Category: Sports

Posted on

Talkin’ trash

We see you, Angel Reese.

You were not the face of this NCAA Final Four. 

That distinction belonged to Caitlin Clark, the Iowa phenom whose prolific scoring in the women’s tournament has dominated the media coverage, from pre-game hype reels to post-game studio analysis. 

Clark was deserving of the accolades. She dropped a record 41 points on previously unbeaten and defending national champion South Carolina in an electrifying semifinal game that became an instant classic. Her game is an entertaining mix of three-point bombs and dime-dropping on pick and rolls. It’s not surprising she had the media swooning.

But you are a superstar of a different flavor. 

You are audacious. You trademarked the nickname, “Bayou Barbie.” You wear a crown for photos; play in false eyelashes with flowing hair and manicured nails. That swag is real. Your game is a spectacular mix of finesse and power. You put up 34 double-doubles this season, a feat never before accomplished. You were named MVP of the finals.

It’s easy to see how all you Tigers might have taken a little extra satisfaction in hanging an unheard-of 102 points on Iowa after being over-shadowed in the walk-up to the title game by Clark and the Hawkeyes. Who can blame you for handing back to Clark a little of the trash-talking she had been dishing out all tournament?

So, why was it such a big deal?

You nailed it in responding to media questions about the post-game flexing:

“I don’t fit the narrative. I don’t fit in the box that y’all want me to be in. I’m too hood, I’m too ghetto, y’all told me that all year. But when other people do it y’all don’t say nothin.”

The dog whistling was obvious, but the whole thing might have faded quickly if it didn’t cut so close to the bone.

Two days earlier South Carolina coach Dawn Staley called out the shade being thrown at her squad’s defense-minded, inside game after the Gamecocks lost to Iowa in the semi-finals.

Iowa coach Lisa Bluder in a post-game interview suggested rebounding against Carolina to “going to a bar fight.” She meant it as a compliment.

Staley took umbrage.

“The truth about our team? That’s a good question. We’re not bar fighters. We’re not thugs. We’re not monkeys. We’re not street fighters,” Staley told reporters at a news conference.

“If you really knew them, if you really knew them, like you really want to know other players that represent this game, you would think differently. So don’t judge us by the color of our skin. Judge us by how we approach the game.”

Many don’t want to see race in all of this.

Iowa is one of the whitest teams in D1 college basketball. Of nine players who took the floor in the final, seven are white. Compare that to LSU, where all eight players who got into the game are black. And South Carolina, where nine of the 10 in the semi-final are black. This in a sport where more than half of all D1 players are black.

But the prejudice isn’t in line-ups or any player’s or coach’s intentions. 

The racism is too often inherent in media coverage, and the words that are chosen to represent the athletes, coaches, fans, and their actions on the court.

Naming it and shaming such behavior should be encouraged.

We see you, Angel Reese.

Posted on

FIFA’s long path to equality

This week, FIFA announced it would triple the prize money it awards to teams competing in the women’s World Cup, from $50 million to $150 million.

“This year for FIFA is the year of women. It’s a women’s (year),” President Gianni Infantino said at the organization’s annual meeting in Rwanda. “As a father of four daughters, four beautiful daughters I should add, I know very well how much attention we need to give to women in our lives. FIFA is no different in that.”

Woohoo! Thanks, daddy.

For all the self-congratulatory trumpeting and wide-eyed media headlines, the increase is incremental progress and it’s driven by FIFA’s cynical attempt to deflect public criticism by reframing its own paternalism.

The decision — a few months ahead of the tournament in Australia and New Zealand — stems not from FIFA trying to do the right thing, but from public pressure exerted as the top women’s soccer teams in the world have demanded equal treatment from FIFA and their own federations. It also comes in the wake of a public backlash over FIFA taking a hefty fee from the misogynist government of Saudi Arabia to sponsor the women’s tournament.

It’s hard to believe, then, that the sudden boost in the women’s prize money is the result of a sincere effort by FIFA to do the right thing when it comes to gender equality.

