Lets see your best Title IX violations.

[_MIA_]

I mentioned OK mainly because it's large....

Marita Hynes or are you thinking about the field they play the WCWS on (Hall of Fame complex). In any case I am sure Marita Hynes is nice compared to 95% of D1 teams but when you compare the facility to many of the SEC teams (for example) it is not nearly as nice or has at much seating capacity.

Regents approve 'design and development' of new softball stadium proposal

There's a new plan in the works.

www.normantranscript.com

 

[PDM]

Few years back my local Little League shut down all softball and started 50/70 and 54/80 teams using the freed-up field space.

That statement doesn't mean much without more information. How many softball players were in the program? How many baseball players? Were girls allowed to play on baseball teams after softball was dropped? Were girls discriminated against, or was it just a better use of the facilities to pick one sport that both sexes would play to get the most out of the facilities. It all depends on the numbers. If there are 200 kids who want to play baseball and 5 who want to play softball, doesn't it make more sense to just have baseball and let the softball players join the baseball program? At Little League age, girls can certainly compete. My friend's daughter played baseball (playing no softball at all even though there was a program) up through MS and ended up as a starter on a D1 softball team. She and her parents felt that she would get better competition and improve her skills more by playing with the boys. I certainly would prefer having a softball option, and I am 100% in favor of offering as many opportunities in as many different sports as possible, but sometimes it just doesn't make sense when looking at the number of participants. Can you give us some more information?

 

[truecrimson]

When our new high school was built they constructed an athletic facility for boys baseball, football, etc.. They "forgot" to build a practice field for softball or any place for female athletics. Lawsuit was immediately filed and the construction company had to add these on. Everything for the girls looks like cheap add-ons and everything for the boys is top-notch. All of this despite the fact that the softball program has been WAY more successful in the past few years.

 

[ang2bmd]

When our new high school was built they constructed an athletic facility for boys baseball, football, etc.. They "forgot" to build a practice field for softball or any place for female athletics. Lawsuit was immediately filed and the construction company had to add these on. Everything for the girls looks like cheap add-ons and everything for the boys is top-notch. All of this despite the fact that the softball program has been WAY more successful in the past few years.

Now this is a title 9 issue! That's ridiculous

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[Northball]

When our new high school was built they constructed an athletic facility for boys baseball, football, etc.. They "forgot" to build a practice field for softball or any place for female athletics. Lawsuit was immediately filed and the construction company had to add these on. Everything for the girls looks like cheap add-ons and everything for the boys is top-notch. All of this despite the fact that the softball program has been WAY more successful in the past few years.

How long ago did this take place?

 

[JOHNN]

I'm obviously late to the party here, but do you know what year this softball complex was built compared to the baseball complex? To me, the softball facility seems like it would have been considered top notch when it was built probably a few years earlier (if that is indeed the case).

Being that I'm pretty familiar with LSU's facilities (and I realize you cant compare the majority of facilities out there to theirs), I know that sometimes there is a difference of a few years between upgrades of one facility to the next so that's why I asked when they were built in comparison to each other.

 

[Shiloh]

That statement doesn't mean much without more information. How many softball players were in the program? How many baseball players? Were girls allowed to play on baseball teams after softball was dropped? Were girls discriminated against, or was it just a better use of the facilities to pick one sport that both sexes would play to get the most out of the facilities. It all depends on the numbers. If there are 200 kids who want to play baseball and 5 who want to play softball, doesn't it make more sense to just have baseball and let the softball players join the baseball program? At Little League age, girls can certainly compete. My friend's daughter played baseball (playing no softball at all even though there was a program) up through MS and ended up as a starter on a D1 softball team. She and her parents felt that she would get better competition and improve her skills more by playing with the boys. I certainly would prefer having a softball option, and I am 100% in favor of offering as many opportunities in as many different sports as possible, but sometimes it just doesn't make sense when looking at the number of participants. Can you give us some more information?

Softball was an 8-10 team (depending on the year) in house league that occasionally ventured out to play against other towns. The girls were always welcome to play baseball but not many did, and not many have since. Except for T-ball and coach pitch maybe 2-3 per year. (Baseball has 6 leagues, from T-ball through Majors, softball had Majors and Minors only, so girls <7 yrs old played T-ball and coach pitch.)

Baseball attracts about 450 kids per season overall, softball had about 100.

No girl has made the 50/70 or 54/80 teams (tryouts required) since they were formed, about 5 years ago now. Field space in town is extremely limited.

Your point about making baseball the unisex sport is a good one and it’s well-taken. However, even viewed through an unisex lens, the falloff in female participation makes it pretty clear the changes had a disparate impact. Still, I still see disparate treatment given the limited field space, and simultaneous closure of softball and opening of the baseball teams for boys 13-14 years old.

 

[PDM]

Softball was an 8-10 team (depending on the year) in house league that occasionally ventured out to play against other towns. The girls were always welcome to play baseball but not many did, and not many have since. Except for T-ball and coach pitch maybe 2-3 per year. (Baseball has 6 leagues, from T-ball through Majors, softball had Majors and Minors only, so girls <7 yrs old played T-ball and coach pitch.)

Baseball attracts about 450 kids per season overall, softball had about 100.

No girl has made the 50/70 or 54/80 teams (tryouts required) since they were formed, about 5 years ago now. Field space in town is extremely limited.

Your point about making baseball the unisex sport is a good one and it’s well-taken. However, even viewed through an unisex lens, the falloff in female participation makes it pretty clear the changes had a disparate impact. Still, I still see disparate treatment given the limited field space, and simultaneous closure of softball and opening of the baseball teams for boys 13-14 years old.

Sorry for the late reply. I just saw yours. If we are talking about 8-10 softball teams with 100 players, that is a significant number and those girls should not have softball taken away from them, especially when most have not been able to make a baseball team. Even with limited facilities, if they can accommodate 450 baseball players, they can also accommodate 100 softball players, even if it means cutting the number of baseball teams/players. I have no bias here. I just want the boys and girls to be treated equally. Girls need the opportunities just as much, if not more than the boys at that age (or any age).