Conference 7.286::sports_90

    Well, i for one am really ticked off if one of the alleged players
    
    is Zeke Mowatt, ex-giant and all.. Anyways, in regard to your question
    
    karen,  a reporter  is a reporter know  matter  what the gender..
    
    They are in there to get the story, in this instance, there seems
    to be  some harassment [sexually wise] i will wait till the whole
    story comes out, but it looks like some  Pats players  wanted to
    play their own type of game in lockerroom, at her expense, ..  
    
    
    Jim
    

    I believe female reporters are there to do a job, no more, no less, and
    I also believe there's no excuse for the way the Patriot players
    allegedly treated Lisa Olsen.  Period, end of discussion.  I'm
    personally embarassed because I consider myself a part of the Patriots
    family and anything reflecting badly on the team reflects badly on me.
    
    I do believe however that a female sports reporter covering a male team
    must strive very, very hard to not give the slightest impression of
    being there for anything but her job.  Otherwise, she leaves herself
    open for this sort of accusation.
    
    I believe further that male sportswriters should be given the same
    access to the locker rooms used by women, otherwise, we are upholding a
    double standard.  It's part of the same double standard that says it's
    OK to have an all-woman event (road race, club, etc) but not OK to have
    an all-man event.
    
    John
    
    

    Agreed John. I guess I have a problem with any female seeing me
    half-dressed (except a girlfriend of course :-) - that's just basic
    modesty. I understand where some players are coming from. I don't
    parade around in a towel for any female that comes by, why would teh
    locker room be different ?
    
    Therefore my solution is to have a period where there are no reporters
    at all. Then let them all in.
    
    As for the Pats harrassment, like John said, no excuse for that at all.
    Mike Madden of Globe had the best idea. Make it public, and make the
    players apolgize in front of their wives and girlfriends. You better
    believe that THEY will exact justice, if the Pats can't or won't.
    
    Finally, there have been cases of men being tossed out of locker rooms
    of women. Sorry ladies, you can't have it both ways ...

Could we have a brief summary of what the story is?

On this side of the pond we don't know, but it's also a good idea to put in
a little blurb so that everyone has the same amount of info.

Tks., rick 

    
    I don't know what incident is being specifically discussed, but in
    general I think the post-game locker room interviews are a fine
    tradition.  However, women should not be let in, because the players
    should have the right to their personal privacy where their naked
    bodies are concerned.  I'm sure many of them are uncomfortable for a
    variety of reasons.  Heck, I feel pretty strange when some nurse has to
    see me at my worst.
    
    Unfortunately, some women reporters put up a stink, and if the issue is
    pushed any further (some players may insist that the women be removed,
    too), the most likely scenario would be that the locker rooms will
    become off-limits to all.
    
    Dickster
    

    
    
    Hi,
    
       I have been reading the Globe and the Herald reports and it truly
    has turtned into a great media pissing contest. !st I think that a
    women  reporter (or any reporter for that matter) knows what they are
    getting themselves into when they cover a major sports team. The last
    thing thatI want to read about is some overgrown, sex crazed,
    Neandrathal, that has sexually harassed a reporter. Oh gosh How will I
    continue my duty as a  reporter if I can't get the inside scoop when
    they are about to take a shower?
    
    
      If they (reporters) are so hell bent on a story they should wait
    until after the team is out of the showers and into the pressroom for
    the details. Who really wants to talk to the press after you and your
    team has just taken a beating on the field ?  Do I feel sorry for the
    reporter ? No way! They crossed the line by entering the lions den,
    they should pay the price.  
    
    now we have to put up with the poor poor me routine as the press grill
    the Pats on their rotton behaviour, and sexual harrassment charges.
    I would like to hear game stats not one reporters Biased opinion on
    how she was "MindRaped".
    
    Save it or go into another proffession.
    
    
    
    -TH

Yeah, I could use a short blurb, since I don't know the details.

Generically speaking, if a person is part of the media, and they
have access, the should be professional.  The players should also
respect that, and be professional also.

I agree with Dock.  There should be a period where players are allowed
to have some privacy before the press is allowed in, I think it would
alleviate a lot of these situations.

Also, if women have access to the men's lockerroom, it should definitely
work the other way.   There are male gynecologists who put aside male
feelings in the name of professionalism, and male reporters can do the
same.  It's just a question of maintaining professionaly decorum...

'Saw

    Wow, 7 "adult level" replies in a row.  Will wonders ever cease, Karen?
    
    				:-)
    
    I agree with the opinion that players have a period of time to
    themselves before the onslaught of reporters, male or female.  This
    way, players willing choose to talk to reporters while naked,
    semi-naked, or not naked at all.......
    
    Make that 8 "adult level" replies.  :-)
    
    Hawk

    The details as I know them are these:
    
    The Patriots open the locker room to the press every day after
    practice, as they are required to do by the NFL.  The locker room is
    also open after games, after an appropriate cooling-off period, as is
    also required by the NFL.
    
    After Monday's practice last week, Lisa Olsen, a reporter for the
    Herald who is covering the Patriots on a regular basis, was allegedly
    insulted by 5 unnamed Patriots players.  The insults were of a sexual
    nature.  She blew up at the team, the team apologized to her, the
    players were supposedly disciplined for it.  The basis of the incident
    actually took place last Sunday.  She was looking for Andre Tippett to
    ask him about the great play of the linebackers against the Colts. 
    Andre, who didn't play the entire game, was getting treatment for his
    injury.  On the flight home, there was supposedly discussion among the
    players about what she was hanging around so long for, alleging that
    she was being a voyeur.  That seems to be what led to the insults on
    Monday.
    
    The Herald tried to keep the matter quiet as well, preferring to handle
    it directly with the Patriots.  It was actually the Globe that broke
    the story.  The Herald got all upset at the Globe for doing so. 
    Yesterday was the first time she'd gone into the locker room since the
    incident.  I haven't read the Herald so I don't know how they're
    playing it but Mike Madden devoted his column to it today.  There were
    another couple of insults given, several Patriots players showed
    support and two players who were named as having been part of the
    original incident have denied involvement.  I really don't want to
    quote too much of the article.
    
    I side with the players on press access in general.  No player has ever
    really said anything worth repeating.  I don't like dealing with the
    press, though it is a part of my other job.  I think of the press, and
    I think the players think of the press, with some degree of paranoia. 
    I believe the media will try to get you if they can.  I don't like that.
    It's especially tough to face the music after a tough loss and to hear
    the same stupid questions, day in and day out.  I have very little
    sympathy to the press for their complaints they have about being unable
    to do their job but there's still no excuse for what happened to Lisa
    Olsen.
    
    Yet, I believe the locker rooms should be open because the press has
    helped make pro sports what it is today.  The job the press does, tough
    as it is on both sides, is necessary to the sports industry as a whole
    and only indirectly benefits the players.  It's tough to make them see
    that.  I also believe that if the locker rooms are going to be open,
    they should be open to all reporters, male and female, regardless of
    the gender of the athletes.  But we should also be sensitive to the
    feelings of the players as well.  Some have jealous wives.  Some have
    deep-seated religious beliefs that must also be respected.
    
    John

    
    Players have made remarks filled with sexual innuendo since before the
    locker rooms were "opened" up.  The women came in, saying we want to be
    able to do our job, we don't want to change anything, etc.  The players
    are acting no different than they did (if anything, more restrained)
    and now this reporter is upset because something with sexual innuendo
    was said.  Maybe the use of the word 'open' regarding the locker rooms
    is improper.
    
    Bruce

    Of course, they should be able to their job - but it has to work
    both ways.  In other words, males should be let into females lockers.
    Of course, there aren't as many 'chances' for this to happen.  I
    never remember a male reporter talking to Chrissie Evert after
    she got out of the shower...
                       
    This hits a nerve with me.  In the quest for 'equality' (a good
    thing), to often a double standard is employed.  I'll take road
    racing, for example.  All male races are basically a thing of the
    past - since they are sexist, and are usually protested.  However,
    all female races are fairly common - no men allowed.  
    
    Anyway, Bruce May hit it on the head - sexual innuendos in the locker
    room weren't invented when women came in - in fact, I'd guess it
    automatically has lessened, dueto embarrassment....
    
