The Missed Opportunity: Mediation’s Untapped Potential in International Sport

The Missed Opportunity: Mediation’s Untapped Potential in International Sport | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article The Missed Opportunity: Mediation’s Untapped Potential in International Sport Muiris Lyons This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7940614/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Mediation in sport has long been recognised as a process aligned with the values of fairness, respect, and integrity that underpin athletic competition, yet its practical use remains limited. This article explores why mediation—despite its proven success in other sectors—has yet to gain meaningful traction within international sports dispute resolution. Drawing on original empirical research with twenty-three senior mediators across ten jurisdictions, it provides the first practitioner-based snapshot of mediation’s role in sport today. The findings reveal a field rich in expertise but constrained by low case volumes, weak referral pathways, and entrenched adversarial culture. Settlement rates of around sixty-five per cent on the day and eighty per cent within a month confirm mediation’s effectiveness where it is used. The analysis identifies three core themes: sport-suitability, the need for tailored procedural design, and the systemic value of mediation within sport’s governance architecture. The article also considers whether mediation might complement formal adjudication in disciplinary and doping matters through structured facilitation and restorative processes. It concludes that mediation already works in sport—it is the system around it that must evolve to embed it more fully within the international sporting order. Sports law Mediation Dispute resolution Arbitration Governance Restorative justice Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 1. Introduction Mediation in international sport has attracted growing attention in recent years—both from academics and practitioners—yet its potential remains curiously under-realised ( Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ; Goodrum 2013 ) . This article approaches the subject from a practitioner’s vantage point, informed by new empirical research and by the voices of those who work daily within the contested space of sports dispute resolution. Through a targeted survey of leading mediators and practitioners, it seeks to capture a clear picture of the current state of play for mediation in sport as we move through 2024–2025 (CAS 2024; Sport Resolutions 2024 ) . Across most civil and commercial fields, mediation has become a familiar and trusted process: efficient, confidential, and capable of resolving conflict without destroying relationships ( Duthie 2014 ; Allen 2024 ) . In sport, however, that transformation has yet to take root. Arbitration still dominates—entrenched, institutionally supported, and often assumed to be the natural or inevitable path ( Blackshaw 2014 ) . Yet this reliance on arbitration may conceal lost opportunities: chances for earlier, more flexible, and more constructive outcomes that better reflect the values of sport itself ( Blackshaw 2022 ) . The study that follows asks three straightforward questions. Why does mediation remain underused in sport? What kinds of disputes appear most suitable for it? And how might it be more meaningfully integrated into sport’s procedural landscape? Drawing on both the existing literature and the author’s original empirical data, the discussion explores patterns of uptake, perceptions of effectiveness, and the barriers that continue to impede wider adoption ( Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ) . It also considers how mediation is evolving—through virtual platforms, hybrid formats, and new institutional frameworks—and whether more proactive or even mandatory approaches might help overcome the inertia that has long characterised this field (Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil 2024; Acharya 2023 ; Booker 2024 ) . Three themes run through the analysis. The first is sport’s natural affinity with mediation. The process mirrors many of sport’s own values: fairness, respect, adaptability, and the preservation of relationships ( Mironi 2017 ; Goodrum 2013 ) . These qualities are often central to athlete–club and governance dynamics, and to the broader ecology of sport where cooperation endures long after specific contests have ended. In such settings, mediation is not simply a cheaper or quicker alternative to arbitration—it is often the process that best fits the spirit of the dispute ( Blackshaw 2022 ) . The second is the need for a tailored model. Sport operates under compressed timelines and intense scrutiny. Careers can hinge on a single decision; reputations can change overnight. A mediation process designed for commercial litigation will rarely meet these pressures without adjustment. What is needed is a sport-specific approach: one that acknowledges hierarchy, emotional intensity, and the unique blend of competition and community that defines the sporting world ( Hesse 2014 ; Duthie 2014 ) . The third concerns mediation’s systemic value. Beyond individual cases, mediation has the capacity to strengthen the integrity of sporting governance. By amplifying participant voice and encouraging creative, consensual solutions, it can act both as a preventative measure and as a restorative one—resolving disputes while preserving the human connections that sustain the game ( Mironi 2017 ; Blackshaw 2022 ) . It is not a replacement for arbitration but its natural complement, offering in many cases a more humane and holistic path to resolution. The article unfolds as follows. Section 2 reviews the existing literature, drawing on key contributions from Mironi, Hesse, Goodrum, Blackshaw and others. Section 3 outlines the methodology and headline findings from the author’s empirical survey. Section 4 interprets those findings, analysing which disputes most lend themselves to mediation, the persistent barriers to uptake, the rise of virtual formats, and the debate around mandatory referral. Section 5 turns to the more controversial question of whether mediation might also have a role in disciplinary and regulatory disputes. The conclusion draws these threads together and offers practical recommendations for embedding mediation more firmly within the international sports dispute-resolution ecosystem. 2. Literature Review The scholarship on mediation in sport is wide and steadily growing. Taken together, it tells a familiar story: the promise of mediation, its persistent marginalisation, and the slow evolution of the frameworks that surround it. For present purposes, a few contributions stand out as particularly resonant with the questions explored in this study. Each offers a glimpse of how mediation has been understood, championed, and sometimes overlooked within the sporting world. The Promise of Mediation in Sport-Related Disputes ( Mironi 2017 ) Professor Mordehai Mironi of Haifa University remains one of the clearest and most persuasive voices on the subject—and, fittingly, one of the respondents to the author’s survey. His 2017 paper (Mironi 2017 ) is perhaps the most comprehensive academic account of mediation in sport, weaving policy analysis with practitioner insight from the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Mironi opens with a telling example: a CAS mediation between an African and a European football club over unpaid transfer fees. What began as a straightforward financial claim evolved into a forward-looking settlement including youth-development and coaching exchanges—an outcome unimaginable in an adversarial process. For Mironi, the case encapsulates mediation’s capacity to transform conflict into collaboration. He argues that mediation should not replace arbitration but sit alongside it, formally recognised and institutionally supported. His analysis isolates the qualities that make mediation a natural fit for sport—speed, cost-efficiency, privacy, flexibility, and, above all, the ability to preserve relationships and reputation. In a close-knit global industry, where the same actors meet repeatedly in different guises, these are not incidental virtues but essential ones. Mironi also acknowledges the process’s limits. Mediation lacks finality, produces no precedent, and contributes little to the evolving lex sportiva ; yet he concludes that these trade-offs are outweighed by systemic and relational gains. His prescription—better mediator training, incentives to mediate, and limited mandatory referral, particularly in employment disputes—has shaped later commentary (Blackshaw 2022 ; Goodrum 2013 ). Is Mediation Suitable to Resolve Sports-Related Disputes? ( Hesse 2014 ) Volker Hesse’s study (Hesse 2014 ) offers a practitioner-researcher perspective that mirrors the approach taken here. Based on interviews with sixteen mediators, lawyers, and officials who collectively participated in 117 mediations, Hesse found that more than half regarded mediation as most appropriate for contractual disputes, with employment issues close behind. Regulatory and doping cases remained largely beyond reach. Hesse reported a 65 per cent success rate—remarkably consistent with later empirical data (Hesse 2014 ; Mironi 2017 ). Even when no agreement was reached, participants described the process as clarifying, humanising, and productive: mediation provides a “safe space” in which dialogue can occur, often paving the way for later resolution. His analysis also highlights recurring obstacles—occasional lack of good faith, weak enforcement, and limited institutional encouragement—but concludes that mediation offers a swift, confidential, and cost-effective path for commercial and relational disputes in sport, provided federations promote it through education and procedural reform. Mediation in Sports Disputes: Lessons from the UK ( Goodrum 2013 ) Neil Goodrum ( 2013 ) brings the seasoned insight of a mediator steeped in practice. He asks why, given its suitability, mediation remains so little used. The answer, he suggests, lies in perception: the lingering idea that mediation is a “soft option” or a sign of weakness—an attitude reinforced by sport’s competitive ethos. Drawing on UK experience and cases such as Halsey v Milton Keynes NHS Trust (2004 EWCA Civ 576), Goodrum reframes mediation as a pragmatic, commercially intelligent choice. He anticipated developments that have since reshaped civil justice. Long before cost sanctions and mandatory consideration became mainstream, Goodrum argued that such measures could usefully be applied to sport. His call for education, role-modelling, and institutional incentives remains as relevant now as it was then (Booker 2024 ; Acharya 2023 ). Recent Developments and Doctrinal Shifts Since those foundational works, the surrounding legal and policy terrain has moved on. In Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council (2024 UKSC 20), the Supreme Court confirmed that courts may lawfully stay proceedings to encourage or require mediation so long as access to justice is preserved. The judgment dismantled the caution imposed by Halsey and signalled a cultural shift toward judicial endorsement of consensual resolution (Booker 2024 ; Allen 2024 ). Although most sports disputes fall outside civil courts, Churchill reinforces mediation’s legitimacy and is likely to influence how governing bodies design their own processes. Across Europe, the Mediation Directive (2008/52/EC) and the European Code of Conduct for Mediators (2020) continue to define good practice—voluntariness, impartiality, and confidentiality—principles now woven into modern concepts of sporting integrity (Duthie 2014 ). Ian Blackshaw, one of mediation’s earliest and most persistent advocates, has likewise argued for integration across all levels of sport governance and for re-imagining CAS procedures to allow greater scope for negotiated outcomes (Blackshaw 2014 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). Writing in World Sports Advocate and the International Sports Law Review , he points to mediation’s particular value in safeguarding, selection, and interpersonal disputes where privacy and relationship preservation are vital. Empirical support has followed. The 2023 CEDR Mediation Audit reported that 89 per cent of commercial mediations settled either on the day or shortly afterwards (CEDR 2023). Although not sport-specific, these figures echo both Hesse’s findings and the author’s survey data. The Audit also warned against over-formalisation and highlighted diversity and representation issues—concerns familiar in sport’s multicultural landscape (Bowyer-Jones 2019 ). Finally, the 2021 CAS Mediation Rules established a streamlined framework intended to encourage greater use (CAS 2024). Yet uptake remains modest: fewer than 130 mediations since 1999 against hundreds of arbitrations each year. Sport Resolutions ( 2024 ) reports a similar pattern, averaging fewer than seven mediations annually. The disparity between mediation’s theoretical promise and its limited practice persists. Synthesis Across the literature, the pattern is unmistakable. Mediation’s benefits in sport are repeatedly acknowledged—speed, cost, privacy, relational repair—yet structural and cultural inertia continue to hold it back (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ; Goodrum 2013 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). Scholars and practitioners converge on the same prescription: integration. Mediation must be written into the fabric of sport’s rules, contracts, and institutional processes if it is to move from the margins to the mainstream. The author’s own research, set out in the following sections, builds on that foundation. It adds new empirical evidence from leading sports mediators and explores how mediation’s promise might finally be realised within the living systems of sport. 3. Methodology This study draws on original empirical research undertaken by the author in 2024 to examine how mediation is perceived and practised in the international sporting arena. The aim was to capture the lived experience of those who mediate at the sharp edge of sport—how they see the process working, where they believe it falls short, and what might help it to take deeper root. The intention was not simply to count mediations, but to understand why a process so well suited to sport remains so sparingly used (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ; Goodrum 2013 ). Survey Design The research employed a concise online survey of seventeen questions, designed to take around ten minutes to complete. It combined quantitative and qualitative formats—short and long text responses, multiple-choice and checkbox selections—to balance factual information with reflective insight. The questions explored six broad areas: • the mediator’s professional background and level of experience; • the types and frequency of sports disputes mediated; • perceptions of effectiveness and settlement rates; • procedural preferences, such as virtual or in-person formats; • perceived obstacles to successful mediation; and • views on how uptake might be improved (Hesse 2014 ). The survey was distributed through three carefully targeted channels intended to reach the small, specialised community of international sports mediators. CAS Mediation Panel. The Court of Arbitration for Sport maintains a list of approved mediators appointed for four-year terms (CAS 2024). At the time of the study, 52 individuals were publicly listed. Of these, 39 could be contacted directly by email or LinkedIn, producing 10 completed responses—a 28 per cent response rate among those contactable. Respondents included mediators practising in the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, France, Israel, and Hong Kong. Sport Resolutions (UK). Sport Resolutions operates a panel of more than 300 neutrals but does not publicly distinguish between arbitrators and mediators (Sport Resolutions 2024 ). Following discussions with the organisation’s management, the survey was circulated to the panel in October 2024 and generated three responses. Though modest in number, these participants provided valuable insight from the UK’s most established sports dispute-resolution body. Direct Outreach. In addition, approximately 20 experienced mediators known to the author through professional networks were invited to participate. Many also sit on the Sport Resolutions panel. This route produced ten further responses, including from high-profile figures such as William Norris KC, former FIFA Regulatory Director James Kitching, and senior mediators based in Switzerland, Australia, and the UK (Goodrum 2013 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). Respondent Profile In total, 23 substantive responses were received, representing mediators active across ten jurisdictions. Over 65 per cent reported more than 15 years’ experience mediating sports disputes; only 4 per cent had fewer than five years. The sample therefore reflects a senior, expert cohort able to offer authoritative perspectives on current practice (Hesse 2014 ). While small, the number of respondents is proportionate to the size of the global community of specialist sports mediators (Mironi 2017 ). It includes both institutional and independent practitioners, encompassing formal panels and ad hoc arrangements, and thus provides a realistic cross-section of practice in this field. Data Context and Interpretation The findings have been analysed qualitatively rather than statistically. They are presented in Section 4 alongside publicly available data from CAS, Sport Resolutions, and CEDR for comparative context (CEDR 2023; CAS 2024). CAS, for example, reported only 17 mediation cases in 2023, bringing its total to 122 since the procedure’s introduction in 1999—figures that echo the modest activity levels described by respondents (Sport Resolutions 2024 ). The goal was not to measure prevalence alone but to explore the dynamics that lie beneath the numbers: how mediators perceive the strengths and weaknesses of the process, what cultural factors shape its success, and what reforms might allow it to flourish (Mironi 2017 ; Goodrum 2013 ). The mixed-methods approach allows patterns to emerge from both the quantitative indicators—such as reported settlement rates—and the qualitative themes of trust, timing, and institutional design (Hesse 2014 ). Purpose and Scope In keeping with the broader aims of the article, this research seeks to understand not merely whether mediation works in sport but how it might work better (Mironi 2017 ). The findings therefore address three overlapping questions: Why does mediation remain underused despite its apparent suitability for sport? What procedural or cultural factors influence its success or failure? How can governing bodies, mediators, and practitioners embed it more effectively within sport’s dispute-resolution ecosystem (Blackshaw 2022 )? The next section presents the results and analysis of the survey, structured around the three central themes identified in the Introduction—sport-suitability, tailored design, and systemic value. 