Sarah Ellerby vs Jennifer Chen (How would you rule?)

Barbara said:
What has been found out is that Ellerby got a warning.

The WPBA has/had instated a: "warning, fine, suspension" ladder of discipline.

The WPBA requires written offense violations because anything verbal can be argued as heresay for defense.

Barbara
Click to expand...




If this is all that was done, it raises more questions than answers.

1) Was this a technical decision because of a failure to submit a written complaint?

2) Is this requirement for a written statement a commonly understood and used procedure in the WPBA?

3) Are there any considerations made to ensure that non english speaking players understand the complaint procedures when these incidents happen?

4) Were there any conditions to the ruling, such as did Sarah E. have to acknowledge any wrongdoing or have to formally apologize to anyone?

5) If an incident like this happens again with her or anyone for that matter, does the tournament director have any authority to take immediate action or will they have to wait for a written complaint and a ruling from the board as well?

6) Did Sarah E. deny the incident in the hallway?

7) Was it relevant to the board that this incident in the hallway happened during a match?

8) Has any player been asked or pressured in any way to not discuss these or any similar incidents with anyone outside the WPBA?

9) Do the WPBA board members feel confident that this ruling adequately prevents anything like this from happening again?

I could go on and on and on.
 
I am having a real problem with the clandestine way in which the WPBA chooses to operate.

In any other sports organization, NFL, MLB, NBA, etc...when a player commits an infraction, it is handled in a very public way, and dealt with swiftly. The player and the infraction are announced, and investigation in immediately launched, and usually within a few days of the incident, a ruling and punishment (if applicable) have been handed down and announced. It puts the player in the spotlight and sends a clear message that this behavior within a professional sports organization will not be tolerated.

Since a referee was called to deal with the alleged foul committed, it at that point should have become a matter of record, and the alleged retaliatory attack should have fallen under that umbrella...since the incidences were directly related to one another.

I believe that by the WPBA handling such affairs in such a clandestine manner, they have done more to hurt their credibility than any public handling of this affair could have done. I know that for myself, I will never look at the WPBA the same way again, or with the same amount of respect that I once did...and that is a direct result of the way it chose to handle this particular incident.

Please note that all of the above is with respect to the WPBA's governing board...and is not meant to be a slight against the many fine ladies who make up the players base of the WPBA.

Lisa
 
Da Poet said:
If this is all that was done, it raises more questions than answers.

1) Was this a technical decision because of a failure to submit a written complaint?

2) Is this requirement for a written statement a commonly understood and used procedure in the WPBA?

3) Are there any considerations made to ensure that non english speaking players understand the complaint procedures when these incidents happen?

4) Were there any conditions to the ruling, such as did Sarah E. have to acknowledge any wrongdoing or have to formally apologize to anyone?

5) If an incident like this happens again with her or anyone for that matter, does the tournament director have any authority to take immediate action or will they have to wait for a written complaint and a ruling from the board as well?

6) Did Sarah E. deny the incident in the hallway?

7) Was it relevant to the board that this incident in the hallway happened during a match?

8) Has any player been asked or pressured in any way to not discuss these or any similar incidents with anyone outside the WPBA?

9) Do the WPBA board members feel confident that this ruling adequately prevents anything like this from happening again?

I could go on and on and on.
Click to expand...

Be careful, Sarah has a gun permit. And an itchy trigger finger. :grin:
 
jay helfert said:
Be careful, Sarah has a gun permit. And an itchy trigger finger. :grin:
Click to expand...

Everyone has a gun permit in Florida. They come our cereal boxes. Johnnyt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top