    JD

    Personally, I think the league is in error.  It should immediately
    bar ALL press from the locker room.  A seperate room/area should
    be designated for the interviews.  The locker room was designed
    for one thing only, and that was for the participants to dress for
    the game and undress after it was completed.  As it stands now,
    the only way a player can keep from meeting the press is to stay
    in the shower.  I don't care what the rights are of the press, the
    rights of the individual come first.  So, if a player does NOT want
    to meet the press, why should he be almost forced to, unless he
    wants to shower for an hour or more?
    
    This is also unfair to a female reporter who may NOT want
    to enter the lockerroom, but is forced to in order to be competitive
    with the male reporters.
    
    Again, I don't see the value of any player being interviewed in
    his birthday suit.  If a player is so happy and excited over his
    play, or that of his team, he should be able to go to a designated
    area for an interview prior to removing his uniform.  
    
    Lee

While it not may be much of an excuse, I can see where some of the
problem comes in....

In a sport like football especially, you've psyched yourself up
all week, since Thursday, you've visualized the other team, their
uniforms, their colors, and you've visualized yourself annihilating
them, crushing them, crunching them.

Come Sunday you go out there and your adrenalin is pumping, you can't
wait for the kickoff because you're going to explode, you can't wait
for that first hit because there's so much animal energy building
up inside you that you've got to plow your body through the other
guy.

You play the game, you're good and tired, and you're definitely in
all-male mode.  The f-word is flowing freely, and the story is
definitely become more r-r-r-r-ribald (as Lovitz would say on SNL).
Now a woman reporter comes in the lockerroom.


It's no excuse, really, but that's potentially a scenario that could
occur with some individuals and probably does.

At a drinkup after a rugby game, many of us have to consciously control
what we say, because we're on an adrenalin high from having just played.
Thank God we don't have to deal with reporters or anything, and that
the most complicated thing we have to do is pull the beer tap.  Trying
to put myself into an athlete's place in the lockerroom, trying to
shower, and field many questions, some of them insipid, is overwhelming to
think about.

I think the press as a whole, regardless of gender, should be more
understanding.  

But that still doesn't excuse disrespect of *anyone* let alone a female
reporter...

Just some more thoughts,
FrankWa

Lee you have expressed my feelings exactly. I also think that there should be a 
seperate room for all players to go to that wish to be interviewed. Many sports
(like tennis) due this after the event. 

the lockerroom should be for the players to shower and get cleaned up. Don't 
allow any access to it. Too bad coaches get fined for shutting the locker room
doors and keeping the press out. The NFL  and other leagues have stupid 
policy on this issue.

Metz

    The only problem I have with the separate room is that it's too
    convenient a way for the players to duck their responsibility (and to a
    certain extent, I think there is) to talk to the press.  The reason the
    interviews take place in the locker room is because the players are, to
    a certain extent, a captive audience.  It'd be too easy for players to
    sneak out another way or to not show up until after deadline.
    
    John

    
    From the reports I read, we are NOT talking about sexual innuendo here.
    The players in question are accused of making lewd, suggestive
    unprintable remarks to the reporter.  There was apparently no subtlety 
    involved.
    
    I'm not sure what the big deal is, anyway.  Without getting into it
    in too much detail, why don't these guys put a robe on or something
    when exiting the showers?  I'm sure that some kind of solution, with
    very little inconvenience, could be worked out.  And the same could
    very easily be applied to women's lockerrooms.
    
    If the reports in the Globe are accurate, the players in question AND
    THEIR OWNER are classless slobs.  Victor Kiam is quoted in this
    morning's paper as having said, "She's a classic bitch.  No wonder the
    players don't like her."
    
    Just another good reason for me not to like this team.
    
    glenn
     

My feelings on this are that reporters either are allowed in the
lockerroom or not. If they are, it doesn't matter if the reporters are
male of female nor if the athletes are male and female.

If this is a valued journalistic event, it should be set up for everyone.

TTom

    
    For years players made "lewd, suggestive unprintable remarks" to each
    other and to reporters.  Now because one is a woman they have to change
    the way they act?  I thought the women going into the locker rooms were
    saying that things _didn't_ have to change?
    
    Bruce, defending the Patsies for the 1st time in his life

    	John, I personally believe that if a player doesn't want to
    talk to the press he doesn't have to.  I never could figure out
    the whole lockerroom scene anyway (just like the live TV interview).
    These guys for the most part give the same stock answers.  Most
    of the juciy stories are from unquotable sources and are probably
    furnished at some bar after a few drinks, not in the lockerroom after
    the game.  If the NFL wanted to close the lockerrooms to all the
    press it would be okay with me.
    
    				/Don

    
    C'mon, Bruce, you can't tell the difference between using profanity
    when joking with your friends and making sexually suggestive comments
    to a co-worker?  That's the proper analogy.  These guys weren't cutting 
    up with each other while by chance in Lisa Olson's presence, the 
    comments were directed AT HER and FOR HER!
    
    By logical extension, I guess if players are used to pounding the heck 
    out of each other, maybe they shouldn't have to change their behavior 
    when dealing with reporters in the locker room, either.  Maybe that's 
    what happened to poor Will McDonough a couple of years back...
    
    glenn
     

I don't think any player should be obligated to talk to the press.

Just because I play on X team, doesn't mean that I have to talk to
John Doe or Jane Doe reporters for whoever.

Everyone always laughs about Mark Bavaro and how tough he is to
interview.  Well, Bavaro is a very very private person, who is
shy on top of that.  He does not interview well at all.  (I know
a friend of his wife's, so I have this on pretty good authority).

Why, just because a man has a God-given talent to play football,
should he be expected to be extremely glib and a wonderful, available
orator?

The robe deal doesn't cut it either.  The locker room should be
a domain where a player can change his/her clothes, shower, get
a rub down, sit in the whirlpool.

How would you softball players/rugby players/soccer players etc
feel if a reporter from your home town paper came into your
bathroom at home just after you got out of the shower?


Just some thoughts I guess....
'Saw

> How would you softball players/rugby players/soccer players etc
> feel if a reporter from your home town paper came into your
> bathroom at home just after you got out of the shower?

	I'd love it. " the fact that me  this long hair leaping unknow could be
 the star of this...." 

Seriously though I do believe that there is a 15 minute grace period before
they allowed in so if anyone has religous beliefs etc they have time to get
ready. 

as for JD and the others who feel it should work both ways yeah in a perfect
world maybe but this one ain't. Cmon now we all know men are basically pigs.
Could you seriously interview Katrina Witt, or Gabriella Sabertina etc in the
buff and keep your mind on business? I know dam well I couldn't.

I think if a woman goes into a lockerroom she has to expect an occassional
pass to be made at her but she certainly doesn't deserve to be insulted
which seem to be the case here. 

Let's face it, women have been going into lockers for few years now and there
haven't been many incidents or problems except  when some joker goes too far.

and cmon Don if a player really doesn't want to be interviewed he can slip
out early hid or keep his mouth shut. If he hangs around he's fair game.

Saw back to you a bit I'd say a lockerroom is public place, certainly more
than my bathroom. If a reporter came to my house he'd atleast wait in the
other room until I got out of the shower or off the crapper....I'm sure the
actual changing area is somewhat seperated from the showers and johns and they
are off limit....

mike

    I see you wasted no words, Mike!  :-)
    
    Hawk

    There's a difference between joking around and using the "f-word"
    in the locker room and sexually harassing someone in particular.
    I think it's completely out of line.  If they don't want her to
    be around, they can ask her to leave or offer to get Tippett or
    something else.  But as someone who's doing her job, she has as
    much right as the men who go in there.  No, no shots of Chrissie
    out of the shower, but the men and women go to the press room after
    matches.  When was the last time you saw a shot of Lendl in the
    locker room?
    
    As far as women's races and what not, that's a separate issue.
    The issue here is how the Patroits (tm Don?) should be able to
    get away with harrassing a reporter like that.  Maybe both sides
    haven't been given, but it sounds to me like an apology (and
    maybe a fine) should be in order.  This isn't Rob Woodward walking
    around in the buff and posing, this is intentionally insulting and
    degrading someone.  Telling jokes in front of her isn't the same
    thing.
    
    -Walt

   Female reporters should not be allowed in the locker rooms of male
   athletes.

   Male reporters should not be allowed in the locker rooms of Female
   athletes.

   Females who think this is discriminatory should choose a different
   profession, or cover a different sport.

   Males who think this is discriminatory should choose a different
   profession, or cover a different sport.