4. Results and Analytical Discussion 4.1 Who Mediates Sports Disputes The respondent profile offers an immediate insight into a field that is still emerging yet already highly professionalised. Nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of those surveyed reported more than fifteen years’ experience in mediation, while only a small minority (4 percent) had fewer than five years. The remainder—roughly one-third—fell between five and fifteen years. These are practitioners at the top of their craft: mediators who have worked across multiple jurisdictions and subject areas, many of whom sit on panels at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Sport Resolutions (UK), and other institutional rosters worldwide (CAS 2024; Sport Resolutions 2024 ). Several also serve as trainers, arbitrators, or ombuds within federations, bringing to mediation a perspective shaped by years inside the structures they now help to reform. Yet this depth of experience does not translate into corresponding case volume. Almost 80 percent of respondents had handled fewer than twenty-five sports mediations in total, and only two reported more than fifty. On an annual basis, over 80 percent conduct fewer than five sports mediations. Even among seasoned professionals with strong institutional links, mediation in sport remains a peripheral part of practice rather than a regular activity (CEDR 2023). This imbalance between expertise and opportunity mirrors the institutional statistics. CAS, despite its global reach, registers only a handful of mediations each year against hundreds of arbitrations (CAS Annual Report 2023). Sport Resolutions, which maintains one of the longest-running sport-specific mediation schemes, reports similar proportions: fewer than ten mediations annually out of several hundred cases (Sport Resolutions 2024 ). The pattern suggests a structural paradox. Sport attracts highly skilled mediators—many with precisely the qualities that sport requires—but offers them too few occasions to use those skills within a sporting context (Mironi 2017 ). Respondents were quick to identify the causes. “The number of CAS arbitrations I’ve seen that would have settled in a day if referred to mediation is staggering,” one mediator observed. Another remarked, “Most sports bodies talk about mediation but never trigger it; the culture is still to litigate.” Others linked the low case numbers to the absence of early-referral mechanisms: “Mediation is mentioned in the rules, but nobody knows who has authority to start it.” Several noted that institutions often rely on a small circle of familiar names for arbitration but have yet to cultivate a comparable mediation culture or referral habit (Goodrum 2013 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). A few respondents added that the rarity of sport-specific mediations has practical consequences for training and knowledge-sharing. With so few live cases, mediators seldom have opportunities to observe one another or to build collective experience of what works best in sport. “We have a lot of individual expertise,” one commented, “but very little institutional learning. Every case feels like a pilot project.” This absence of continuity limits feedback loops and inhibits the development of consistent best practice (Hesse 2014 ). From an analytical perspective, the data illuminate several important themes that resonate with the broader argument of this article. Sport-suitability. The calibre of available mediators demonstrates that expertise is not the problem. The profession has already attracted practitioners who understand both the culture and the commercial realities of sport. The challenge lies in connecting that talent with disputes at a time when it could make a difference (Mironi 2017 ). Tailored design. Low case volumes reveal the weakness of existing referral pathways. Without structured triggers—such as mandatory-consideration clauses, early-neutral invitations, or standard contract provisions—potential mediations dissipate before they begin (Goodrum 2013 ; CEDR 2023). The design of access points is as important as the design of the process itself. Systemic value. Every unmediated dispute represents a lost opportunity to save time, money, and relationships, and to relieve institutional pressure on over-burdened arbitration systems. The survey data therefore expose not only an implementation gap but also a governance gap: a failure to translate principle into procedure (Blackshaw 2022 ). In sum, the survey portrays a mature yet under-deployed professional community—one rich in experience, thin in opportunity. The skill and will to mediate are present; the system has yet to make full use of them. The next subsection considers which disputes do reach mediation and what that distribution reveals about mediation’s current and potential footprint in sport. 4.2 What Kinds of Disputes Get Mediated Respondents reported a wide spectrum of disputes reaching mediation, but the pattern of acceptance and avoidance is revealing. Mediation has taken firm root in the contractual and commercial domain, yet remains tentative in regulatory, disciplinary, and eligibility matters—areas where, paradoxically, its relational and restorative qualities might be most valuable (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ). The most frequent category was player–club contractual disputes (around 74 percent). These ranged from contract terminations and transfer-fee disagreements to image-rights clauses and unpaid agent commissions. As one mediator explained, “These cases are perfect for mediation: reputations to protect, relationships to preserve, and outcomes that can be creative.” Another added that contractual mediations “often involve people who will meet again in the next transfer window—it makes sense to leave the door open” (Goodrum 2013 ). Next came governance and internal organisational conflicts (approximately 52 percent). These included disputes between boards or committees, elections to office, and tensions between international federations and national associations. Politics, personality, and long memories dominate these arenas. Several respondents described governance disputes as “crying out for mediation,” yet still under-represented in formal case statistics (Sport Resolutions 2024 ). One noted wryly, “Sport spends a fortune on governance codes but still resolves its governance fights by litigation.” Sponsorship and commercial disagreements followed closely (around 48 percent). Here, mediation’s confidentiality and flexibility provide a decisive advantage. Settlements can include non-financial terms—extended sponsorship periods, revised marketing rights, performance bonuses, or joint public statements—solutions that no arbitral tribunal could easily craft (CAS 2024). “It allows the relationship to survive the dispute,” a mediator commented, “and that is usually worth more than the money.” By contrast, disciplinary and regulatory cases—outside the strict anti-doping sphere—appeared less often (roughly 39 percent). Examples included club suspensions, misconduct allegations, and breaches of codes of conduct. Many mediators felt these matters were still framed too narrowly as punitive, and therefore perceived as incompatible with mediation’s consensual character (Blackshaw 2022 ). A minority disagreed: “Not every disciplinary matter is about punishment; sometimes it’s about restoring trust.” That debate resurfaces in Section 5 . Selection and eligibility disputes were cited by about 22 percent of respondents. These cases are time-sensitive and emotionally charged, often arising days before major competitions. Their urgency and the perceived need for binding, enforceable outcomes tend to push them toward adjudication (Hesse 2014 ). Yet several mediators felt that even limited facilitation could help. “A single conversation can defuse a selection crisis and save a season,” one recalled. Finally, doping-related matters were almost entirely absent (around 13 percent). The strict-liability framework of the World Anti-Doping Code and the deterrent logic of sanctions leave little space for negotiated resolution—a boundary well recognised in the literature (WADA 2021; Mironi 2017 ). Taken together, the distribution paints a mixed picture. Mediation has achieved legitimacy in the commercial sphere but remains largely unexplored where identity, reputation, and relationships are most at stake. The message from respondents was consistent: broader education and more thoughtful procedural design are needed to normalise mediation across all categories of dispute (Blackshaw 2022 ; Goodrum 2013 ). Viewed through this article’s analytical lens: Sport-suitability. The disputes most often mediated are those least adversarial in nature, confirming that mediation resonates with sport’s cooperative instincts (Mironi 2017 ). Tailored design. Low-uptake areas such as selection and discipline require formats that work under extreme time pressure and preserve procedural fairness (Hesse 2014 ). Systemic value. Extending mediation beyond contractual matters could ease tribunal backlogs and encourage a more preventive culture of dispute management (CEDR 2023). In short, sport currently mediates selectively—confident in commerce, cautious in matters of governance and identity. The next question is obvious: when mediation is used, does it actually work? 4.3 Does Mediation Work in Sport? The short answer is yes. The data leave little room for doubt that mediation works—and works well—for the kinds of disputes that reach it (Hesse 2014 ; Mironi 2017 ). Across all respondents, the average same-day settlement rate was about 65 percent, rising to nearly 80 percent when agreements concluded within twenty-eight days were included. These figures align closely with the 2023 CEDR Audit (89 percent overall) and Hesse’s ( 2014 ) study (65 percent), placing sports mediation firmly within the success range of its commercial and civil counterparts (CEDR 2023). Filtering out less-experienced practitioners (those with fewer than ten sports mediations) raised the same-day rate to roughly 72 percent. Among the most seasoned mediators, reported rates approached 90 percent. Only two respondents cited significantly lower figures (around 25 percent), both involving complex, multi-party governance disputes where “success” could not be measured solely by settlement (Hesse 2014 ; Mironi 2017 ). The qualitative evidence reinforces these numbers. “Most disputes that reach mediation settle—it’s the getting there that’s the problem,” one mediator observed. Another commented, “Even when we didn’t reach agreement, the parties left closer than they arrived. The arbitration that followed was shorter, cheaper, and calmer.” These remarks echo Mironi ( 2017 ) and Goodrum ( 2013 ), who argue that mediation’s worth lies not only in results but in process: narrowing issues, improving understanding, and preserving relationships. Outcomes also vary by dispute type. Contractual and sponsorship cases tend to settle most readily—often above 75 percent—while governance and selection cases achieve closer to 50 percent. Mediators attributed the difference less to procedural flaws than to psychology and politics. “Once egos or politics enter,” one said, “success depends less on technique than on timing” (Goodrum 2013 ). Mediation’s Indirect Benefits Even when no final agreement is reached, mediations deliver consistent secondary gains. Roughly two-thirds of “unsuccessful” cases produced clarified interests, better communication, or a framework for later resolution. One mediator described mediation as “a catalyst for settlement,” another as “a shared reality check.” These indirect benefits illustrate mediation’s relational value: it restores dialogue and preserves respect even when differences remain (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ). They also highlight the need for tailored process design—sufficient time for preparation, caucusing, and post-session follow-up, especially in emotionally charged disputes (Blackshaw 2022 ). Comparative Effectiveness and Systemic Implications The contrast with arbitration is striking. A typical CAS arbitration lasts six to twelve months; a mediated settlement can be achieved in days or weeks (CAS 2023 Annual Report). The human consequences of delay—missed seasons, lost transfer windows, careers on hold—were recurring themes in respondent comments. “In sport, time is everything. Mediation keeps people playing,” one summarised. Systemically, diverting even a modest share of suitable cases to mediation would ease pressure on CAS and domestic tribunals while cutting costs for athletes and organisations alike. Many respondents argued that mediation should be the default first step in sport’s dispute-resolution ladder, with arbitration reserved for issues that genuinely require formal adjudication (Goodrum 2013 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). Comparative Institutional Context These survey findings mirror the institutional data reported by CAS and Sport Resolutions. Both bodies conduct only a handful of mediations each year compared with hundreds of arbitrations, yet their settlement success broadly matches the wider mediation benchmark (CAS 2023 Annual Report; Sport Resolutions 2024 ). In contrast, national frameworks that embed mediation as a routine stage—such as the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC) and the U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC)—handle far greater volumes (SDRCC 2023; USOPC 2023). The pattern is unmistakable: where mediation is structurally integrated rather than merely available, uptake and success rise dramatically. Table A1 – Comparative Institutional Mediation Data (CAS 2023; Sport Resolutions 2024 ; SDRCC 2023; USOPC 2023) Institution Average Mediations per Year Average Arbitrations per Year Approx. Settlement Rate (Mediation) Notes / Observations CAS – Court of Arbitration for Sport 2–5 300–400 ≈ 65% Predominantly commercial/sponsorship; few disciplinary matters Sport Resolutions (UK) 5–10 400 + ≈ 70% Employment, governance, welfare mix SDRCC – Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada 20–25 (incl. ERF) 60–70 ≈ 75% Mediation/facilitation set as default stage USOPC – U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee 10–15 50–60 ≈ 70% Regular use for selection and SafeSport 4.4 Virtual vs In-Person Mediation The pandemic did more than disrupt calendars; it altered the practice of mediation itself. What began as necessity has become habit. Virtual and hybrid formats are now woven into the fabric of sports dispute resolution, transforming accessibility and logistics in ways few expect to reverse (CEDR 2023). Among the twenty-three respondents, ten reported that more than seventy per cent of their recent mediations were conducted virtually; seven said the same proportion were in-person; and three described an even split. The balance reflects both preference and circumstance. As one mediator observed, “Virtual mediation has made international sport disputes viable that would never justify the cost of travel.” Practitioners agree, however, that digital convenience comes with trade-offs. In high-value, reputation-sensitive, or emotionally charged matters, many still prefer to be physically present. Body language, corridor conversations, and the spontaneous empathy that arises in a shared room remain hard to replicate (Hesse 2014 ). “In person you read the room,” said one, “online you read the screen.” A hybrid pattern is emerging. Preliminary meetings, document reviews, and procedural planning now often take place online, with the final negotiation held face-to-face (CEDR 2023). The distinction is no longer virtual versus in-person but when—and for whom—each format best serves. For smaller commercial disagreements or early-stage discussions, online sessions offer efficiency and inclusivity. For complex governance or interpersonal disputes, physical presence still matters (Mironi 2017 ). Virtual practice brings unexpected advantages. Athletes unfamiliar with formal legal processes find online settings less intimidating. Parties from smaller or geographically dispersed sports can engage expert mediators from abroad without the cost or delay of travel (Sport Resolutions 2024 ). For multi-national federations, the environmental and financial savings are tangible. Yet limitations persist: reading emotion through a screen, managing connection failures, and safeguarding confidentiality when parties join from uncontrolled environments. “Online gives reach but takes away presence,” one mediator reflected. “We’ve learned to live with both.” For this article’s second theme—the case for tailored design—the message is clear. The format must fit the context. Hybrid models, used intelligently, preserve the trust and dialogue that define effective mediation while overcoming logistical and financial barriers that once constrained international sport (CEDR 2023; Hesse 2014 ). 