What Can Players And Clubs Do About 'AI Slop'?
By.
Dale Johnson
Football issues correspondent
2 March 2026
506 Comments
You do not have to look far on social media to discover images and videos of footballers in unlikely or bizarre scenarios.
Scroll through TikTok and you may quickly come across Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo cutting each other's hair, or boarding the Titanic in Edwardian gown. You may even see Kylian Mbappe on a ski-lift with a turtle.
This is the result of the rapid growth of expert system (AI). Or, more specifically, AI 'slop'.
AI can be asked to deliver practically anything. By anybody. The tools are ending up being ever more sophisticated and easily accessible.
It will end up being even more difficult to find what is genuine and what is, in AI terms, deepfake.
It might seem, for the a lot of part, like safe fun. After all, who actually believes Messi and Ronaldo have been serving hamburgers?
But exists a point at which gamers and clubs will attempt to draw the line?
Options are limited for players to do something about it
As football has become an industrial juggernaut, players and clubs have actually had to find out how to care for their brand names.
That might be by securing the club crest or challenging making use of a gamer's name in unauthorised marketing product.
Take Chelsea midfielder Cole Palmer, who has trademarked the term 'Cold Palmer' with the UK federal government's Copyright Office. The 23-year-old did the same with his name, sign and signature 'shivering' event.
Creating protections is something. Having the ability to tackle this new AI world of relentless content is another.
In the UK there is minimal legislation covering someone's likeness. Or, as it is contacted football, image rights.
Jonty Cowan, legal director at law firm Wiggin LLP, told BBC Sport that AI was providing "lots of unique challenges".
" Various federal governments around the globe are attempting to find out ... how do we respond to AI?" said Cowan.
AI is being utilized to put gamers into real-life circumstances, in addition to those more undoubtedly phony.
Take the unveilings of Antoine Semenyo and Marc Guehi by Manchester City in January.
The club's official pictures show each gamer with director of football Hugo Viana. Yet before those pictures had actually even been taken, you could find AI pictures of Semenyo and Guehi signing a contract together with manager Pep Guardiola.
There was another of Semenyo being welcomed at the training centre by former player Yaya Toure, whose old squad number - 42 - he was expected to take.
None of these events happened, but it was impossible to tell the photos were fake.
Last month, an image appeared of Manchester United head coach Michael Carrick with Frank Ilett - the fan who will not cut his hair till the Red Devils win five video games in a row.
Once again, it did not take place but looks so reasonable.
And Cowan said it was hard for there to be any option when material is presented "in a non-contentious manner".
Unless a person has suffered commercial or reputational damage, choices are restricted.
" It's constantly been rather challenging for a specific to enforce IP rights," Cowan said. "If it is a deepfake that is showing them in a compromising position, let's state, that's different."
The Data (Use and Access) Act came into force last month, making it a criminal offence to create, share or request a raunchy deepfake.
But then you have AI-generated videos such as Celtic's Luke McCowan punching an assistant referee. Could it harm his reputation, or is it simply not believeable?
A more important issue for players may be 'passing off'. This is where somebody unjustly associates their own services or products with the track record and goodwill of an established brand name or organization - or gamer.
It is meant to deceive consumers into thinking they linked to it - to the hinderance of the recognized brand name.
Cowan described that in December 2024, as part of an AI-related assessment, the UK government said it was thinking about "introducing some sort of personality right".
That would offer a player more scope to take action.
Clubs, for their part, have a few more choices open up to them.
Social network accounts putting gamers in the shirts of their brand-new team - or any group - is absolutely nothing brand-new.
But what if a club wished to take issue?
" Where you've got, for instance, the Man City set they might look at other IP rights," Cowan said.
" Have they infringed the hallmark in their crest? Or design rights in their t-shirt? For that sort of image, that's what a club or an individual would likely be taking a look at."
BBC Sport understands City believe fans know official channels remain the only places to opt for any genuine news, images or videos.
But as the lines blur even more, will clubs keep that position?
Tackling platforms more reasonable than court action
While clubs and players might consider taking the creators of AI images to court, it is a long and costly battle.
Cowan says there is a quicker and more affordable path: challenge the platforms directly.
" The Online Safety Act has actually been introduced in the UK recently, which is putting a commitment on platforms to take on illegal content," he added.
" It may well be that we will see more systems that platforms will present to have that material removed. Often, that is the simplest and quickest way to tackle these images."
This could lead to a growth in companies caring for the digital rights of clubs and gamers.
Those that currently exist scrape websites and apps - using AI, of course - to identify where a business's copyright or an individual's image might have been utilized.
They can ask for takedowns, effectively dealing with making use of AI without the affected celebrations getting directly involved.
Bad stars might utilize AI for dubious ways
AI presents opportunities along with problems. Adverts and promotional material can be created without gamers even needing to leave their homes.
But alongside the genuine AI-generated adverts, it is simple for unauthorised celebrations to take a player's likeness and utilize it to promote their service.
Last year the oversight board that runs Meta's appeals process banned an advert for a gambling app on Facebook, external that was created utilizing AI.
It included a manipulated video of previous Brazil striker Ronaldo which mimicked his voice. It was not gotten by Meta's automated detection tools.
Meta was told to produce "quickly recognizable signs that differentiate AI content" to avoid "considerable amounts of rip-off content".
It was a prime example of a being challenged and required to act.
The Football Association has had to tackle debate, too.
England head coach Gareth Southgate was targeted throughout Euro 2024. Fake AI-generated interviews revealed Southgate making negative remarks about his gamers.
The videos were reported and taken down. They were discovered to have actually breached TikTok's AI-generated policy, which forbids content that "falsely reveals public figures in particular contexts".
But by that point, the videos had been viewed and shared by millions of people.
Should users be forced to say they have utilized AI?
Scrolling through apps today, it is uncommon for anyone to indicate AI has actually been used.
That is even with TikTok's community standards asking users to "identify practical AI-generated material" and banning content thought about to "harmfully misguide or impersonate others".
Cowan believes there is unlikely to be any significant change to legislation, however platforms could be offered tougher guidelines.
" There are transparency requirements under the EU AI Act," Cowan described, with the act not covering the UK.
" Under marketing policies, influencers have to disclose where a video they produce has been sponsored.
" I think we might end up with comparable openness requirements. A little '#AI produced' or similar label in the corner."
The problem will be whether developers care, and how simple enforcement is for platforms.
Cowan included: "If you've got those outright videos, where someone's putting out a hideous deepfake, they're not going to stress over including that label."
For now, at least, it appears clubs are not too worried - that AI is just something happening on social networks.
There may come a point they decide more action is required.