   Women are getting too pushy. The thought of an all male function drives
   them batty (more batty). An all male club, an all male race, a stag
   night... etc.  Yet they think nothing of having (company sponsored)
   female only breakfasts, female only this, and female only that. It's
   time men stopped acting like wimps. Scream your guts out Sweet
   Patootie; YOU....  ain't allowed. Period.

   Have you noticed that none of the militant `feminists' (I think that
   should be an oxymoron) have denounced the chauvinist behavior that
   allows females (but not males) to be returned from Iraq?

   Mike JN

    
   > Females who think this is discriminatory should choose a different
   > profession, or cover a different sport.
    
    I don't think the issue is one of public opinion anymore.  I believe 
    that if a locker room is open to the media, members of either sex are 
    guaranteed access BY LAW.  It's very easy to see where one could not
    make a living at one's profession if denied equal access.  Let's
    face it, very few female reporters could make a living if restricted to
    coverage of only women's sports.
    
    This is also a very different situation from a private club, where 
    discrimination does not affect the status of one's employment.
    
   > Have you noticed that none of the militant `feminists' (I think that
   > should be an oxymoron) have denounced the chauvinist behavior that
   > allows females (but not males) to be returned from Iraq?
    
    I believe that this decision is a matter of Iraqi policy, not US policy.  
    Last I checked, the Prez was demanding release of all hostages, male and
    female.
    
    In any case, while there may very well be such a thing as a militant 
    feminist, I fail to see what it has to do with someone wanting to make
    a living covering sports.  I doubt that a "militant feminist" would be
    comfortable in such a profession anyway, especially if required to be
    subjected to the likes of one Victor Kiam.  Has Lisa Olson given any
    indication that she fits this profile?
    
    Oh, and last Friday's Globe gave a blip that Channel 4's Alice Cook
    also has also been the victim of some (if less harsh) of the same 
    treatment from the Patriots in the past.  Is Ms. Cook also a militant 
    feminist?
    
    glenn
    

Besides Mike what if the woman really loves her job, she should have to give it 
up because a few folks can't act like adults? Same goes for a guy if he really
enjoys women's sports. Although him manlyhood maybe open to questioning I think
Dick Buttons would die if they didn't let him cover women's figure skating...

mike

    re.25
    
    
    
      Bravo!
    
    
       You have to take this for what it's worth, the Globe and the Herald
    going at it and Kiam's refusal to give an apology. First of all the
    herald is nothing short of the Enquirer and the globe is run by
    communists. Of course the herald dumps on michael Madden (TG) and globe
    dumps on poor miss Olson. The matter was all but forgotten until the 
    globe broke the stories and the herald countered with a rebuttal. Were
    not talking top noth journalism here, this is 2 reporters and two
    papers that don't like each other. Both of which is spewing basic
    garbage, there isn't any biased reporting here know is there.
    
    
    Anther thing, would you  (if you were a female  reporter) hang around 
    to get a storie form an injured player in th locker room ? Personnally
    I would find it offensive but don't feel that I should be the one to
    put on a robe. She is the guest in their house not the other way
    around.  I say to bad if a few of the boys said a few things, she's a
    big girl, working in a big world with a few big men around. 
    
    Now she can cry sexual harrassment by being a female in a mens locker
    room  with 40 + men around, twist the story to her advantage , print
    her biased views in the paper where the pats don't have a chance to
    defend themselves. Meanwhile the Globe can leak the story and sell a fe
    papers in meantime 
    
     Unreal
    
    
    -TH

    
    All right Dinz.... (.1)..... I didn't think you were that type of guy,
    but it warms my heart to see that you feel that way!
    

    
    I agree with those who feel that maybe there should be more time
    given to the players to take a shower and relax a bit after the
    game, before the hoard of reporters are let in the locker room.
    I remember watching the tube after a Celtics win and could see a
    couple of guy's swinging in the breeze in the background, I thought
    can't they give these guy's a little privacy? BTW isn't this the 
    same Lisa Olsen who drudged up some old dirt(Oil Can) in Montreal?
    I know that got a few people miffed. She is not well liked from 
    what I hear/read. I'm not implying that it has anything to do 
    with women in locker rooms, just adding fuel to the fire. 
    
    
    
    Steve

   Glenn and Mike

   Stop trying to be reasonable!
   This is strickly a_emotional topic.
   Women are always telling men that we have to learn to express our
   emotions.
   What they've never figured out is... when women get emotional they cry.
   When men get emotional they slap the shit out of something. Men are
   getting better and better at CONTROLLING their emotions, and women keep
   telling them to let loose.... Crazy!
   What they're really asking is for men to act like women.
   Won't work.
   (some states it's illegal, and most places it's at least frowned upon)

   PS - If he's going to be such a wuss, I say let Dick Buttons die!

   Mike JN

    Hey Linda, welcome to SPORTS!  Figures you'd enter your first reply in
    the lockerroom note.......  :-)
    
    Hawk

    
    Let 'em all leave their clothes outside the door, hop in the shower,
    work up a good lather, and discuss the game on equal terms.
    
    Dickster
    

    I agree wif Mike JN, and I applaud the players who were not afraid to
    show their dissapproval to having a female in THEIR lockerroom where
    THEY shower and dress after practice and/or games. I also applaud those
    who have the guts to not give anyone a postgame interview at any time.
    Sure they are in a high profile occupation but like someone said, the
    privacy of the individual comes first. It seems like it'd be better for 
    the players if there was a separate room for post game interviews and 
    hoopla. That way if someone doesn't feel like talking, he doesn't have
    to and nobody bothers them when trying to dress, etc. It also gives the
    players a chance to calm down if they had a bad game.  

This is such a tough subject.

I mean, if I was a_athlete I wouldn't want women in the lockerroom
while I was changing.  I wouldn't even really want men in their either.

Perhaps they should extend the off-limits time a little more, because
after a game there's days when I could stand in the shower for an hour.


And what would happen if there were women in there and I came out
and had a woody.  Next day in the Globe the entire world would
know whether the 'Saw's woody is half-laquered or full lacquered....
it just ain't kosher....


'Saw

    Hmmm.  Interesting.  I've a female friend who did AP Sports Photography
    for a couple of years, including full access to the Chicago Blackhawks
    dressing room.  So I'm not talking completely out of my right ear.
    
    Women can be as interested in sports as men.  They want to be (and can
    be) sports reporters, just as good (and as bad) as men.  I rather like
    the approach that tennis takes, where reporters are barred from the
    locker rooms, and the players are *required* to spend some time in the
    pressroom, within a certain period of time after their match.  Players
    who fail to meet with the press are subject to fines.  It certainly
    seems reasonable to me that a similar format should be possible for
    team sports.  Possibly 'press room' duty should rotate, with some
    subset of players, defined *before* the game, forced to attend on pain
    of fines, but with others allowed to participate if they choose. 
    Legitimate injury either changes the timing (as in tennis) or forces a
    'designated substitute', whichever is appropriate.
    
    Until then, comments directed to specific reporters which impugn their
    motivation for being present seem uncalled for.  Behavior which
    encourages such comments is also uncalled for.  Seems like there's
    enough blame to go around and tar everyone on this particular incident.
    Women who are interested in sports (and I'm one of 'em, in spades), 
    learn that they *must* put up with a lot of language and behavior which 
    may be personally distasteful, but which is part-and-parcel of the 
    sub-culture of sports.  You learn to become appropriately deaf-and-blind.
    
    I suspect that men in a woman's locker room would find the atmosphere 
    significantly different from the men's locker room.  It has been my
    personal experience that women seek out and have provided for them more
    private spaces for changing.  Personally, I get a little crawly when
    other *women* see me in the all-together, and avoid it as much as
    possible.  My mother was even worse in this regard than I am.  Possibly
    women younger than me (and/or more actively athletic) are not as bothered.
    
    
    And re .25 (if you're still here).  There is a faction of the 'militant
    feminist' movement which *does* object to the women-and-children-first
    philosophy of evacuation of non-combatants from Iraq and Kuwait.  They
    feel it should be children-and-responsible-parent-first :-) .  At this
    point, I'll take any and every body that Hussein is willing to allow to
    leave.
    
    A&W

    1990 or not, I feel it's inappropriate for {men/women} to be in
    {female/male} locker rooms.  There are just too many issues and
    opportunities for poor discretion from both sides.  And the "lets be
    professional about it" line doesn't cut it -- it's totally
    inappropriate.
    
    I see no problem with members of either sex being sportswriters for any
    sport.
    