4.5 Challenges Faced in Sports Mediation Despite its clear advantages, mediation in sport remains under-used. Respondents identified three clusters of continuing obstacles—cultural, procedural, and institutional—together with practical ideas for overcoming them (Hesse 2014 ; Goodrum 2013 ; Mironi 2017 ). (a) Cultural and psychological barriers The most frequently cited difficulty was a deficit of trust. Rivalries, media attention, and reputational risk magnify conflict. As one mediator put it, “Athletes and clubs talk about respect, but when a dispute hits, it becomes about control.” Emotional intensity also plays a part. Few sporting disputes are purely commercial; identity and pride are always in the room. Sport’s competitive psychology, shaped around winning and losing, can make compromise feel like defeat (Goodrum 2013 ). “The will to win is hardwired,” said another. “Collaboration doesn’t come naturally when everything else in your life is scored.” Overcoming this requires cultural reframing and mediators who understand the language and rituals of sport itself (Blackshaw 2022 ). (b) Procedural and professional barriers A deep adversarial default persists among some lawyers and administrators. Several respondents described counsel who discourage mediation for fear that it signals weakness. One mediator observed, “Lawyers sometimes forget that in sport, delay is defeat” (Goodrum 2013 ). Time pressure compounds the problem. Tournaments and seasons leave narrow windows for resolution; by the time mediation is proposed, positions are entrenched. Respondents advocated early-trigger mechanisms—mandatory pre-arbitration consideration, automatic invitations to mediate, or fast-track procedures designed to fit sporting calendars (Hesse 2014 ). (c) Institutional and structural barriers Many federations have yet to embed mediation formally. While CAS and Sport Resolutions offer well-drafted frameworks, internal referral routes within federations remain inconsistent (CAS 2023 Annual Report; Sport Resolutions 2024 ). Without default pathways, initiation depends on ad hoc goodwill. One mediator summarised the frustration: “The bodies talk about mediation as part of their toolbox, but the tools stay in the box.” Several respondents emphasised that until mediation is written into regulations and standard player or sponsorship contracts, it will remain peripheral (Mironi 2017 ). (d) Overcoming the barriers Respondents proposed a range of practical remedies: • Education and awareness – integrating mediation into sports-law curricula, governance training, and coaching programmes (Blackshaw 2022 ). • Leadership by example – publishing anonymised case studies and celebrating successful mediations to normalise their use (CEDR 2023). • Procedural integration – inserting mediation clauses into contracts and disciplinary codes (Goodrum 2013 ). • Early neutral involvement – piloting facilitation or Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) models to de-escalate disputes before they harden (Hesse 2014 ). These suggestions converge on a single insight: the barriers are not inherent to mediation but to the way sport introduces it. A culturally fluent, time-sensitive, and institutionally supported framework could remove most of the resistance. “The process isn’t broken,” one mediator concluded. “Our timing and framing are.” 4.6 Benefits Observed by Practitioners When mediation does take place, the experience is overwhelmingly positive. Respondents described the process in language that recurred across the survey—speed, cost, flexibility, and relationship repair—each of them central to sport’s distinctive environment (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ; Goodrum 2013 ). (a) Speed and cost-effectiveness Mediation resolves disputes in days or weeks rather than months. In sport, time lost is often opportunity lost. As one mediator said succinctly, “Delay equals defeat.” Costs are proportionately lower, widening access for individual athletes and smaller organisations who might otherwise be priced out of justice (CEDR 2023; CAS 2023). (b) Preservation and restoration of relationships In the close-knit world of sport, parties often continue working together long after a dispute ends. Maintaining dialogue can therefore be as important as the terms of settlement (Mironi 2017 ). “The best outcomes aren’t just deals on paper,” a mediator reflected, “they’re when people can look each other in the eye again.” Confidentiality and informality create the safe space required for those conversations (Blackshaw 2022 ). (c) Flexibility and creativity of outcomes Mediation allows for solutions that formal tribunals cannot easily deliver: deferred payments, coaching or ambassadorial roles for former players, joint marketing ventures, or reputation-repair measures (Hesse 2014 ). Such outcomes align with mediation’s second and third themes—tailored design and systemic value—because they address both immediate conflict and future cooperation (Mironi 2017 ). (d) Confidentiality and reputation Privacy protects not only the individuals but also the institutions involved. In an era of instant publicity, discretion can be decisive. “You can’t build trust in front of a camera,” one respondent said (Goodrum 2013 ). (e) Compliance and satisfaction Because mediated outcomes are self-determined, parties feel ownership and are more likely to comply voluntarily. This enhances legitimacy, echoing Mironi’s ( 2017 ) and Goodrum’s ( 2013 ) observation that compliance rates in mediation exceed those following arbitral awards. (f) Psychological and emotional benefits Finally, mediation provides a form of emotional closure. It allows people to tell their story, to be heard, and to leave conflict with dignity (Hesse 2014 ). As one mediator put it, “Mediation gives people closure even when they don’t win.” For athletes facing career-defining disputes, that dignity can be as valuable as any financial term (Blackshaw 2022 ). Taken together, these observations confirm that mediation delivers not only procedural efficiency but human value. It restores dialogue, protects reputations, and reinforces the ethical ideals—fairness, respect, and integrity—that sport aspires to uphold (Mironi 2017 ; Goodrum 2013 ). 4.7 Strategies for Increasing Uptake Practitioners were almost unanimous on one point: the problem is not whether mediation works, but whether it is seen, trusted, and embedded deeply enough to become routine (Hesse 2014 ; Goodrum 2013 ). (a) Mandatory referral or mandatory consideration Roughly half of respondents favoured some form of mandatory first step before arbitration or disciplinary proceedings, echoing the evolving approach within civil-justice systems in the UK and EU (Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil [2024] UKSC 20). Others preferred a softer model—mandatory consideration rather than compulsion—to preserve voluntariness (Mironi 2017 ). “Until mediation is built in, not bolted on, people won’t take it seriously,” one mediator commented (Goodrum 2013 ). (b) Education and training A lack of understanding among lawyers, administrators, athletes, and agents remains the single greatest barrier to uptake (Blackshaw 2022 ). “It’s remarkable how many lawyers who appear before CAS have never sat in a mediation,” one respondent noted. Joint mediator–arbitrator training and targeted education for player representatives could bridge that gap (Hesse 2014 ). (c) Regulatory and contractual reform Mediators were clear: unless mediation appears in statutes, disciplinary codes, and player contracts, it will remain peripheral (Mironi 2017 ). “If mediation isn’t in the rules, it’s out of the culture,” one mediator said. CAS could lead by including a mandatory-consideration clause or explanatory note within its Code (CAS 2023). National federations might follow Sport Resolutions’ ( 2024 ) model, requiring parties to attempt mediation before arbitration. (d) Visibility and case studies Culture changes through storytelling. Respondents highlighted the power of visible success—publishing anonymised case studies or testimonials to show mediation’s rigour and outcomes (CEDR 2023). “People need to see that mediation isn’t a soft option; it’s a smart one,” a mediator remarked (Goodrum 2013 ). High-profile endorsements from respected figures could shift perceptions rapidly (Blackshaw 2022 ). (e) Institutional leadership Respondents called for governing bodies—FIFA, UEFA, the IOC, and national federations—to champion mediation publicly. “If the bodies that preach dialogue don’t model it, who will?” asked one. Institutional leadership can transform mediation from procedural afterthought to cultural norm (Mironi 2017 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). (f) Expanding the procedural toolkit Several mediators advocated broadening the procedural toolkit: Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) for preliminary assessment; facilitative case-management conferences pre-mediation; multi-tier clauses combining mediation, ENE, and arbitration; and virtual “drop-in” mediation services at major events (CEDR 2023; Sport Resolutions 2024 ). Each of these ideas reflects the same conclusion: mediation will not expand organically. It requires deliberate institutional embedding, cultural advocacy, and regulatory design (Mironi 2017 ). “The case for mediation has been made for twenty years,” one mediator concluded. “The case for making it happen is what matters now.” 4.8 Summary Taken together, the data and practitioner testimony reveal a coherent picture of mediation’s position within sport today (Hesse 2014 ; Mironi 2017 ). The process demonstrably works. It produces fast, affordable, and flexible outcomes that preserve relationships and uphold the values of respect and integrity that sport publicly espouses (Goodrum 2013 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). Yet a paradox persists: a sector ideally suited to mediation uses it sparingly. The reasons lie as much in culture as in structure—mistrust between parties, emotional heat, institutional inertia, and a persistent default to adjudication (Mironi 2017 ). The expertise exists; the pathways do not. The evidence reinforces the article’s three central themes. First, mediation’s sport-suitability is beyond question; what remains is to translate potential into practice. Second, tailored design is crucial: processes must reflect the compressed timelines, reputational stakes, and complex hierarchies that define the sporting world (Hesse 2014 ). Third, mediation’s systemic value becomes clear once it is viewed not as a rival to arbitration but as part of a continuum—a procedural ladder that begins with dialogue and escalates only when necessary (Goodrum 2013 ; CAS 2023). Embedded in this way, mediation strengthens governance, enhances compliance, and eases the strain on formal tribunals (Blackshaw 2022 ). The challenge now is not conceptual but operational. The next section turns to the hardest question of all: whether mediation might also play a legitimate, structured role in disciplinary and doping disputes—areas long regarded as beyond its reach. 5. Extending the Boundaries: Mediation in Disciplinary and Doping Disputes The survey data in Section 4 show that most mediations in sport concern contractual or governance issues. Yet the logic of those findings invites a re-examination of a long-standing assumption: that disciplinary and doping cases lie beyond mediation’s reach. This section challenges that orthodoxy. It argues that while mediation cannot replace formal adjudication in regulatory matters, it can, in certain circumstances, complement it—particularly where welfare, education, or reputational rehabilitation are involved (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ). 5.1 The Conventional Exclusion Both Mironi ( 2017 ) and Hesse ( 2014 ), together with most institutional frameworks, treat disciplinary and doping cases as off-limits. The reasoning is well known: these disputes involve allegations of wrongdoing, public-interest concerns about integrity, and the need for consistent sanctions. They require transparency, enforceability, and deterrence—qualities seemingly at odds with mediation’s confidentiality and flexibility (WADA 2021 Code). The CAS Code and WADA framework reinforce this distinction. The World Anti-Doping Code rests on strict liability, fixed sanction ranges, and narrow discretion; national disciplinary codes emphasise procedural formality and accountability (CAS 2023 Annual Report; WADA 2021 Code). From that perspective, mediation’s privacy can look like a weakness: it may obscure precedent or invite charges of leniency (Goodrum 2013 ). Yet blanket exclusion carries costs. It fuels adversarial escalation, prolongs distress, and inflicts reputational harm that far outlasts the sanction itself (Blackshaw 2022 ). The boundary between disciplinary and non-disciplinary matters is often porous. Many so-called disciplinary cases—particularly those involving welfare, safeguarding, or interpersonal conflict—contain relational and educational elements that mediation is well placed to address (Hesse 2014 ). 5.2 Comparative and Emerging Practice International practice already offers examples that blur the divide. In Canada, the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre’s Early Resolution Facilitation stage applies even in doping matters. It focuses on disclosure, cooperation, and mitigation before formal hearings (SDRCC 2023). Though not mediation in the strict sense, it shows how facilitated dialogue can improve efficiency and humanise a rigid process (Hesse 2014 ). Similar hybrid approaches exist in parts of Europe and Australia, especially for safeguarding, discrimination, and bullying complaints (Blackshaw 2022 ). Here the emphasis is on behaviour change and welfare rather than punishment. These experiments suggest that, with proper safeguards, mediation can add value without undermining integrity (Mironi 2017 ). 5.3 The Case for a Limited and Structured Role The author’s empirical findings echo those comparative lessons. Several respondents expressed cautious support for a limited, clearly defined role for mediation within disciplinary systems (Goodrum 2013 ). They accepted that not all cases are suitable but argued that dialogue can still serve a constructive function at particular stages (Hesse 2014 ). One mediator remarked, “We shouldn’t confuse fairness with formality. Mediation can make discipline fairer by letting people be heard.” Another observed, “In low-level misconduct cases, mediation can prevent escalation and protect welfare.” Potential entry points include: • Pre-hearing facilitation to clarify facts, narrow issues, and explore early acceptance of responsibility; • Mitigation discussions to allow athletes to explain context, remorse, or cooperation in a private setting; and • Post-hearing restorative meetings to rebuild relationships, reintegrate athletes, or address harm caused (Rest Justice Council 2023). These functions align with mediation’s relational strengths while leaving sanctions to formal tribunals. Mediation becomes an adjunct—a complement, not a substitute, to adjudication (Mironi 2017 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). 5.4 Restorative and Educational Dimensions Recent restorative-justice scholarship supports this more nuanced view (Rest Justice Council 2023). Restorative models focus on dialogue, accountability, and reparation rather than punishment alone. In sport, they are gaining ground in safeguarding and abuse prevention, where empathy and learning are integral to culture change (Blackshaw 2022 ). Mediation, framed appropriately, can serve these purposes. It offers a confidential space where offenders can acknowledge harm and those affected can express impact—opportunities rarely afforded by formal hearings (Hesse 2014 ). For athletes returning from suspension, a mediated conversation with clubs or governing bodies can ease reintegration and reduce stigma (Goodrum 2013 ). This form of restorative mediation does not erode anti-doping or disciplinary rules; it operates around them, addressing the human consequences of enforcement (WADA 2021 Code). As one mediator put it, “We can’t mediate the sanction, but we can mediate the aftermath.” 5.5 Safeguards and Boundaries Credibility in this space depends on clear safeguards (Mironi 2017 ; Blackshaw 2022 ): • Voluntary participation, free from coercion; • Transparency of scope—clarity about what may and may not be discussed; • Regulatory compliance—no outcome should contradict a formal decision (WADA 2021 Code); and • Mediator expertise in disciplinary frameworks and culture (Hesse 2014 ). Observed carefully, these boundaries ensure that mediation complements, rather than competes with, formal integrity mechanisms (CAS 2023). 5.6 Relevance to the Article’s Core Themes Viewed through this article’s analytical lens, the argument for cautious extension becomes clearer (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ). • Sport-suitability : Even in disciplinary settings, the human and relational dynamics of sport endure. Shared communities benefit from dialogue, empathy, and rehabilitation (Blackshaw 2022 ). • Tailored design : Structured facilitation or restorative sessions can sit within disciplinary systems without compromising integrity. Informal resolution suits minor misconduct; structured reintegration fits post-sanction recovery (Rest Justice Council 2023). • Systemic value : Integrating dialogue at appropriate stages can strengthen legitimacy and compliance. When participants feel heard, acceptance of sanction improves, enhancing trust in governance itself (Goodrum 2013 ). 5.7 Policy Implications and Next Steps For governing bodies, the question is not whether mediation belongs here, but how (Mironi 2017 ). Incremental steps could include: Pilot schemes within national federations for lower-tier cases, independently monitored for fairness and impact (Sport Resolutions 2024 ). Restorative-reintegration programmes for athletes returning from suspension or misconduct (Rest Justice Council 2023). Early-facilitation procedures, modelled on the SDRCC approach, to address procedural and mitigation issues (SDRCC 2023). Joint training for disciplinary officers and mediators to build cross-understanding (Blackshaw 2022 ). Such measures would align sport with wider trends in justice reform, where dialogue increasingly complements punishment (Goodrum 2013 ). They would also place sport on the side of procedural innovation grounded in evidence rather than habit (Hesse 2014 ). 5.8 Summary In sum, mediation—carefully designed and safeguarded—can bring humanity, education, and repair to disciplinary and doping frameworks (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ). It does not weaken integrity; it strengthens it by addressing the emotional and cultural dimensions of compliance (Blackshaw 2022 ). The empirical evidence, comparative practice, and restorative-justice principles together suggest that the time has come to test these boundaries through pilot initiatives and measured evaluation (SDRCC 2023; Sport Resolutions 2024 ). The concluding section now draws these threads together and sets out the broader implications of this study. The survey data in Section 4 show that most mediations in sport concern contractual or governance issues. Yet the logic of those findings invites a re-examination of a long-standing assumption: that disciplinary and doping cases lie beyond mediation’s reach. This section challenges that orthodoxy. It argues that while mediation cannot replace formal adjudication in regulatory matters, it can, in certain circumstances, complement it—particularly where welfare, education, or reputational rehabilitation are involved. 