The relationship between athletes and big international sports federations reminds the relationship between an individual and a State. In the position of monopoly these federations secure uniform rules and integrity of their competitions based on specific sports regulations rather than based on provisions of various and different national laws. International sports federations want to achieve compliance with their rules. This is done by disciplinary proceedings and forced sports arbitration. On one hand International sports federations are experts in the field of sport concerning fight against doping or eligibility rules. On the other hand they are in the dominant position in commercial matters related to sports due to the Pyramid structure of sports. International sports federations are on the top of this pyramid. Their rules are binding for national sports associations, clubs, athletes and other stakeholders. International sports federations claim the autonomy concerning regulation of sports but their quasi-legislation is often in conflict with general law, namely EU law and law of human rights. This publication deals with the scope of the sports autonomy. In other words what the law can accept and which specific rules of sports sector are not acceptable in the light of the economic freedoms and human rights. This evaluation is made based on examples of selected controversial mechanisms of international sports federations, namely 1) compulsory jurisdiction of sports arbitration and issue of fair trial at Court of Arbitration for sport, 2) modern slavery of transfer rules, 3) strict rules of fight against doping, 4) sanctioning of athletes for participation at unauthorized competitions, 5) freedom of expression.