    Solution??  Just what a few in here have suggested.  A league-wise
    policy to conduct interviews in a separate location, after the athletes
    have showered and changed.......
    
    Why is this so difficult????
    
    -- dg

    One other aspect of this situation is that there must be some wives
    who are, to say the least, extremely uncomfortable with the thought
    that their husbands are in this situation.
    
    To turn the situation around, I know that I would NOT stand for
    my wife to be interviewed by a male, if she were an athlete, in
    her locker room.  Discussing this with her last evening, she expressed
    the same, were it to be me undergoing this experience.
    
    Also, why should any player, who just completed a physically exhausting
    game, not have the time to both physically and mentally relax prior
    to being interviewed?  Why have the writers got more rights than
    the players?
    
    The right of privacy of an individual certainly takes precedence
    over any right of the press to an interview.  
    
    I did hear this morning that one player was fined.  No amount was
    stated, but it was suspected that it is Zeke Mowatt.
    
    Lee

Hey Mike JN (.25)

>>   Women are getting too pushy. The thought of an all male function drives
>>   them batty (more batty). An all male club, an all male race, a stag
>>   night... etc.  Yet they think nothing of having (company sponsored)
>>   female only breakfasts, female only this, and female only that. It's
>>   time men stopped acting like wimps. Scream your guts out Sweet
>>   Patootie; YOU....  ain't allowed. Period.

You certainly sound like you're on the ball.  It usually goes like this:

Step 1:  Everything "all male" slowly gets zapped, and we all feel guilty.
Step 2:  Those charming ladies start concocting their "all female" things
         and by the time we wimps figure it out, we've been had!

Anyway, show the lady the door.  She has as much business in a men's locker 
room as we do in the ladie's lingerie department.

I reckon it's time for Mr. T and his "This is a decade of trivialities" speech!

It seems crazy to even have to discuss such an idea.

rick ellis

    
    
    Not really excusing the abuse she took, but if comments attributed to
    her, by the Herald (or globe) are correct, I can see why Kiam was
    upset, and made the remarks he did.
    
    I read that he was in the locker room after the Cinn. fiasco, and she
    walked by and asked him if he was there to usher her around also.
    (guess there was a security guard with her). He answered no, he was
    there to see his team. He then turned to a associate with him and made
    the bitch comment.
    
    
    Now if my team had just stunk up the joint, I don't think I would be in
    the mood for anyone to hit me with that line. And chances are anyone
    in that situation with have made the classic bitch statement
    
    
    
    Lou

>Anyway, show the lady the door.  She has as much business in a men's locker 
>room as we do in the ladie's lingerie department.
    
    What good would it do them to go there once every Christmas?
    
    Wonk ot Deen, and all that  :-)
    
    ML
    
    P.S.  The ONLY solution is to not let ANY of them in until players have
    a chance to become decent...   Someone also stated around the office
    today (and I agree) that this has to have been building up for some
    time - it just doesn't "happen", I don't think...   (And why her and
    not somebody else?)

    
    
       In 1985 the NFL approved a rule that allows all registered media
       into the locker rooms.  Regardless of color, race and gender
       etc.  Since the NFL approved this rule I feel they are obligated
       to accomidate the media in those situations.  To bad if the players
       don't want to talk.  In any professional sport, these guys are
       being payed big bucks to play a game, a sport, a kids sport.
       I have no sympothy for them.  Dealing with the press is part
       of their job ! 
    
       Lisa Olsen stated, that going into this profession she expected
       to have to deal with some locker room discomforts.  But 5 guys 
       surrounding her suggesting she touch their privates etc. is totaly
       unacceptable in that atmosphere.  These guys are supposed to
       be professionals ????  
    
       Victor Kiam, well, he's just a total idiot !!!!!!!!!!!
                  
       I wonder If that was one of Kiam's sales pitches for his Lady
       Remingtons ????
                      

    
    	Does anyone REALLY know what happened? I watched the news last
    night but didn't really find out just exactly what lewd acts were
    performed. Of course all the media sides together so basically all
    I got was a biased opinoin. John Dennis kind of ticked me off with 
    his comments. He said that , Well the players are given 15 minutes 
    to relax and shower, gee that's enough time. FIFTEEN MINUTES!! Have
    any of you ever got off a hockey, or a football uniform and took a 
    shower in 15 minutes??? Not this guy. How about they give the player's
    a little more time. He also made a good comment however, it seems that
    the Bruins solved the problem by issuing bath robes, something the 
    Pat's should consider. 
    
    
    
    
    Steve

    
    	From what I read in yesterday's Herald, the Pat's were offered
    robes a long time ago and since nobody wanted to wear them
    Management took them away...  
    
    
    Steve

    
    	Well so much for that!
    
    
    
    
    	Steve

    
    Oh, those poor, poor, players, having their privacy violated and such.
    It's a wonder they can even perform with all that pressure from all
    those ugly media types.  Let's make a rule that gives them the rest of
    the day off on game day.  Then they can be interviewed the next day, 
    after they've cooled off and the game is forgotten and nobody cares what 
    they've got to say anyway.
    
    Funny how when it comes to media relations, very few take the players'
    side normally, but when an incident of good old-fashioned sexual abuse 
    rears its ugly head, the masses come stampeding to defend the 
    good-ole-boys and their "rights". 
    
    People seem to think that this a constitutional right-to-privacy issue.
    It's not.  The NFL, not the media, has opened the locker rooms up, and
    for a very good reason.  They know which side the bread's buttered on.
    Free publicity for both the teams and players make the game more
    popular and benefits everyone involved.  The Cro-magnons that don't
    understand this should take it up with Mr. Tagliabue if they don't like 
    it, instead of attacking the neighborhood reporter.
    
    glenn
    
         

.42>room as we do in the ladie's lingerie department.
    
.42>    What good would it do them to go there once every Christmas?
   
No, No!!  As sponsor, I *fund* the X-Mas lingerie trip - I don't actually go 
there.  I went once or twice and felt like an ass, so now I wait outside 
with all the dogs.

:^{)

re 
   

    re: lingerie dept.
    
    I always get a kick out of the lady manikans in lingerie departments,
    you know, the ones with anatomically correct breasts which appear to
    have been exposed to the cold......  :-)
    
    Hawk

   I LOVE the ladies lingerie department. Really neat stuff. Come
   Christmas, I get Big Suze some really incredible... uh... apparel.
   She's always half afraid to open her presents if the kid is around.

   Mike JN

>    Oh, those poor, poor, players, having their privacy violated and such.
>    It's a wonder they can even perform with all that pressure from all
>    those ugly media types.  Let's make a rule that gives them the rest of
>    the day off on game day.  Then they can be interviewed the next day, 
>    after they've cooled off and the game is forgotten and nobody cares what 
>    they've got to say anyway.
    
>    People seem to think that this a constitutional right-to-privacy issue.
>    It's not.  The NFL, not the media, has opened the locker rooms up, and
>    for a very good reason.  They know which side the bread's buttered on.
>    Free publicity for both the teams and players make the game more
>    popular and benefits everyone involved.  The Cro-magnons that don't
>    understand this should take it up with Mr. Tagliabue if they don't like 
>    it, instead of attacking the neighborhood reporter.
    
     I usually find myself thinking along the same lines Glenn does, but in
     this case I don't.  While I agree that it was Roselle's office that gave
     the instruction, that doesn't mean it was right.  I am interested in
     what happens during the game, but I honestly don't think that there is
     any benefit to the fans in having interviews immediately after the game.
     There is no good reason why the NFL has opened the locker rooms after
     games, and in my opinion the additional value of having interviews in a
     locker room instead of a press room is negligible.  In fact, I can't
     remember having paid any attention to interviews right after a game.

    How does one become a reporter covering the GLOW lockerroom after their
    matches?  I wouldn't object if a GLOW lady talked dirty to me,
    especially that Mt. Fiji babe......  :-)
    
    Hawk

I agree with Mike JN about the lingerie dept.  Guys, you want
female attention?  Walk into Victoria's Secret with a perplexed 
look on your face, and tell the first female sales person who
approaches you that you have to buy something, and are quite
overwhelmed by the experience....  turns into a fun afternoon.

Actually, 15 minutes is not enough time to shower and change,
let alone come down after the game.  As most of you know,
I sweat like Dominique.  After a game or workout, I like to 
cool off in uniform before changing.  Also, I'm not in the
mood to talk right away...

I can see where the football players would feel the same way.