6. Conclusion This article set out to ask a simple question: why does mediation—so naturally aligned with the values and realities of sport—still occupy such a marginal place in international sports dispute resolution? Drawing on original empirical research with twenty-three senior mediators across ten jurisdictions, it offers the first practitioner-based snapshot of a field that remains more potential than practice. The findings confirm both mediation’s effectiveness where it is used and the extent of the opportunity still waiting to be seized (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ; Goodrum 2013 ). The survey revealed settlement rates of about sixty-five per cent on the day and close to eighty per cent within a month, results that mirror those in commercial sectors (CEDR 2023). Mediators emphasised that the value of the process lies not only in resolution but in what precedes it: the narrowing of issues, the restoration of dialogue, the reduction of hostility. In this respect the data give empirical weight to what Mironi, Hesse and Goodrum foresaw in theory—that mediation is an instinctive procedural fit for sport (Mironi 2017 ; Hesse 2014 ; Goodrum 2013 ). Three lessons stand out. First, sport-suitability . Mediation reflects the values that sport claims as its own—fairness, respect, collaboration, and integrity. It gives parties control over timing and outcome, protects privacy, and preserves relationships that often endure long after a dispute is resolved (Blackshaw 2022 ). For athletes and organisations bound by tight calendars and ongoing interdependence, these are not secondary advantages but essential ones. Second, tailored design . Generic civil or commercial models cannot simply be transposed into sport. Procedures must account for compressed seasons, regulatory hierarchies, and the emotional weight that sporting competition carries. Hybrid and virtual formats have broadened access, yet success still depends on mediator credibility and cultural fluency (Hesse 2014 ; Mironi 2017 ). Mediation in sport must be designed for its environment, not imported from elsewhere. Third, systemic value . Mediation’s significance reaches beyond individual settlements. It can ease the pressure on arbitral systems such as CAS and national tribunals, enhance compliance through party ownership, and build trust in the fairness of governance (CAS 2023 Annual Report; Sport Resolutions 2024 ). Even partial outcomes contribute to legitimacy by giving participants a genuine voice (Goodrum 2013 ). The analysis also exposes the barriers that keep mediation at the margins. They are more cultural than technical: adversarial habits, institutional inertia, and weak procedural integration (Hesse 2014 ). The mediators surveyed—many linked to CAS and Sport Resolutions—were clear that progress depends on institutionalisation. Mediation must be written into the statutes, regulations, and contracts of sport if it is to become a normal stage of the dispute-resolution pathway (Mironi 2017 ; Blackshaw 2022 ). Section 5 extended the discussion into the disciplinary sphere, suggesting that mediation, used carefully, could complement formal adjudication (Mironi 2017 ). Early facilitation and restorative processes, properly safeguarded, can enhance welfare and reintegration without diluting integrity (Rest Justice Council 2023; SDRCC 2023). These innovations illustrate mediation’s adaptability and its potential to strengthen rule-based systems by addressing their human consequences (Blackshaw 2022 ). For policymakers and administrators, the implications are straightforward. Federations and governing bodies should: • integrate mediation clauses into disciplinary codes and player agreements (Sport Resolutions 2024 ); • provide education and awareness training for administrators, agents, and advisers (Goodrum 2013 ; Blackshaw 2022 ); • develop pilot schemes for early-resolution and restorative processes (SDRCC 2023; Rest Justice Council 2023); and • publish anonymised data to demonstrate success and normalise use (CEDR 2023). Further research should measure the impact of such initiatives on cost, timing, and participant satisfaction, and compare outcomes across jurisdictions to identify best practice (Hesse 2014 ; Mironi 2017 ). The evidence supports a single, clear proposition: mediation already works in sport—it is the system around it that has yet to adapt. The challenge is no longer to prove suitability but to embed practice. Mediation embodies the spirit of sport itself: competitive but fair, disciplined yet humane, seeking resolution rather than victory at any price (Blackshaw 2022 ). Implemented with care, it can strengthen both justice and integrity within the global sporting order. Mediation works. It works in sport. And it deserves its place on the field. Declarations Ethics and Data Statement This research was practitioner-led and conducted independently by the author as part of his thesis for his 2024 Global Master in International Sports Law at ISDE, Madrid. The study involved a voluntary online survey of practising sports mediators distributed through three channels: the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Mediation Panel, the Sport Resolutions (UK) panel, and the author’s professional network. Participants took part openly, identifying themselves in their professional capacity, and provided their insights and data voluntarily for academic analysis. No personal or sensitive data were sought, and responses were treated respectfully and confidentially for research purposes only. Given the professional status of respondents and the non-personal nature of the study, formal institutional ethics approval was not required. All data were collected and analysed directly by the author to ensure integrity and accuracy. No external funding or conflicts of interest are declared. Author Contribution Sole author Muiris Lyons Acknowledgement I would like to acknowledge Mr Dev Kumar Parmar, Academic Director of the GMSL at ISDE and my thesis supervisor. Data Availability I have the response to my research questions in a google spreadsheet. References Acharya A (2023) Mandatory Mediation and Civil Procedure Reform in England and Wales. Civil Justice Q 42(1):45–61 Allen H (2024) Early Neutral Evaluation and the Future of Mediation in Civil Justice. The Mediator Magazine (Spring 2024): 12–18 Blackshaw IS (2014) Settling Sports Disputes by CAS Mediation. CAS Bull 1/2014:24–30 Blackshaw IS (2022) Mediating Sports Disputes: National and International Perspectives. T.M.C. Asser, The Hague Booker J (2024) Mediation Culture and Judicial Encouragement: Developments after Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil . New Law J 174(8051):22–25 Bowyer-Jones K (2019) The Growth of Mediation in UK Sport. Sports Law Adm Pract 26(2):33–39 Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2024] UKSC 20 Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) (2024) Annual Report 2023. Lausanne Duthie S (2014) The Changing Culture of Mediation in England and Wales. ADR Q 18(3):17–23 Goodrum N (2013) Mediation in Sports Disputes: Lessons from the UK. LawInSport (online, 18 June 2013) Halsey v Milton Keynes NHS Trust [2004] EWCA Civ 576 Hesse V (2014) Is Mediation Suitable to Resolve Sports-Related Disputes? LawInSport (online, 27 May 2014) Mironi M (2017) The Promise of Mediation in Sport-Related Disputes. Int Sports Law J 16:131–154 Sport Resolutions (2024) Annual Report and Case Statistics 2023–24. London Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC) (2023) Annual Report 2022–23. Montreal United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee (USOPC) (2023) Dispute Resolution Programme Summary. Colorado Springs World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) (2021) World Anti-Doping Code. Montreal Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7940614","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":548811214,"identity":"bb86d895-2fe9-4ba0-99f1-87e313afb904","order_by":0,"name":"Muiris Lyons","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Instituto Superior de Derecho y Economia (IDE)","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Muiris","middleName":"","lastName":"Lyons","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-10-25 03:10:37","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7940614/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7940614/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":96970624,"identity":"28efff3c-f2eb-4c17-afd9-faa469a01b33","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":365478,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"TheMissedOpportunityISLJanonymisedforsubmission.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/cfa5bfc321a29483b90a4738.docx"},{"id":97137028,"identity":"295fd89e-bd85-46db-9b6a-aad3313407ac","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-01 09:57:17","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":3255,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"437f05bb09d042b4b3c5e7c0f6e8dfb2.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/59c9fc6a0c15278444cb438a.json"},{"id":96970625,"identity":"565b6a3c-05d2-464f-94e8-71d6d5efd55d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":101629,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"437f05bb09d042b4b3c5e7c0f6e8dfb21enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/45f684feea6df650fe6560d7.xml"},{"id":97136726,"identity":"75037a6c-9e1b-48fd-bc7d-d7683b793f46","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-01 09:56:56","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":72968,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/63d68e91ba3310efeedf1f6a.png"},{"id":96970631,"identity":"fe0e504a-dbe6-49c9-8f8a-72c246d6b9cc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":73864,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/8a131621a4907da2022c8272.png"},{"id":96970633,"identity":"721ab3d8-b6a6-4ca3-818d-20e2fbfd5a0e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":101729,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/a50fbd006130fcb737acb77a.png"},{"id":96970629,"identity":"72653e39-1c1a-4516-b08d-85899dae9c7e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":64694,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/064273dd7d483f2edac3489f.png"},{"id":96970634,"identity":"0337c604-5db4-4774-bc95-9ae5d0b26960","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"xml","order_by":16,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":100050,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"437f05bb09d042b4b3c5e7c0f6e8dfb21structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/923a7df09fb87239ece454d8.xml"},{"id":96970635,"identity":"5dfaec8a-6be5-49e6-8d14-6740acfb5dab","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"html","order_by":17,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":112091,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/5af05f70261e4e1a5e6acce2.html"},{"id":97137063,"identity":"341828d6-78c5-4cef-b857-6c819195871c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-01 09:57:19","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":21353,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/d2d8639fce97068eeee24bfc.png"},{"id":96970623,"identity":"70f01632-8441-48f0-a521-23e378f1b900","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":34260,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/a759ae4c88e405473e23637a.png"},{"id":96970627,"identity":"f5e16d0d-db33-44b3-8bd7-9b16db016788","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-28 07:14:28","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":46606,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/c584a621907fc0aaf03a6474.png"},{"id":97138664,"identity":"310c98f7-2baf-480a-8623-dc935415fd5c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-01 09:59:10","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":33853,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSee image above for figure legend.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/fb1f60ae8b69c76096a0841b.png"},{"id":97249086,"identity":"86dd26a3-e1a5-4b66-8472-74d28a86575c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-02 13:10:17","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1666651,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7940614/v1/419792b7-e759-462e-8442-a60292c2f32a.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"The Missed Opportunity: Mediation’s Untapped Potential in International Sport","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eMediation in international sport has attracted growing attention in recent years\u0026mdash;both from academics and practitioners\u0026mdash;yet its potential remains curiously under-realised \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eMironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e. This article approaches the subject from a practitioner\u0026rsquo;s vantage point, informed by new empirical research and by the voices of those who work daily within the contested space of sports dispute resolution. Through a targeted survey of leading mediators and practitioners, it seeks to capture a clear picture of the current state of play for mediation in sport as we move through 2024\u0026ndash;2025 \u003cem\u003e(CAS 2024;\u003c/em\u003e Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross most civil and commercial fields, mediation has become a familiar and trusted process: efficient, confidential, and capable of resolving conflict without destroying relationships \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eDuthie \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Allen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e. In sport, however, that transformation has yet to take root. Arbitration still dominates\u0026mdash;entrenched, institutionally supported, and often assumed to be the natural or inevitable path \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eBlackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e. Yet this reliance on arbitration may conceal lost opportunities: chances for earlier, more flexible, and more constructive outcomes that better reflect the values of sport itself \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eBlackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study that follows asks three straightforward questions. Why does mediation remain underused in sport? What kinds of disputes appear most suitable for it? And how might it be more meaningfully integrated into sport\u0026rsquo;s procedural landscape? Drawing on both the existing literature and the author\u0026rsquo;s original empirical data, the discussion explores patterns of uptake, perceptions of effectiveness, and the barriers that continue to impede wider adoption \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eMironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e. It also considers how mediation is evolving\u0026mdash;through virtual platforms, hybrid formats, and new institutional frameworks\u0026mdash;and whether more proactive or even mandatory approaches might help overcome the inertia that has long characterised this field \u003cem\u003e(Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil 2024;\u003c/em\u003e Acharya \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Booker \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThree themes run through the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe first is sport\u0026rsquo;s natural affinity with mediation. The process mirrors many of sport\u0026rsquo;s own values: fairness, respect, adaptability, and the preservation of relationships \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eMironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e. These qualities are often central to athlete\u0026ndash;club and governance dynamics, and to the broader ecology of sport where cooperation endures long after specific contests have ended. In such settings, mediation is not simply a cheaper or quicker alternative to arbitration\u0026mdash;it is often the process that best fits the spirit of the dispute \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eBlackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe second is the need for a tailored model. Sport operates under compressed timelines and intense scrutiny. Careers can hinge on a single decision; reputations can change overnight. A mediation process designed for commercial litigation will rarely meet these pressures without adjustment. What is needed is a sport-specific approach: one that acknowledges hierarchy, emotional intensity, and the unique blend of competition and community that defines the sporting world \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eHesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Duthie \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe third concerns mediation\u0026rsquo;s systemic value. Beyond individual cases, mediation has the capacity to strengthen the integrity of sporting governance. By amplifying participant voice and encouraging creative, consensual solutions, it can act both as a preventative measure and as a restorative one\u0026mdash;resolving disputes while preserving the human connections that sustain the game \u003cem\u003e(\u003c/em\u003eMironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e. It is not a replacement for arbitration but its natural complement, offering in many cases a more humane and holistic path to resolution.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe article unfolds as follows. Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e reviews the existing literature, drawing on key contributions from Mironi, Hesse, Goodrum, Blackshaw and others. Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e outlines the methodology and headline findings from the author\u0026rsquo;s empirical survey. Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e interprets those findings, analysing which disputes most lend themselves to mediation, the persistent barriers to uptake, the rise of virtual formats, and the debate around mandatory referral. Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e turns to the more controversial question of whether mediation might also have a role in disciplinary and regulatory disputes. The conclusion draws these threads together and offers practical recommendations for embedding mediation more firmly within the international sports dispute-resolution ecosystem.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Literature Review","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe scholarship on mediation in sport is wide and steadily growing. Taken together, it tells a familiar story: the promise of mediation, its persistent marginalisation, and the slow evolution of the frameworks that surround it. For present purposes, a few contributions stand out as particularly resonant with the questions explored in this study. Each offers a glimpse of how mediation has been understood, championed, and sometimes overlooked within the sporting world.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThe Promise of Mediation in Sport-Related Disputes (\u003c/b\u003eMironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eProfessor Mordehai Mironi of Haifa University remains one of the clearest and most persuasive voices on the subject\u0026mdash;and, fittingly, one of the respondents to the author\u0026rsquo;s survey. His 2017 paper (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) is perhaps the most comprehensive academic account of mediation in sport, weaving policy analysis with practitioner insight from the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMironi opens with a telling example: a CAS mediation between an African and a European football club over unpaid transfer fees. What began as a straightforward financial claim evolved into a forward-looking settlement including youth-development and coaching exchanges\u0026mdash;an outcome unimaginable in an adversarial process. For Mironi, the case encapsulates mediation\u0026rsquo;s capacity to transform conflict into collaboration.