What I recall thinking when the story broke was that the way Wilkinson handled Sinc - giving her friend and NT teammate minutes her club form didn’t deserve - meant that if I was a regular squad player I wouldn’t trust her not to show the same favoritism to someone she cared for personally. ANY workplace romance involving superiors-subor…
What I recall thinking when the story broke was that the way Wilkinson handled Sinc - giving her friend and NT teammate minutes her club form didn’t deserve - meant that if I was a regular squad player I wouldn’t trust her not to show the same favoritism to someone she cared for personally. ANY workplace romance involving superiors-subordinates is fraught; RW’s behavior made that one even moreso.
It’s too bad, because it would have been very romantic if they’d only have handled it better. Glad for them that they rode things out and are still together.
That, and the fact that the GM was ALSO very good friends with the coach (and Sinc) really would've made me pretty uneasy as a player. Sinc was also Menges' closest friend on the team (she's mentioned it multiple times over the years...) Just, a lot of entanglements, and not a lot of players are gonna feel empowered to speak up with all of that. And, it obviously made the team uneasy, because that dynamic meant KK didn't do anything when players came to her. This was the letter the players had to write to the league because Heather Davis and KK were trying to sweep it under the rug because "no policies had been breached":
My guess is that this letter was drafted by one of the leaders on the team (maybe Becky or Kling), and it def wasn't Sinc. And still, "Menges insists 'no policies were breached' and that Wilkinson shouldn't have faced the 'massive repercussion' of resigning." (pulled from a news article about it at the times)
So by her logic, Rhian should've just stayed while the two of them pretended like nothing happened and the other people on the team do so also? Not a great locker room culture after that, and lots of mistrust that would've just festered. Like girl, come on! Her teammates were super uncomfortable, and she still didn't get it. It was never gonna work for either Rhian or Menges to stay at the club after that...and honestly with KK still there, some of that mistrust from that situation likely remains with her still in charge. Another reason I would've liked a true fresh start from the Bhathals, after the Riley crap AND the Rhian/Menges/KK crap. It wasn't just the Riley era that they needed to move on from imo...
EDIT: And literally while I was typing this comment, this comes out:
It was always a problem that Sinc, RW, and KK had so many ties, including having been business partners, national team and club teammates, and then trying to navigate KK as first-time executive, RW as first-time pro coach, and Sinc as veteran captain/face of the franchise since Day 1. It wasn't sufficiently different from the "old boys network." Even if there were no conflicts at all, there were always going to be questions of perception/credibility. It never should have happened. But is that in any way surprising, given how quickly these things happened in 2021 and given that MP was still full-on MP? They guy doesn't know any other way to do things but "old boys network." And... Sinc was trusted.
That policy was created or updated *after* RW resigned.
And, I'm gonna quibble with you a bit here. Ready?
It wasn't "the players" who all wrote and/or signed that letter; it was "a group of concerned players," reinforced in closing as "this group of players." Which ones? We don't know. How many? We don't know. But RW didn't try to fight for her job or attempt to get rid of any players.. She did the right thing - after determining that it was an irreparable breach, she resigned.
If I can infer anything from EM's IG, Hannah Betfort, at the least, was not part of the "group of concerned players." She's still IG buddies with EM (see her comments on photos EM posted of her vacationing with RW back in late-July 2023). FWIW, Eckerstrom and our own Jacob Stevens are also still IG buddies with EM.
But, what is definitely true in re-reading that letter is that a "group of concerned players," of some size, felt RW had to go, not so much because of whatever dimensions of relationship RW and EM had had, but because they had not been forthright about it with the players, and so no matter that whatever personal relationship RW and EM had had was over, they didn't trust RW and didn't feel safe professionally in the workplace.
Here is the key paragraph from that letter:
"A locker room is one of the most intimate workplace settings in the world and requires an extraordinary level of trust in order to function properly. Unfortunately, we believe the trust in our locker room has been irrevocably broken, creating an extremely triggering environment for those players on the team who have been victimized by authority figures in the past, and making it impossible for them to feel safe and perform to their full potential."
