA to cancel the playoff matches in March involving the country.FIFA’s measures are only the first step in actions against the country’s soccer teams, said three senior soccer officials familiar with the organization’s discussions, and a harsher penalty — most likely an all-out ban on Russian teams — could be imposed if Russia’s attacks on Ukraine continue, or if it refuses to abide by Sunday’s penalties.The measures mirror some of the penalties imposed against Russian teams by the International Olympic Committee after Russia was caught running a large, state-sponsored doping program; those punishments have been widely ridiculed as inadequate by athletes and Olympic officials from other countries.Stadiums across Europe were illuminated in the colors of Ukraine’s flag this weekend.Michael Probst/Associated PressLeft, Deutsche Bank Park in Frankfurt, Germany. Right, London Stadium, the home of West Ham.Paul Childs/Action Images Via ReutersThey also may not be enough to persuade Russia’s rivals to agree to share a field with a Russian team, and put FIFA in the uncomfortable position of expelling three of its members from the playoff — and thus allowing Russia to advance unchallenged to the World Cup, soccer’s showcase event.Understand Russia’s Attack on UkraineCard 1 of 7What is at the root of this invasion? More