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHe argues that mediation should not replace arbitration but sit alongside it, formally recognised and institutionally supported. His analysis isolates the qualities that make mediation a natural fit for sport\u0026mdash;speed, cost-efficiency, privacy, flexibility, and, above all, the ability to preserve relationships and reputation. In a close-knit global industry, where the same actors meet repeatedly in different guises, these are not incidental virtues but essential ones.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMironi also acknowledges the process\u0026rsquo;s limits. Mediation lacks finality, produces no precedent, and contributes little to the evolving \u003cem\u003elex sportiva\u003c/em\u003e; yet he concludes that these trade-offs are outweighed by systemic and relational gains. His prescription\u0026mdash;better mediator training, incentives to mediate, and limited mandatory referral, particularly in employment disputes\u0026mdash;has shaped later commentary (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eIs Mediation Suitable to Resolve Sports-Related Disputes? (\u003c/b\u003eHesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVolker Hesse\u0026rsquo;s study (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) offers a practitioner-researcher perspective that mirrors the approach taken here. Based on interviews with sixteen mediators, lawyers, and officials who collectively participated in 117 mediations, Hesse found that more than half regarded mediation as most appropriate for contractual disputes, with employment issues close behind. Regulatory and doping cases remained largely beyond reach.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHesse reported a 65 per cent success rate\u0026mdash;remarkably consistent with later empirical data (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Even when no agreement was reached, participants described the process as clarifying, humanising, and productive: mediation provides a \u0026ldquo;safe space\u0026rdquo; in which dialogue can occur, often paving the way for later resolution. His analysis also highlights recurring obstacles\u0026mdash;occasional lack of good faith, weak enforcement, and limited institutional encouragement\u0026mdash;but concludes that mediation offers a swift, confidential, and cost-effective path for commercial and relational disputes in sport, provided federations promote it through education and procedural reform.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMediation in Sports Disputes: Lessons from the UK (\u003c/b\u003eGoodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e\u003cb\u003e)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNeil Goodrum (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) brings the seasoned insight of a mediator steeped in practice. He asks why, given its suitability, mediation remains so little used. The answer, he suggests, lies in perception: the lingering idea that mediation is a \u0026ldquo;soft option\u0026rdquo; or a sign of weakness\u0026mdash;an attitude reinforced by sport\u0026rsquo;s competitive ethos. Drawing on UK experience and cases such as \u003cem\u003eHalsey v Milton Keynes NHS Trust\u003c/em\u003e (2004 EWCA Civ 576), Goodrum reframes mediation as a pragmatic, commercially intelligent choice.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHe anticipated developments that have since reshaped civil justice. Long before cost sanctions and mandatory consideration became mainstream, Goodrum argued that such measures could usefully be applied to sport. His call for education, role-modelling, and institutional incentives remains as relevant now as it was then (Booker \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Acharya \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRecent Developments and Doctrinal Shifts\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSince those foundational works, the surrounding legal and policy terrain has moved on. In \u003cem\u003eChurchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council\u003c/em\u003e (2024 UKSC 20), the Supreme Court confirmed that courts may lawfully stay proceedings to encourage or require mediation so long as access to justice is preserved. The judgment dismantled the caution imposed by \u003cem\u003eHalsey\u003c/em\u003e and signalled a cultural shift toward judicial endorsement of consensual resolution (Booker \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Allen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Although most sports disputes fall outside civil courts, \u003cem\u003eChurchill\u003c/em\u003e reinforces mediation\u0026rsquo;s legitimacy and is likely to influence how governing bodies design their own processes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross Europe, the Mediation Directive (2008/52/EC) and the European Code of Conduct for Mediators (2020) continue to define good practice\u0026mdash;voluntariness, impartiality, and confidentiality\u0026mdash;principles now woven into modern concepts of sporting integrity (Duthie \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIan Blackshaw, one of mediation\u0026rsquo;s earliest and most persistent advocates, has likewise argued for integration across all levels of sport governance and for re-imagining CAS procedures to allow greater scope for negotiated outcomes (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Writing in \u003cem\u003eWorld Sports Advocate\u003c/em\u003e and the \u003cem\u003eInternational Sports Law Review\u003c/em\u003e, he points to mediation\u0026rsquo;s particular value in safeguarding, selection, and interpersonal disputes where privacy and relationship preservation are vital.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEmpirical support has followed. The 2023 CEDR Mediation Audit reported that 89 per cent of commercial mediations settled either on the day or shortly afterwards (CEDR 2023). Although not sport-specific, these figures echo both Hesse\u0026rsquo;s findings and the author\u0026rsquo;s survey data. The Audit also warned against over-formalisation and highlighted diversity and representation issues\u0026mdash;concerns familiar in sport\u0026rsquo;s multicultural landscape (Bowyer-Jones \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, the 2021 CAS Mediation Rules established a streamlined framework intended to encourage greater use (CAS 2024). Yet uptake remains modest: fewer than 130 mediations since 1999 against hundreds of arbitrations each year. Sport Resolutions (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) reports a similar pattern, averaging fewer than seven mediations annually. The disparity between mediation\u0026rsquo;s theoretical promise and its limited practice persists.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSynthesis\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross the literature, the pattern is unmistakable. Mediation\u0026rsquo;s benefits in sport are repeatedly acknowledged\u0026mdash;speed, cost, privacy, relational repair\u0026mdash;yet structural and cultural inertia continue to hold it back (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Scholars and practitioners converge on the same prescription: integration. Mediation must be written into the fabric of sport\u0026rsquo;s rules, contracts, and institutional processes if it is to move from the margins to the mainstream.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe author\u0026rsquo;s own research, set out in the following sections, builds on that foundation. It adds new empirical evidence from leading sports mediators and explores how mediation\u0026rsquo;s promise might finally be realised within the living systems of sport.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study draws on original empirical research undertaken by the author in 2024 to examine how mediation is perceived and practised in the international sporting arena. The aim was to capture the lived experience of those who mediate at the sharp edge of sport\u0026mdash;how they see the process working, where they believe it falls short, and what might help it to take deeper root. The intention was not simply to count mediations, but to understand why a process so well suited to sport remains so sparingly used (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSurvey Design\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe research employed a concise online survey of seventeen questions, designed to take around ten minutes to complete. It combined quantitative and qualitative formats\u0026mdash;short and long text responses, multiple-choice and checkbox selections\u0026mdash;to balance factual information with reflective insight. The questions explored six broad areas:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; the mediator\u0026rsquo;s professional background and level of experience;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; the types and frequency of sports disputes mediated;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; perceptions of effectiveness and settlement rates;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; procedural preferences, such as virtual or in-person formats;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; perceived obstacles to successful mediation; and\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; views on how uptake might be improved (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe survey was distributed through three carefully targeted channels intended to reach the small, specialised community of international sports mediators.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCAS Mediation Panel.\u003c/b\u003e The Court of Arbitration for Sport maintains a list of approved mediators appointed for four-year terms (CAS 2024). At the time of the study, 52 individuals were publicly listed. Of these, 39 could be contacted directly by email or LinkedIn, producing 10 completed responses\u0026mdash;a 28 per cent response rate among those contactable. Respondents included mediators practising in the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, France, Israel, and Hong Kong.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSport Resolutions (UK).\u003c/b\u003e Sport Resolutions operates a panel of more than 300 neutrals but does not publicly distinguish between arbitrators and mediators (Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Following discussions with the organisation\u0026rsquo;s management, the survey was circulated to the panel in October 2024 and generated three responses. Though modest in number, these participants provided valuable insight from the UK\u0026rsquo;s most established sports dispute-resolution body.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDirect Outreach.\u003c/b\u003e In addition, approximately 20 experienced mediators known to the author through professional networks were invited to participate. Many also sit on the Sport Resolutions panel. This route produced ten further responses, including from high-profile figures such as William Norris KC, former FIFA Regulatory Director James Kitching, and senior mediators based in Switzerland, Australia, and the UK (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eRespondent Profile\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn total, 23 substantive responses were received, representing mediators active across ten jurisdictions. Over 65 per cent reported more than 15 years\u0026rsquo; experience mediating sports disputes; only 4 per cent had fewer than five years. The sample therefore reflects a senior, expert cohort able to offer authoritative perspectives on current practice (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile small, the number of respondents is proportionate to the size of the global community of specialist sports mediators (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). It includes both institutional and independent practitioners, encompassing formal panels and ad hoc arrangements, and thus provides a realistic cross-section of practice in this field.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eData Context and Interpretation\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings have been analysed qualitatively rather than statistically. They are presented in Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e alongside publicly available data from CAS, Sport Resolutions, and CEDR for comparative context (CEDR 2023; CAS 2024). CAS, for example, reported only 17 mediation cases in 2023, bringing its total to 122 since the procedure\u0026rsquo;s introduction in 1999\u0026mdash;figures that echo the modest activity levels described by respondents (Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe goal was not to measure prevalence alone but to explore the dynamics that lie beneath the numbers: how mediators perceive the strengths and weaknesses of the process, what cultural factors shape its success, and what reforms might allow it to flourish (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The mixed-methods approach allows patterns to emerge from both the quantitative indicators\u0026mdash;such as reported settlement rates\u0026mdash;and the qualitative themes of trust, timing, and institutional design (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePurpose and Scope\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn keeping with the broader aims of the article, this research seeks to understand not merely whether mediation works in sport but how it might work better (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The findings therefore address three overlapping questions:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhy does mediation remain underused despite its apparent suitability for sport?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhat procedural or cultural factors influence its success or failure?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eHow can governing bodies, mediators, and practitioners embed it more effectively within sport\u0026rsquo;s dispute-resolution ecosystem (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe next section presents the results and analysis of the survey, structured around the three central themes identified in the Introduction\u0026mdash;sport-suitability, tailored design, and systemic value.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Results and Analytical Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.1 Who Mediates Sports Disputes\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe respondent profile offers an immediate insight into a field that is still emerging yet already highly professionalised. Nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of those surveyed reported more than fifteen years\u0026rsquo; experience in mediation, while only a small minority (4 percent) had fewer than five years. The remainder\u0026mdash;roughly one-third\u0026mdash;fell between five and fifteen years. These are practitioners at the top of their craft: mediators who have worked across multiple jurisdictions and subject areas, many of whom sit on panels at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Sport Resolutions (UK), and other institutional rosters worldwide (CAS 2024; Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Several also serve as trainers, arbitrators, or ombuds within federations, bringing to mediation a perspective shaped by years inside the structures they now help to reform.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eYet this depth of experience does not translate into corresponding case volume. Almost 80 percent of respondents had handled fewer than twenty-five sports mediations in total, and only two reported more than fifty. On an annual basis, over 80 percent conduct fewer than five sports mediations. Even among seasoned professionals with strong institutional links, mediation in sport remains a peripheral part of practice rather than a regular activity (CEDR 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis imbalance between expertise and opportunity mirrors the institutional statistics. CAS, despite its global reach, registers only a handful of mediations each year against hundreds of arbitrations (CAS Annual Report 2023). Sport Resolutions, which maintains one of the longest-running sport-specific mediation schemes, reports similar proportions: fewer than ten mediations annually out of several hundred cases (Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The pattern suggests a structural paradox. Sport attracts highly skilled mediators\u0026mdash;many with precisely the qualities that sport requires\u0026mdash;but offers them too few occasions to use those skills within a sporting context (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRespondents were quick to identify the causes. \u0026ldquo;The number of CAS arbitrations I\u0026rsquo;ve seen that would have settled in a day if referred to mediation is staggering,\u0026rdquo; one mediator observed. Another remarked, \u0026ldquo;Most sports bodies talk about mediation but never trigger it; the culture is still to litigate.\u0026rdquo; Others linked the low case numbers to the absence of early-referral mechanisms: \u0026ldquo;Mediation is mentioned in the rules, but nobody knows who has authority to start it.\u0026rdquo; Several noted that institutions often rely on a small circle of familiar names for arbitration but have yet to cultivate a comparable mediation culture or referral habit (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA few respondents added that the rarity of sport-specific mediations has practical consequences for training and knowledge-sharing. With so few live cases, mediators seldom have opportunities to observe one another or to build collective experience of what works best in sport. \u0026ldquo;We have a lot of individual expertise,\u0026rdquo; one commented, \u0026ldquo;but very little institutional learning. Every case feels like a pilot project.\u0026rdquo; This absence of continuity limits feedback loops and inhibits the development of consistent best practice (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom an analytical perspective, the data illuminate several important themes that resonate with the broader argument of this article.