What's odd, though, is that the "group of concerned players" took a (pardon the phrase) paternalistic approach in expressing concern for "the player’s personal safety."
Notice their wording here in a very carefully worded letter. It wasn't stated as a generalized concern for any player's personal safety in a power-imbalanced relationship. It was stated as concern for "THE player's personal safety" -- meaning, Menges. This construal is reinforced few sentences later: "out of concern for the well-being of our teammate..."
If you'll recall, Menges later spoke in the media that her personal safety had not been threatened and was not under threat, and that when RW and EM fessed up to having feelings for each other, they cut off the personal communication and RW self-reported to HR.
It's clear in the letter that Menges tried to talk to her teammates about the situation after the meeting of some players with KK and Davis.
Interestingly, though, the letter pivots. When the unnamed group of players brought the issue to KK and Davis, and were told that it had already been reported to them and investigated the league and that RW had been cleared of any wrongdoing, the signees state "This has left us feeling unsettled and unsafe for a number of reasons."
So, now it's not a paternalistic concern for Menges's safety, but rather a concern for their own safety, because they've put themselves out there. Because, again, they're not speaking for the entire team -- as they said, they were a "group of concerned players." How many and whom, we don't know.
The "group of concerned players" also expressed doubt that KK and Davis had been forthright with them. That's crucial here too... and to me, if RW had to go, then KK and possibly Davis should have faced a similar ultimatum. Because, again, it wasn't about the just about the legal and ethical issues of the coach-player relationship; it was about how the FO handled things.
The letter signees noted that within 12 hours of a meeting between KK, Davis, and the "reporting players" -- who asked that they remain anonymous -- EM was "reaching out to teammates for individual discussions." Did KK and/or Davis tip her off? Or did she find out some other way? Pretty hard to keep secrets in a small locker room, which the letter signees themselves describe as "one of the most intimate workplace settings in the world."
Then, within 24 hours, RW began reaching out to players individually, both those who did and did not participate in the meeting with KK and Davis. We know nothing about those outreach efforts -- only that some players were now afraid.
The "group of concerned players" then write:
"Given the nature of this staff member’s control over our playing time and contract status, this potentially puts players in the incredibly difficult position of having a conversation where they feel pressured to support said staff member’s continued employment with the club or face potential reprisals/retaliation. In fact, we believe that employees of the club are already being threatened with potential retaliation since we have come forward with our concerns."
Why? Because...
"Staff who have been informed of the investigation and its outcome were told that if they’re uncomfortable moving forward working with or under the coach involved then they should seek employment elsewhere."
Even with all the incredible own-goals happening in this situation, I find it difficult to believe that anybody -- KK, Davis, or RW -- was dumb enough to say "if you're uncomfortable working with or under the coach, you should seek employment elsewhere."
It was probably something more like "We understand and we support you. We would and will do everything we can to help you find another suitable situation, if that's your decision." You might still read between the lines and draw the same conclusion, but I doubt that KK, Davis, or RW were quite that ham-fisted. Maybe, but I doubt it.
I also have to note here that at this point in the letter, the "group of concerned players" make clear that it was not just a "coach" involved, but indeed a member of the coaching staff who has "control over playing time" (which a HC does) and "contract status" (which a HC does not; influence yes, control no.).
So what to make of all of that?
Well, one thing is that there's a real irony here. Namely, the "group of concerned players" initially came forward, in part, out of concern for "the player's personal safety," by which they meant, among other things, professional matters like "playing time" and "contract status," and yet the player left after the ensuing season, apparently by her own request, because she wanted a "fresh start." I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess the locker room rift never fully healed, and that Menges did not in fact feel supported by the "group of concerned players."
Anyway...
Good on Casey Stoney for going full-on David Brent imitating Eric Hitchmough ("I don't agree with that in the workplace"):
“I don’t agree with staff having relationships with players on any level,” Stoney said during a press conference in October 2022.