The fact remains that the prize pool for women’s teams, even at its increased level, is a fraction of the prize pool for men’s teams.

The men’s prize pool in Qatar totaled $440 million. The cup winner, Argentina, took home $42 million. The sixteen teams that didn’t make it out of the group stage each received $9 million. In other words, the worst men’s team got a bigger prize than the best women’s team.

Infantino pledged to equalize the prize pools for men’s and women’s teams in the next World Cup tournaments, in 2026 and 2027. “Today, (we are) embarking on a historic journey for women’s football and for equality,” he told the meeting. “This will lead us on a path to equal pay.”

It was unclear why it will take four years to travel that path.

Infantino complained about TV networks, specifically those that are publicly financed, being unwilling to pay more for broadcast rights. (He also complained about their critical coverage of FIFA.) That’s unlikely to change in four years. It certainly won’t increase enough to cover the cost to “equalize the prize pools.” 

And it’s not like the men’s prize pool hasn’t ballooned in the last generation.

Over the last 20 years, the top men’s prize has grown fivefold, from $8 million in 2002. Even accounting for inflation, the increase has been exponential.

The men’s teams have been awarded prize money for years. FIFA didn’t pay prize money to women’s teams until 2007 when cup winner Germany received $1 million out of a $5.6 million pool. In 2019, the women’s prize pool totaled $30 million. The men’s winner in 2018, France, was awarded $38 million.

How paltry was the women’s prize pool?

The $50 million was about equal to the $48 million budgeted by FIFA to cover training and travel expenses for the men’s team, apart from the prize money.

Posted on

BG is back. Where’s the joy?

Nothing was triumphant in Brittney Griner’s return to the United States.

It was, to be sure, a relief and a joy, to her family and friends. But it came at a cost.

In order to persuade Russia to free Griner following a drug conviction, U.S. negotiators agreed to cut short by six years the prison term of the notorious Russian arms deal, Viktor Bout, whom the media regularly aggrandizes as the Merchant of Death.

Some, especially conservatives, are infuriated that Bout was released at all.

Others are aggrieved that Russia refused to release Paul Whelan, a former Marine working as the head of global security for BorgWarner, which has no offices in Russia but vouched for Whelan’s work visa, the Detroit Free Press reported. Whelan, arrested in 2018, was convicted of espionage and sentenced to 16 years in a labor camp.

The implication in both complaints is that the U.S. made a bad deal — that Griner’s freedom was less important than Whelan’s or Bout’s freedom. 

It’s more than that, though.

Griner is a 6-foot-nine black woman who identifies as queer. She wears long dreadlocks and a multitude of tattoos. She moves with an athletic swagger and she was arrested on drug charges.

In the mainstream view, those details are strikes against her.

Griner is an exceptional athlete. She’s twice won Olympic gold medals; a college national championship and a WNBA title. She was a college All America and a six-time  WNBA all-star. She was in Russia to play in a professional league on a contract that more than doubles her “supermax” WNBA salary.

She was detained while going through Russian customs in early March. Authorities said they found two cannabis vape cartridges and less than a gram “hashish” oil. Griner was charged with smuggling drugs and sentenced in August to nine years in prison. 

Griner’s detainment came shortly after Russia’s invaded Ukraine and amid widespread condemnation from European and American leaders. At one point President Biden ad-libbed a line in his speech to say of Putin, “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” The White House later denied the president was calling for regime change.

It’s not inconceivable that Putin saw Griner as a bargaining chit.

Beyond the geo-political intrigue, Griner’s “crime” in Russia is something that is legal in many places in the U.S. Griner says she uses prescription cannabinoids for pain management.

For many political opportunists, Griner represents a perfect storm of race, drugs, gender, and sexuality tinged with anti-Americanism.

It makes it easy — almost sensible — for them to complain that sparing Griner nine years in prison on trumped up charges was too high a price to pay. If she had been white, or male, or straight, or patriotic — like the accused spy Paul Whelan, perhaps —then it might have been worth the deal.

Which is why Griner’s return to the US has seemed — publicly at least— as less than a triumph.

