Thanks This is really interesting. As a male coach and father of a young girl I will be watching this one closely. I pass no judgement at this time. However, I am betting that the university settles this before any dirty laundry airs. Let's face it, he has been the head coach of UNC and the National Team for too long for something 'not so pleasing' to come out. I think UNC will save face and bite the bullet.
still no trial date A mediator is to be in place by April 1 and discovery should end November 1. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/soccer/2003-01-23-dorrance-suit_x.htm
Re: Thanks I wouldn't be so sure about this. From what I can tell there are no financial motives from the plaintiffs, so I would suspect that any mediated settlement that they would agree to would have to contain either 1) a public admission/apology or 2) Dorrance's removal from his position as a women's athletic coach at UNC-CH. I don't see UNC-CH or Dorrance agreeing to either one of these conditions. - This is all conjecture on my part. I have purposely not discussed this case or these issues with anyone directly or indirectly involved. I only know what I've read in the papers.
The plaintiffs' biggest problem at this point is that, since the time of the original filing, the atmospere for this sort of thing has changed considerably. Earlier, the mere accusation of inappropriate behavior was enough to convict, the burden of proof was on the defendant and this sort of case got settled as often as not. But the whole climate has changed, and now the burden clearly rests with the plaintiff, as it should. And Dorrance has two big plusses: First, his attorneys can parade an almost endless stream of some, if not most, of the biggest names in female sports in the USA, all of whom will testify, and HAVE ALREADY publically stated, that not only were they never approached in this manner but they consider it totally out of character for him. How many do they want? Fifty? A hundred? Why, his attorneys will ask, was NOT ONE OTHER GIRL, in 20 some years of coaching, ever approached in this manner? Keller will look very alone. As for her complaint about being frozen out of the US team, whatever the truth of the matter may be, the question she has to prove is NOT, as she seems to feel, that she had excellent playing credentials. Clearly, she did. Rather, what she will have to prove, because Dorrance's lawyers will make it the issue, is that one of the players who DID make the team, and coincidentally won the World Championship, should not have been on the team. And proving that Milbrett, or Hamm, or Parlow or Chastain should have been left off the squad so that she could have been on it is a very tall order. The US is positively LOUSY with good female strikers, and a LOT of them didn't make the team or even get to camp. This is an uphill battle, and UNC is not stupid - they are pretty sure they can win this one or they never would have let it go this far. No settlement. Keller loses.
Re: Re: Thanks Huh?? Where do you get that from??The article calls it a $12 Million lawsuit and mentions Keller seeking lost income.....
Re: Re: Re: Thanks There's always punitive figures attached to these types of lawsuits. It's a pretty big stick to encourage the other side to settle. I more or less discount the $12mmm, but I will grant you the lost income. Thanks for the correction. My bad.
There was a lengthy profile piece about Dorrance in Sports Illustrated 3 or 4 years ago (following the initial filing I think). I seem to remember him describing himself as someone who knew nothing about women well into adulthood; yet he seemed to believe that his rather idiosyncratic methods were the sole reason for UNC's dominance of the women's game. That's a combination that certainly implies the possibility of sexual harassment. It's unlikely that his understanding of his players is as complete as he appears to believe. If someone made it through his recruiting system who wasn't how he thought she was, I don't think it would take much for things he did and said to feel like harrassment for the player, and I'm pretty sure that there is no requirement for the defendant to agree that behavior X was sexual harassment for a court to find for the plaintiff. That being said, I don't know anymore than anyone else about the fact of the case, but I'm pretty sure that public statements by Dorrance and various X-UNC players simply don't matter one way or another. As for Keller's status w/ the national team, wasn't she the team's leading scorer (at something like a goal a game) in the year before she filed the suit? Afterwards, she had, what, a couple caps? It seems extremely unlikely that she would have gone from the consensus best striker in the country not even worthy of a spot on the team so quickly.
On a team with possibly the greatest female forward in the history of the world, (the name is Hamm - maybe you've heard of her, she scored 20 goals in the year Keller tied for second on the team with 14) to call Keller "the consensus best striker in the country" isn't even remotely accurate. Furthermore, she was replaced on the team primarily by Foutopolos (I know I spelled that wrong) who, at 5-11, filled a need for some size in an otherwise rather small front line. Keller is 5-4. In any case, Keller scored virtually all her goals against the weakest competition the team faced. (Combined score: 47 - 2). Tony DiCicco made some personnel decisions, all of which are completely defensible. "The consensus best striker in the country"? I don't think so.