Couple of thoughts (re: both this and the above comment):
1) Menges strikes me as a bit of a blunt instrument. That's not a bad thing to be when you're a crunching centerback. But I'm not sure how good she is at reading the room, and her weird insistence on "nothing to see here, move along..." after the Wilkinson affair news broke, well...
2) A disaffected clique of players within the Thorns locker room? Quelle suprise! (Dani Foxhoven has entered the chat...) I have a sneaky feeling that's been a pretty regular thing here since 2013. Not sure if it goes back to Paulson himself, but it sure has been not-all-that-unusual here for some time.
That's where I can't agree more that one of the huge elephants-in-the-training-room is the "Peregrine culture" - slipshod, grab-ass, careless, old-boy/girl-ism. It's the sort of thing that makes stuff like the Affaire Mengison happen. Stuff like Pierre Soubrier handing out 222s like candy. Stuff like random assistants forcing hugs on people...all the way up to RileyCriming(TM).
Much as I'm still not sold on KK's skillset, to me it's just that she's part of all that. If she was brilliant at GM-ing, I'd still believe this outfit is better off with an untainted body. Goes for the whole crew, frankly.
I have a hard time pegging Menges. She's obviously a bright person with a sensitive soul. Georgetown ain't easy, and her artistic chops show her appreciation for inner and outer beauty, at the least. She also seems to be a good person, a gentle soul (when not on the pitch), and fairly introverted tho not awkwardly so.
But, yeah, there's an air of "No, hey, guys, it's me and it wasn't like that" about all of it. That was never gonna work, and it shouldn't.
It's almost a bit naive, in a not-self-aware sort of way. I think that's what you mean about being a blunt instrument and not being able to read the room.
I do agree with the point she made, tho, that you have to trust the processes that you've fought hard to create and which had just now been implemented, even if the result isn't what you think it should be. And what it really came down to were breaches of trust and at least some group of players feeling professionally unsafe. Which, you know, unless you're part of a very small handful of players worldwide, you're probably always looking over your shoulder. But you don't need conditions that justify or amplify that anxiety.
That all said, I'm eager to see how the Bhathals handle their governing duties. I think the new hire for Prez of Biz Ops is promising. She has some real experience from her time in the NBA, NHL, and MLB. Hopefully KK gets some mentoring-by-osmosis and getting away from Peregrine really means a culture rebuild.
Naive is when you’re shocked that your teammates condemn your actions. I don’t get “shocked”, I get “WTF is everyone so arsed about this? I told you it’s okay.” (when “don’t sleep with the boss” is, like, HR Thou Shalt Not #1). It kinda takes some brass to tell your coworkers “get over it” in those circumstances.
So I’m not sure how EM is in other respects. But on this? She comes across like a bulldozer.
It doesn't matter if it were 3 or 10, though imo, so counting heads doesn't really matter to me. And that letter was written by one of the veterans. Meghan Nally didn't write that. I would find it very hard not to believe that Becky or Kling wouldn't back any player voicing discomfort (if not concerned themselves) and join them in drafting that. Becky especially recognizes her responsibility to stand up for the players in the league with the least voice. She was the president of the NWSLPA.
And I never said Rhian didn't do the right thing after the fact. She shouldn't have even been hanging around with Menges on her off-days in the first place, that was the first and perhaps the worst of her missteps. And it was enough to lose her job over, regardless of it she reported it (which WAS the right thing to do.) There was no outcome after those exchanged texts that would've been appropriate anywhere, in any functioning business, than her inevitably leaving. In the letter, it also mentions that Menges had no intention of keeping things professional, even after the fact.
"For example, in our meetings with LeBlanc and Davis we were led to believe that there was no relationship to speak of and that any further contact between the parties would be entirely professional. However, based on subsequent conversations with the player involved that does not appear to be true."
