“Avoiding criticism in the media”: the surprising rule of Premier Padel

The rule Premier Padel 2026 contains a provision that deserves closer attention. It concerns neither the prize money, nor the rankings, nor the conduct of the matches, but a much more sensitive subject: the players' public statements .

By reviewing the official men's and women's regulations, several clauses precisely define what a player can publicly state about a tournament, the FIP, and other matters. Premier Padelsponsors or even referees.

One of them even has a particularly explicit title: “Avoid criticism in public or in the media.”

Failure to comply with the obligations in this section may expose a player to a fine of up to 10,000 euros , or even to a suspension of the Tour.

This interpretation takes on a particular dimension when one recalls the 2025 crisis, during which several players publicly, and sometimes very harshly, protested Premier Padel and the FIP.

A section entitled "No Denigration"

First notable element: the regulations Premier Padel includes a section 1.4.10 entitled “No Denigration”.

It regulates the statements and actions of players that could damage the reputation, public image, or "good name" of Premier Padel, from the FIP, the Tour, but also from various actors linked to them.

The wording goes quite far, since the text also targets statements that “constitute criticism of the Tour or any service or product” i.e "constitute a critique of the Tour or any service or product" entities and persons concerned.

The same provision appears in the women's regulations.

Therefore, this is not a characteristic specific to male players.

"Avoid criticism in public or in the media"

But it is especially in the Code of Conduct, in section 10.1.11 dedicated to dishonorable or unprofessional behavior that makes the text particularly interesting.

One sub-paragraph is literally titled:

“Avoid criticism in public or in the media” i.e "Avoid criticism in public or in the media."

The following sentence is even more explicit:

“A player shall not direct criticism to a Tournament, sponsor, player, referee, the FIP to the media or the public. »

In other words:

"A player must not make any criticisms to the media or the public regarding a tournament, a sponsor, a player, a referee, or the FIP."

The regulations then specify the channel to use:

“All such complaints must be submitted to the Supervisor. »

Is :

"All these complaints must be submitted to the Supervisor."

The provision also exists in the women's regulations.

One clarification is necessary, however: in this specific sentence, Premier Padel is not named directly Mentioned are the tournament, the sponsors, the players, the referees and the FIP.

Corn (Mais) Premier Padel appears explicitly in other provisions of the same section.

Premier Padel is explicitly protected a few lines above

The Code of Conduct stipulates that a player must respect these obligations. "at all times" and, particularly during a tournament or event for which their entry has been accepted, to refrain from behavior that is detrimental to the Tour, to Premier Padel or to the FIP.

The regulation also specifies “whether in the coming or not” i.e "whether or not he is on the tournament site" .

Public comments are explicitly included.

The text specifically targets public statements that attack or denigrate a person, a tournament, in a manner deemed unreasonable. Premier Padelthe Tour, Premier Padel , a sponsor, a player, a referee, FIP staff or the FIP itself.

It also prohibits public comments that the player knows, or should reasonably know, will harm the reputation or financial interests of the parties involved.

The scope is therefore relatively broad and goes beyond the single press conference organized at the tournament venue.

Fines of up to 10,000 euros and a possible suspension

These obligations are not simply communication recommendations.

The regulation states that failure to comply with the preceding points constitutes a violation of the Code of Conduct.

The penalties provided for include, in particular a fine of up to 10,000 euros and total suspension from participation in the Tour for a period determined by the Sports Discipline Committee .

The same system is in the women's regulations.

However, be careful not to go beyond the text: this does not mean that any criticism will automatically result in a fine of 10,000 euros or a suspension.

These are the sanctions that can be applied when a violation of this section is found.

And yet, in 2025, the players openly criticized the circuit

This is where reading the regulations becomes particularly interesting.

Because recent history Premier Padel shows that the players did not always keep their disagreements in the Supervisor's office.

Quite the contrary.

In early 2025, the circuit is going through one of the most significant crises in its short history. The conflict centers on changes made to the charts and, more broadly, on the relationships between Premier Padel, the FIP and some of the male players.

The P2 teams from Gijón and then Cancún became the symbols of this power struggle.

And several players are speaking out publicly.

Gonzalo Rubio: "Stop threatening us"

Among the strongest stances taken is that of Gonzalo Rubio .

“Stop threatening us!”, “We have been lied to!”: Gonzalo Rubio protests against Premier Padel and the FIP

End of February 2025, Padel Magazine returns to the highly critical statements of the Spanish player in an article entitled:

"Stop threatening us, we've been lied to": Gonzalo Rubio speaks out against Premier Padel and the FIP."

Rubio disputes the handling of the conflict and claims in particular that commitments made to the players have not been respected.

When reviewed in light of the regulations, these declarations constitute a particularly interesting example of open public criticism of the governing bodies of professional padel .

Pablo Lijó: "We fled one threat only to encounter another."

Pablo Lijó He too adopts a particularly stern tone.

In February 2025, the Spaniard published a long message on social media in which he compared the situation he was experiencing with Premier Padel to that previously known with the World Padel Tour.

Pablo Lijó says: “We fled one threat to find another!”

Padel Magazine then repeats this formula:

"We left a company that threatened us and didn't rely on us, only to join another that does exactly the same thing."

Lijó simultaneously announces his intention not to participate in the tournaments in Gijón and Cancún.

Again, it is difficult to imagine a more concrete example of a player publicly expressing his profound disagreement with the organization of professional padel.