Perhaps if the league got their act together, it would eliminate
the possibility of any such future problems, and lessen the amount
of controversy that surrounds these locker room interviews...

'saw

      I don't know about the Patriots but I do know about the Red Sox and
    what they do after each game. First things first, most of the guys sit
    down and eat from the buffet table of food that is provided. If they
    take a shower first, they might miss out on getting a bite to eat. 
    The same holds true for the visiting team. The Sox have a locker room
    and a weight training room nearby, but they really don't have a room
    that would be suitable for interviews. Fenway Park was built way back
    before TV cameras and microphones and females reporters were not
    considered. The press is usually prohibited from going in right after
    the game and sometimes that's a problem in getting the team out if they
    are going on a road trip. The equipment bags have to be packed and the
    players have a bus to catch to the airport, so invariably there are
    people from the press in the locker room when the players are in
    the shower. The visitor's locker room is even smaller than the Sox and
    as soon as you walk in, the shower room is in view. Most of the guys
    seem to be modest enough to cover up when the women are around, but 
    some of them don't even attempt to. Personally, I don't feel it is a 
    place for the women to be, but they have a job. I doubt the Red Sox are
    going to build a room to be used exclusively for interviews, I don't 
    even know where they have space to do it.
    
    Paul
     

    if the press hired more butt ugly 2 baggers they wouldn't have this
    problem ;-)

    
    Thanks Hawk!  I figured that I should get involved in this conference
    since I am such a sports fan.  And what better place to start!

    Better go into the Introduction note and tell us about yourself, Linda.
    That's the first step in becoming a SPORTS noter.  Then check-out the
    SPORTS terms (glossary?) note to better aquaint yourself to the SPORTS
    specific terms us noters frequently use in here (ie. filberts).  Better
    watch your note count- don't want to be in the top 10 like 'Saw and the
    Slasher.  And always say "congrats" when any team wins.......
    
    Most of all, always have a huge sense of humor in here (I know you do
    anyway!).
    
    Oh, and at least once a day, write "the Jets sip"!
    
    Hawk

    
    From what I've been able to infer (the story hasn't gotten very much
    play here) the comment made was something like "do you like what you
    see?"  If that is close to correct, I have no problem with what
    happened.  While playing sports throughout high school and college I've
    spent quite a bit of time in the locker rooms, and have heard similar
    comments.  If this reporter is expecting players to change the way they
    act simply because she is a woman, sho should find another job. 
    
    "Locker room talk" is a slang expression for what some people would
    call bad language.  It got that name for a reason.  This writer isn't
    the first person to have a lewd comment directed at her while in a
    locker room and if she can't handle, she should just not show up there
    again, not expect everyone else to alter their style because she is
    around.
    
    
    Bruce  

    I wanted to take a day to think about this, because I can sympathize
    with both sides.  I would feel uncomfortable if I were beseiged by
    reporters after stepping out of the shower every morning.  But, I have
    rationalized that if I were a professional athlete who's bread is
    buttered by those very reporters, I should take whatever steps are
    necessary to cure my discomfort.  And I have never had any doubt that
    the actions of Zeke Mowatt and his four teammates are anything but
    reprehensible.
    
    There also seems to be a general agreement among the reporters that a
    separate room for interviews and a barring of reporters from the
    lockerroom is no solution.  There is no guarantee that the players
    would attend these events, and they feel certain in many cases they
    wouldn't.  This would be a solution which would further impede a
    reporters ability to do his or her job.
    
    Therefore, my solution is as follows.  Extend the period of no
    reporters in the lockerroom from 15 minutes to one half hour. 
    Carefully explain to the players at the first meeting every summer that
    reporters in the lockerroom are a fact of life and that female
    reporters are a fact of life as well.  Advise them that reprehensible
    behavior towards any reporter will not be tolerated and follow through
    with appropriate punishments (hefty fines, suspension without pay,
    etc.)  FUrther, advise the players that they have 30 minutes to solve
    their discomfiture, or else just get used to the fact.  If they want
    towels to wrap themselves in, give them towels.  If they want robes,
    make robes available.  If they want to be showered and at least covered
    up they've got 30 minutes to do that.
    
    I find the Patriot organization's role in this fairly ugly as well. 
    The aftermath has been announced.  Pat Sullivan has conducted an
    investigation, believes his players for the most part, and has fined an
    "unnamed" player an "unnamed" amount.  I believe that he probably fined
    Mowatt around $250 or $500.  Obviously we are talking wristslap here. 
    Kiam's behavior is inexcusable and he should be censored by the league. 
    Sullivan is the usual spineless twit who is doing the damage control
    thing, but would rather pretend that it's no big deal here in 1990.
    
    The incident occured and the 5 guilty players ought to be punished. 
    From what I've heard, they are easily identifiable from a number of
    sources, but only one name has been named - Mowatt.  SUllivan and Kiam
    had the incident placed in their hands, and they have fumbled that in
    as ugly a fashion as the original incident.
    
    Dan

re Hawk/Linda:

	Welcome aboard Linda, good to have you.  This entire notesfile
	is somewhat akin to a lockerroom, but we do try to keep
	it kinder and gentler.

	I'll send you some SPORTshrooms to enhance your noting pleasure.
	(Besides, you'll see Jimi Hendrix that way...)

	Hawk, I resent the remark about note count.8^)  My note count
	has been way down.  Just because I have an addiction to junk
	noting and have spent time at the /Don Work Out YOur Addiction
	Farm, doesn't mean  you should put me down.  I mean I didn't
	mention your alcoholism....8^) 8^) 8^) 8^)

re /Don:

	The animal thing has merit.  To psyche yourself all week, build
	to a frenzy before game time, and then to turn it off is 15 minutes
	after the game is not possible for everyone


'Saw, the Hertz of Junk Noters....

    
    	Until I know *exactly* what was done by the players I cannot
    condemn them/him. NOT ONE THING HAS BEEN STATED AS FACT. What did
    he "Zeke Mowatt" actually do???????? Does anyone know out there?
    It kind of makes a difference, you know both sides of the story 
    kind of thing. If what the man did was lewd, then that is not 
    tolerable in any case, but if it were a case of some "bad timing",
    crude teasing it's another matter. Was there any other reporter 
    that saw exactly what happened besides Ms. Olsen? I really would like
    to know, just out of curiousity.
    
    
    
    
    Steve 

    Just some of my thoughts:
    
    o Lisa Olson had the right to be in the lockerroom.  If the players
      didn't like it, then they should voice their reasons to the NFL.
    
    o Victor Kiam had the right to say what he wanted.  The forum in
      which he chose to state his opinion was wrong in my opinion.
    
    o Why is it that both Channel 4's Alice Cook and the Globe's
      Jackie MacMullan both say that the Pats treated them in the
      same manner, yet both the Celtics and Bruins organizations
      give them no problem? (After reading a reply a few back I know
      why the Sox weren't mentioned, thanx)
    
    o The actions of the players (involved) and Kiam will lead people
      to the generalization that the Pats organization is sexist and
      chauvinistic.  These players and Kiam should realize that their
      actions are representative of the N.E. Patriots organization;
      just the same as each and every one of us act on DEC's behalf
      each day.
    
    o I view this team as not only losers on the field, but OFF as well.

    
    
    RE .64
    
    According to quotes by Olsen, five players surrounded her exposing
    their genitals making comments such as "is this what your looking
    for" daring her to touch them etc.  She said they were inches away
    when they were crowding her.

	The new rules that dictate the length of socks, no shirts
hanging out etc, but I'll include the crowd noise and other such silly
things because the NFL is trying to project this image of a PG rated
game.  Football is about as close to war as your going to get.  Maybe
it isn't XRated like war is but it's definitely R whether Mr Tagliabue
likes it or not.  How does it relate to the alleged sexual abuse case?
Some of these players come from pretty tough backgrounds, and with some
football probably kept them out of jail.  What kind of behavior do you
expect from some of these guys?  They're not all choirboys like some
would prefer it.  

	I said it doesn't excuse what happened, but tell me the NFL
isn't ridiculous when it markets videotapes of bone crunching almost
crippling hits then fines a player for not having his shirt tucked
in.  The NFL is trying to market something that ain't there, never
has been and never will be.