It’s too bad the questions about her release have over-taken support (or even joy) for her return.

At a White House news conference, Cherelle Griner recognized the bittersweet event. 

“Today, my family is whole. But as you all are aware, there are so many other families who are not whole,” she said.

“BG is not here to say this, but I will gladly speak on her behalf and say that BG and I will remain committed to the work of getting every American home, including Paul, whose family is in our hearts today. As we celebrate BG being home, we do understand that there are still people out here who are enduring what I endured the last nine months of missing tremendously their loved ones.”

Griner has been through an ordeal. She was a political prisoner, not a criminal. She cut her braids while in prison, according to reports, because the prison was so cold they would freeze before they could dry after she washed them.

The first thing she did in a gym at the military base in Texas after her return was to dunk a basketball.

Posted on

Led by a woman, UC men win DIII title

University of Chicago men’s soccer NCAA DIII champion. Credit: University of Chicago

The University of Chicago men’s soccer team won the NCAA Division III national championship on Saturday, led by first-year coach Julie Sitch.

Sitch is the first woman to lead an NCAA men’s soccer team to a national championship.

Why is that a big deal?

In winning the title, Sitch’s success helps dismantle the fallacy that women can’t lead (or that men won’t follow a woman). The Maroons beat Williams College 2-0 to win the title, completing a historic, undefeated season, 22-0-1.

There are women who coach men’s teams, though not very many. According to the NCAA’s 45 Years of Title IX report, women hold just 4.6% of head coaching positions across all divisions of men’s teams in the NCAA.

Julie Sitch
Credit: University of Chicago

“The more we can see it, the more we can envision women in these (coaching) positions,” Sitch told Medill Reports earlier this year

Opening opportunities to women will help prove that coaching is about coaching, not gender. “For me, it doesn’t make a difference if it’s men or women,” she said. “I just want to get the best out of these athletes, help them pursue their dreams and goals, and my culture for that doesn’t change.”

Sitch is a home-grown talent

At suburban Oswego High School, she was Illinois Gatorade Women’s High School Soccer Player of the Year in 2002. At DePaul University, she broke the school’s career records in goals and assists. She was the 2003 Conference USA Player of the Year and was a 2005 All-Big East first-team selection. She made the Under-21 U.S. National Team and played professionally until 2015.

She took up coaching in 2015 as an assistant on the University of Chicago women’s team, which reached the NCAA semifinals in 2016 and the national championship game in 2017. She took over as the University of Illinois-Chicago head coach from 2018-19 and in 2020 joined the Chicago Red Stars in the NWSL as an assistant coach.

In April, she was named head coach of the University of Chicago men’s team.

Posted on

Legendary

I am not a tennis fan.

Still, I was transfixed by the US Open and the farewell to Serena Williams.

Serena Williams sending love to the US Open crowd.
Photo credit: US Open

I could have done without the Oprah voice-over tribute (though I loved the hype video with Queen Latifah) as well as some of the cheesy post-match, on-court interviews/toasts/statements.

But, my, Serena did sparkle.

She has completely co-opted what Billie Jean King once characterized as one of the “good clothes sports” — tennis, golf, skating — where female athletes were encouraged to compete. Her flowing black entry cape and her tennis/evening wear court apparel were perfect for her primetime turn at sold-out Arthur Ashe Stadium.

More captivating, underneath all of that high style, was the pure, once-in-a-generation athletic greatness.

Williams, 40, had played only a few matches in total the previous year. She was thick and strong and confident. Her shot-making was brilliant. She was resilient; remarkable. Every shot drew the crowd’s applause.

She came in unseeded and cruised in her first-round match 6-3, 6-3. She stepped up in the next round as a clear underdog against World #2 Anett Kontaveit, who was three when Williams won her first US Open title. Williams provided an epic coda to her career with a two-and-half-hour exhibition of guts and glamor, winning narrowly 7-6, 2-6, 6-2. Williams would lose in a three-hour, three-set, third-round thriller.

Some suggest that had she not played doubles with her sister, Venus Williams, between her second- and third-round singles matches, she might have had a shot at a 24h Grand Slam singles title.

