Yates Report Highlights Abuse in NWSL

what an absolute mess. Could this mean the folding of the Thorns if they're forced to sell them and the Timbers? Or at the least, relocate them? Also curious to see if any other teams' ownership is in jeopardy and if they could halt any expansion in the near future.

 

I think "no" to every question there, save for the "other teams' ownership".

The Timbers and Thorns are far too popular in Portland for there not to be someone who could be easily convinced to buy the teams and keep them there.

Whisler in CHI has been asked to step down before, and those calls have only gotten stronger with the report release. Since CHI is one of the "independent" teams, and in one of the biggest media markets, he might be the easiest one to be "forced out". Not sure if it'll be as in the cards for Malik or Neace to sell, both because there are associated teams and because the local market may not have a buyer. If they *do* sell, then relocations might be likely.

I don't see this halting expansion at all. Remember that the NWSL FO had its leadership overturned last year as well as all of the coaches that were let go, plus the CBA has now been in place for a while. If anything, the previous empowerment of the NWSLPA would have been more likely to cause expansion interest to waver (i.e. higher overhead and oversight) than this report will because - aside from some of the owners still in place (which would only indirectly affect new ownership groups) - most of the problem people have already been removed.

 

Well, forget waiting: POR have fired both Wilkinson and Golub
https://theathletic.com/3660347/2022/10/05/timbers-thorns-gavin-wilkinson-mike-golub-fired/
Owner MP is still on, of course.

 

Considering the termination was after MP stepped aside, I wonder if it was the interim President Heather Davis that fired them. While I'm sure Davis would have informed MP, it seems odd that MP would announce they were all stepping aside from their duties with regards to the Thorns yesterday and then to announce Wilkinson and Golub were terminated today.

 

The initial statement the Thorns released from Paulson said, "We have promised the NWSL that we will not do media or make any public statements related to the investigation until the joint NWSL/NWSLPA Investigation is released in November, which is tremendously difficult." This was the same statement that indicated Paulson, Wilkinson, and Golub would be stepping aside through the NWSL playoffs. Later, the quoted language was removed from the statement. It seems reasonable to interpret this as suggesting the NWSL saw the initial language and decided it was ok for the Thorns to go ahead and say (or do) something. Thus it is conceivable the decision on Wilkinson and Golub had been made but was on hold based on an understanding the NWSL wanted everything to stay in place until release of the second investigative report, but that once things were clarified with the NWSL, the termation of Wilkinson and Golub could proceed -- and thus the timing.

 

Per EQZ (yesterday evening)
8 p.m. ET: The Chicago Red Stars board of directors announces that it voted to remove Arnim Whisler as chairman, immediately transition him out of a board seat, and “codify his removal from any further participation with either club or board operations.”

 

It's a shame. The Club that I have supported from it's inception as an original Season Ticket Holder, from the day back in 2009 when a caravan of Red Stars supporters traveled from Chicago to down state Illinois across the river from St. Louis to watch the Red Stars play St Louis Athletica and where I first met like fans who support the women's game like SiberianThunderT. It has come to this. Very sad.

 

The Yates Report — as well as the reporting of journalists like Meg Linehan and Molly Hensley-Clancy — is important and, on the whole, excellent. If it has a significant flaw, it's in its treatment of Chicago Red Stars ownership, specifically Arnim Whisler. Whisler isn't blameless nor is he, at this time, indispensable, so perhaps it's both inevitable that he's forced to sell his share in the club and necessary for the league and its players to move on.
It's important, however, that at least some people retain their critical thinking skills and the Yates Report fails the critical thinking test in tailoring the report in such a way to heap blame on Whisler, conflating Dames' verbal abuse and bullying with his sexual abuse and suggesting, through innuendo, that Whisler knew about all of it. After detailing Dames' awful treatment of players at both his youth clubs and at the Red Stars, the Report turns to Whisler's culpability by leaping in with quotes from Red Stars players that "he knew", "if he says he doesn't know, he's lying"

Of course the players are very believable, very credible witnesses... when it comes to CONCRETE, SPECIFIC ACTIONS THEY WITNESSED. But of course the question is, KNEW WHAT? What Dames did with the girls on his youth club, the Eclipse, detailed page after sickening page in the Report?