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSport-suitability.\u003c/b\u003e The calibre of available mediators demonstrates that expertise is not the problem. The profession has already attracted practitioners who understand both the culture and the commercial realities of sport. The challenge lies in connecting that talent with disputes at a time when it could make a difference (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTailored design.\u003c/b\u003e Low case volumes reveal the weakness of existing referral pathways. Without structured triggers\u0026mdash;such as mandatory-consideration clauses, early-neutral invitations, or standard contract provisions\u0026mdash;potential mediations dissipate before they begin (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; CEDR 2023). The design of access points is as important as the design of the process itself.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSystemic value.\u003c/b\u003e Every unmediated dispute represents a lost opportunity to save time, money, and relationships, and to relieve institutional pressure on over-burdened arbitration systems. The survey data therefore expose not only an implementation gap but also a governance gap: a failure to translate principle into procedure (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn sum, the survey portrays a mature yet under-deployed professional community\u0026mdash;one rich in experience, thin in opportunity. The skill and will to mediate are present; the system has yet to make full use of them. The next subsection considers which disputes do reach mediation and what that distribution reveals about mediation\u0026rsquo;s current and potential footprint in sport.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.2 What Kinds of Disputes Get Mediated\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eRespondents reported a wide spectrum of disputes reaching mediation, but the pattern of acceptance and avoidance is revealing. Mediation has taken firm root in the contractual and commercial domain, yet remains tentative in regulatory, disciplinary, and eligibility matters\u0026mdash;areas where, paradoxically, its relational and restorative qualities might be most valuable (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe most frequent category was player\u0026ndash;club contractual disputes (around 74 percent). These ranged from contract terminations and transfer-fee disagreements to image-rights clauses and unpaid agent commissions. As one mediator explained, \u0026ldquo;These cases are perfect for mediation: reputations to protect, relationships to preserve, and outcomes that can be creative.\u0026rdquo; Another added that contractual mediations \u0026ldquo;often involve people who will meet again in the next transfer window\u0026mdash;it makes sense to leave the door open\u0026rdquo; (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNext came governance and internal organisational conflicts (approximately 52 percent). These included disputes between boards or committees, elections to office, and tensions between international federations and national associations. Politics, personality, and long memories dominate these arenas. Several respondents described governance disputes as \u0026ldquo;crying out for mediation,\u0026rdquo; yet still under-represented in formal case statistics (Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). One noted wryly, \u0026ldquo;Sport spends a fortune on governance codes but still resolves its governance fights by litigation.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSponsorship and commercial disagreements followed closely (around 48 percent). Here, mediation\u0026rsquo;s confidentiality and flexibility provide a decisive advantage. Settlements can include non-financial terms\u0026mdash;extended sponsorship periods, revised marketing rights, performance bonuses, or joint public statements\u0026mdash;solutions that no arbitral tribunal could easily craft (CAS 2024). \u0026ldquo;It allows the relationship to survive the dispute,\u0026rdquo; a mediator commented, \u0026ldquo;and that is usually worth more than the money.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBy contrast, disciplinary and regulatory cases\u0026mdash;outside the strict anti-doping sphere\u0026mdash;appeared less often (roughly 39 percent). Examples included club suspensions, misconduct allegations, and breaches of codes of conduct. Many mediators felt these matters were still framed too narrowly as punitive, and therefore perceived as incompatible with mediation\u0026rsquo;s consensual character (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). A minority disagreed: \u0026ldquo;Not every disciplinary matter is about punishment; sometimes it\u0026rsquo;s about restoring trust.\u0026rdquo; That debate resurfaces in Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSelection and eligibility disputes were cited by about 22 percent of respondents. These cases are time-sensitive and emotionally charged, often arising days before major competitions. Their urgency and the perceived need for binding, enforceable outcomes tend to push them toward adjudication (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Yet several mediators felt that even limited facilitation could help. \u0026ldquo;A single conversation can defuse a selection crisis and save a season,\u0026rdquo; one recalled.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, doping-related matters were almost entirely absent (around 13 percent). The strict-liability framework of the World Anti-Doping Code and the deterrent logic of sanctions leave little space for negotiated resolution\u0026mdash;a boundary well recognised in the literature (WADA 2021; Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTaken together, the distribution paints a mixed picture. Mediation has achieved legitimacy in the commercial sphere but remains largely unexplored where identity, reputation, and relationships are most at stake. The message from respondents was consistent: broader education and more thoughtful procedural design are needed to normalise mediation across all categories of dispute (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eViewed through this article\u0026rsquo;s analytical lens:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSport-suitability.\u003c/b\u003e The disputes most often mediated are those least adversarial in nature, confirming that mediation resonates with sport\u0026rsquo;s cooperative instincts (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTailored design.\u003c/b\u003e Low-uptake areas such as selection and discipline require formats that work under extreme time pressure and preserve procedural fairness (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSystemic value.\u003c/b\u003e Extending mediation beyond contractual matters could ease tribunal backlogs and encourage a more preventive culture of dispute management (CEDR 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn short, sport currently mediates selectively\u0026mdash;confident in commerce, cautious in matters of governance and identity. The next question is obvious: when mediation is used, does it actually work?\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.3 Does Mediation Work in Sport?\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe short answer is yes. The data leave little room for doubt that mediation works\u0026mdash;and works well\u0026mdash;for the kinds of disputes that reach it (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross all respondents, the average same-day settlement rate was about 65 percent, rising to nearly 80 percent when agreements concluded within twenty-eight days were included. These figures align closely with the 2023 CEDR Audit (89 percent overall) and Hesse\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) study (65 percent), placing sports mediation firmly within the success range of its commercial and civil counterparts (CEDR 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFiltering out less-experienced practitioners (those with fewer than ten sports mediations) raised the same-day rate to roughly 72 percent. Among the most seasoned mediators, reported rates approached 90 percent. Only two respondents cited significantly lower figures (around 25 percent), both involving complex, multi-party governance disputes where \u0026ldquo;success\u0026rdquo; could not be measured solely by settlement (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe qualitative evidence reinforces these numbers. \u0026ldquo;Most disputes that reach mediation settle\u0026mdash;it\u0026rsquo;s the getting there that\u0026rsquo;s the problem,\u0026rdquo; one mediator observed. Another commented, \u0026ldquo;Even when we didn\u0026rsquo;t reach agreement, the parties left closer than they arrived. The arbitration that followed was shorter, cheaper, and calmer.\u0026rdquo; These remarks echo Mironi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and Goodrum (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), who argue that mediation\u0026rsquo;s worth lies not only in results but in process: narrowing issues, improving understanding, and preserving relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOutcomes also vary by dispute type. Contractual and sponsorship cases tend to settle most readily\u0026mdash;often above 75 percent\u0026mdash;while governance and selection cases achieve closer to 50 percent. Mediators attributed the difference less to procedural flaws than to psychology and politics. \u0026ldquo;Once egos or politics enter,\u0026rdquo; one said, \u0026ldquo;success depends less on technique than on timing\u0026rdquo; (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMediation\u0026rsquo;s Indirect Benefits\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEven when no final agreement is reached, mediations deliver consistent secondary gains. Roughly two-thirds of \u0026ldquo;unsuccessful\u0026rdquo; cases produced clarified interests, better communication, or a framework for later resolution. One mediator described mediation as \u0026ldquo;a catalyst for settlement,\u0026rdquo; another as \u0026ldquo;a shared reality check.\u0026rdquo; These indirect benefits illustrate mediation\u0026rsquo;s relational value: it restores dialogue and preserves respect even when differences remain (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). They also highlight the need for tailored process design\u0026mdash;sufficient time for preparation, caucusing, and post-session follow-up, especially in emotionally charged disputes (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eComparative Effectiveness and Systemic Implications\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe contrast with arbitration is striking. A typical CAS arbitration lasts six to twelve months; a mediated settlement can be achieved in days or weeks (CAS 2023 Annual Report). The human consequences of delay\u0026mdash;missed seasons, lost transfer windows, careers on hold\u0026mdash;were recurring themes in respondent comments. \u0026ldquo;In sport, time is everything. Mediation keeps people playing,\u0026rdquo; one summarised.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSystemically, diverting even a modest share of suitable cases to mediation would ease pressure on CAS and domestic tribunals while cutting costs for athletes and organisations alike. Many respondents argued that mediation should be the default first step in sport\u0026rsquo;s dispute-resolution ladder, with arbitration reserved for issues that genuinely require formal adjudication (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eComparative Institutional Context\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese survey findings mirror the institutional data reported by CAS and Sport Resolutions. Both bodies conduct only a handful of mediations each year compared with hundreds of arbitrations, yet their settlement success broadly matches the wider mediation benchmark (CAS 2023 Annual Report; Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, national frameworks that embed mediation as a routine stage\u0026mdash;such as the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC) and the U.S. Olympic \u0026amp; Paralympic Committee (USOPC)\u0026mdash;handle far greater volumes (SDRCC 2023; USOPC 2023). The pattern is unmistakable: where mediation is structurally integrated rather than merely available, uptake and success rise dramatically.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable A1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026ndash; Comparative Institutional Mediation Data (CAS 2023; Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; SDRCC 2023; USOPC 2023)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eInstitution\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAverage Mediations per Year\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAverage Arbitrations per Year\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eApprox. Settlement Rate (Mediation)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNotes / Observations\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCAS \u0026ndash; Court of Arbitration for Sport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u0026ndash;5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e300\u0026ndash;400\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;65%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePredominantly commercial/sponsorship; few disciplinary matters\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSport Resolutions (UK)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5\u0026ndash;10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e400 +\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;70%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEmployment, governance, welfare mix\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSDRCC \u0026ndash; Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e20\u0026ndash;25 (incl. ERF)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e60\u0026ndash;70\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;75%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMediation/facilitation set as default stage\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUSOPC \u0026ndash; U.S. Olympic \u0026amp; Paralympic Committee\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10\u0026ndash;15\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e50\u0026ndash;60\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;70%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRegular use for selection and SafeSport\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.4 Virtual vs In-Person Mediation\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe pandemic did more than disrupt calendars; it altered the practice of mediation itself. What began as necessity has become habit. Virtual and hybrid formats are now woven into the fabric of sports dispute resolution, transforming accessibility and logistics in ways few expect to reverse (CEDR 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAmong the twenty-three respondents, ten reported that more than seventy per cent of their recent mediations were conducted virtually; seven said the same proportion were in-person; and three described an even split. The balance reflects both preference and circumstance. As one mediator observed, \u0026ldquo;Virtual mediation has made international sport disputes viable that would never justify the cost of travel.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractitioners agree, however, that digital convenience comes with trade-offs. In high-value, reputation-sensitive, or emotionally charged matters, many still prefer to be physically present. Body language, corridor conversations, and the spontaneous empathy that arises in a shared room remain hard to replicate (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). \u0026ldquo;In person you read the room,\u0026rdquo; said one, \u0026ldquo;online you read the screen.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA hybrid pattern is emerging. Preliminary meetings, document reviews, and procedural planning now often take place online, with the final negotiation held face-to-face (CEDR 2023). The distinction is no longer virtual versus in-person but when\u0026mdash;and for whom\u0026mdash;each format best serves. For smaller commercial disagreements or early-stage discussions, online sessions offer efficiency and inclusivity. For complex governance or interpersonal disputes, physical presence still matters (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVirtual practice brings unexpected advantages. Athletes unfamiliar with formal legal processes find online settings less intimidating. Parties from smaller or geographically dispersed sports can engage expert mediators from abroad without the cost or delay of travel (Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). For multi-national federations, the environmental and financial savings are tangible. Yet limitations persist: reading emotion through a screen, managing connection failures, and safeguarding confidentiality when parties join from uncontrolled environments. \u0026ldquo;Online gives reach but takes away presence,\u0026rdquo; one mediator reflected. \u0026ldquo;We\u0026rsquo;ve learned to live with both.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor this article\u0026rsquo;s second theme\u0026mdash;the case for tailored design\u0026mdash;the message is clear. The format must fit the context. Hybrid models, used intelligently, preserve the trust and dialogue that define effective mediation while overcoming logistical and financial barriers that once constrained international sport (CEDR 2023; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.5 Challenges Faced in Sports Mediation\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite its clear advantages, mediation in sport remains under-used. Respondents identified three clusters of continuing obstacles\u0026mdash;cultural, procedural, and institutional\u0026mdash;together with practical ideas for overcoming them (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(a) Cultural and psychological barriers\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe most frequently cited difficulty was a deficit of trust. Rivalries, media attention, and reputational risk magnify conflict. As one mediator put it, \u0026ldquo;Athletes and clubs talk about respect, but when a dispute hits, it becomes about control.\u0026rdquo; Emotional intensity also plays a part. Few sporting disputes are purely commercial; identity and pride are always in the room. Sport\u0026rsquo;s competitive psychology, shaped around winning and losing, can make compromise feel like defeat (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). \u0026ldquo;The will to win is hardwired,\u0026rdquo; said another. \u0026ldquo;Collaboration doesn\u0026rsquo;t come naturally when everything else in your life is scored.