I assume you mean Parlow, who has more than 3 times as many caps as Fotopoulos. I will plead guilty to over reaching there, but it doesn't change the fact that she abruptly went from a frequent start to out of the picture on a team with relatively little turn-over. She played for the USA 37 times through 1998 (the year she filed the suit), and exactly once since then. I have no idea if this happened in a way that would allow Keller to win that part of her suit, but it certainly happened, and I find it unlikely in the extreme that it would have if there had been no suit against Dorrance.
Cutting Keller was defensible, in part, only because of the hatchet job that was done on Keller, mostly by people associated in one way or another with UNC. (including Tony DiCicco, who never said a bad word about a player until after Debbie Keller filed a lawsuit) People, including DiCicco, who had previously had only praise for Keller all of a sudden thought she was terrible. Coincidence? I doubt it matters if a million players who played for Dorrance and weren't harassed. It only takes one. There was some vocal support of Dorrance, but former players were not unamimous in their support. I wouldn't assume that there are no former players whose testimony, if allowed, could hurt Dorrance. The university could face heat for their "investigation", too. How did they investigate without interviewing Keller? Keller's suit is not groundless. Two federal judges have now ruled against motions to dismiss. As far as UNC settling and saving face. It's already rather late in the day for that.
Some Thoughts “Both women contend that Dorrance sexually harassed them by asking questions about their sex lives and the sexual activities of their teammates. Keller further alleges that Dorrance made unwanted phone calls and physical contact that amounted to assault and battery. “ “Tilley also allowed a claim that Dorrance had interfered with Keller's gaining a spot on the 1999 U.S. national soccer team. Keller maintains that she was dropped from the team in retribution for suing and that she lost income and recognition when the team went on to win the 1999 World Cup.” “U.S. District Judge N. Carlton Tilley Jr. ruled in November that the case can proceed with depositions and other forms of discovery…” I’m sure the defense and Mr. Dorrance will be very interested in what comes forth in the discovery process….the fact that things have gone this far is by no means evidence that a crime was committed, or vice versa. First there is the question of credible witnesses and/or physical evidence to support the allegations. To the degree that those exist, the case becomes tougher for the defense and Mr. Dorrance. In the absence of strong evidence (if that is the case) the case becomes tougher for the prosecution. The courts will have to decide whom to believe. The defense will focus attention on Mr. Dorrance’s character. Character witnesses will be very important. Like it or not his stature in the community, accomplishments etc. and behavior with hundreds of other female players since 1979 will be pertinent.
Re: Some Thoughts And that could be his biggest problem, however many national championships he has won notwithstanding. He has a real image problem.
Re: Re: Some Thoughts Well now THAT'S certaainly justice: I've accused you of sexual harassment, and dragged your reputation through the mud, so now you have an "image problem". I wonder why. And no, I meant what I said: Parlow was a lock anyway; Fotopolous was on the bubble. The POINT here, if you'll try to pay attention, is not that Keller was unqualified. Far from it. But she has to prove that she was MORE qualified than girls who did make the team in order for her to prove she was discrimnated against. It would have to be clear cut. And it's far from it. Do I think she got the shaft from DiCicco? Sure I do. IMO Tony didn't feel she was worth the disruptions, the resentments, the divisiveness. But she can't prove this, and even if she could, I doubt a jury would blame the coach for the decision; traditionally, juries are very solicitous of a coaches' perogatives.
It's deja vu all over again. Anyone who wants to plow through the 1998 Sports Illustrated article - the published version is 10 pages long - and make a marginally more informed assessment can find it here. http://pamplemousse1.bravepages.com/Dorrance 1.htm You also might be interested in Gino Auremmia's more humble take on coaching women...and on Dorrance. http://www.huskyhardcores.com/jjarchive/Dec11-hh_jacobs.stm
Re: still no trial date That's an interesting timeline. Even if mediation fails and the case goes to trial, it will be after the WWC in China (though presumably before the '04 Olympics). Whatever else emerges (or doesn't), the letters in that article show really questionable judgement.