A basic element of critical thinking is to ask what did someone know and when did they know it; and what's the evidence that they actually had the information available to them. Whisler of course knew Dames yelled & screamed at his players; he knew it was abusive or some of the players found it abusive.

I also won't say Whisler had zero knowledge of actions crossing the line between adult male coach and younger women players — one on one dinners, late night text messages, things which we know should raise red flags. But what "everyone knew" at the youth club, Eclipse, was not as noticeable at the Red Stars, which the Yates Report does let on but only after pages of horrifying the reader with incidents that scream out for someone to do something, either other coaches or parents or staff members at Eclipse or someone in the youth soccer community.

***
Naturally we're sympathetic to the anger and frustration of the Red Stars players, who have now called for Whisler to sell his stake in the team. It's impossible for me, though, to escape the feeling that Whisler is bearing the blame for all the anger and frustration that young women soccer players and fans in Chicago feel towards people in youth soccer INCLUDING PARENTS, who had far more reason than Whisler did to know Dames was exploiting and preying upon children and young women.

***
Whisler is also a convenient target for the lawyers and paralegals hired to investigate what other people do wrong. They like to have an impact; they want their reports to go off like a bomb. For a report which curiously fails to provide a whole lot more than what Meg Linehan and Molly Hensley-Clancy reported in the Athletic and the Washington Post — such as on what NWSL Pres Jeff Plush did or didn't do — Whisler's convenient because he's not an MLS owner and therefore more vulnerable.

In setting out to write a report, the authors often decide early on, are they going to say whether the organization they're scrutinizing is doing pretty well or are they going to write a damning report. Clearly they felt a need to write a damning report suggesting problems going unsolved and an organization in crisis with the safety and well-being of its players at risk. Of course, it's what we all anticipated because we know the players haven't had the protection they've deserved and we don't want the problems swept under the rug

But to make that point it's necessary to downplay or ignore that 7 or 8 coaches have already been fired as a result of abuses or the reports of Linehan and Hensley-Clancy. Two teams had already changed owners (Washington Spirit and Utah Royals). At least one GM had been sacked. And two current coaches were on months-long suspensions while accusations against them were being investigated.

Maybe it's necessary for the greater good — and it is a greater good to make sure players are protected and listened to, but some of us weren't born yesterday and we can see that authors of reports like this are anxious to make an impact, and are willing to write it in a way to make that impact

***
Journalists and fans of women's soccer can say owners like Whisler should sell their teams, and maybe it's the easiest way forward. But it's also critical thinking to say, Sure. Now.

Because now we have new teams popping up and new investors wanting to buy in and help make this a better sport. That's great. They weren't around in 2014 when Whisler could first have been accused of not following up on Dames. They weren't around in 2010/2011 when NWSL's predecessor, WPS, was dying and Whisler (and Whisler's family) was one of only a few owners keeping the dream of professional women's soccer alive.

Perhaps Whisler has to be sacrificed for women's soccer to put its past behind us, a past its embarrassed by, like having grown up poor. But in some way, truth always matters and that some people think as if truth matters, even if all their friends discard it out of convenience. There are going to be times when the future of a country depends on truth mattering; and truth will only matter if there are people for whom truth matters, out of intellectual habit and belief.

 

Whisler also knew Dames was not qualified to coach the Red Stars. He had no A license for all the years he was there, and he never made an effort to get it. That in itself shows you how Whisler looked the other way in an obvious factual situation. He did not care enough about the players to get them a coach who was qualified.

That leads to footnote #1386, which I just found.

For nearly eight of the nine years that Rory Dames was head coach of the Red Stars, he did not have an A license.

Instead, the NWSL applied for -- and received -- a waiver from U.S. Soccer.