\u0026rdquo; Overcoming this requires cultural reframing and mediators who understand the language and rituals of sport itself (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(b) Procedural and professional barriers\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA deep adversarial default persists among some lawyers and administrators. Several respondents described counsel who discourage mediation for fear that it signals weakness. One mediator observed, \u0026ldquo;Lawyers sometimes forget that in sport, delay is defeat\u0026rdquo; (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Time pressure compounds the problem. Tournaments and seasons leave narrow windows for resolution; by the time mediation is proposed, positions are entrenched. Respondents advocated early-trigger mechanisms\u0026mdash;mandatory pre-arbitration consideration, automatic invitations to mediate, or fast-track procedures designed to fit sporting calendars (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(c) Institutional and structural barriers\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMany federations have yet to embed mediation formally. While CAS and Sport Resolutions offer well-drafted frameworks, internal referral routes within federations remain inconsistent (CAS 2023 Annual Report; Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Without default pathways, initiation depends on ad hoc goodwill. One mediator summarised the frustration: \u0026ldquo;The bodies talk about mediation as part of their toolbox, but the tools stay in the box.\u0026rdquo; Several respondents emphasised that until mediation is written into regulations and standard player or sponsorship contracts, it will remain peripheral (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(d) Overcoming the barriers\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRespondents proposed a range of practical remedies:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Education and awareness \u0026ndash; integrating mediation into sports-law curricula, governance training, and coaching programmes (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Leadership by example \u0026ndash; publishing anonymised case studies and celebrating successful mediations to normalise their use (CEDR 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Procedural integration \u0026ndash; inserting mediation clauses into contracts and disciplinary codes (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Early neutral involvement \u0026ndash; piloting facilitation or Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) models to de-escalate disputes before they harden (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese suggestions converge on a single insight: the barriers are not inherent to mediation but to the way sport introduces it. A culturally fluent, time-sensitive, and institutionally supported framework could remove most of the resistance. \u0026ldquo;The process isn\u0026rsquo;t broken,\u0026rdquo; one mediator concluded. \u0026ldquo;Our timing and framing are.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.6 Benefits Observed by Practitioners\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhen mediation does take place, the experience is overwhelmingly positive. Respondents described the process in language that recurred across the survey\u0026mdash;speed, cost, flexibility, and relationship repair\u0026mdash;each of them central to sport\u0026rsquo;s distinctive environment (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(a) Speed and cost-effectiveness\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMediation resolves disputes in days or weeks rather than months. In sport, time lost is often opportunity lost. As one mediator said succinctly, \u0026ldquo;Delay equals defeat.\u0026rdquo; Costs are proportionately lower, widening access for individual athletes and smaller organisations who might otherwise be priced out of justice (CEDR 2023; CAS 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(b) Preservation and restoration of relationships\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the close-knit world of sport, parties often continue working together long after a dispute ends. Maintaining dialogue can therefore be as important as the terms of settlement (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). \u0026ldquo;The best outcomes aren\u0026rsquo;t just deals on paper,\u0026rdquo; a mediator reflected, \u0026ldquo;they\u0026rsquo;re when people can look each other in the eye again.\u0026rdquo; Confidentiality and informality create the safe space required for those conversations (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(c) Flexibility and creativity of outcomes\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMediation allows for solutions that formal tribunals cannot easily deliver: deferred payments, coaching or ambassadorial roles for former players, joint marketing ventures, or reputation-repair measures (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Such outcomes align with mediation\u0026rsquo;s second and third themes\u0026mdash;tailored design and systemic value\u0026mdash;because they address both immediate conflict and future cooperation (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(d) Confidentiality and reputation\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrivacy protects not only the individuals but also the institutions involved. In an era of instant publicity, discretion can be decisive. \u0026ldquo;You can\u0026rsquo;t build trust in front of a camera,\u0026rdquo; one respondent said (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(e) Compliance and satisfaction\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBecause mediated outcomes are self-determined, parties feel ownership and are more likely to comply voluntarily. This enhances legitimacy, echoing Mironi\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and Goodrum\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) observation that compliance rates in mediation exceed those following arbitral awards.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(f) Psychological and emotional benefits\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, mediation provides a form of emotional closure. It allows people to tell their story, to be heard, and to leave conflict with dignity (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). As one mediator put it, \u0026ldquo;Mediation gives people closure even when they don\u0026rsquo;t win.\u0026rdquo; For athletes facing career-defining disputes, that dignity can be as valuable as any financial term (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTaken together, these observations confirm that mediation delivers not only procedural efficiency but human value. It restores dialogue, protects reputations, and reinforces the ethical ideals\u0026mdash;fairness, respect, and integrity\u0026mdash;that sport aspires to uphold (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.7 Strategies for Increasing Uptake\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePractitioners were almost unanimous on one point: the problem is not whether mediation works, but whether it is seen, trusted, and embedded deeply enough to become routine (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(a) Mandatory referral or mandatory consideration\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRoughly half of respondents favoured some form of mandatory first step before arbitration or disciplinary proceedings, echoing the evolving approach within civil-justice systems in the UK and EU (Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil [2024] UKSC 20). Others preferred a softer model\u0026mdash;mandatory consideration rather than compulsion\u0026mdash;to preserve voluntariness (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). \u0026ldquo;Until mediation is built in, not bolted on, people won\u0026rsquo;t take it seriously,\u0026rdquo; one mediator commented (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(b) Education and training\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA lack of understanding among lawyers, administrators, athletes, and agents remains the single greatest barrier to uptake (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). \u0026ldquo;It\u0026rsquo;s remarkable how many lawyers who appear before CAS have never sat in a mediation,\u0026rdquo; one respondent noted. Joint mediator\u0026ndash;arbitrator training and targeted education for player representatives could bridge that gap (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(c) Regulatory and contractual reform\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMediators were clear: unless mediation appears in statutes, disciplinary codes, and player contracts, it will remain peripheral (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). \u0026ldquo;If mediation isn\u0026rsquo;t in the rules, it\u0026rsquo;s out of the culture,\u0026rdquo; one mediator said. CAS could lead by including a mandatory-consideration clause or explanatory note within its Code (CAS 2023). National federations might follow Sport Resolutions\u0026rsquo; (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) model, requiring parties to attempt mediation before arbitration.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(d) Visibility and case studies\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCulture changes through storytelling. Respondents highlighted the power of visible success\u0026mdash;publishing anonymised case studies or testimonials to show mediation\u0026rsquo;s rigour and outcomes (CEDR 2023). \u0026ldquo;People need to see that mediation isn\u0026rsquo;t a soft option; it\u0026rsquo;s a smart one,\u0026rdquo; a mediator remarked (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). High-profile endorsements from respected figures could shift perceptions rapidly (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(e) Institutional leadership\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRespondents called for governing bodies\u0026mdash;FIFA, UEFA, the IOC, and national federations\u0026mdash;to champion mediation publicly. \u0026ldquo;If the bodies that preach dialogue don\u0026rsquo;t model it, who will?\u0026rdquo; asked one. Institutional leadership can transform mediation from procedural afterthought to cultural norm (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e(f) Expanding the procedural toolkit\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral mediators advocated broadening the procedural toolkit: Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) for preliminary assessment; facilitative case-management conferences pre-mediation; multi-tier clauses combining mediation, ENE, and arbitration; and virtual \u0026ldquo;drop-in\u0026rdquo; mediation services at major events (CEDR 2023; Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEach of these ideas reflects the same conclusion: mediation will not expand organically. It requires deliberate institutional embedding, cultural advocacy, and regulatory design (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). \u0026ldquo;The case for mediation has been made for twenty years,\u0026rdquo; one mediator concluded. \u0026ldquo;The case for making it happen is what matters now.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e4.8 Summary\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eTaken together, the data and practitioner testimony reveal a coherent picture of mediation\u0026rsquo;s position within sport today (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The process demonstrably works. It produces fast, affordable, and flexible outcomes that preserve relationships and uphold the values of respect and integrity that sport publicly espouses (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Yet a paradox persists: a sector ideally suited to mediation uses it sparingly.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe reasons lie as much in culture as in structure\u0026mdash;mistrust between parties, emotional heat, institutional inertia, and a persistent default to adjudication (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). The expertise exists; the pathways do not.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe evidence reinforces the article\u0026rsquo;s three central themes. First, mediation\u0026rsquo;s sport-suitability is beyond question; what remains is to translate potential into practice. Second, tailored design is crucial: processes must reflect the compressed timelines, reputational stakes, and complex hierarchies that define the sporting world (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Third, mediation\u0026rsquo;s systemic value becomes clear once it is viewed not as a rival to arbitration but as part of a continuum\u0026mdash;a procedural ladder that begins with dialogue and escalates only when necessary (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; CAS 2023). Embedded in this way, mediation strengthens governance, enhances compliance, and eases the strain on formal tribunals (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe challenge now is not conceptual but operational. The next section turns to the hardest question of all: whether mediation might also play a legitimate, structured role in disciplinary and doping disputes\u0026mdash;areas long regarded as beyond its reach.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Extending the Boundaries: Mediation in Disciplinary and Doping Disputes","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe survey data in Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e show that most mediations in sport concern contractual or governance issues. Yet the logic of those findings invites a re-examination of a long-standing assumption: that disciplinary and doping cases lie beyond mediation\u0026rsquo;s reach. This section challenges that orthodoxy. It argues that while mediation cannot replace formal adjudication in regulatory matters, it can, in certain circumstances, complement it\u0026mdash;particularly where welfare, education, or reputational rehabilitation are involved (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.1 The Conventional Exclusion\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eBoth Mironi (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and Hesse (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), together with most institutional frameworks, treat disciplinary and doping cases as off-limits. The reasoning is well known: these disputes involve allegations of wrongdoing, public-interest concerns about integrity, and the need for consistent sanctions. They require transparency, enforceability, and deterrence\u0026mdash;qualities seemingly at odds with mediation\u0026rsquo;s confidentiality and flexibility (WADA 2021 Code).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe CAS Code and WADA framework reinforce this distinction. The World Anti-Doping Code rests on strict liability, fixed sanction ranges, and narrow discretion; national disciplinary codes emphasise procedural formality and accountability (CAS 2023 Annual Report; WADA 2021 Code). From that perspective, mediation\u0026rsquo;s privacy can look like a weakness: it may obscure precedent or invite charges of leniency (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eYet blanket exclusion carries costs. It fuels adversarial escalation, prolongs distress, and inflicts reputational harm that far outlasts the sanction itself (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The boundary between disciplinary and non-disciplinary matters is often porous. Many so-called disciplinary cases\u0026mdash;particularly those involving welfare, safeguarding, or interpersonal conflict\u0026mdash;contain relational and educational elements that mediation is well placed to address (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.2 Comparative and Emerging Practice\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eInternational practice already offers examples that blur the divide. In Canada, the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre\u0026rsquo;s Early Resolution Facilitation stage applies even in doping matters. It focuses on disclosure, cooperation, and mitigation before formal hearings (SDRCC 2023). Though not mediation in the strict sense, it shows how facilitated dialogue can improve efficiency and humanise a rigid process (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSimilar hybrid approaches exist in parts of Europe and Australia, especially for safeguarding, discrimination, and bullying complaints (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Here the emphasis is on behaviour change and welfare rather than punishment. These experiments suggest that, with proper safeguards, mediation can add value without undermining integrity (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.3 The Case for a Limited and Structured Role\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe author\u0026rsquo;s empirical findings echo those comparative lessons. Several respondents expressed cautious support for a limited, clearly defined role for mediation within disciplinary systems (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). They accepted that not all cases are suitable but argued that dialogue can still serve a constructive function at particular stages (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne mediator remarked, \u0026ldquo;We shouldn\u0026rsquo;t confuse fairness with formality. Mediation can make discipline fairer by letting people be heard.\u0026rdquo; Another observed, \u0026ldquo;In low-level misconduct cases, mediation can prevent escalation and protect welfare.