Add a GM (and Heather Davis) that was trying to just go "Shhhhhhh" and I would've been SUPER uncomfortable and wouldn't have wanted that to continue either, especially while still reeling from the other club drama they were still in the middle of. I can't imagine that many players in the entire league would be indifferent to it either. Just like, this isn't a hard or complicated one here. It's just not ok! Nobody should go to jail or be banned from soccer for life or anything, but it was never gonna work in Portland after that. Especially if you consider the environment of the Thorns club/team at that time (and for years prior) and what those players had been going through. I'm not gonna read into who is still IG friends after the drama because I don't think that's always indicative of true feelings on this situation. Menges may not even know who signed onto that letter. I've stayed "friends" on IG with people for years beyond when our friendship ended because it's simply MORE drama to unfollow someone than to just...not be bothered. I'm also guessing they don't have any actual ill-will towards her or Rhian. Our STF buddy Jacob was friends with Menges (and Rocky) before any of this, so his inclusion is kinda here-nor-there.
I thought the "we're concerned about our teammate" part was weird, but ultimately doesn't distract from the very real other issues they raise. And ultimately, none of them should've even had to go through all of this drama in the first place. Or had to have multiple conversations. It's just messy and not well-dealt with, and gets worse when the FO became involved. KK should've left as well, and I kinda still can't believe she's still around after that and because she's also inept at her job. (And I know the players don't like her either.) What outcome did Menges want here? For Rhian to stay? I'm not even gonna touch the retaliation part, because this likely goes deeper than we all publicly know...but like....MESS. KK saying that actually wouldn't surprise me at all. I don't find her very professional in general, and her public actions we know of here don't help her case. Bhathals should've cleaned house. I hope they still do. This is not how good business are ran, and it makes me unsurprised by Menges' nonchalance about MP's behavior as well. Casey Stoney (and literally everyone else speaking out against these player-coach relationships) are absolutely right and they should continue to say so loudly.
Regardless, it's kinda simple. Coach reciprocates feelings with player (that obv remained bc they're still together); coach has to go. If that happened immediately, the fallout drama with Menges and her teammates would've been dampened, or maybe even prevented. Players shouldn't have even had to get involved. KK/FO should've protected them in the first place, and they should've never had to go to the league.
I too don't think it matters whether it was 3 or 10 either.
I also totally agree with you that players and coaches should not be socializing 1-to-1, going to events together, etc. But... that can also be a gray line rather than a red one. I'd like to think it's OK for a coach and player to have a cup of coffee or lunch together to talk shop, so long as each pays their own way (which, I believe the players do have a per diem), no booze, and it's truly public space. So, I'm with you!
Also with you as to the problem of KK's veracity. You and I both know, from this off-season alone, there's plenty of reason to question her veracity.
All I mean to say is that that letter wasn't written by "the players," which is what you said.
It was written and signed by "a group of concerned players," quoting from the letter.
Which is to say, the locker room was split, not unified. And that's part of why RW resigned. She learned quickly that she could not rebuild trust with the whole; there was a group of players that had no trust, and so the only right thing was for her to resign.
The fact that the letter was written and signed by "a group of concerned players" also shows that they weren't acting collectively -- this wasn't a grievance procedure under the CBA (and, BTW, Menges had been involved in the NWSLPA leadership too, though I think only as a Treasurer).
This "group of concerned players" speaking on Menges's behalf was kind of in a weird place. They weren't presenting a formal grievance on behalf of the player. Usually, with formal grievances, a union won't proceed on an aggrieved employee's behalf unless the aggrieved party wants to proceed; they'll try to resolve it informally and internally first. I think that's what they tried to do, going the HR-type route, with the meeting with KK and Davis.
When they were told that it had already been reported and investigated formally, they didn't trust it and they then moved to other issues. And they went directly to the league when they didn't get the answer they thought was appropriate -- not because I think they were trying to get their way, but because I think they believe the league had made a mistake.
And... I threw Betfort out there because it's pretty clear from her comments on IG that either she didn't sign the letter or if she did she and EM have a fine relationship.
She said: "Pretty sure you were supposed to send me these and you copied my dream to see whales so. Pretty salty about it all rn"
There's nothing about Betfort's comment that sounds like a fig leaf or just being a IG friend.
Anyway... it is striking to me that both Stoney and Hayes recognize that the right approach is non-fraternization.
