Fighting for integrity against a corrupting diseaseThe Legal Metaphors of Sports Fraud

Resumo

Probably ever since the appearance of sports, fraud has always been present, especially (though not exclusively) when financial gain is involved, through betting and otherwise (Forrest et al 2008). With globalization and the new technologies, both sports fraud and the fight against it have also become global, as law enforcement agencies and authorities have realized that, like most forms of crime, sports fraud knows no borders, especially since the arrival of the Internet (Bozkurt 2012) and the influx of money into global sports (The Guardian, 2013). As a result, legal scholars have turned their attention to the instruments allowing the detection of, and the fight against, fraud in sports, which can take many forms, including match-fixing and doping, but also bribery or misuse of inside information, amongst others. In order to construct a discourse which both criminalizes the practices and justifies the efforts (in terms of funding and human power) to prevent them, a wide array of figurative imagery has developed. An analysis of the metaphors used shows that, as a logical result of the actors in this field (law enforcement and legal experts), the metaphorical frames are very similar to those encountered for other forms of crime (see, amongst others, Murray 1984 or Larsson 2013). Thus, legal and law enforcement activity is seen as a “battle”, “a war”, or “a fight”; the activity is viewed as a disease (“corruption”, “malaise”, “cancer”), or physical damage (“corrosive”) which requires “remedial measures”, which involve “flagging” or “putting pieces together”, while almost unanimously “integrity” is chosen as the aim to be protected. In our study, we shall analyse a sample data from journal papers and book chapters dealing with various aspects of sports fraud, in order to see to what extent legal scholars use metaphorical language in order to discuss sports fraud, and to what extent the metaphorical discourse is influenced by the legal instruments used to fight against fraud, especially anti-fraud provisions.