Influence at the Intersection of MLS and NWSL (or how to start a good debate)

It was announced today that Mia Hamm Garciaparra is one of 22 part owners of the “new” LA MLS team Los Angeles Football Club (LAFC).

It didn’t take long for the conversation to begin about why Mia would put her money into MLS and not into NWSL. Let me preface the rest of this by saying no one has come forth to say if Mia is, or has been asked to be, involved in NWSL. So there’s that.

I truly see the arguments on both sides of this, but I definitely do not agree with the side that says she should invest in NWSL because she’s Mia Hamm; because she has money and power, because she – I don’t know, “owes” soccer something?

Mia Hamm has carried the torch for women’s soccer in the U.S.A. and in many parts of the world for over 15 years. She was part of the 1999 World Cup team that started the idea that there could even be a women’s soccer league in the United States. She was one of 20 founding players of WUSA in 2001. Mia Hamm has been influential and has lent her name and likeness and experience to so many things supporting women’s soccer I can’t even begin to list them all.

MLS (and NWSL) in the United States is a business, like any other professional sport. If a prominent retired women’s soccer player wants to put her money anywhere in the sport, it is truly a disservice to criticize where.

Has anyone been able to find out if she has been involved in an NWSL team or a team looking to get into the league? Has anyone asked her to get on board? Maybe she is is involved with LAFC looking to incorporate a women’s team in the future. Maybe she’s sick of all the fan back-biting and wants none of it. The fact is, we don’t know if either of these scenarios, or any others are true. Wouldn’t women’s soccer be better served if someone were to answer these questions before they start the discussion?

I guess my problem with the discussion as it stands is it comes from such a negative perspective. Wouldn’t the sport and it’s fans and leagues be better off by celebrating the fact that an ex-women’s soccer player has ascended to this level in the soccer world and look for ways to leverage that?

I always think there will be questions that need answers, but we should make sure we’re asking the right questions.

If you think the right question was asked, I’d like to see your reasoning in the comment. Let’s talk.

We Need to Talk: Meaningful or Meaningless?

Diane:

Had to be said and I couldn’t say it better.

Originally posted on happygosnarky:

wntt_bb_main_tuesdays_0

TV’s first all-female sports talk show hit the air Tuesday night. Toward the end they ran a segment called “Meaningful or Meaningless,” i.e. is Orton over Manuel at QB for the Bills meaningful or meaningless. I thought I’d use that tactic to share my thoughts on the show. So fasten your garter belt, here we go!

Meaningful or Meaningless: There is an all-women sports talk show on national television.

HGS Sez: Meaningful

Whether or not you feel this show is necessary, or has questionable goals, or can succeed, giving a platform to voices that have traditionally been marginalized is a good thing. There is unprecedented visibility for women in sports media right now and rather than wait for an invitation to the men’s sports-media table, a group of women have seized a table of their own (though yes the timing is coincidental and fortuitous). The show may not run for 10…

View original 652 more words

Time To Empty The Bench

Every so often there are so many things going on in the world of sports that even I have a hard time following them all. When that happens I get a kind of ‘opinion overload’, now is one of those times. So, to use a sports analogy I’m going to empty the bench and put all my opinions on the field in one post..here goes.