8/9 years!! pic.twitter.com/aC7GMIqyv6

— Alex Azzi (@ByAlexAzzi) October 4, 2022

 

Very well said. I saw and remember the days when Whisler's family was selling merchandise at WPSL Red Stars games to raise enough money so that the team can travel and have meals. When all the other owners of the Red Stars bailed after WPS, Whisler took on the brand and continued the team. None of these reports mentions that amount of money Whisler and his family may have lost over 14 years of keeping this team going. I am sure he is well off but does not sure he has deep pockets. IMO, he had to do what he had to do to keep it going, house players in his buildings, fix his own plumbing, etc. I'm not defending him, just pointing out what this article misses out on. We Red Stars fans in the stands enjoyed the ride every year!

 

Also, when it comes to youth soccer and you can see it all the time, everywhere, the screaming coaches sometimes just yelling at kids without giving much instruction. You tend to wonder, why would a parent let their kid be coached by this person? Parents are just as responsible to monitor abuse and do something about it as people in positions of authority. In my opinion.

 

For now, I'll re-post what I said at Equalizer —
Following on the heels of both the Yates Report and reporting by Meg Linehan (The Athletic) & Molly Hensley-Clancy (Washington Post), this new report is underwhelming and will serve to trivialize the very real abuses which those earlier reports dealt with.
James Clarkson was suspended largely based on his angry belief (mistaken or not) that players drank alcohol before a preseason match with Pumas?!
This is Me-Too Lawyering. We, too, can write a Big Report. We, too, can get people suspended or fired, and chalk up Billable Hours for our firm.
Some people on social media are questioning the timing of the release, right during a World Cup semifinal. What they're trying to bury is this report doesn't add a whole lot to what we've previously learned, and that the two major consequences of the investigation so far — the suspension of Clarkson and firing of Cromwell — are underwhelming in comparison to the abuses committed by Paul Riley & Christy Holly, which were shocking and demanded action

 

You don't think Cromwell's behavior demanded action? Based on the report she was trying to damage the career and livelihood of players. Not to mention force them to uproot their lives. Call me crazy, but that is a pretty big f'n deal.

 

Retaliation by a coach for being reported for serious abuse is of course itself a serious concern. But what's "favoritism" in and of itself? Not playing some players as much as others? Not thinking some players are giving 100% while others are? Coaches aren't allowed to make coaching decisions anymore? If, say, a coach was showing favoritism because of personal relationships with players, of course that's a problem and it's the kind of problem which rightly, thankfully, finally has led to coaches getting fired in NWSL.

But nothing of the sort is alleged here. Orlando was not a good team. It was a mess when Cromwell got there. It was the reason she was hired. Because it wasn't a good team and it's not hard to imagine that the prickly nature of some of the players themselves was part of the problem.

We're acting as if players are never the problem and what we're moving toward is privileging those players — all they have to is complain first, and then anything that happens after that is "retaliation". I've never seen the movies "Mean Girls" or "Heathers" so maybe I have the plot on them wrong, but I imagine if we ever wanted mean girls to take over a team and make sure they couldn't be stopped, this is exactly how we would go about doing it.

 

So you did not actually read the report then. There was more detail in there. Favoritism is the least of Cromwell’s issues. Sexual comments by Cromwell to players, threatening to waive or trade players who participated in meetings with management. Favoritism was just mentioned as additional information. It was hardly the core issue.

 

It was one main reason cited for the initial complaints. OK a dd some (alleged) sexual comments about how some players looked.
The retaliation is alleged to have stemmed from players complaining about these things. "Did YOU read the report?"

We're starting to elevate every accusation of coaching misconduct to the level of sexual abuse and harassment which made changes, firings, reports and newspaper stories necessary. We all want to support players but the fanboy/fangirl instinct is such that we simply don't see how we're making coaching impossible for all but the most perfect Pollyannas in the world. We're acting like there aren't Heathers or Mean Girls out there who will abuse the protections we're trying to put in place in order to protect themselves.

In Houston, a majority of the team thought Clarkson was "tough but fair" — at least the report was decent enough to publish that finding.

We're in the process of making NWSL coaching positions very undesirable to a big pool of the soccer coaches in the world. It's hard to imagine a coach from any major college program choosing to abandon their cushy NCAA job for the NWSL unless they're somehow being driven out. Unless a coach is confident they are the sweetest, nicest, "nobody-can-hate-me" kind of person, why would they trade the job security of college for this madhouse?