Thomas Leygue mentions "blackmail" Premier Padel / FIP

The protest also affects French players.

The March 3 2025, Padel Magazine publishes an interview with Thomas Leygue titled:

“Thomas Leygue reveals the behind-the-scenes details of the crisis and the ‘blackmail’ of Premier Padel / FIP”.

Thomas Leygue reveals the behind the scenes of the crisis and the blackmail of Premier Padel / FIP

The Frenchman gives his interpretation of the conflict and notably evokes the pressure felt by the players in the power struggle that pitted them against the governing bodies.

These various statements primarily demonstrate one thing: the controversy surrounding the 2025 tournament did not take place solely within internal meetings between players' associations. Premier Padel and the FIP.

It was also worn in the media and on social networks .

Premier Padel he himself acknowledges the public criticism from the players

And this observation is not based solely on the players' words.

In March 2025, Premier Padel and the FIP publish an official communication devoted to the developments of the circuit after several meetings with representatives of the players.

Premier Padel responds to criticism and warns players about the consequences of their actions

The statement explicitly refers to the criticisms “repeated, public and officially-communicated” i.e "repeated, public and officially communicated" , formulated by male players concerning in particular the size of the tables.

Premier Padel then announces the return to the 2024 formats for the men's P1 and P2 draws starting from Santiago P1.

In the same press release, Premier Padel However, it adopts a very firm position regarding what it calls an illegal boycott of certain tournaments and announces legal actions as well as a referral to the FIP with a view to possible disciplinary proceedings.

However, it is necessary clearly distinguish between the two subjects .

Nothing in this statement suggests that these proceedings targeted the players because they had publicly criticized Premier PadelThe announced actions were linked to the boycott and alleged breaches of contractual obligations.

Were Rubio, Lijó or Leygue sanctioned for their criticisms?

This is a crucial question.

And on this point, we must be extremely careful.

We have not identified any official evidence to suggest that Gonzalo Rubio, Pablo Lijó, Thomas Leygue or any other player has been specifically sanctioned on the basis of the "No Denigration" clause or the "Avoid criticism in public or in the media" paragraph for these statements.

It would therefore be incorrect to present any proceedings related to the 2025 conflict as sanctions imposed because the players had spoken publicly.

What we can establish is nevertheless particularly interesting: The players have publicly criticized the governing bodies. Premier Padel has officially recognized the existence of public and repeated criticism, while its regulations simultaneously regulate certain forms of public criticism.

And in tennis? The ATP explicitly protects "legitimate disagreement".

The comparison with professional tennis provides further insight.

Le ATP Rulebook 2026 It also contains provisions concerning public comments that could be detrimental to the circuit, tournaments or their participants.

But the ATP regulations provide a particularly important clarification:

“Responsible expressions of legitimate disagreement with ATP policies that are truthful, complete, and made in good faith are not prohibited. »

In other words:

"Responsible expressions of legitimate disagreement with ATP policies, when truthful, complete, and made in good faith, are not prohibited."

This is an important point: the ATP regulations explicitly distinguish between certain statements that may be sanctioned and the responsible expression of a legitimate disagreement .

In the relevant sections of the regulations Premier Padel In the 2026 legislation we studied, we did not find any exception formulated in such an explicit manner protecting legitimate disagreement expressed publicly and in good faith.

This obviously does not allow us to conclude that All criticism is permitted at the ATP and forbidden at [the other venue]. Premier Padel .

But the difference in wording between the two regulations deserves to be highlighted.

Legally independent players

One final element makes the subject even more interesting.

The rule Premier Padel he himself defines the relationship between the players and the circuit as a relationship strictly commercial and sporting .

The players are considered independent parties and the text specifies that there is no “no employment relationship” (“no salaried employment relationship”) between them and Premier Padel, the FIP or the Tour.

This obviously does not mean that the restrictions provided for in the Code of Conduct would be legally invalid.

An independent athlete may accept contractual and regulatory obligations to participate in a competition.

But the juxtaposition is interesting: Players are legally defined as independent, while being subject to a particularly precise framework regarding their public expression when they participate in the Tour.

So, can a player criticize? Premier Padel ?

Say that « Premier Padel "All criticism is forbidden" that would be going further than what the regulation allows us to state.

However, several elements are written in black and white.

The regulation includes a clause entitled “No Denigration” .

It regulates public comments that could be detrimental to Premier Padel, at the Tour or at the FIP.

And most importantly, its Code of Conduct includes a provision entitled “Avoid criticism in public or in the media” requesting that certain complaints be addressed to the Supervisor rather than to the media or the public.

This could result in sanctions of up to A €10,000 fine and a suspension from the Tour de France .

The contrast with the 2025 crisis is striking.

That year, Rubio, Lijó, Leygue and other players had publicly expressed their discontent. Premier Padel he himself had officially acknowledged the existence of criticisms "repeated, public and officially communicated" from the male players.

Even more recently, last May, Sofia Saiz denounced the limitations of the system. Premier Padel...

Sofía Saiz denounces the limitations of the system Premier Padel "I can't find a way to continue."

A year later, reading the regulations raises a simple question, but one that is far from trivial:

Where does a professional player's legitimate disagreement end and where does criticism that could become a disciplinary offence begin?

The regulation sets several limits.

The border, however, appears much less obvious.

Franck Binisti

Franck Binisti discovered padel at the Club des Pyramides in 2009 in the Paris region. Since then, padel has been part of his life. You often see him touring France to cover major French padel events.