  • Domestic violence as it relates to sports:
    Domestic violence can never be justified, it can be rationalized, but never justified. I’m not sure why domestic violence is different than just you know, violence, but according to the law it is. If the law singles it out as a separate offense then ALL sports need to have a policy in place to deal with it when it occurs. Because let’s face it, it will occur. Sport is just a microcosm of society and since it hasn’t been eradicated in society, it won’t be eradicated in sport. In my opinion any policy has to include help as well as consequences from the sport entity involved. Every person has done something they are glad they got a chance to grow from and change for the better. I am not and never have been an advocate of zero tolerance. I don’t feel that policy addresses the problem, it only makes it a problem for someone else. I also think that every case is different and a policy has to have enough flexibility not to punish someone for merely being accused.
  • NFL and Sponsor reactions to domestic abuse:
    The NFL was not at all prepared for the backlash they got from the public in regard to the recent cases of domestic abuse, no one will deny that. And they are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to sports realizing that they have a social responsibility that reaches much farther than making small pink things for the ladies. They didn’t get it right, but they too deserve a chance to change. I look at it as allowing them to make the mistakes and address the problems in drafting policy so each and every other sport doesn’t have to, let them bear the burden for their short-sightedness and we all reap the benefits. The fact that the sponsors have jumped on board to spur the NFL along is just an added benefit. Each sponsor has a different social message, so let’s just deal with each of them individually as our conscience sees fit.
  • USSF, NWSL, and domestic violence:
    Just like the NFL, USSF and NWSL don’t have a domestic violence policy that addresses what to do when a player is accused. Honestly, is anyone surprised by this? Soccer is a “civilized” sport, not like that barbaric other football. They need one and the arrest of Hope Solo brought that to light. Unlike that other football, USSF and NWSL has decided to let this play out in court before they assess any penalties. Is this the right thing to do? I think so. I think whatever comes out in court will go a long way to shape the domestic violence policy for USSF going forward.  I also don’t think they ever expected the first alleged offender to be from the women’s side, so they were doubly unprepared.
  • The double standard and domestic violence:
    Once again I think everyone was a little surprised that a (relatively) high profile  female athlete was accused of domestic violence and didn’t really know how to handle it. Within USSF I don’t think we can call this a double standard since we have nothing within the sport to compare it to. (If you know different, please correct me in the comments) As far as sponsors go, you may be able to make a better argument. Nike has suspended an endorsement contract for a male athlete until the verdict is in. Why they don’t do the same for a female athlete, I don’t know. Maybe the court of public opinion isn’t loud enough (snark).
  • The court of public opinion and domestic violence:
    I hate the court of public opinion for several reasons, least of which is it’s propensity to judge by knee-jerk reaction. Just because a video surfaces or some individual looking for their 15 minutes of fame makes some loud accusations, that does not always, note I said not always, mean guilt or result in a conviction. I believe we are a country of laws and as such every accused deserves their day in court..a real court, with real laws and procedures.
  • Abby Wambach is a rock star..and a soccer star..and still relevant..and the youngsters will just have to wait their turn or make a case so good that no one can deny them a spot on the roster. That’s how it’s done, kiddos.
  • Cycling politics aside, these cycling uniforms are horrendous. I don’t care if the Pope designed them.
  • I get my WoSo fix (and other sports I follow) largely from Twitter. Twitter is mean..and great..and mean. I’m having a hard time with that. I love snark and sarcasm, love it! Why can’t folks understand it doesn’t have to be mean and personal to be good?
  • Why do baseball players play in their pajamas these days? Those long uniform pants…
  • WNBA has really stepped it up this year, Brittney Griner has changed the game.
  • Don’t cry that you can’t afford WCQ/WWC tickets when you’ve tweeted at least $700 in jersey purchases in the last year. It’s all about priorities people.
  • I have zero interest in tennis anymore, even Serena can’t make me watch.
  • Sometimes sports, like life, sucks. But sometimes it doesn’t and those are the moments I watch for.

Calm Down and Play On

This is to clarify my tweet to NWSL about smoke at Portland Thorns’ home games.

I sent the tweet to NWSL because by the shots shown on Portland’s YouTube broadcast it appeared that the smoke was in the stands with fans. It was a simple question about the rules, which state flares/smoke by fans is strictly prohibited.

Their reply was that it was part of Portland’s game day atmosphere, under the control of Portland. I mistakenly took that as Portland was choosing to violate the rules. If you follow Merritt Paulson on twitter, you might understand why I thought this to be the case. As it turns out that is not the case. The smoke is set off from a capo stand by the supporters group. It is not set off by a fan and is not in the stands.

I know this to be the case because some level-headed members of their supporters group, Rose City Riveters, took the time to explain it to me. Unfortunately, all the snark and “Portland hater” tweets and subtweets did not explain the process to me.

I don’t hate on teams/players/supporters groups. I have my favorites and I have those I do not like. If I don’t like something I usually state that fact and leave it at that. Occasionally I digress into snark, but not very often.

To me this whole experience is just indicative of how quick people are to look for the worst on twitter. I’ve been guilty of it a time or two, but I try not to be that way. I support the league and the teams in it. I don’t always like the league and I have teams I don’t like, but I hate neither.

I hope this helps some to understand that my question did not arise out of hate, but a concern for safety and adhering to the rules.

If you’d like to discuss this further, please feel free to use the comments.

Blue Crew Ticket Combo Pack

Diane:

Good value, better experience!

Originally posted on KC Blue Crew:

Supporters Section Ticket Combo Pack

Want to save some money? We have the perfect deal for you! With our supporters section ticket combo you will receive: a t-shirt, sunglasses, drawstring bag, and a single game supporters section ticket to a game of your choice. These items if bought individually are a $40 value, so you’re saving $10. This combo is a great way to make any FC Kansas City game an exciting and memorable experience. Without breaking your bank you get to enjoy the game in the fun, lively supporters section and receive some cool merchandise as well. Proceeds from these go to help cover Blue Crew expenses like tailgating and banner supplies. Order yours today to ensure that we will have tickets to the game you want still available!

Click here to order!

View original

The World Cup Experiment

Originally posted on A Foreign Language:

Over the past month the world has erupted in a football (soccer) frenzy. As an avid supporter of the sport, and an ex park player, I couldn’t be happier about it! Every four years FIFA blesses each of its football faithful with one month where living, breathing and talking non-stop football is acceptable even to those outside of the sporting religion.

The World Cup tournament attracts all sorts; those who have been counting down the days since the Spanish packed the trophy in their overhead luggage upon departing South Africa to those who insist on trawling through hours of strategic, tactical, team and individual brilliance to find the negatives (enter diving and Luis Suarez). The World Cup month invites all sorts to get amongst the atmosphere, to ooh and to aah and to behave as self-appointed football analysts.. That is unless of course you are a woman.

Before I continue…

View original 615 more words

A Little Something To Chew On

Yup. I went there. This IS about Luis Suarez and his apparent inability to control his mouth and Hope Solo and her apparent inability to control..I don’t know – drinking maybe? Anger?

