追回环法王的舞弊所得

    很多人撰文指出兰斯•阿姆斯特朗损失的未来潜在收入，可是，很少有文章谈到他丧失过去所获收入的可能性——这些收入是他运动生涯的颠峰时期挣得的，据指控，当时他已经使用了兴奋剂。显然，体育合同中追回条款极为罕见。《财富》杂志（Fortune）就这一话题采访了三家“超级”体育经纪机构——由于话题敏感，他们不愿披露身份。采访发现，三家经纪机构都表示，从来没有听说过追回条款这回事，也从来没有有人问起这个话题，任何营销或运动员合同中也从来没有包含过这种条款。有一位经纪人甚至表示，如果有营销机构希望加入此种条款，那他会“拉起客户，扬长而去”。

    不过，体育合同中确实包含道德条款，试图在合同有效期间约束运动员的行为。根据该条款，如果某个运动员做出了某种出格行为，运动队或营销机构有权撕毁合同，但并未明文规定，在合同已经执行完毕且相关款项已经付清的情况下还能追回钱财。阿姆斯特朗之事将成为很好的“判例式案件”。2004年，阿姆斯特朗第六次赢得环法冠军，但当时他已经遭遇使用兴奋剂的指控，保险公司SCA Promotions因此寻求暂且不向其支付500万美元的奖金。阿姆斯特朗向法院起诉该公司并胜诉。可是，如今美国反兴奋剂机构褫夺了阿姆斯特朗的头衔，SCA卷土重来，寻求推翻2004年的判决，追回这500万美元。

    如果SCA能够成功追回这笔钱，其他潜在兴奋剂使用者或许会警醒，不再认为靠舞弊赢得胜利是个好主意。但从长期来看，SCA的胜利无法改变任何事情，除非它促使营销人员和运动队团结起来，要求追回条款成为体育明星们未来一切合同中的标准条款。除非这种情况发生，使用兴奋剂被抓的风险永远也抵不上运动员可以靠兴奋剂获得的利益，对那些职业生涯已近尾声的运动员来说尤其如此。追回条款对遏制华尔街人士过于热衷高风险操作的行为模式有没有影响？有什么影响？现在回答这个问题还为时过早。不过，如果这一措施成功，那赞助企业和运动队也可以借鉴，以此抑制体育界滥用兴奋剂或以其他形式的舞弊现象。

    译者：小宇

    Much has been written about Lance Armstrong's loss of future earnings, but not much has been said about the potential loss of his past earnings -- those that he made while he was at his prime and allegedly doped up. Apparently, clawback provisions in sport contracts are extremely rare. Three "super" sports agency interviewed by Fortune on this topic, who wished not to be identified given the sensitive nature of this topic, say that they have never heard of a clawback provision ever being asked for or given in any kind of marketing or player contract. One of the agents went so far to say that if a marketer asked for such a provision, he would, "take his client and walk out of the room."

    But sports contracts do have moral clauses which attempt to keep athletes in line while under contract. This gives the sports team or marketer the right to break a contract if an athlete acts up in some way, but most do not explicitly say they can take money back after the contract is up and paid. Armstrong will be a good test case here. In 2004, SCA Promotions sought to withhold paying a $5 million bonus to the cyclist after winning his sixth Tour following allegations of doping. Armstrong took SCA to court and won. But now that the US Anti-Doping Agency has stripped Armstrong of his titles, SCA is back and is looking to overturn the 2004 ruling and clawback that $5 million.

    If SCA is successful in clawing back its cash, it could possibly deter other would-be dopers from thinking about cheating their way to glory. But an SCA win won't change anything in the long run unless it causes marketers and sports teams to come together and require that clawback provisions be standard in all future contracts with sports stars. Until that happens, the risk of getting caught doping won't out way the gains for an athlete, especially one near the end of his or her career. It is too early to know what if any impact that clawbacks have had on curbing risk taking on Wall Street, but if it proves successful, then companies and sport teams could help curb substance abuse and cheating by following its lead.