				/Don

    
    Thanks, but unless someone else saw it too, it's just her word.
    I'm not trying to say she is lying, I just would like to hear it
    from another source other than Olsen. I find it hard to believe that
    5 grown men huddled around her and exposed themselves. Maybe 1 or 2
    but a gang of 5? Why was only one Patriot fined? Please don't get me
    wrong, I do not condone that kind of act in any way, shape or form.
    I would just like to know what ACTUALLY happened.
    
    
    
    Steve

    
    > According to quotes by Olsen, five players surrounded her exposing
    > their genitals making comments such as "is this what your looking
    > for" daring her to touch them etc.  She said they were inches away
    > when they were crowding her.
    
    Yep, sounds like your typical, run-of-the-mill, locker room horseplay
    to me.  Probably the same as the male sportswriters get...
    
    glenn
    

    >Thanks, but unless someone else saw it too, it's just her word.
    >I'm not trying to say she is lying, I just would like to hear it
    >from another source other than Olsen. I find it hard to believe that
    >5 grown men huddled around her and exposed themselves. Maybe 1 or 2
    >but a gang of 5? 
    
    First you want to know exactly what happened.  Then, when told, you
    create doubt because it's the word of the victim.  FWIW, the story
    seems to be collaborated from other sources in the press, specifically
    writers for the Herald and Globe.  I don't know if they were present,
    but Olsen says there were other writers present, and they have seen fit
    to write about it as well.
    
    Dan

    
    Dan, I still haven't found out *exactly* what happened.
    All I've heard are allegations. Coming from "Mr. Objectional"
    I thought you of all people would understand my curiousity.
    First I hear she's interviewing Hurst, then it's Tippett, then
    I hear it's two men, then I hear five. I just want to know the
    facts, that's all. No one has told me anything other than what
    was alleged. I'm not trying to cause any trouble Dan. And yes 
    that was an excellent question, "Why was only one fined?" 
    Why not 5 like Olsen said it was, or was it two men?
    
    
    
    Steve

    
    I was discussing the incident with my bo-dacious wife last night, and
    she said that if they had asked her "is this what you're looking for?",
    she'd have said something like "Nah...not even close.  But how 'bout
    telling me about that pass you dropped in the third quarter."
    
    Yes, the Patriots were bad boys, but I wonder if some kind of prior
    animosity existed between this reporter and the players that pushed
    this incident to the sensitivity limits.
    
    Dickster
    

    
    Hmmmmmm... maybe there is another side to the story? Dan your
    allway's crying about injustice at Norte Dame et al. Why have
    you forsaken the player's side of the story, which we haven't 
    heard yet?
    
    
    
    Steve

    I tried to give the facts once, or what I've read are the facts.  I
    don't know anymore other than what I've read and believe me, I'm not
    asking anyone in the organization.
    
    The roots of the incident took place after the Colts game.  She was
    waiting to interview Andre Tippett, who was getting medical treatment. 
    One of the players made a disparaging remark, supposedly, something to
    the effect of "What is she hanging around so long for?"
    
    The actual incident took place after last Monday's (9/17) practice when
    she was accosted while either interviewing or waiting to interview
    Maurice Hurst.
    
    The Kiam remark took place while she was waiting to do her interviews
    after the Cincinnati game.  She wanted to interview Irving Fryar. 
    According to what I've read, Fryar likes to wait until he's gotten
    dressed before being interviewed.  While waiting to interview Irving,
    another player made a remark like "No wonder she wants to talk to
    Irving, his locker is near the shower."
    
    Also according to what I've read, it was 5 guys who did it, I don't
    know if it was corroborated by another member of the press, and only
    one person has been fined.  That person is allegedly Zeke Mowatt.
    
    Does that cover it OK?
    
    John

    >Dan, I still haven't found out *exactly* what happened.
    
    Well, until I see a videotape of the incident, which I don't think I
    well, I guess I'll never know exactly either.  I guess you're going to
    have to form your own opinion, and the more informed you are the
    better.  Like it or not, I've been informed about this situation in the
    last few days (newspaper articles, TV and radio interviews, etc.) and I
    have no reason to doubt the reporter.
    
    Re: Why was only one fined.  Because only one was identified and Pat
    Sullivan wanted to put this thing behind them as quickly as possible. 
    It's your basic, "lift rug, now sweep" scenario.
    
    Dan

    
    
       Even if half of what she (Olsen) said is true, I still don't
       see a place for those kinds of actions.  
    
       The relationships between sportswriters and players is supposed
       to be, one proffesional talking to another proffesional.

             

    
    Thanks John. I guess I've beaten a dead horse on this one, I still
    wonder why only Mowatt was fined, and not the other 4 players. If
    you can believe everything you read then I'm satisfied, but can you?
    
    
    
    Steve

RE: the question of an interview room...

I still don't see why an interview room wouldn't work. It seems to me that the
press think it is their right to interview players. I think that the players
have a right to privacy and should grant interviews as they see fit. Why
should a player be expected to be available for the media at every turn.
What happened to reporters who had the drive to try and work hard at a story
instead of expecting the players to gush forth widsom after every game?

While I agree that the actions of the Patriot players is reprehensible and the
apparent wrist slap is just that I to am curious about getting all the facts.
I have yet to hear anybody mention the fact that another reporter has said
"I was there..I saw this happen". I don't get the local Boston papers so I 
haven't read the articles for myself but I haven't heard this yet.

I bet you would eliminate most of the sensational stories that the local 
Boston media likes to feast on if they didn't allow reporters in the locker
room. Can anybody name me one big scoop that has resulted from a locker room
interview that wouldn't have happened if the interview was conducted 15-20
minutes later? I'm talkng about a real story that actually pertains to 
an on the field event.

Metz

    >Why have you forsaken the player's side of the story, which we haven't  
    >heard yet?                                           
    
    Because I haven't heard anyone, excepting yourself, claim there is a
    player's side to the story, least of all the player.  And also because
    so many people who frequent the inside of that lockerroom, reporters
    and players alike, seem to accept the only public version as fact.
    
    If there were disagreement over the incident, don't you suppose at the
    very least Zeke Mowatt would be protesting in the media?
    
    Dan

    
    
    RE .77
    
    Olsen wrote that she was surrounded by the five, and couldn't
    identify all of them because she "wouldn't give them the satis-
    faction of looking up at them".  She was able to identify Mowatt
    because she saw him walking towards her, she thought he was on
    his way to the showers. The showers are behind Hursts locker, 
    near where she was standing.

    
    So far we have the following "quotes":
    
    - Something about touching it
    
    - Is this what you are looking for?
    
    - Why is she waiting around so long?
    
    - She's waiting near the shower.   
    
    Only one account has more than one of these quotes in it.  It seems to
    me that no one has gotten the real story yet, but everyone is ready to 
    jump on the players.
    
    Had any of those commetns been direct at a male sportswriter, nothing
    would have come of it.
    
    Bruce
   

    
    
       Don't forget the reporters are our link to the sports news !!
       A proffesional athlete provides a service, the service is
       entertainment.  We the public are they're customers, and we
       want to be informed.  This is done by the media.  Proffesional
       athletes, as far I'm concerned, are obligated to give up some
       of their time to imform their customers of progress, set backs,
       etc.
        

    Why does Dan want to see a video tape of naked Patriots?

    
    I think if a male athlete makes a sexual reference to a part of his 
    anatomy towards a female reporter, that it's quite a bit different 
    than performing the same act towards a male reporter (which is 
    probably irrelevant because it wouldn't happen anyway), for obvious 
    reasons.  Those that mistake that distinction for unfairness or an 
    inherent inequality between men and women that *proves* Lisa Olson 
    shouldn't have been there are completely missing the point.  It's the 
    intent, not necessarily the physical act itself, which is to be 
    condemned.  As a member of the media, I believe that Lisa Olson has 
    asked to be treated as an equal professionally, not sexually or in any
    other way.  The players' actions had everything to do with Lisa Olson 
    being a female, and nothing to do with her being a reporter.
                                               
    The same would hold true with a female athlete and a male reporter, 
    for those who still believe a double standard is being upheld.
         
    The "lack of proof" angle is also without substance.  The Patriots
    themselves have already issued an admission and apology on behalf of
    Zeke Mowatt.  Why hasn't he denied it if it isn't true?  Dan's right.
    If there's a videotape, we won't see it (we did get to see her crying
    her eyes out after the incident, though).  There's not going to be a
    trial.  So nothing ever happened?  Even in the face of all evidence and
    a public admission?  It's basically this same mentality on a larger 
    scale that prevents rape cases from going to trial.  Hell, it's her 
    word against his, right?  That's what it usually boils down to.  Most 
    people have a hard time accepting this rationale when they're on the 
    victim's side of the issue, though.
    
    glenn
    

    
    According to the Globe, Mowatt ($460k/yr) will be fined
    $2000, to be paid over 14 weeks.
    