What I recall thinking when the story broke was that the way Wilkinson handled Sinc - giving her friend and NT teammate minutes her club form didn’t deserve - meant that if I was a regular squad player I wouldn’t trust her not to show the same favoritism to someone she cared for personally. ANY workplace romance involving superiors-subordinates is fraught; RW’s behavior made that one even moreso.
It’s too bad, because it would have been very romantic if they’d only have handled it better. Glad for them that they rode things out and are still together.
That, and the fact that the GM was ALSO very good friends with the coach (and Sinc) really would've made me pretty uneasy as a player. Sinc was also Menges' closest friend on the team (she's mentioned it multiple times over the years...) Just, a lot of entanglements, and not a lot of players are gonna feel empowered to speak up with all of that. And, it obviously made the team uneasy, because that dynamic meant KK didn't do anything when players came to her. This was the letter the players had to write to the league because Heather Davis and KK were trying to sweep it under the rug because "no policies had been breached":
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qYorWe1Quwdyr5DlzOQmxlVLngxkFbo7SisvXx_FiEU/edit
My guess is that this letter was drafted by one of the leaders on the team (maybe Becky or Kling), and it def wasn't Sinc. And still, "Menges insists 'no policies were breached' and that Wilkinson shouldn't have faced the 'massive repercussion' of resigning." (pulled from a news article about it at the times)
So by her logic, Rhian should've just stayed while the two of them pretended like nothing happened and the other people on the team do so also? Not a great locker room culture after that, and lots of mistrust that would've just festered. Like girl, come on! Her teammates were super uncomfortable, and she still didn't get it. It was never gonna work for either Rhian or Menges to stay at the club after that...and honestly with KK still there, some of that mistrust from that situation likely remains with her still in charge. Another reason I would've liked a true fresh start from the Bhathals, after the Riley crap AND the Rhian/Menges/KK crap. It wasn't just the Riley era that they needed to move on from imo...
EDIT: And literally while I was typing this comment, this comes out:
https://twitter.com/EqualizerSoccer/status/1770526567803826217
It was always a problem that Sinc, RW, and KK had so many ties, including having been business partners, national team and club teammates, and then trying to navigate KK as first-time executive, RW as first-time pro coach, and Sinc as veteran captain/face of the franchise since Day 1. It wasn't sufficiently different from the "old boys network." Even if there were no conflicts at all, there were always going to be questions of perception/credibility. It never should have happened. But is that in any way surprising, given how quickly these things happened in 2021 and given that MP was still full-on MP? They guy doesn't know any other way to do things but "old boys network." And... Sinc was trusted.
And, then, as involves RW and EM...
https://equalizersoccer.com/2024/03/20/matt-lampson-fired-from-houston-dash-for-alleged-player-relationship/
That policy was created or updated *after* RW resigned.
And, I'm gonna quibble with you a bit here. Ready?
It wasn't "the players" who all wrote and/or signed that letter; it was "a group of concerned players," reinforced in closing as "this group of players." Which ones? We don't know. How many? We don't know. But RW didn't try to fight for her job or attempt to get rid of any players.. She did the right thing - after determining that it was an irreparable breach, she resigned.
If I can infer anything from EM's IG, Hannah Betfort, at the least, was not part of the "group of concerned players." She's still IG buddies with EM (see her comments on photos EM posted of her vacationing with RW back in late-July 2023). FWIW, Eckerstrom and our own Jacob Stevens are also still IG buddies with EM.
But, what is definitely true in re-reading that letter is that a "group of concerned players," of some size, felt RW had to go, not so much because of whatever dimensions of relationship RW and EM had had, but because they had not been forthright about it with the players, and so no matter that whatever personal relationship RW and EM had had was over, they didn't trust RW and didn't feel safe professionally in the workplace.
Here is the key paragraph from that letter:
"A locker room is one of the most intimate workplace settings in the world and requires an extraordinary level of trust in order to function properly. Unfortunately, we believe the trust in our locker room has been irrevocably broken, creating an extremely triggering environment for those players on the team who have been victimized by authority figures in the past, and making it impossible for them to feel safe and perform to their full potential."