 

Cromwell was not fired for the favoritism. She was spoken to about the concerns by management, and they were all moving forward together after that. However, both Cromwell and her assistant are alleged to have retaliated against those who were part of the meeting. So what Cromwell was fired for was the second act. Threatening careers and livelihoods of players for expressing concerns about her to management. That is a big f'n deal. The third assistant Reis did not cooperate with investigators, and was accused of telling players to say positive things to the investigators. The fact that Reis behaved this way shows there was something there. Innocent people do not need to manipulate investigations.

I did not read the Clarkson report, but he was also not fired. His contract just expired, and will not be renewed.

For the life of me, I will never understand why coaches treat players like shit. They are all on the same team striving for the same results. Invest in them as people and they will run through a wall for the team.

 

Tony DiCicco left Kelly O'Hara off his U20 team because she wasn't "buying-in" to what he was trying to do. Should he have been fired and banned from soccer for emotional abuse? For potentially affecting the career of a player? For not giving so much wondrous love that O'Hara was willing to run through walls for him?
"Buying-in" is a standard term we hear all the time relating to coaching and team-building. If you're correct, the term is either meaningless or it's a euphemism for emotional abuse.

Honestly.

 

OK.. There is a huge difference between not buying into a coach's plan and a coach retaliating against players for bring up concerns to management, even if those concerns are unfounded. Whether or not you agree that the initial complaint was valid or not, it does not justify the retribution for making the complaint and participating in the investigation. Seriously, managers get "false" complaints from employees all the time, that doesn't mean the manager can punish them for making it...

 

So the difference is DiCicco cut O'Hara before she had folks like us telling her to lodge a complaint first. We all relate to the players and tend to sympathize with them but obviously some of us don't want to maintain any sense of perspective or balance

In related news ->
As fans we're going to speculate on what coach we want for our favorite teams when the need arises.Guess what? We can pretty much forget it now. They'd be nuts to come here now with lawyers & journalists crawling over the place

Statement from Houston attorney David Minces who represents former @HoustonDash Coach James Clarkson: pic.twitter.com/NnZPM8HSFO

— Mark Berman (@MarkBerman_) December 15, 2022

 

oooof, I come back from a week at a conference and boy have I missed a lot, NWSL and otherwise. (Not gonna touch the forum-drama in the FIFA rankings thread with a ten-foot pole.) I'll go to NWSL expansion in a bit, but this stuff here...

It does seem that there's a different standard for coach behavior in WoSo vs BroSo, and I think that's a statement on the lax standard in BroSo. It's telling that the NWSL report came out in the middle of the Men's WC semifinals, because yikes on just about everything in the report. I'm gad everything has come to light so the league and everyone around it can deal with the issue, but still really disappointed that it all happened in the first place. All power to the NWSLPA for forcing change here.

 

How do we know we've gone far enough? When it begins to look like we're going too far.
It's the old pendulum metaphor. The further it swings one way, the further it will swing back the other way. It's just the way of the world. It's almost impossible to get it to swing just right

It was important players get more power over their working conditions in the league. This is a good thing and it's impossible to get it perfect.

At same time, I don't think we're wrong to recognize when the pendulum is getting nudged too far in the other direction. The league is creating a situation where most coaches must feel they're walking on eggshells and it's simply going to keep many good coaches from even considering taking a job in the NWSL

The effect may not be readily apparent — it would be more so if we were in Europe as NWSL teams would be competing in UEFA Champions League for example — but shrinking the quality of the coaching pool is going to compound other factors leading to other countries catching up to and surpassing American women's soccer. Within a decade, the US is going to be bowing out in the quarterfinals of World Cups & Olympics with increasing regularity

 

I take it you are an abusive coach. The pendulum has not swung too far. The abusive coaches need to be removed from the game, so good on the NWSL for shining a light on this. Casey Stoney has straight up said that this is not an NWSL issue. It is a global problem in the women's game. Good coaches will not worry about working in the NWSL. In fact, they will appreciate the healthy environment that the NWSL and its players are now creating. The modern coach knows the boundaries, and ethical coaches do not worry about crossing them.

