CLAIMS FOR LIBEL have traditionally been the preserve of the rich and famous. Hollywood stars, high-profile politicians, prominent society figures — these were the people who used to instruct an elite band of super-aggressive law firms to correct their maligned reputations. Now, though, a new breed of claimant is on the block. Roll up the Premiership footballer.

It is hard to imagine footballers from yesteryear being quite so sensitive — and litigious — as their modern-day counterparts. The likes of Stan Bowles, Rodney Marsh and Charlie George were often the subject of tabloid gossip, but they preferred to let their boots, rather than their lawyers, do the talking. Now, though, footballers threaten proceedings for libel as swiftly as Jürgen Klinsmann used to hit the deck.

Cynics may say that there is a reason for this and that it illustrates exactly what is wrong with the modern game. Bowles and his brethren were not paid a fortune by sponsors. Today’s stars sometimes go so far as to trademark their own names and if they have not taken this step, will certainly be party to endorsements from global brands with images and reputations to protect that eclipse those of their contracted footballers.

Add to the mix the big clubs and their own international, multimillion brands, and the cynic suspects that the underlying animus for many a libel action is clear: a footballer sues for libel not to protect his reputation but that of his sponsors. Cue the tabloid scandal, cue the dramatic gesture — regardless of the truth.

The trend began with Bruce Grobbelaar. The former Liverpool goalkeeper sued for libel over articles in The Sun published in 1994 that alleged he had taken bribes to throw games. The newspaper appeared to have incontrovertible evidence and many questioned not merely Grobbelaar’s ethics but also the wisdom of taking legal action. At the first High Court trial, he was awarded £85,000 damages, but the award was quashed by the Court of Appeal, which said the jury’s award was “an affront to justice”.

Undeterred, the formerly loveable goalkeeper took his case to the House of Lords. He walked away with an award of £1 damages, a ringing condemnation and a legal bill of more than £1 million.

Grobbelaar’s experience was not, of course, emblematic of the merits of every footballer’s claim for libel. It is curious, though, that while many claims are now brought, few make it to the courtroom. The claim brought by Harry Kewell against Gary Lineker and The Sunday Telegraph is a recent exception that proves the rule. Most are settled long before a star’s grievances are tested under the forensic glare of British advocacy.

The cynic will again have his theories about this. So, too, will he question the way in which many footballers, despite being paid vast salaries, bring their claims on “no win, no fee” deals. These were introduced four years ago, ostensibly to open up libel to those without funds. A claimant’s lawyer only gets his costs if he wins, but if he does win, a “success fee” is levied, meaning that he can double his money. En route, the claimant does not have to dip into his wallet. Ethical questions persist about these arrangements, not the least of which is that surely a footballer has the means to put his money where his mouth is and foot the bill of a libel claim.

Comparisons are invidious, but unlike footballers, rugby players rarely sue for libel. The cynic may say it is because they do not have massive sponsorship contracts clandestinely calling the shots. Or, perhaps, they are a little more robust than those who grace the green and lucrative fields of televised football.

Explore Football

• Premier League

• Football League

• Scotland

• European Football

• International Football

• TheGame

• Live Match Tracker

• The Fink Tank

• Fantasy Football