She brooked no such talk. In her farewell, it was important for her to honor a legacy that is completely intertwined, she said. “Without Venus, there would be no Serena.”

Ahead of the Open, in (another) cover story for Vogue magazine, Williams said she will “evolve away from tennis.” She said it was a transition rather than a retirement, which seems wise for a 40-year-old who’s at the midpoint of her life.

At her post-match news conference, Williams was less definitive. Asked if this is definitely her last tournament, she smiled. “Yeah, I’ve been pretty vague about it, right?” she said. “I’m going to stay vague because you never know.”

Whether she returns or not, her turn at the US Open leaves no doubt about her legendary status as the greatest women’s tennis player of all time.

Posted on

Kobe’s legacy

My immediate reaction to reports of Kobe Bryant’s death was sorrow.

I’ve never been a big fan. I certainly appreciated his skills, although I take exception to Magic Johnson’s statement that Kobe was the greatest Laker ever. (Fine for you to abdicate, Magic, but what about Jerry West or Kareem?) When it comes to the NBA, I’m more of a Bill Walton girl. Then again, the news of someone’s death always brings an outpouring of love. The sadness and grief make us want to look for the goodness.

Kobe Bryant at a WNBA game with his daughter, Gianna.

Among the praise was considerable focus on his love for the women’s game, from coaching his 13-year-old daughter, who also died in the helicopter crash along with seven others, to his mentoring of Sabrina Ionescu, the University of Oregon phenom who tearfully took the court for a game Sunday afternoon, shortly after the news broke.

Even so, after more than an hour of hagiography, I started to get annoyed. ESPN reporters failed to provide any context to Bryant’s life and career. Yes, he was an incredible athlete; a hall-of-fame lock; a prolific scorer. He was also an “alleged” rapist.

In 2003, while the 27-year old Kobe was rehabbing an injury in Colorado, a 19-year-old hotel staffer accused him of rape. The police reports verify her account of a brutal attack, including bending her over a chair and choking her hard enough leave bruises. He told police, according to a transcript of his interview, choking is “my thing” and said he didn’t stop until he asked if he could ejaculate on her face and she said no. A month later, he admitted to being unfaithful and bought his wife, Vanessa, a $4 million, 8-carat purple diamond “apology” ring.

He was charged but never tried because the young woman, whose reputation had been publicly smeared by Kobe’s legal team, declined to testify. In exchange, Kobe made a public apology. “Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did,” he said in a written statement.

It is critically important, amid the public sorrow and grief, to provide the details of the case against him because, it seems to me, that experience helped reshape his life in a profound way.

Perhaps the charges against him helped him see his actions through a different lens.

I’m certain that rearing four daughters also helped him reframe what transpired that night. What father doesn’t worry about the predatory culture in which we raise boys to become men and pursue women, even to the point that President Trump can talk about grabbing women by the pussy and dismiss it as “locker room talk.”

The redemption for Kobe, I think, was in his involvement in sports for women and girls. His second child, Gigi, was an aspiring basketball star. He became her personal and team coach. They were often photographed together attending major sports events featuring women’s teams.

Kobe became a huge supporter of women’s professional basketball and the women’s US national soccer team and professional women’s tennis.

He had a close bond with Ionescu, a California kid who went to Oregon and has posted more triple-doubles than any other player, male or female, in NCAA history. She surpassed the Pac-12 conference record for assists last week, besting the mark set by Gary Payton, who became an NBA star. On Sunday, after the fourth-ranked Ducks defeated the seventh-ranked Oregon State Beavers, Ionescu said she was dedicating the season to Kobe: “Everything I do, I do it for him,” she said.

Kobe’s legacy as a supporter of women is as important as his accomplishments in the NBA. It also shows that we as people can learn and grow from even the worst mistakes we make.

Kobe was not perfect, and it’s important to remember that, as well as the 81-point game, the 18 all-star teams, and the five NBA championships. Perhaps we can conclude that his transformation as a human being was even more meaningful than his success as an athlete.