According to media reports, the German sportswear giant, adidas, has taken steps to terminate its sponsorship of the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) in light of the current doping and corruption scandals that have engulfed athletics.

The 11-year sponsorship deal was due to have run until 2019.

Neither adidas nor the IAAF have confirmed whether the reports are true, but adidas have confirmed in a statement that the stories are “not accurate” and that ‘adidas has clear anti-doping policy in place. Therefore, we are in close contact with the IAAF to learn more about their reform process’.

Separately, the IAAF has stated they are in close contact with all of their commercial partners.

It isn’t yet clear whether adidas has definitely taken the decision to walk away from athletics, but the combination of media reports and adidas’ public stance so far indicate that they are, at the very least, considering their future with the IAAF very seriously. This is unsurprising — the nature and extent of the problems currently faced by the IAAF with the World Anti-Doping Agency are a true nadir for them, and sport generally, with allegations not only that widespread athlete doping has taken place but that, shockingly, the federation actively took steps to delay doping sanctions, cover up positive doping results and extort doping athletes.

However, despite this background, the reported adidas exit still came as a shock to many industry observers. There is very little history in sport of sponsors terminating deals for ethical reasons and, to date, the other IAAF sponsors (Toyota, Seiko, TDK, TBS and Mondohas) appear not to be thinking of exiting.

At the same time (and despite mounting public criticism), adidas has remained a loyal and first tier sponsor of the beleaguered football world governing body, Fifa.

Why, then, would adidas consider taking this action? One perspective is that the IAAF scandals relate to alleged doping, which has a direct impact on the field of play and has the ability to tarnish the brand image and reputation deeply.

It goes to the very heart of what competitive sport is all about, and trashes that notion. This is to be contrasted with the Fifa scandal, which, despite being highly damaging, has centred around a lack of financial probity and vote-buying, but not around the performance of athletes.

In other words, as a matter of ethics, the IAAF crisis is simply of a different magnitude to the problems faced by Fifa.

A more cynical take is that adidas have comparatively less to lose commercially from pulling out of the IAAF deal. They can still take the moral high ground and mitigate any reputational damage, but focus their commercial efforts on other sports.

Globally, athletics has a smaller television viewing audience and participation numbers are much lower than a number of other major sports, including football. Although the IAAF deal is a valuable and important part of the adidas sponsorship inventory, the 23 million pound IAAF rights fee should be contrasted with, for example, the reported value of the current adidas/Fifa deal (£200m for rights from 2015-2030) and the new adidas/Real Madrid shirt sponsorship (£1.06 billion for rights from 2016-26).

The fiercely contested global market for football kit is estimated to be worth 5 billion pounds annually and adidas would be loath to surrender its strategic and long-standing relationship with Fifa because it would, in turn, risk losing market share to its biggest competitor, Nike, which it may not recover for a very long time.

There is also a basic legal point to consider. Aside from the ethical and commercial considerations, it is possible that adidas have chosen to terminate the IAAF agreement because they have the express contractual right to do so.

The position under the Fifa deal might be different, particularly given that the crisis largely relates to the allegedly corrupt actions of individual representatives, not Fifa itself. If no express right to terminate existed, there is a risk that unilateral termination by adidas of its agreement would expose it to a claim for wrongful termination.

Given that the Fifa deal is due to run to 2030, that claim could be considerable.

Whatever the reasons behind adidas’ decision, if they do pull out of the IAAF deal this would be the first time in recent years that a high-profile sponsor has taken such a decision and this would represent another real blow to the IAAF.

It could also mark a new era for sports marketing in which sponsors pull away from damaged and corrupt federations and sports (something many of their customers have been wanting for some time). If that happens, this could also mark a new era for the governance of certain sports governing bodies which, under pressure from their sponsors, will be forced to become more transparent, professional and accountable — to their commercial partners, their athletes and their fans.

— The writer is Partner, Head of Sport for the Gulf Region at Pinsent Masons Global Sports Advisory.