Stanford softball

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

May 30, 2015
8
0
Did Title IX investigators clear him of all accusations, or just Title IX issues? Players claimed favoritism, giving players derogatory nicknames, mishandling a player's concussion, pressuring hurt players to get back on the field, breaking practice rules, ignoring complaints about alcohol use among players and employing a guy like Marcello. Did the Title IX investigators have an opinion on those things?

I'm talking about something that I know nothing about beyond what I've read. I'm not claiming that the coach should've been fired. I don't know. I'm just saying I've not read anything that makes me take sides on it. I just find it hard to believe that an 18-year coach is forced out because a group of players came to the AD to complain about playing time. Also find it hard to believe that a good coach is going to be subject to a revolt of this many players. But, maybe I'm naive. Hope we get more out of Stanford before long. Will be interesting to see if Rittman is a head coach again soon. That might tell us more about the court of public opinion among those in college athletics.

well since you seem to know all about the complaints, can you tell us what a title ix investigator is empowered to investigate? because all those complaints in the outside world would seem to point to a "hostile work environment" claim, but if you know what the investigator's powers are, then you can answer your own question. how many players are you saying "revolted"? my understanding is that there were five at the meeting along with parents who met with the ad. none of the other players were invited, which is how the five got away with claiming to have authorization to speak on behalf of five freshmen on the team.
 
Jun 27, 2011
5,089
0
North Carolina
well since you seem to know all about the complaints, can you tell us what a title ix investigator is empowered to investigate? because all those complaints in the outside world would seem to point to a "hostile work environment" claim, but if you know what the investigator's powers are, then you can answer your own question. how many players are you saying "revolted"? my understanding is that there were five at the meeting along with parents who met with the ad. none of the other players were invited, which is how the five got away with claiming to have authorization to speak on behalf of five freshmen on the team.

I don't know what a Title IX investigator is empowered to investigate. Maybe somebody can help us there.

According to this story, a group of 10 current and former players met with the AD one year ago. This lists the complaints, along with rebuttals by players who supported the coach.

Stanford softball in shambles after infighting, controversial resignation | Stanford Daily
 
May 30, 2015
8
0
I don't know what a Title IX investigator is empowered to investigate. Maybe somebody can help us there.

According to this story, a group of 10 current and former players met with the AD one year ago. This lists the complaints, along with rebuttals by players who supported the coach.

Stanford softball in shambles after infighting, controversial resignation | Stanford Daily

yes. i just went back and looked at that myself. most of it looks petty to me, though i really think it's over the top to lie about another player having drinking problems and claiming they were caused by the coaches. i believe it's called defamation. the young lady termed an alcoholic is now a top flight player at another school. she could sue, but i suspect she's having too much fun and success to worry about "mean girls," who are probably going to end up stewing in this for a long time. people who make accusations of this kind and get their names spread around don't have much to look forward to.
 
Last edited:
Dec 20, 2012
1,085
0
you have leah white, no relation to mike white, mixed up with nyree white, who is mike white's daughter, was a pitcher at stanford and quit the team for her own reasons last year. the story is that she asked for a medical resignation so she could keep her scholarship and was denied. then her "family" (read mike white) got involved. what none of us know is the full range of allegations made at the original meeting with the ad. eventually, however, all the team members knew who was involved and who said what about whom, since the parent of one of the complaining players circulated his "notes" of the meeting to all parents - even those whose kids were apparently being targeted as "favorites" (thus implying they had not earned their places as starters). the title ix investigation cleared the head coach of any violations. so it appears that it comes down to players complaining about not enough playing time and the ad buying in without ever having spoken with players who were not complaining. on top of that, the complainers claimed they had authority to speak for last year's freshmen, who did not attend the meeting. later when the freshmen learned what had happened at the meeting, they felt they were misrepresented. so it really boiled down to a complaining minority of players, which is probably why they decline to speak. the first question would be, in view of the title ix investigator's findings, do you feel what you did was right? how would they justify complaining about "favorites" when the performance record of those they complained about is out there for all to see?

Yeah, my bad was thinking of Nyree. Brain fart, she left last year or year before.
 

sluggers

Super Moderator
Staff member
May 26, 2008
7,133
113
Dallas, Texas
I don't know what a Title IX investigator is empowered to investigate.

The article says, "As a result of the allegations, Marcello became the subject of a Stanford-initiated Title IX investigation conducted by an outside attorney."

If there is a violation of Title IX, one factor the DOE (Department of Education) considers is whether the school attempted to fix the problem without the DOE. Therefore, schools concerned that there might be an investigation by DOE will hire an outside attorney to investigate the allegations before the DOE gets involved. The school then proposes a solution to the Title IX violation, and the DOE is more likely to adopt the school's solution.

In this case, it seems that Stanford did just that....It hired an attorney to investigate the allegations. The investigator interviewed 26 players, coaches and athletic staff.

The investigation found that it was more likely than not that Marcello “engaged in persistent unwelcome conduct that in the aggregate created a sexually hostile environment,” and that he “failed to maintain appropriate boundaries with several players.”

So, the investigator concluded that Marcello created a sexually hostile environment.
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,481
Members
21,445
Latest member
Bmac81802
Top