CAS publishes detailed verdict on Vinesh Phogat appeal, says onus lies on athlete to make weight

In her appeal, Vinesh had demanded that she be given a joint silver with Cuban wrestler Yusneylis Guzman Lopez, who lost to her in the semifinals but was promoted to the summit clash following the Indian’s disqualification.

Yui Susaki of Japan in action with Vinesh Phogat of India during Paris 2024 Olympics. | Photo Credit: REUTERS

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

The Sole Arbitrator assigned to hear Vinesh’s appeal, on August 14, rejected her appeal against a gut-wrenching disqualification from the women’s 50kg final for being 100gm overweight, a decision that evoked a sharp reaction from the Indian Olympic Association (IOA).

Here are some of the points made in the full verdict:

• The problem for the Athlete is that the Rules are clear as to the weight limit and are the same for all participants. There is no tolerance provided for -– it is an upper limit. It does not even allow for the weight of the singlet. It is clearly up to an athlete to ensure that they remain below that limit
• There is no dispute that the Applicant was above the weight limit. She gave the above evidence clearly and directly at the hearing. Her case is that the amount of excess was 100g and that a tolerance should apply as this is a small excess and explicable for reasons such as drinking water and water retention, in particular during the pre-menstrual phase
• The verdict also emphasised that Vinesh is an experienced wrestler and there was no evidence that she did not understand the weight requirements.

READ | Paris Olympics a deep wound, but strength from loved ones will help me heal, says Vinesh Phogat

Vinesh had demanded that she be given a joint silver with Cuban wrestler Yusneylis Guzman Lopez, who lost to her in the semifinals but was promoted to the summit clash following the Indian’s disqualification. The gold was claimed by American Sarah Ann Hildebrandt.

•  The Applicant made detailed submissions in support of her contention that what occurred on August 6 and 7 were two separate competitions. She points to the fact that there are two weigh-ins, one on each day and that each weigh-in has effect for the whole day. She also points out that when all rounds, including the final, are on one day, there is only a single weigh-in. In effect, her submission is that there are as many competitions as there are days over which rounds take place, with weigh-ins for each whole day. This argument is unpersuasive. Elimination from the competition cannot be limited to elimination from the final round of the competition
• The verdict stated the rules, draconian as they are, make it clear that not only is the wrestler removed from the competition but also ranked last and without a ranking. This makes clear an intention not to apply simply to disqualification from the round for which the weigh-in failed.
• The verdict underlined that Article 7 of the Rules provides, relevantly, that each contestant is deemed to be taking part of her own free will and is responsible for herself and is entitled to compete in only one weight category, the one corresponding to her weight at the time of the official weigh-in
• The verdict underlined that there was no wrongdoing on Vinesh’s part
• The document also emphasised that the Sole Arbitrator does not have the power to award medals. That rests with the IOC. The silver medal and the bronze medals have been awarded. There is no provision in the Rules for the awarding of a second silver medal. The IOC pointed out that it awards medals based on rankings from the competition and that Vinesh was not ranked