    Charlie
    

    Just on the news:  Victor Kiam is now *denying* that he called her
    a "Classic B*tch".  He says that he said "She's an aggresive one"

       Kiam has retracted his denial and apologized to Olson for "anything
    I might have said". He also made a comment during the 6:00 news 
    about Olson "going into the shower to look for a player", he also
    retracted that at 11:00. Kiam is following in the great tradition of
    Patriot execs as B.S. artists.
    
                                        Denny

    
    I don't kmow Dan. I guess it would be logical for Mowatt to deny the
    incident so I guess something happened, I just have my doubts around
    what exactly happened. From what I had gathered from reading articles 
    and watching the news I drew a picture of 5 players flogging it in 
    front of this helpless woman. I just didn't buy that. 
    
    
    
    Steve

    For a much better explanation than I could ever give about why open
    locker rooms are a better solution than the interview room, read note
    172.30 by Mark Frederickson in the Red Sox conference.
    
    John

>    RE .77
>    
>    Olsen wrote that she was surrounded by the five, and couldn't
>    identify all of them because she "wouldn't give them the satis-
>    faction of looking up at them".  
    
    How's that again???

    
      RE .91
    
      Yeah I know what you mean, I had to read it twice.  It was in
      yesterdays Herald.  The interpretation I got, when she realized
      what was going on she just looked straight ahead and made her
      way out.

                                                      

Kiams new breakfast cereal:

Nuttin' Bitch.

    	Heinz is coming out with a new pickle
    
    	Vlassic Bitch!

    John Dennis says Kiam didn't say Classic bitch....
    
    
    It was Classy bitch...
    

    re: .90
    
    Could you post that note here in the SPORTS notes conference? Some of
    us don't really care to read the RED SOX notes conference.
    
    Dennis
    

    I can't - not without permission of the author.
    
    John

    Mowatt has been called to the appear before the commissioner.
    
    Related discussions:  There is also one going on in the Patriots
    conference.  Because those discussions are rather lengthy, I don't
    think it would be a good idea to cross post them anyway.  In addition,
    some of the authors don't participate in this conference and wouldn't
    be able to offer a rebuttal.

    Mark Fredrickson kindly gave me permission to cross post entry 172.30
    from Red Sox.  It sums up my feelings about why press access is needed
    (even though I don't always like the way the press does its job) in a
    way far better than I can.  Mark works in Digital's PR Department.
    
    John
    
            <<< HARBOR::SHPLOG$DUA6:[NOTES$LIBRARY]RED_SOX.NOTE;1 >>>
                             -< Red Sox.... 1990 >-
================================================================================
Note 172.30               Lisa Olson in the Locker Room                 30 of 46
ASABET::FREDRICKSON                                 105 lines  26-SEP-1990 10:32
                 -< Ridiculous solutions to the wrong problem >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	There are two fundamentally incorrect assumptions in the 
	argument being put forth by some that the Lisa Olson 
	situation is symptomatic of the "problem of women in locker
	rooms" or the "problem of the media in locker rooms." 

	1. It isn't much of a problem in the first place, and even 
	if there is still a minor one in some people's eyes, it 
	certainly does not warrant anything close to the banning of 
	press, or worse, female press, from locker rooms. Of the 
	thousands of sporting events covered every year by male and 
	female members of the news media, an incident such as this one 
	comes up -- how often? -- five or six times, if even that? And 
	in almost every case, including this one, the culprit is not 
	"the system which allows women into locker rooms," but rather 
	the inexcusable (in this case absolutely criminal) behavior of 
	a small number of animals. The solution is athletes behaving 
	like law-abiding adults.

	2. The presence of news media at sporting events is not a 
	privilege granted by the proprietor, but a rather simple 
	supply-and-demand situation wherein the sports team or league
	needs the media as much as, or more than, the media needs the 
	sport. Restricting media access to the athletes and coaches is
	based on a faulty assumption that a team does a writer a favor by 
	granting him or her the access needed to properly publicize the 
	team. How absurd! This suggests a real lack of understanding of 
	the fundamental relationship between the press and organized 
	sports. Interviewing the participants after a game, like sitting 
	in a press box eating free food during the game, is not a 
	privilege. It is part of doing a job, a job that the team very 
	much needs done for its business success, and a job that the 
	media outlet has deemed necessary for its business success. It 
	has nothing to do with "the public's right to know" -- the NFL is 
	not the U.S. Senate. It has to do with a team or league's *desire* 
	and *business need* for the public to know, for its players to 
	become famous, for its licensed merchandise to be sold. It has to 
	do with the media improving its success by satisfying a public 
	appetite for information about said team or league. 
	
	Teams and leagues are free to make whatever rules they would 
	like to make with regard to media access to locker rooms. 
	Creative solutions like interview rooms are fine as long as they 
	are equally applied -- either every journalist has access to the 
	locker room or none does. 

	Originally, say 15 years ago, the presence of women in the sports 
	media led to a lot of experimental solutions such as separate 
	interview rooms. That turned out to be a fine solution for some 
	sports but not for the major team sports. 

	The major team sports concluded that open locker rooms are better. 
	Why? Because they allow for more thorough news coverage, which is 
	what the leagues, the media and the fans want. Interview rooms 
	give players an easier chance to avoid the press, and deprive the 
	press of access to every player they'd like to talk to. Longer 
	waiting times after games are certainly a viable option as long as 
	they don't severely threaten media deadlines. 

	But this has nothing to do with separate interview rooms or 
	15-minute waiting periods. Let the institutions involved settle
	those matters. Let the teams and media outlets strike a balance
	between player privacy and good coverage and press deadlines by 
	making those rules as they see fit. The fact is, they have 
	already done that. A player who wishes to retain his modesty can 
	qyuite easily do so in any number of ways. That is not the issue. 

	The issue is not women in locker rooms. To 99 percent of all the 
	people involved in organized sports and the sports news media, 
	that issue was settled over a decade ago. The issue here is what
	what was done, and what continues to be done, to a reporter who 
	was trying to do her job. The issue is that a terrible violation
	of the law and of her decency is being excused and dismissed, or
	classified as a symptom of a "bigger" problem called "women in 
	locker rooms," or "the press in locker rooms," exactly the same 
	way the Wellesley Police are dismissing their little case of 
	mistaken identity. 

	It's a symptom of a bigger problem, all right. But the problem 
	isn't the press in locker rooms. It's much bigger than that.

	Tuesday night Upton Bell interviewed Victor "Valdez" Kiam for the 
	Channel 4 early news. With everyone expecting Victor to be in his 
	full-throttle backpedal mode, denying previous statements and 
	issuing apologies and trying desperating to recover public favor 
	like Exxon in the wake of its oil spill, Victor instead escalated 
	the attack on Lisa Olson. He explained that, before the now-famous 
	incident, Olson allegedly entered a shower area in Indianapolis 
	looking for a player. Victor grinned as he let the intended 
	implication of his statements be absorbed by the camera. It 
	reminded me of the classic rape-defense technique -- "She wore a 
	low-cut dress, didn't she? Know what I mean, eh?"
	
	Predictably, the story was retracted when it turned out to be 
	completely untrue. By the late news, Kiam's prepared statement was 
	in place, "retracting" his earlier words and stating that Lisa 
	Olson was not even in the place he had earlier claimed he had seen 
	her. 

	What a pathetic character Kiam is. I would have bet that no one
	could take the public anger away from the offending players, but 
	the owner has effectively done it. He has become the story. But 
	let's not forget big Zeke and his pals. 

	Mark 
    

    
    
        Article in the Herald has asked everyone to boycot the game
        on Sunday !!

       There's a note in the Globe today about a comment made by the
    Tiger's Jack Morris to a female press intern. It seems she was asking
    him a question and his response was that he: "wouldn't talk to a woman
    when I'm naked unless I'm on top of her." And what do you think was the
    reaction of Pres. Bo? He said Morris' comment was "out of line but
    predictable", and that she was only in the lockerroom to "create a
    story".
                                        Denny

   Five of `em, huh?

   Couldn't recognize `em though.

   Just the facts, ma'am... what were they wearing?
   	Well.. uh  uh.. well..

