BY: DM
Published 5 hours ago
Harriet Haynes, a British transgender pool champion, has lost her high-profile discrimination lawsuit against the English Blackball Pool Federation (EBPF). The ruling marks a legal first in UK sports, applying a newly established definition of “woman” based on biological sex.
As one of England’s top-ranked women’s pool players, Haynes clinched a Women’s Pro Series title earlier this year. Soon after, the EBPF introduced a sudden ban on transgender competitors in its female category. In August 2023, the federation declared that ladies’ events would be open only to players assigned female at birth, insisting the change was necessary to ensure “equality and fairness for all,” according to The Independent.
The decision meant Haynes — who had been a stalwart of the Kent women’s county team — could no longer compete in women’s tournaments. Instead, EBPF officials told her she could play in the men’s division. Haynes did not take the news kindly, and a legal battle ensued.
The court has sided with the EBPF.
Haynes launched a discrimination claim against the EBPF in 2024. “I am a woman and I have no advantage,” Haynes told Pink News. “So why should I have to play in a category that is going to cast a spotlight on to me and the fact that I have transitioned?”
In a judgement delivered this month, the court upheld the federation’s policy barring anyone not “born female” from women’s tournaments — a rule change that had abruptly ended Haynes’ run in the ladies’ division last year. According to the BBC, Haynes argued that the exclusion policy was “direct discrimination” on the basis of gender reassignment – a protected characteristic under the UK Equality Act 2010. She also contended that the ban violated her human rights, including the right to privacy and family life under the European Convention on Human Rights, by denying her the identity of competing as a female athlete.
Throughout the legal battle, Haynes maintained that competitive pool is a game of skill and precision, not raw physical power. Her legal team presented expert testimony that pool is not a “gender-affected” sport. However, Judge Parker disagreed with Haynes’ assertions. The court ruled that English eight-ball pool qualifies as a “gender-affected activity”, meaning the average female player would be at a disadvantage against the average male player due to physical attributes.
EBPF has welcomed trans pool players to their open competition.
EBPF defended its policy, insisting on reserving female-only competitions for those assigned female at birth. Chairman Paul Thomson and National Secretary Anna Goodwin stated bluntly that they made the decision “in the interests of fairness,” believing anyone who has gone through male puberty holds a competitive edge over biological women in pool, per Pink News.
Under the EBPF’s current rules, transgender women are welcomed only in the “open” category, which is effectively the men’s division rebranded. The women’s category remains explicitly closed to anyone born male. After the recent verdict, EBPF representatives reiterated that transgender players like Haynes are encouraged to continue playing in open tournaments. However, the women’s category will only remain protected for “biologically female” competitors.
Does having an “open” category provide equal opportunity, or is it still discriminatory?
