Written by As we’ve attempted to define- and perhaps ‘pin down’ is a better phrase- what Culture in Sports is and isn’t, in this space over the last several weeks, my last article on allegations of sexual harassment made against former New York Mets Manager Mickey Callaway keeps racing back into my mind. One of Callaway’s five accusers, all women working in media, described his conduct as, “the worst kept secret in sports.” Which then prompted recalling Denise Harvey’s article focusing on ending abusive treatment of young gymnasts that appeared on January 24, and referencing the documentary, Athlete A. Athlete A shows not just a now convicted sexual predator allowed and enabled in operating around young athletes, it also highlights abusive coaching, and the abdication of responsibility by leaders of a national sports federation for the welfare of the athletes in their charge.
It is crucial to note that Callaway is only accused and no determination as to his responsibility has been made. Nothing in this post attempts to equate different allegations of abusive treatment, just to illustrate that sports have been ground for numerous allegations of differing kinds and types of abusive treatment, and these run through sports at every level, often as poorly kept secrets.
All of this, prompts the questions, are sports more susceptible to giving abusers and harassers space to operate, and if so, are sports particularly poorly structured to expose these abuses, and protect athletes and those victimized because of their love of the game?
It is difficult to say sports are a more fertile ground than any other business sector or area of work or life. Racism, sexual harassment, abusive treatment have been documented in all areas of life. But lawyers who work in exposing these abuses, in their various forms, will point to several attributes that allow abuse and harassment to spring up and go unreported or under reported. These are: 1) where clear power imbalances exist- where one individual has significant power over another in the same space; 2) in areas where many people are drawn because of the rewards or exclusivity associated with them and opportunities are considered special or unique; and 3) where the urgency of the next upcoming event is palpable and a reason to delay investigation or review.
Hollywood, Wall Street, electoral politics, and sports have all three of these dynamics working in the extreme. Only a few individuals have the resources and power to produce big films, cast actors in career-making roles, and the lure of the next big hit is an urgent proposition. Money in finance and power in politics all offer similarly heady and exclusive cocktails. So sports are not alone, but it is critical for those of us charged with preventing or mitigating abuse be cognizant of the risks and harms at play and how abusive treatment can be enabled and prevented.
Sports are one of the last areas in our public life where extreme power imbalances don’t just still exist, they are celebrated. The ability to achieve victory is an elixir that causes us to suspend our better judgment at times.
Unlike mega-entertainment companies or financial firms, sports organizations are also uniquely susceptible to mishandling or disbelieving allegations, because they don’t have processes for handling such allegations. Professional sports franchises are valued in the billions, but most don’t have significantly built out structures or resources in legal, human resources, or ethics and compliance for handling allegations of misconduct or abuse.
All sports organizations, but especially pro sports franchises, also are built to value external success, meaning highly-compensated employees (coaches, managers, star players) are given great privilege not based on neutral standards but on their market power. Also pro franchises, as small organizations, are not often diverse enough workplaces to have that cultural diversity function to positively influence the behavior of the entire team. Imagine, if Mickey Callaway reported to a female team president, might his behavior have been different?
Finally, urgency is often used as an excuse in sports for delaying (or not taking) action. The next season, the next game, the championship game, an upcoming Olympics, can never be allowed to be an excuse for failing to confront wrongdoing or misconduct. One of my favorite films is Chariots of Fire, one of only two sports movies to win the Oscar as Best Picture. In it, the lords who led the British Olympic Committee at the 1924 Paris Olympics having failed in getting runner Eric Liddell to abandon his religious principles and run on Sunday were rescued by the ability to enter Liddell in another event and they muse over what had just transpired in a side conversation:
“Duke of Sutherland : A sticky moment, George.
Lord Birkenhead : Thank God for Lindsay. I thought the lad (Liddell) had us beaten.
Duke of Sutherland : He did have us beaten, and thank God he did.
Lord Birkenhead : I don’t quite follow you.
Duke of Sutherland : The “lad”, as you call him, is a true man of principles and a true athlete. His speed is a mere extension of his life, its force. We sought to sever his running from himself.
Lord Birkenhead : For his country’s sake, yes.
Lord Birkenhead : No sake is worth that, least of all a guilty national pride.”
The script is right “[n]o sake is worth that,” and the urgency of the next game cannot be an excuse for failing to end abusive treatment or from confronting the truth. The same sports that lift up our souls, begin to wither and die if we do.