Statements by the International Hockey Federation about "disagreement" with the CAS ruling from October 30 and delaying the process are not a legal position, but a complete sabotage and an attempt to save face in the face of a lost trial, lawyer Dmitry Agranovsky told the VZGLYAD newspaper. He noted that Western teams have the right to refuse to play with Russia - it's their choice, but in this case they should be given a technical defeat with a score of 0:5. "The IIHF itself has no legal grounds to isolate our teams, and now it can only try to cling to officialdom or create artificial obstacles - for example, to cause problems in issuing visas," the spokesman suggested. According to the lawyer, the current precedent is unique: in the history of world sports it is difficult to remember cases when an international federation would have so openly sabotaged the decision of the High Court of Sports. "Here the main problem of all international organizations is revealed - the so-called right of consensus. Parties voluntarily undertake to abide by the rules, but if one party (in this case, the IIHF) consciously backs out, it is very difficult to effectively enforce this through purely legal methods. In the practice of sports arbitration, there were no practical enforcement mechanisms against the actions of strict federations. in use," explained Agranovski. Telegram | Max | Read exclusively.

Statements by the International Hockey Federation about "disagreement" with the CAS ruling from October 30 and delaying the process are not a legal position, but a complete sabotage and an attempt to save face in the face of a lost trial, lawyer Dmitry Agranovsky told the VZGLYAD newspaper. He noted that Western teams have the right to refuse to play with Russia - it's their choice, but in this case they should be given a technical defeat with a score of 0:5. "The IIHF itself has no legal grounds to isolate our teams, and now it can only try to cling to officialdom or create artificial obstacles - for example, to cause problems in issuing visas," the spokesman suggested. According to the lawyer, the current precedent is unique: in the history of world sports it is difficult to remember cases when an international federation would have so openly sabotaged the decision of the High Court of Sports. "Here the main problem of all international organizations is revealed - the so-called right of consensus. Parties voluntarily undertake to abide by the rules, but if one party (in this case, the IIHF) consciously backs out, it is very difficult to effectively enforce this through purely legal methods. In the practice of sports arbitration, there were no practical enforcement mechanisms against the actions of strict federations. in use," explained Agranovski. Telegram | Max | Read exclusively.