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePotential entry points include:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Pre-hearing facilitation to clarify facts, narrow issues, and explore early acceptance of responsibility;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Mitigation discussions to allow athletes to explain context, remorse, or cooperation in a private setting; and\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Post-hearing restorative meetings to rebuild relationships, reintegrate athletes, or address harm caused (Rest Justice Council 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese functions align with mediation\u0026rsquo;s relational strengths while leaving sanctions to formal tribunals. Mediation becomes an adjunct\u0026mdash;a complement, not a substitute, to adjudication (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.4 Restorative and Educational Dimensions\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eRecent restorative-justice scholarship supports this more nuanced view (Rest Justice Council 2023). Restorative models focus on dialogue, accountability, and reparation rather than punishment alone. In sport, they are gaining ground in safeguarding and abuse prevention, where empathy and learning are integral to culture change (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMediation, framed appropriately, can serve these purposes. It offers a confidential space where offenders can acknowledge harm and those affected can express impact\u0026mdash;opportunities rarely afforded by formal hearings (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). For athletes returning from suspension, a mediated conversation with clubs or governing bodies can ease reintegration and reduce stigma (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis form of restorative mediation does not erode anti-doping or disciplinary rules; it operates around them, addressing the human consequences of enforcement (WADA 2021 Code). As one mediator put it, \u0026ldquo;We can\u0026rsquo;t mediate the sanction, but we can mediate the aftermath.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.5 Safeguards and Boundaries\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eCredibility in this space depends on clear safeguards (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e):\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Voluntary participation, free from coercion;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Transparency of scope\u0026mdash;clarity about what may and may not be discussed;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Regulatory compliance\u0026mdash;no outcome should contradict a formal decision (WADA 2021 Code); and\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; Mediator expertise in disciplinary frameworks and culture (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eObserved carefully, these boundaries ensure that mediation complements, rather than competes with, formal integrity mechanisms (CAS 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.6 Relevance to the Article\u0026rsquo;s Core Themes\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eViewed through this article\u0026rsquo;s analytical lens, the argument for cautious extension becomes clearer (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eSport-suitability\u003c/b\u003e: Even in disciplinary settings, the human and relational dynamics of sport endure. Shared communities benefit from dialogue, empathy, and rehabilitation (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eTailored design\u003c/b\u003e: Structured facilitation or restorative sessions can sit within disciplinary systems without compromising integrity. Informal resolution suits minor misconduct; structured reintegration fits post-sanction recovery (Rest Justice Council 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; \u003cb\u003eSystemic value\u003c/b\u003e: Integrating dialogue at appropriate stages can strengthen legitimacy and compliance. When participants feel heard, acceptance of sanction improves, enhancing trust in governance itself (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.7 Policy Implications and Next Steps\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor governing bodies, the question is not whether mediation belongs here, but how (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Incremental steps could include:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003ePilot schemes within national federations for lower-tier cases, independently monitored for fairness and impact (Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eRestorative-reintegration programmes for athletes returning from suspension or misconduct (Rest Justice Council 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eEarly-facilitation procedures, modelled on the SDRCC approach, to address procedural and mitigation issues (SDRCC 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eJoint training for disciplinary officers and mediators to build cross-understanding (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSuch measures would align sport with wider trends in justice reform, where dialogue increasingly complements punishment (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). They would also place sport on the side of procedural innovation grounded in evidence rather than habit (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.8 Summary\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn sum, mediation\u0026mdash;carefully designed and safeguarded\u0026mdash;can bring humanity, education, and repair to disciplinary and doping frameworks (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). It does not weaken integrity; it strengthens it by addressing the emotional and cultural dimensions of compliance (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe empirical evidence, comparative practice, and restorative-justice principles together suggest that the time has come to test these boundaries through pilot initiatives and measured evaluation (SDRCC 2023; Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The concluding section now draws these threads together and sets out the broader implications of this study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe survey data in Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e show that most mediations in sport concern contractual or governance issues. Yet the logic of those findings invites a re-examination of a long-standing assumption: that disciplinary and doping cases lie beyond mediation\u0026rsquo;s reach. This section challenges that orthodoxy. It argues that while mediation cannot replace formal adjudication in regulatory matters, it can, in certain circumstances, complement it\u0026mdash;particularly where welfare, education, or reputational rehabilitation are involved.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis article set out to ask a simple question: why does mediation\u0026mdash;so naturally aligned with the values and realities of sport\u0026mdash;still occupy such a marginal place in international sports dispute resolution? Drawing on original empirical research with twenty-three senior mediators across ten jurisdictions, it offers the first practitioner-based snapshot of a field that remains more potential than practice. The findings confirm both mediation\u0026rsquo;s effectiveness where it is used and the extent of the opportunity still waiting to be seized (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe survey revealed settlement rates of about sixty-five per cent on the day and close to eighty per cent within a month, results that mirror those in commercial sectors (CEDR 2023). Mediators emphasised that the value of the process lies not only in resolution but in what precedes it: the narrowing of issues, the restoration of dialogue, the reduction of hostility. In this respect the data give empirical weight to what Mironi, Hesse and Goodrum foresaw in theory\u0026mdash;that mediation is an instinctive procedural fit for sport (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThree lessons stand out.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFirst, \u003cb\u003esport-suitability\u003c/b\u003e. Mediation reflects the values that sport claims as its own\u0026mdash;fairness, respect, collaboration, and integrity. It gives parties control over timing and outcome, protects privacy, and preserves relationships that often endure long after a dispute is resolved (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). For athletes and organisations bound by tight calendars and ongoing interdependence, these are not secondary advantages but essential ones.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecond, \u003cb\u003etailored design\u003c/b\u003e. Generic civil or commercial models cannot simply be transposed into sport. Procedures must account for compressed seasons, regulatory hierarchies, and the emotional weight that sporting competition carries. Hybrid and virtual formats have broadened access, yet success still depends on mediator credibility and cultural fluency (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Mediation in sport must be designed for its environment, not imported from elsewhere.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThird, \u003cb\u003esystemic value\u003c/b\u003e. Mediation\u0026rsquo;s significance reaches beyond individual settlements. It can ease the pressure on arbitral systems such as CAS and national tribunals, enhance compliance through party ownership, and build trust in the fairness of governance (CAS 2023 Annual Report; Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Even partial outcomes contribute to legitimacy by giving participants a genuine voice (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe analysis also exposes the barriers that keep mediation at the margins. They are more cultural than technical: adversarial habits, institutional inertia, and weak procedural integration (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The mediators surveyed\u0026mdash;many linked to CAS and Sport Resolutions\u0026mdash;were clear that progress depends on institutionalisation. Mediation must be written into the statutes, regulations, and contracts of sport if it is to become a normal stage of the dispute-resolution pathway (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSection \u003cspan refid=\"Sec13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e extended the discussion into the disciplinary sphere, suggesting that mediation, used carefully, could complement formal adjudication (Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Early facilitation and restorative processes, properly safeguarded, can enhance welfare and reintegration without diluting integrity (Rest Justice Council 2023; SDRCC 2023). These innovations illustrate mediation\u0026rsquo;s adaptability and its potential to strengthen rule-based systems by addressing their human consequences (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor policymakers and administrators, the implications are straightforward. Federations and governing bodies should:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; integrate mediation clauses into disciplinary codes and player agreements (Sport Resolutions \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e);\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; provide education and awareness training for administrators, agents, and advisers (Goodrum \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e);\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; develop pilot schemes for early-resolution and restorative processes (SDRCC 2023; Rest Justice Council 2023); and\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026bull; publish anonymised data to demonstrate success and normalise use (CEDR 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurther research should measure the impact of such initiatives on cost, timing, and participant satisfaction, and compare outcomes across jurisdictions to identify best practice (Hesse \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Mironi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe evidence supports a single, clear proposition: mediation already works in sport\u0026mdash;it is the system around it that has yet to adapt. The challenge is no longer to prove suitability but to embed practice. Mediation embodies the spirit of sport itself: competitive but fair, disciplined yet humane, seeking resolution rather than victory at any price (Blackshaw \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Implemented with care, it can strengthen both justice and integrity within the global sporting order.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMediation works. It works in sport. And it deserves its place on the field.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEthics and Data Statement\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis research was practitioner-led and conducted independently by the author as part of his thesis for his 2024 Global Master in International Sports Law at ISDE, Madrid. The study involved a voluntary online survey of practising sports mediators distributed through three channels: the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) Mediation Panel, the Sport Resolutions (UK) panel, and the author\u0026rsquo;s professional network. Participants took part openly, identifying themselves in their professional capacity, and provided their insights and data voluntarily for academic analysis. No personal or sensitive data were sought, and responses were treated respectfully and confidentially for research purposes only. Given the professional status of respondents and the non-personal nature of the study, formal institutional ethics approval was not required. All data were collected and analysed directly by the author to ensure integrity and accuracy. No external funding or conflicts of interest are declared.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSole author Muiris Lyons\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eI would like to acknowledge Mr Dev Kumar Parmar, Academic Director of the GMSL at ISDE and my thesis supervisor.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eI have the response to my research questions in a google spreadsheet.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAcharya A (2023) Mandatory Mediation and Civil Procedure Reform in England and Wales. Civil Justice Q 42(1):45\u0026ndash;61\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAllen H (2024) Early Neutral Evaluation and the Future of Mediation in Civil Justice. \u003cem\u003eThe Mediator Magazine\u003c/em\u003e (Spring 2024): 12\u0026ndash;18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlackshaw IS (2014) Settling Sports Disputes by CAS Mediation. CAS Bull 1/2014:24\u0026ndash;30\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBlackshaw IS (2022) Mediating Sports Disputes: National and International Perspectives. T.M.C. Asser, The Hague\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBooker J (2024) Mediation Culture and Judicial Encouragement: Developments after \u003cem\u003eChurchill v Merthyr Tydfil\u003c/em\u003e. New Law J 174(8051):22\u0026ndash;25\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBowyer-Jones K (2019) The Growth of Mediation in UK Sport. Sports Law Adm Pract 26(2):33\u0026ndash;39\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChurchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2024] UKSC 20\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCourt of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) (2024) \u003cem\u003eAnnual Report 2023.\u003c/em\u003e Lausanne\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDuthie S (2014) The Changing Culture of Mediation in England and Wales. ADR Q 18(3):17\u0026ndash;23\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoodrum N (2013) Mediation in Sports Disputes: Lessons from the UK. \u003cem\u003eLawInSport\u003c/em\u003e (online, 18 June 2013)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHalsey v Milton Keynes NHS Trust [2004] EWCA Civ 576\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHesse V (2014) Is Mediation Suitable to Resolve Sports-Related Disputes? \u003cem\u003eLawInSport\u003c/em\u003e (online, 27 May 2014)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMironi M (2017) The Promise of Mediation in Sport-Related Disputes. Int Sports Law J 16:131\u0026ndash;154\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSport Resolutions (2024) \u003cem\u003eAnnual Report and Case Statistics 2023\u0026ndash;24.\u003c/em\u003e London\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (SDRCC) (2023) \u003cem\u003eAnnual Report 2022\u0026ndash;23.\u003c/em\u003e Montreal\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUnited States Olympic \u0026amp; Paralympic Committee (USOPC) (2023) Dispute Resolution Programme Summary. Colorado Springs\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWorld Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) (2021) \u003cem\u003eWorld Anti-Doping Code.\u003c/em\u003e Montreal\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Sports law, Mediation, Dispute resolution, Arbitration, Governance, Restorative justice","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7940614/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7940614/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eMediation in sport has long been recognised as a process aligned with the values of fairness, respect, and integrity that underpin athletic competition, yet its practical use remains limited. This article explores why mediation\u0026mdash;despite its proven success in other sectors\u0026mdash;has yet to gain meaningful traction within international sports dispute resolution. Drawing on original empirical research with twenty-three senior mediators across ten jurisdictions, it provides the first practitioner-based snapshot of mediation\u0026rsquo;s role in sport today. The findings reveal a field rich in expertise but constrained by low case volumes, weak referral pathways, and entrenched adversarial culture. Settlement rates of around sixty-five per cent on the day and eighty per cent within a month confirm mediation\u0026rsquo;s effectiveness where it is used. The analysis identifies three core themes: sport-suitability, the need for tailored procedural design, and the systemic value of mediation within sport\u0026rsquo;s governance architecture. The article also considers whether mediation might complement formal adjudication in disciplinary and doping matters through structured facilitation and restorative processes. It concludes that mediation already works in sport\u0026mdash;it is the system around it that must evolve to embed it more fully within the international sporting order.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"The Missed Opportunity: Mediation’s Untapped Potential in International Sport","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-11-28 07:14:23","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7940614/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"22165d15-55cf-429e-a45c-8596ee05179a","owner":[],"postedDate":"November 28th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-12-08T11:08:49+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-11-28 07:14:23","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7940614","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7940614","identity":"rs-7940614","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}