Portuguese 1500-meter runner José Carlos Pinto blasted European athletics officials in Birmingham on Friday after his personal coach, Gjert Ingebrigtsen, was denied championship accreditation due to safeguarding rules, leaving the athlete without his trainer for the major event.
Accreditation Denied Under Safeguarding Rules
Portuguese runner José Carlos Pinto arrived at the European Athletics Championships in Birmingham facing an unexpected hurdle when his coach, Gjert Ingebrigtsen, traveled to the city without official credentials. European athletics authorities denied Ingebrigtsen accreditation, citing World Athletics safeguarding rules designed to protect athletes from harassment, abuse, and exploitation.
The decision prevents Ingebrigtsen from entering restricted areas such as warm-up zones and specific sections of the stadium. Pinto, who bowed out of the 1500-meter heats, voiced bitter frustration over the ruling and argued that the restriction unfairly penalizes him.
I feel like I am being bullied, Pinto said, as reported by NRK. The athlete contended that safeguarding policies should protect all participants, maintaining that he also suffers as a victim by losing his primary coach during the most critical part of the season.
Appeals and Inconsistencies Cited by the Portuguese Federation
Frustration within the Portuguese camp stems from what they view as an erratic application of championship rules. The Portuguese athletics federation listed Ingebrigtsen as Pinto’s personal coach and pursued multiple formal appeals against the ban.
The Portuguese federation appealed the decision three separate times without success, according to Pinto. Athletes and coaches questioned why the governing body previously granted Ingebrigtsen accreditation for the European Cross Country Championships and the European Club Championships, only to reverse course for the main summer meet.
Legal representation for Ingebrigtsen revealed that a separate safeguarding review involving World Athletics remains active at a level above European athletics, adding further administrative complexity to the coach’s status at international competitions.
Legal Background and Fallout Within Norwegian Athletics
The controversy surrounding the coaching ban traces back to wider family and legal disputes involving the Ingebrigtsen family. In 2025, Gjert Ingebrigtsen stood trial accused of domestic abuse against two of his children. A court acquitted him of nearly all charges but convicted him of a single instance of physical maltreatment against his daughter, issuing a 15-day suspended sentence.
Sons Jakob, Henrik, and Filip Ingebrigtsen publicly severed their professional and personal ties with their father in 2022, stating they wanted no further contact with him in an athletic context. Jakob Ingebrigtsen secured a gold medal in the 5000-meter event in Birmingham, competing while his father watched from the stands as a private citizen.
Institutional backlash extends beyond European organizers. The Norwegian Athletics Federation enacted a formal board resolution barring Ingebrigtsen from receiving accreditation for future championships.
Shifting Alliances Among Elite Distance Runners
Narve Gilje Nordås, who previously shared a training group with Pinto under Ingebrigtsen, ended his coaching collaboration with Ingebrigtsen shortly before the championships.
Canadian runner Kieran Lumb also halted his training partnership with Ingebrigtsen in July. Athletics Canada previously confirmed that security checks disqualified Ingebrigtsen from receiving credentials for the world championships in Tokyo.
Despite the departures of other athletes, Pinto remains steadfast in his loyalty. He credited Ingebrigtsen with transforming his career, noting that his current competitive standing is a direct result of their partnership.
Calls for Transparency From Governing Bodies
Pinto argued that private email correspondence with national federations fails to provide clear reasoning, leaving competitors in the dark about shifting standards.
European athletics officials have maintained that their restrictive stance aligns fully with international safeguarding obligations.
