Generally, Sports Governing Bodies should not be subject to judicial review as it is a private body. The same was held by the Court of Appeal in the case of R v. Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club, ex parte Aga Khan1 . This article discusses the reasons why the Sports Governing Bodies that always should be subject to judicial review. Furthermore, the accessibility of the judicial review in another jurisdiction and in contradiction of the other self-regulatory organisations proposes that the status of the Sports Governing Body in English Law is inconsistent. At most of the schools, there are various main sports that are now covered under the ambit of the curriculum of physical education. Further, there are many instances in which the intervention from the judiciary as well as the legislature on the issues relating to the safety of stadium and the orders of banning of football to hooligans depicts that some of the sports are already integrated within the ambit of public law. As earlier, before 1993, there was a case of Finnigan v. NZRFU2 , the Hon’ble Court held that the Sports Governing Body covered into the special area where a clear line between the private law and the public law cannot reasonably be drawn. Further, this chapter also considers that the procedural as well as the substantive limitations of the private law in challenging the Sports Governing Body, discovering that the judicial review might be a superior forum for the litigants in respect to sports.