I am taking the liberty of quoting our very own Preston MacMurray on the subject of Ms Keller's complaints: From May, 1999: Heroes of the Week: Mark Crane, Dan Burns and Herbert Channick, the arbitrators who heard Debbie Keller's frivolous lawsuit against US Soccer. The arbitrators found that US Soccer acted appropriately in selecting its roster for the 1999 women's residency program. After not being selected to the 26-player residency roster in January, Keller, a member of the national team pool, filed suit in February claiming US Soccer was retaliating against her for her other suit, that for sexual harassment against the University of North Carolina and its head coach Anson Dorrance, who was also once the US head coach. Eight current or former UNC players are now with the team as it prepares for the Women’s World Cup and virtually every one of those players signed a letter supporting Dorrance in the case. More than 10 other witnesses testified over the four days of hearings, after which Crane, Burns and Channick conveyed their decision orally. (Keller subsequently filed suit claiming oral decisions are themselves a form of sexual harassment.) "With this matter behind us, our players, coaches and administrative staff can continue to focus on the most important task at hand, which is winning the 1999 FIFA Women's World Cup," said US Soccer Secretary General Hank Steinbrecher. "At this time, we wish Ms. Keller good luck in all her future endeavors." In other words, we'll keep your resume on file; don't call us, we'll call you; don't let the door hit you in your ass on your way out. From October, 1999: Lawyers' Wet Dream: Debbie Keller This scary woman is one who plainly will never be satisfied. Drap her in gold and precious jewels, dine her with rare and succulent cuisine, house her in marbled palaces, attend to her with muscular Nubian eunuchs waving palm fronds, start her in every US national team game (all ages & levels, and both genders) from now until she croaks (even when she is in a wheelchair, drooling oatmeal and pooping her Depends) and she still won't be happy! Trouble, they name is Deborah. Woe be the coach who gave Keller her first game, for she hath troubled every coach in every land since. (March, 1999) From November, 2002: It Lives! When last we heard from North Carolina's most famous hair-dresser -- and in North Carolina, that is saying alot -- in March, 1999, former semi-decent Tar Heel Debbie Keller was setting an example for aggrieved soccer parents everywhere by trying to sue her way onto the US Womens National Team. A team that did just fine, thank you, without her, due to the uncommon common sense displayed by federal arbitrators. Keller sued because she wasn't invited to the National Team's World Cup training camp. But that isn't why TotW concerns itself with a women who is a pimple on the ass of soccer. No, TotW concerns itself with Keller because she is still suing Anson Dorrance, the head coach of the University of North Carolina's womens team for sexual harassment. Keller, and Melissa Jennings -- an even less significant pimple -- claim Dorrance asked them questions about their sex lives, and the sexual activities of their teammates, made unwanted phone calls, end engaged in physical contact that amounted to "assault and battery". People who have problems with keeping their sexuality on the straight and narrow, commit their personal perversion on a regular basis. People do what they enjoy, and won't stop doing it until forced to stop. Serial killers, rapists, sexual harassers, it doesn't matter. John Wayne Gacy would have bodies up to his attic by now if he hadn't got caught. Where are the corpses in Dorrance's crawlspace? Apparently, there aren't any. Keller and Jennings are the only women claiming Dorrance harassed them, while numerous other UNC players continue to support him. Even Rosalyn Carter didn't pose for any more pictures with Chicago's most famous clown after the cops dug up the first body. So, this past week federal judge Carlton Tilley Jr. refused to dismiss Keller's get-rich-quick $12 million suit against Dorrance. Can you blame her? Hairdressers don't make that much money. Especially in Spivey's Corner. Keller needs to give it up, and get on with hew hairdressing career and let US Soccer get on with their business.
Bill Archer Your post is naive. If your daughter was sexually harassed would you ignore it? I am not saying that Debbie was. I have no idea. And, frankly neither do you. If she was, I applaud her guts to put her reputation on the line like this. She is definitely doing the right thing (if it happened). Your post was awfully judgemental when we all have no clue what happened.
Re: Bill Archer That's a good post, runbabyrun. I don't think Bill Archer's post is exactly naive, though. Well, maybe it is naive of him to think that quoting someone who is so demeaning to ANY woman - let alone a woman who was very much a star at UNC during her tenure - would sway anyone to his perspective. His quoted "expert" also trots out old, tired myths about harassment - like that harassment is always serial. I got a better understanding of where Mr. Archer is coming from when I looked at his "personal forum" - https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=395 . He demonstrates his deep respect for women with threads like "soccer with topless women" and "girls on cam". Birds of a feather.
Trial date set I hesitate to revive this thread because the discussions are inevitably so non-productive. There is, however, a new development: discovery still ends in November, but a trial date has now been set for next April. Outcast with a cause Soccer star Debbie Keller to give deposition in case against well-known college coach By Bonnie DeSimone Tribune staff reporter Published June 15, 2003