loyola Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 I'm not sure it was posted but here's the full decision in this case: http://www.adrsportred.ca/resource_centre/pdf/english/NR-790252.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 I didn't read the entire pdf, but I did read the findings. Essentially, Pellerud has been exonerated. I'm sure all the detractors won't change their mind on this issue though. Here is the final decision: Decision: The decisions made by Pellerud relating to membership, carding and funding of the Claimants were not affected by any bias, conflict of interest, apparent conflict of interest or improper motive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted June 19, 2007 Author Share Posted June 19, 2007 I'm at page 17 out of 29, and it's a very interesting read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 quote:Originally posted by loyola I'm at page 17 out of 29, and it's a very interesting read. Personally, the only thing that I find really interesting is the way the judge doesn't accept inuendo and false allegations as fact the way most people on this forum do when trying to make their points. But I wouldn't expect less from a judge. I'll make sure I fully read this later tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 The outcome is no real surprise but you're right, the detractors will probably not change their minds or admit they got it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loyola Posted June 19, 2007 Author Share Posted June 19, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Richard The outcome is no real surprise but you're right, the detractors will probably not change their minds or admit they got it wrong. After reading the decision, it seems quite clear that Hooper and the girls were wrong in the way they handled the situation. I just can't wait to see the excuses of "the detractors". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Hopefully, we've seen the last of the personal agenda posts on this topic, although I highly doubt it. Very interesting report. I wish Hooper, Latham and Nonen all the best in their future endeavors. It was great to watch them play over the years. Hopefully, this situation is behind them and they can return to represent Canada again at some point. Latham and Nonen particularly are still young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Are any of them playing anywhere in the W-League this season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaylee Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Nonen and Latham are playing for the Atlanta Silverbacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack Personally, the only thing that I find really interesting is the way the judge doesn't accept inuendo and false allegations as fact the way most people on this forum do when trying to make their points. But I wouldn't expect less from a judge. I'll make sure I fully read this later tonight. Fact..he is not a judge..but an arbitrator... a very different animal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Game, set and match -- Pellerud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Richard À The outcome is no real surprise but you're right, the detractors will probably not change their minds or admit they got it wrong. I found a number of issues in the details of how things get done very revealing... 1) Even was drafting up the player agreements ...and they were not being vetted by the CSA. 2) How the CSA basically absolved themselves from the decision making process, and were not asked about CSA code of conduct regards Conflict of interest. 3)The arbitrator made a point of saying he did not know if the rent paid by Pelerud to Kerfot was a "market rent" and the representatives of the players presented no evidence it was low rent for Vancouver... ( there lawyers if thats who represented them did a piss poor job on that aspect ). 4) Why did they the players lawyers agree to video ..testamony from Pelerud and players in NZ and there was no video testamony from people in Atlanta ? Anyways a interesting sports law case... It cleary shows that the players were in a employee / employer relationship in my opinion, and even if the dismissals were for cause ... there may be labour law to get a payout from the CSA as dismissed employees in the same vien as ...Mr Pipe and his settlement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Arbitrator: John Welbourn, L.L.B., C.Arb., MCIArb Probably a much better choice to arbitrate this dispute than most judges. If the claimants wanted a judge they should have gone to court, they still can if they really think they have grounds for a claim and the arbitrator was wrong in his conclusion. I think breach of contract by the players as confirmed by the evidence presented was just cause for termination of any existing contract by the CSA and/or its agents plus there was the unwillingness on the part of the Claimants to accept reasonable terms and conditions for a contract renewal no matter whether such contract was prepared by a layman or a lawyer. Pellerud and the CSA come out on top no matter which way you look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Trillium Fact..he is not a judge..but an arbitrator... a very different animal. Errr, that's what I meant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoachRich Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Wow, definitely worth the read. Even & the team went the extra mile but the others disconnected from the team in the worse way. Well handled by the coach, staff, team reps & team. Best wishes to all of them as they move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Interesting fact: I'm pretty sure that the Richard W. Pound mentioned on page two is the same Dick Pound that heads WADA. Its apparent that the three players gambled and lost big time. I'm sure they felt so right at the time, but not attending the Newfoundland game sealed their fate. Really amazing read, in a nerdy kind of way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vic Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Quite a read. I think if you boil it all down, you end up here: August 1 (Charmaine Hooper, to team) "As we discussed a few weeks ago in Minneapolis, we would not agree to any terms set forth by the coaching staff until a contract was written up. We will then, as a team, along with the coaching staff, agree