What's odd, though, is that the "group of concerned players" took a (pardon the phrase) paternalistic approach in expressing concern for "the player’s personal safety."
Notice their wording here in a very carefully worded letter. It wasn't stated as a generalized concern for any player's personal safety in a power-imbalanced relationship. It was stated as concern for "THE player's personal safety" -- meaning, Menges. This construal is reinforced few sentences later: "out of concern for the well-being of our teammate..."
If you'll recall, Menges later spoke in the media that her personal safety had not been threatened and was not under threat, and that when RW and EM fessed up to having feelings for each other, they cut off the personal communication and RW self-reported to HR.
It's clear in the letter that Menges tried to talk to her teammates about the situation after the meeting of some players with KK and Davis.
Interestingly, though, the letter pivots. When the unnamed group of players brought the issue to KK and Davis, and were told that it had already been reported to them and investigated the league and that RW had been cleared of any wrongdoing, the signees state "This has left us feeling unsettled and unsafe for a number of reasons."
So, now it's not a paternalistic concern for Menges's safety, but rather a concern for their own safety, because they've put themselves out there. Because, again, they're not speaking for the entire team -- as they said, they were a "group of concerned players." How many and whom, we don't know.
The "group of concerned players" also expressed doubt that KK and Davis had been forthright with them. That's crucial here too... and to me, if RW had to go, then KK and possibly Davis should have faced a similar ultimatum. Because, again, it wasn't about the just about the legal and ethical issues of the coach-player relationship; it was about how the FO handled things.
The letter signees noted that within 12 hours of a meeting between KK, Davis, and the "reporting players" -- who asked that they remain anonymous -- EM was "reaching out to teammates for individual discussions." Did KK and/or Davis tip her off? Or did she find out some other way? Pretty hard to keep secrets in a small locker room, which the letter signees themselves describe as "one of the most intimate workplace settings in the world."
Then, within 24 hours, RW began reaching out to players individually, both those who did and did not participate in the meeting with KK and Davis. We know nothing about those outreach efforts -- only that some players were now afraid.
The "group of concerned players" then write:
"Given the nature of this staff member’s control over our playing time and contract status, this potentially puts players in the incredibly difficult position of having a conversation where they feel pressured to support said staff member’s continued employment with the club or face potential reprisals/retaliation. In fact, we believe that employees of the club are already being threatened with potential retaliation since we have come forward with our concerns."
Why? Because...
"Staff who have been informed of the investigation and its outcome were told that if they’re uncomfortable moving forward working with or under the coach involved then they should seek employment elsewhere."
Even with all the incredible own-goals happening in this situation, I find it difficult to believe that anybody -- KK, Davis, or RW -- was dumb enough to say "if you're uncomfortable working with or under the coach, you should seek employment elsewhere."
It was probably something more like "We understand and we support you. We would and will do everything we can to help you find another suitable situation, if that's your decision." You might still read between the lines and draw the same conclusion, but I doubt that KK, Davis, or RW were quite that ham-fisted. Maybe, but I doubt it.
I also have to note here that at this point in the letter, the "group of concerned players" make clear that it was not just a "coach" involved, but indeed a member of the coaching staff who has "control over playing time" (which a HC does) and "contract status" (which a HC does not; influence yes, control no.).
So what to make of all of that?
Well, one thing is that there's a real irony here. Namely, the "group of concerned players" initially came forward, in part, out of concern for "the player's personal safety," by which they meant, among other things, professional matters like "playing time" and "contract status," and yet the player left after the ensuing season, apparently by her own request, because she wanted a "fresh start." I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess the locker room rift never fully healed, and that Menges did not in fact feel supported by the "group of concerned players."
Anyway...
Good on Casey Stoney for going full-on David Brent imitating Eric Hitchmough ("I don't agree with that in the workplace"):
“I don’t agree with staff having relationships with players on any level,” Stoney said during a press conference in October 2022.
This is the best policy.
Couple of thoughts (re: both this and the above comment):
1) Menges strikes me as a bit of a blunt instrument. That's not a bad thing to be when you're a crunching centerback. But I'm not sure how good she is at reading the room, and her weird insistence on "nothing to see here, move along..." after the Wilkinson affair news broke, well...