These two people have more in common than you might first think. Suarez is a repeat offender having bitten people at least 2 times prior to his World Cup snack. Solo has a history of involvement in a domestic violence situation, on the night before her wedding – although not as the alleged aggressor – prior to her arrest this past weekend. Suarez is a very good soccer player. Solo is a very good soccer player. Both play for club and country. Both have been disciplined by their respective teams, Suarez for club and Solo for country. Both have brought their share of glory and negativity to the sport.

There are also glaring differences. The most obvious is that Suarez is male and Solo is female. Suarez plays for a prestigious men’s side with all the advantages that provides. Solo plays for one of nine teams in a U.S. women’s league trying survive in a pro sports environment. Suarez is being investigated by FIFA and Solo is being charged by Municipal authorities. Suarez faces a fine and suspension, Solo faces a fine and jail time.

Before I go further let me say with no ambiguity that I do not condone violence, domestic or otherwise and I do not condone biting an opponent during a soccer game, but having said that, I do have issues with the way people, journalists and just Janes and Joes, are treating the two offenses and the two players involved.

Suarez’s is the most recent, so I’ll start there. The man bit another player, blatantly, unapologetically and then blamed it on the other guy. This is not the first time or the second, but the third. Twice for club and now once for country. If it was done off the pitch to a family member he could be charged with domestic violence. See where I’m going with this? He has been fined and suspended for both the 1st and 2nd offenses and is now being investigated for the 3rd. Chances are they will give him another fine and suspension, bigger and longer than the first two. He has been given 2 chances to change his behavior and likely will get a third. Is it because of his gender and his ability and his celebrity? Yes and yes and yes. If he was not a talented male sports star he probably would have seen jail time. Not a lot, but the law does not look kindly on repeat offenders. Journalists and Janes and Joes are all over the board on this. Some say ban him from the game. Some say give him a break, he’s under a lot of stress. Some think it’s funny, some don’t. At the end of the day, Suarez hasn’t changed his behavior. He’s a role model, you say? The little boys, and girls, look up to him? All the more reason to make this a teaching moment of what not to do and how to recover if you do happen to go down this path. Too often we want to keep “offenders” for our own selfish pleasure, but what does that teach? That you are allowed unlimited mistakes? That you don’t have to change? That if you are a talented male sports star you get a pass because we like to see you play? If we truly are concerned about the message we send the kids who look up to him, we have to be willing to be tough and consistent. We have to look past gender and talent and celebrity and deal with the offenses fairly, based on the facts. The facts with Suarez are that he has had 2 chances to change already and hasn’t. He is a repeat offender. Should he be banned from playing? Maybe. If he was on the streets and didn’t change his behavior after the first two offenses he might end up in jail. At the very least he would have a “no contact order”. No contact with the game might be a just sentence.

And now to Solo. Worst case scenario: She is guilty of both counts. She did it, hit her nephew and her sister, was drunk and reacted in anger to taunts thrown at her, was pissed and pissed off. I know everyone cannot related to this scenario, but I have gotten into a drunken disagreement with a family member and if the police had been called I might have ended up in Solo’s shoes. In this scenario she is dead wrong, no excuses. So she’s sentenced, 364 days in jail or $5000, per count, (first time offenders with no criminal record typically don’t get jail time, a fine, counseling and time served usually is the norm, however her nephew is a minor and that may change things). Once she pays her fine and does her court ordered counseling she has paid her debt to society and that should be the end of it, but that’s only in a perfect world. There are also all the personal consequences for her actions; alienated friends and family, lost endorsements, sanction from her job, negative reactions from fans and pundits. And our society’s inability to accept that people are human. They make mistakes and have poor judgement, they violate our codes of conduct and our sensibilities. They also can change and often do when presented with their shortcomings.

People are equating her statements made during the 2007 World Cup with her current charges..not the same people. One has nothing to do with the other and shows no pattern, no matter how hard you look. They also want to throw in her comments on Twitter to Brandi Chastain during the 2012 Olympics..also not the same. Being outspoken does not predict violent behavior. Is it possible she has a problem when she drinks? Absolutely. Is it possible she has a problem controlling her anger when she drinks? Absolutely. Is this a reason to throw her out of the sport? Absolutely not. If she had committed these offenses on the pitch she would likely face a fine and suspension. She most likely would not be thrown off a team, based on the treatment her male counterparts have received. Everyone deserves the chance to change and if they must be judged they deserve to be judged fairly, based on the facts. If she successfully fulfills the requirements of the court, accepts and complies with the sanctions of her employers and does not engage in violent behavior going forward, why shouldn’t she be allowed in the sport? She’s a role model, you say? Little girls, and boys, look up to her? All the more reason to make this a teaching moment of what not to do and how to recover if you do happen to go down this path. Too often we want to get rid of “offenders” to make ourselves feel better, but what does that teach? That you aren’t allowed any mistakes? That you can’t recover from them? That you have to be perfect? If Solo doesn’t comply and does re-offend, have at her. But until that time we owe it to those kids we say we are so concerned about not to send a message of failure, but hope.