It is the unethical, screamers, and predators who will worry about working in the NWSL. So this is a good thing. They will not bother to apply.

 

As a young and shy teenager, on the way home from school I naively accepted a stranger’s offer of a ride home from a bus stop. I ended up getting sexually molested. Fortunately, I got extremely scared, got out of the car, and ran 3 miles home carrying my backpack. I hid the incident away and did not speak of it to anyone for 25 years.

With this and other experiences and perhaps given my nature anyway, I am an absolutist on sexual abuse. I believe it should be a no tolerance offense, cause for immediate firing, and cause for the offender never to be allowed into a similar situation again. I also believe no excuse is good enough for someone with knowledge of an offense not to come forward with that knowledge. And, I have become convinced that reporting such an offense up the established channels is not good enough, if those higher up in the channels allow the offender to get into similar situations. In other words, if no one else is will do it, one who knows must go public. This is the only way to stop this kind of behavior. The alternative is to say that I have a good excuse for not going public, and that excuse is more important than stopping the offender from offending again.

In my mind, Mana Shim followed the right standard when she went public against Paul Riley because she felt that, whatever the consequences for her, she could not allow Riley to do to other women what he had done to her.

With that, here is what I think the NWSL protocols should be, so far as sexual abuse is concerned. If you read carefully, you will see that they are far stricter than anything that has been adopted or approved so far. In particular, the reporting mandates apply to everyone within the NWSL umbrella, including players.

DRAFT PROTOCOLS ON SEXUAL CONDUCT TARGETING A PLAYER BY A STAFF PERSON WHO HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE PLAYER

1. There shall be no confidentiality or non-disparagement agreements related to actual or asserted sexual conduct targeting a player by a staff person who has authority over the player.

2. There shall be no claiming of confidentiality, whether based on attorney-client privilege, attorney work product, advice of counsel, or any other rationale related to actual or asserted sexual conduct targeting a player by a staff person who has authority over the player.

3. There shall be no retaliation or imposition of negative consequences against any person for reporting sexual conduct targeting a player by a staff person who has authority over the player. This does not prevent the imposition of negative consequences on the reporting person where the person intentionally made false allegations.

4. No staff person who has authority over a player shall date, maintain a romantic or sexual relationship with, or otherwise socialize in a small group with the player. This does not prevent players and those in authority from attending large team and non-team social functions where both are present.

5. Any person within the organization who is aware of actual or asserted sexual conduct targeting a player by a staff person who has authority over the player must report the actual or asserted abuse or conduct through organization and NWSL channels established for receiving the report. The report must include all information the person has about the actual or asserted conduct.

6. On receiving a report of actual or asserted sexual conduct, the organization shall (1) conduct a thorough and documented investigation, (2) reach a conclusion on whether the reported conduct did or did not occur or whether it was not possible to reach a conclusion one way or the other, and (3) prepare a written report detailing the investigation including all information reported and collected, the conclusion, and the rationale for the conclusion, all as quickly as is reasonably possible. A copy of the investigative report shall be given to the person submitting the initial report. If the investigative report concludes that the conduct did occur, it shall be released publicly. If the investigative report concludes it was not possible to reach a conclusion one way or the other, it shall be passed up through organization and NWSL channels established for receiving inconclusive reports and, on the organization or the NWSL learning that any potential future soccer-related employer is considering hiring or has hired the person reported against, the organization and the NWSL shall give the report to the potential or actual employer. If the investigative report concludes that the person reporting the abuse or conduct intentionally made false allegations, the investigative report and any negative consequences imposed on the person shall be released publicly.

7. Any staff person who has authority over a player and who targets the player with sexual conduct shall be terminated. In addition, notice of the termination or the specific discipline imposed shall be included in the investigative report.

8. A staff person shall be considered to have authority over a player if the person has the authority to make or provide input into any decision affecting playing time, any aspect of player compensation, player retention on the roster, trades, player injury status, any aspect of the player contract, or any other matter that may have a significant effect on the player in her role as a player.

9. There shall be no exceptions to these requirements and no excuses for not following them.