and all sign the proposed contract." August 5 (Christine Latham, to team) "As we all know, we agreed as a team not to respond to Even’s email concerning the updated relocation information. As of today, I have been informed that no one has responded individually... Lastly, the additional information Even sent out was not to the level of what we discussed as a team during the most recent training camp and did not address our concerns. This is regarding everything from the start date of camp, relocation, etc…. This will be addressed in the conference call and we will move forward AS A TEAM in terms of response back to Even. DO NOT BE PRESSURED TO REPLY INDIVIDUALLY IF HE CONTACTS YOU. We are a team. We agreed to stayed together and stick to what we had decided as a team. If we are going to get what is fair, and secure the future for the players that will come after us, we must stay together 100%." August 7 (Charmaine Hooper, to Les Mezaros) "Just wanted to send an email just explaining why the team has had a bit of a delay in response to your email regarding relocation. I am assuming Andrea has relayed a message to Even stating why the team was delaying. The team met a few weeks ago to discuss some issues pertaining to the relocation. As a team, we thought it would be a good idea to draw up a contract, which the team, along with the coaching staff could come to an agreement on. Until we know all the stipulations for the upcoming relocation, we are not prepared to agree to any terms, as a team. We believe that this will be the best situation for the team and in the end if everyone is happy, the players are able to be at their best mentally and physically and the team can move forward in a positive environment and positive direction. Thanks Les." August 7 (Les Mezaros, to Charmaine Hooper) "Not sure about your comments though as we have positive responses from most players. We are just waiting for your response, Izzy, Latham and KK." That's about all that needs to be said. Pretty sad story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJB Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 It really is a shame that Hooper had to have it end this way. As for Latham, is that it? Is her career with the national team over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAS Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I read through the whole thing - very long, but worth it if you have the time. Here are my thoughts: 1) Skipping Newfoundland was a huge mistake. At first I thought they might have missed it because they may have believed that they were uninvited, but that is clearly incorrect. They could have talked with the staff in person there and sorted things out. Furthermore, they distanced themselves from their teammates when they needed them most and pissed them off. After that, they had zero leverage on the coach. 2) They know that what they did was wrong. Latham admitted it, and Nonen chose to not testify or really fight this, although that could have been a financial decision. 3) They appear to have been trying to create an unofficial players union to build a better negotiating position for the team. Their E-mails use "the team" and "together" alot. There is no mention of any attempt to form an actual union, and it seems unlikely, but the language and emphasis on solidarity points in that direction. 4) Since the CSA usually thrives on apathy, I don't they would like to see the formation of players' unions that might demand things like CSA financial statement, proper facilities and accommodation, proper training and preparation, and actual competence from the CSA. Nonetheless, I would not go so far as to suggest that Pellerud's somewhat heavy-handed and uncompromising approach to this constitutes "union busting". He may, however, have been happy to get rid of someone as demanding and assertive as Hooper, as well as anyone who felt greater loyalty to the captain than the coach. 5) Either the other members of the team were arm-twisted into compliance, and therefore effectively sold them out, or these three greatly misread the feelings of their teammates. The meeting in the Spring among the team where they supposedly agreed to stick together to fight for a good package was obviously unrecorded, and there were no e-mails in the report from other members of the team during the first week of August to support the idea that others were behind them and also refusing to commit to the program. This reminds of the situation that Kennedy faced trying to form a player's union in the NHL where strong-arm tactics and indifference led to the other players abandoning him. The problem though, is that it is impossible to know from the report if that was the case. The reality is that many members of the team already lived in Vancouver, so they did not have issues with relocation. The second largest group would have been members of the Ottawa Fury. It is quite possible that they may have been pissed at Hooper about her comments, so the captain's authority may have already been somewhat underminded by her own actions. I don't know what connection existed between Latham/Nonen and Hooper, apart from perhaps loyalty to the captain, but Latham and Nonen are clearly connected through the Atlanta Silverbacks. It is possible that they greatly misjudged their teammates' support and resolve in this and therefore acted on an assumed position of strength that did not exist. 6) Although these three were essentially in the wrong, the uncompromising approach of Pellerud is not helpful and is probably somewhat gender-based. I do not believe that a female coach would behave the same way, and I know that a national team coach could not pull this stuff with a men's national team that is full of professional - and therefore financially independent - players. Unfortunately, this paternalistic attitude will continue to exist for as long as the Women's game maintains its' amateur status, and the players are financially dependent, through card money and the Kerfoot program, on the whims of the national team coach. 