2) A disaffected clique of players within the Thorns locker room? Quelle suprise! (Dani Foxhoven has entered the chat...) I have a sneaky feeling that's been a pretty regular thing here since 2013. Not sure if it goes back to Paulson himself, but it sure has been not-all-that-unusual here for some time.
That's where I can't agree more that one of the huge elephants-in-the-training-room is the "Peregrine culture" - slipshod, grab-ass, careless, old-boy/girl-ism. It's the sort of thing that makes stuff like the Affaire Mengison happen. Stuff like Pierre Soubrier handing out 222s like candy. Stuff like random assistants forcing hugs on people...all the way up to RileyCriming(TM).
Much as I'm still not sold on KK's skillset, to me it's just that she's part of all that. If she was brilliant at GM-ing, I'd still believe this outfit is better off with an untainted body. Goes for the whole crew, frankly.
Burn it hull and sticks, and rebuild.
I have a hard time pegging Menges. She's obviously a bright person with a sensitive soul. Georgetown ain't easy, and her artistic chops show her appreciation for inner and outer beauty, at the least. She also seems to be a good person, a gentle soul (when not on the pitch), and fairly introverted tho not awkwardly so.
But, yeah, there's an air of "No, hey, guys, it's me and it wasn't like that" about all of it. That was never gonna work, and it shouldn't.
It's almost a bit naive, in a not-self-aware sort of way. I think that's what you mean about being a blunt instrument and not being able to read the room.
I do agree with the point she made, tho, that you have to trust the processes that you've fought hard to create and which had just now been implemented, even if the result isn't what you think it should be. And what it really came down to were breaches of trust and at least some group of players feeling professionally unsafe. Which, you know, unless you're part of a very small handful of players worldwide, you're probably always looking over your shoulder. But you don't need conditions that justify or amplify that anxiety.
That all said, I'm eager to see how the Bhathals handle their governing duties. I think the new hire for Prez of Biz Ops is promising. She has some real experience from her time in the NBA, NHL, and MLB. Hopefully KK gets some mentoring-by-osmosis and getting away from Peregrine really means a culture rebuild.
Naive is when you’re shocked that your teammates condemn your actions. I don’t get “shocked”, I get “WTF is everyone so arsed about this? I told you it’s okay.” (when “don’t sleep with the boss” is, like, HR Thou Shalt Not #1). It kinda takes some brass to tell your coworkers “get over it” in those circumstances.
So I’m not sure how EM is in other respects. But on this? She comes across like a bulldozer.
"Personal safety" is just language that absolutely forced the FO to do something about it.
It doesn't matter if it were 3 or 10, though imo, so counting heads doesn't really matter to me. And that letter was written by one of the veterans. Meghan Nally didn't write that. I would find it very hard not to believe that Becky or Kling wouldn't back any player voicing discomfort (if not concerned themselves) and join them in drafting that. Becky especially recognizes her responsibility to stand up for the players in the league with the least voice. She was the president of the NWSLPA.
And I never said Rhian didn't do the right thing after the fact. She shouldn't have even been hanging around with Menges on her off-days in the first place, that was the first and perhaps the worst of her missteps. And it was enough to lose her job over, regardless of it she reported it (which WAS the right thing to do.) There was no outcome after those exchanged texts that would've been appropriate anywhere, in any functioning business, than her inevitably leaving. In the letter, it also mentions that Menges had no intention of keeping things professional, even after the fact.
"For example, in our meetings with LeBlanc and Davis we were led to believe that there was no relationship to speak of and that any further contact between the parties would be entirely professional. However, based on subsequent conversations with the player involved that does not appear to be true."
