I believe in free speech, but “free speech” doesn’t immunize me from the consequences of exercising my right to free speech when representing a non-political organization of which I am a member.
In other words: the United States Bridge Federation does not strike me as unreasonable for demanding that their representatives eschew political commentary during publicity for official bridge events.
This is not an encroachment on the right of “free speech” as that right is generally understood. The players were there representing the organization, the event, as opposed to being there in their own persons. The organization can reasonably require that they limit their commentary to event-related platitudes, and can enforce that requirement by whatever sanctions are in their legal power to levy.
I will say that “treason” and “sedition” are charges that are over-the-top… but of course the United States Bridge Federation is not making such charges.