7) Regardless of the fact that the arbitrator has cleared Pellerud, steps need to be taken to distance himself and the WNT from the Whitecaps. The arbitrator may have ruled that there was no fire, but I sure as hell see alot of smoke! Pellerud makes enough money to rent a house from someone who doesn't own a W-League team. He can stop making deals with teams which do, infact, amount to match-fixing. The WNT assistant coaches should not be Whitecaps employees. The CSA can rent office space in another building. The location of training camps can be moved around. Efforts can be made to ensure that Canada's W-League teams have a somewhat equal number of WNT members so that the WNT is not so dependent on one club. 8) Following up on my previous point, I do believe that Pellerud is engaged in an improper relationship with the Whitecaps. I do, however, understand why the arbitrator ruled that there was not enough *EVIDENCE* to support such a conclusion. Questionable photographs are not enough, I think the three women were let down by their representatives on the issue of Pellerud renting from Kerfoot. I do not live in Vancouver, but I do know alot about other Canadian markets, and I know that Vancouver has the highest real estate prices in Canada - far ahead of even Toronto and Calgary. I also know that West Vancouver is alot better than East Vancouver. I am sure that a "substantial" home in West Vancouver, just a few doors down from where atleast one billionaire lives and on a property once deemed worthy of future development to later house same billionaire, is worth a hell of alot more on the rental market than just $1500/month. Although the report does not mention any financial records that actually proves that rent is being paid, it doesn't matter. Providing a home at a fraction of market rates is a type of subsidy - which in turn is a form of financial compensation. As an example, the NBA, NHL, NFL, CFL, and MLS all force their teams to operate under a salary cap. If a team that was stuck near the cap were to purchase a $10M mansion and a $500K Rolls-Royce Phantom, and offer them to a player at the rental rate of $1/month in exchange for a lower salary that would keep them under the cap, then you can bet that the other teams would be screaming bloody murder and the league would have their ass. This is an extreme example of course, but it proves my point that subsidized rent can take the place of an actual wage and still create a financial incentive/relationship. The women's accusations took a beating when their claim that there was no rent being paid turned out to be incorrect (assuming there was proof to show that $1500/month was being paid). Nonetheless, the women's representatives should have done some research and demonstrated what the property's actual value on the rental market was. If it is really worth $5-6K/month, or even $3K/month, then you would have real evidence of financial incentive and therefore possible bias. 9) As usual, and as expected, the CSA had nothing useful to say. 10) It may have been quicker to read the report than this post, and I really wanted to have a tenth point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 It seems to me after reading the entire 29 pages that it was a vote by the players NOT to allow Hooper and friends back on the team because of the missed training camp and game. Pellerud would have probably let them come back if the team had wanted it. Why is there no criticism of the team from the Hooper supporters>? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishman Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 What is laughable is how easily one could demonstrate what fair market value is for a rental property in West Vancouver. I believe it was estimated that the home in which Pellerud currently resides is valued at ~$6,500,000, according to a search conducted by the Toronto Star. Hmmm...what would that rent for in the open market in West Van? Well, a simple search using any available rental site engine will tell you that no properties, save perhaps a main floor of a home in EAST Vancouver can be found for $1,500 per month. Typically, homes in West Vancouver would start at about $3,500 per month. And there is no chance that those are $6.5m homes! The mortgage (not like Kerfoot has one on that house!) alone would be over $25K a month! I think they should have done, I dunno, 5 minutes of research. Hey, maybe they could have called a realtor in BC. Nah, that would be too tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regs Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 So the laughable part would be the "plaintiffs" not doing 5 minutes of research, correct? Let's be real and place the blame where it really belongs. In all aspects, it's one way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 quote:Originally posted by Regs So the laughable part would be the "plaintiffs" not doing 5 minutes of research, correct? Let's be real and place the blame where it really belongs. In all aspects, it's one way. Agreed. I just read a poster on Go Big Red who still thinks Hooper, Latham and Nonen did nothing wrong. Unbelievable. Then again, I guess it really shouldn't be surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fan Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 It is a good example of just how messy the CSA incompetence allowed this situation to get to this point. Pellerud and Kerfoot were a disaster waiting to happen as far as good business practice and ethical Standards go. Pellerud's reasons for not playing and playing some players are irrelevant the fact he did two different things is a huge problem. Same thing with the rental house as KAS says just a really bad idea under any circumstance. Kerfoot walked through the CSA door of incompetence and poor business and it was crappy from that moment on. The semantics of how he treated those women doesn't exonerate him from anything. ellerud has poor judgment,questionable ethics and a very manipulative character. The Whitecaps, Kerfoot and the CSA are pathetically linked in a collusive triangle that appears to at least ensured victory for the Whitecaps and even if it is pure and good should have never been allowed or attempted. The CSA and this report and group are as usual, ineffective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan68 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Has anyone considered that since sport has begun players have complained about coaches and often the better players have tried to take over the control (decision making) from the coach. Perhaps this was just a power struggle between two alphas with the coach coming out on top this time. If this were the NBA then I would have put my money on Kobi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.