‘Then there should be sanctions on it, and say that she is no longer welcome” – Vincent van der Voort thinks that refusing Deta Hedman should have been suspended

The Darts Regulation Authority (DRA) has recently taken the step to tighten its eligibility rules for entry into the PDC Women’s Series, a move that effectively excludes transgender players from competing on that circuit going forward.

For Noa-Lynn van Leuven, the ruling represents a deeply significant and emotional turning point in her career. Former professional darter Vincent van der Voort has described the situation as extremely painful for the Dutch player, although he stopped short of declaring that it definitively marks the end of her career in the sport.

Van der Voort spoke openly about the issue on the podcast Darts Draait Door, where he stressed that the human impact of the decision should not be underestimated. According to him, this is not just a regulatory change—it’s a life-altering moment for Van Leuven.

“This is a huge moment for her,” he explained. “It’s a personal tragedy, there’s no doubt about that. She worked incredibly hard to climb her way up, to establish herself, and to secure her place among the women on that circuit. And now, from one moment to the next, that opportunity is gone. Everything is changing for her all at once. Her income disappears, her platform disappears, and she’s now forced to look for an entirely different path forward. For her, it’s a massive blow. But if you take a step back and look at the bigger picture, this is something that was always likely to happen on a global scale. There has been a growing push to keep categories strictly separated.”

With the PDC’s shift in direction, Van Leuven immediately loses her place on the women’s circuit. That means not only the end of her sporting opportunities within that category, but also the loss of the financial security that came with it. According to Van der Voort, that combination is precisely what makes the decision so heavy on a personal level—it’s not just about competition, it’s about livelihood and identity as a professional athlete.

At the same time, Van der Voort acknowledged that this kind of development has been building internationally for quite some time. Across many different sports, governing bodies have been debating how to structure categories and ensure fairness, and he believes it was not unrealistic to expect that darts would eventually face the same dilemma.

He also pointed out that the debate may never have reached this level of intensity if Van Leuven had not been such a visible and competitive presence on the circuit. Because she was performing well and achieving results, the conversation naturally gained more attention and became more polarised.

“If she wasn’t able to compete at a high level, then nobody would really be talking about it,” he said. “That’s just how it works in sport. I’ve always understood why some of the other women have concerns, because from their perspective, they feel like they are playing against a man. But at the same time, I also completely understand Noa-Lynn’s side. She identifies as a woman, she feels like she belongs there, and she was competing under the rules that allowed her to be there. One moment you are allowed to participate, and then suddenly you’re not anymore. That must feel incredibly harsh and confusing. The reality is, there are no perfect rules in situations like this. The question becomes: where do you draw the line, and in which category do you place someone?”

Van der Voort was also critical of how the Professional Darts Corporation (PDC) has handled the issue over time. In his view, the organisation initially permitted participation under one set of rules, only to later introduce a much stricter boundary, which has ultimately led to more confusion and controversy.

With the amended regulations now in place, the PDC has chosen a clear—but undeniably strict—line. Under the new framework, players assigned male at birth are no longer eligible to compete in women’s competitions, setting a precedent for how similar cases will be handled in the future.

Van der Voort believes that if such a rule had been clearly established from the beginning, the situation might never have escalated into such a major issue. “If that had been the rule from the start, it wouldn’t have become this big topic,” he said. “There probably wouldn’t even have been an official statement about it, because nobody would have cared as much. The real problem is that the PDC hasn’t managed this consistently over the past few years. If you introduce a rule that allows someone to compete, then you have to stand by it and enforce it properly. When a player refuses to play under those rules—like Deta Hedman did—then there need to be consequences. That could mean suspensions or clear disciplinary action. Otherwise, you create uncertainty and mixed signals about who is actually welcome.”

For Van der Voort, one thing remains absolutely clear: Van Leuven herself should not be blamed for any of this. She simply competed within the rules that were in place at the time, and it is not her responsibility that those rules have now changed.

“You cannot blame Noa-Lynn for anything,” he stated firmly. “She was allowed to compete, and she took that opportunity, just like anyone else would. Now the rules have changed, and that means she’s no longer allowed—but that’s not on her. She didn’t create those rules, and she shouldn’t be criticised for following them and participating in events she was eligible for.”

As for what the future holds, Van der Voort is not yet prepared to say that this decision brings a definitive end to Van Leuven’s career. In his view, much will depend on how she processes this setback mentally and what choices she makes moving forward in her professional journey.

“She now has to deal with this blow and find a way to move forward,” he concluded. “A lot will come down to her mental strength and how she chooses to respond. We’ve already seen that she can perform well on the Challenge Tour, which is open to everyone, so there are still opportunities out there. The question now is what path she decides to take next, and how she rebuilds from here.”