Add a GM (and Heather Davis) that was trying to just go "Shhhhhhh" and I would've been SUPER uncomfortable and wouldn't have wanted that to continue either, especially while still reeling from the other club drama they were still in the middle of. I can't imagine that many players in the entire league would be indifferent to it either. Just like, this isn't a hard or complicated one here. It's just not ok! Nobody should go to jail or be banned from soccer for life or anything, but it was never gonna work in Portland after that. Especially if you consider the environment of the Thorns club/team at that time (and for years prior) and what those players had been going through. I'm not gonna read into who is still IG friends after the drama because I don't think that's always indicative of true feelings on this situation. Menges may not even know who signed onto that letter. I've stayed "friends" on IG with people for years beyond when our friendship ended because it's simply MORE drama to unfollow someone than to just...not be bothered. I'm also guessing they don't have any actual ill-will towards her or Rhian. Our STF buddy Jacob was friends with Menges (and Rocky) before any of this, so his inclusion is kinda here-nor-there.
I thought the "we're concerned about our teammate" part was weird, but ultimately doesn't distract from the very real other issues they raise. And ultimately, none of them should've even had to go through all of this drama in the first place. Or had to have multiple conversations. It's just messy and not well-dealt with, and gets worse when the FO became involved. KK should've left as well, and I kinda still can't believe she's still around after that and because she's also inept at her job. (And I know the players don't like her either.) What outcome did Menges want here? For Rhian to stay? I'm not even gonna touch the retaliation part, because this likely goes deeper than we all publicly know...but like....MESS. KK saying that actually wouldn't surprise me at all. I don't find her very professional in general, and her public actions we know of here don't help her case. Bhathals should've cleaned house. I hope they still do. This is not how good business are ran, and it makes me unsurprised by Menges' nonchalance about MP's behavior as well. Casey Stoney (and literally everyone else speaking out against these player-coach relationships) are absolutely right and they should continue to say so loudly.
Regardless, it's kinda simple. Coach reciprocates feelings with player (that obv remained bc they're still together); coach has to go. If that happened immediately, the fallout drama with Menges and her teammates would've been dampened, or maybe even prevented. Players shouldn't have even had to get involved. KK/FO should've protected them in the first place, and they should've never had to go to the league.
I too don't think it matters whether it was 3 or 10 either.
I also totally agree with you that players and coaches should not be socializing 1-to-1, going to events together, etc. But... that can also be a gray line rather than a red one. I'd like to think it's OK for a coach and player to have a cup of coffee or lunch together to talk shop, so long as each pays their own way (which, I believe the players do have a per diem), no booze, and it's truly public space. So, I'm with you!
Also with you as to the problem of KK's veracity. You and I both know, from this off-season alone, there's plenty of reason to question her veracity.
All I mean to say is that that letter wasn't written by "the players," which is what you said.
It was written and signed by "a group of concerned players," quoting from the letter.
Which is to say, the locker room was split, not unified. And that's part of why RW resigned. She learned quickly that she could not rebuild trust with the whole; there was a group of players that had no trust, and so the only right thing was for her to resign.
The fact that the letter was written and signed by "a group of concerned players" also shows that they weren't acting collectively -- this wasn't a grievance procedure under the CBA (and, BTW, Menges had been involved in the NWSLPA leadership too, though I think only as a Treasurer).
This "group of concerned players" speaking on Menges's behalf was kind of in a weird place. They weren't presenting a formal grievance on behalf of the player. Usually, with formal grievances, a union won't proceed on an aggrieved employee's behalf unless the aggrieved party wants to proceed; they'll try to resolve it informally and internally first. I think that's what they tried to do, going the HR-type route, with the meeting with KK and Davis.
When they were told that it had already been reported and investigated formally, they didn't trust it and they then moved to other issues. And they went directly to the league when they didn't get the answer they thought was appropriate -- not because I think they were trying to get their way, but because I think they believe the league had made a mistake.
And... I threw Betfort out there because it's pretty clear from her comments on IG that either she didn't sign the letter or if she did she and EM have a fine relationship.
She said: "Pretty sure you were supposed to send me these and you copied my dream to see whales so. Pretty salty about it all rn"
There's nothing about Betfort's comment that sounds like a fig leaf or just being a IG friend.
Anyway... it is striking to me that both Stoney and Hayes recognize that the right approach is non-fraternization.