   Do you think a line-up would help?
	Well.. uh  uh.. well..

   Mugshots?
   	Well.. uh  uh.. well..

   Well? What would you like?
   	(whisper, whisper, whisper)

   Red-faced policeman:	Well.. uh  uh.. well..

    She said she didn't give them the pleasure of looking up at them,
    she was too embarrassed.

    	What I would like to know is how someone who has already bought
    a ticket will hurt Kiam by boycotting?  I'm out $28.00 and Victor
    is out nothing because I never patronize the concessions.
    
    				/Don

    
   > What I would like to know is how someone who has already bought
   > a ticket will hurt Kiam by boycotting?  I'm out $28.00 and Victor
   > is out nothing because I never patronize the concessions.
    
    You don't.  But apparently the Patriots rely fairly heavily on
    non-season-ticket sales.  And there's always next year.
    
    I used to fit into that category.  I'd buy about four tickets to 4-6
    games a year and go with a group of friends.  Then Vic rolled into
    town, hiked endzone seats from $14 to $21 while simultaneously putting
    a second-rate product on the field, and tried to put a positive spin on
    the thing by claiming the Patriots needed to remain competitive with
    the rest of the league.  I'd understand if this team was like the
    Redskins, selling out every game since 1965 or something, but they were
    having trouble as it was.
    
    Boycott started early for me.
    
    glenn
    

 Don's right though why should any fan have to boycott the game? Let the
 press boycott by themselves and watch the pats change their tune. God
 knows he's given them enough reason too already including charging them
 to eat....

 mike

    For any fan who's already bought tickets, it won't hurt the team a bit
    since the stadium gets the revenue from concessions and parking, not
    the team, now that they're under separate ownership.  For any fan who
    bought tickets to not use the tickets will just hurt the stadium
    corporation.
    
    For people who were thinking of going deciding not to buy tickets then
    that's a different story.
    
    John

    Miss Lisa made the Phoenix TV noon news today.  I'm not sure I'd ask
    her to touch my John Henry ;-)

    RE: .108
    
         Is it true what they say about ignorance being bliss?

    >>     Is it true what they say about ignorance being bliss?

    And Mikey Heiser is a blizzard!!!
    

>    >>     Is it true what they say about ignorance being bliss?
    
    You tell me!  

    AS A WOMAN I KNOW THE FEELING OF BEING ABLE TO DO THE SAME JOB AS A
    MAN...BUT WHEN IT COMES TO SPORTS, MEN CAN COMINTATE AND EXPRESS THE
    SITUATIONS IN A GAME MUCH MORE EFFECTIVELY.
    AS FOR THE LOCKER ROOM, A WOMAN WHO INVADES WILL CHANGE THE WHOLE
    ENVIRONMENT OF THE GAME......WHICH I FEEL IS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!
    GET A REAL JOB OLSON!!!!!
    
    kt 

    kt,
    
    Why should sports be different???  A job is a job, and if Lisa
    Olson likes the profession she is in, then why should she have
    to answer to that?  How many people go through life with a job
    that thay are unhappy in?
    
    Being a sports fan and being female can be a trying experience.
    I can't count the number of times I've received totally ignorant
    remarks like, 'Oh, I bet your favorite Bruin is Cam Neely, right?'
    or they seem to think you go to the games to pick guys up.  (And
    not to generalize here....) Like seeing men dressed like slobs,
    acting like idiots from all of their alcohol consumption and using
    excessive expletives turns me on.  I hardly think so.  I go because
    I enjoy seeing a good hockey/lacrosse/baseball game.
    
    As for men being able to commentate and express the game much more
    effectively....hogwash!  Men and women don't always see things on
    the same perspective.  Why should we always be subjected to
    hearing/reading the same garbage over and over?  A new view on any
    topic can be refresing.  

>    remarks like, 'Oh, I bet your favorite Bruin is Cam Neely, right?'

	Yup.  That's right.  Just ask /Don.  (-:

    	I came in late today because I locked myself outta the house.
    	No car keys either.
    
    	Boston has a coupla DJs named Joe and Andy. Because of Victor
    	Kiam's back-pedalling on the Lisa Olson situation, Joe and
    	Andy felt that Victor should be given a spot on the US Olympic
    	cycling team. So, they called the US Olympic Center/whatever
    	in Colorado Springs this morning. They eventually got to talk
    	to a fella in charge of scheduling.
    
    	My paraphrase of the conversation follows.
    
    	J&A: "Have you been following the Lisa Olson story?"
    
    	USOC: "Yes, I've been following it."
    
    	J&A: "Well, we thought Victor back pedalled so well that you
    	      might have a place for him on the US Cycling team. He's
    	      pretty old but is in pretty good shape."
    
    	USOC: "<Laughter> Well, there might be a place, but I'm not
    	       sure whether it would be a road event or a track event.
    	       Maybe you should talk to the Cycling Federation."
    
    	Andy: "Maybe you have a place for him on the swimming team.
    	       He has a pretty good backstroke.'
    
    	USOC: "<Laughter> I'm not sure. I'd have to see his split times
    	       first."
    
    	****************************
    
    	Whoever this guy was, he never missed a beat, and he cracked up
    	more than once.
    
    	Joe and Andy are too funny sometimes.
    
    	Scott

    Yesterday was an embarrassing circus.  I haven't been so depressed at
    and after a game since the strike in 1987.  I'm ready to quit.
    
    John

       Does anyone else think ol' Vic sounded loaded yesterday? He was
    slurring and mis-pronouncing words all over the place.
                              Denny

    
       RE: .116
    
       John,
    
       I'm missing something, but from the contents of the notes, I
       get the idea you work for the patriots organization is some
       form.  Would you mind saying what you do for them ?  I'm just
       curious, it's got nothing to do with the topic of this note.
    
       Thanks,
    
       Steve

    
    I didn't think there could be a worse time in Pats history than the
    days of the infamous "Chuck Fairbanks to Colorado" fiasco. I was
    wrong. Official attendance yesterday, when they should have been
    able to draw for John Hannah Day (felt real bad for John), was just
    enough to fill Fenway Park (36,700). Maybe they should talk to the
    Red Sox about a grass field?
    

   Part of the circus is a result of the media.

   They are like sharks in bloody water (but less likable).

   They overplay every development, and adopt a `Mike Hammer' demeanor.

   It isn't just sports reporters. It's every reporter I've ever come
   across.

   If they were covering the invasion of Iraq, such intensity might be
   justified. Their overzealous attempts to cover this `story' border on
   the ridiculous. They have no perspective.

   If the Pats had raped and mutilated the woman, this hullabaloo would be
   justified. Some lewd comments and gestures do not. Kiam is admittedly a
   contributor. When it first happened, a `Sorry lady, inexcusable... won't
   happen again' would have sufficed.

   Now every jerk group in the nation wants to get in on the `action'.

   I hate this stupid shit!

   Mike JN

    I'm the team's official scorer and head statistician.
    
    I'm not really proud of my association with the team today.  Mike
    Childs, I'm not in for the money and didn't think it was very funny at
    all.
    
    John

 John, I really apologize to you then. I wasn't trying to be funny. I just
 felt that you shouldn't let thing you have no control over upset you so
 much. I assume that you get paid for this service so why throw the cash
 away, because of a few idiots was the basic message I was trying to send
 to you.

 Sure, I do alot of bashing but I do include my smilies when I'm trying to
 be funny. And in this case I was not because what should have been a real
 enjoyable day for John Hannah and the organization was a fiasco.

 Again John, I'm real sorry, I should have realized how upset you were and
 kept quiet. Not that it'll do much good now but I'll delete it....

 mike

Saturday's Miami Herald ran the results of a survey they did of the Dolphins
players' opinions of women reporters in the lockerroom.  Opinion was pretty 
well split between  "it's uncomfortable being undressed in front of women" 
comments and "no problem: they've got a job to do just like the male reporters".

The Sunday Herald ran a column by an intern in their sports department, who is
a woman and did some sports reporting for the Detroit Free Press earlier.  Her
account of the Olsen incident explained the "I didn't want to give them the
satisfaction of looking up" comment:  apparently the reporter was sitting on
a stool, interviewing a player, when the five players came up and surrounded
her.  Certainly it wasn't their faces at her eye_level.

    
    I saw Jackie MacMullan on the Sunday morning ESPN sportswriters' show
    and one of the things she said that struck me as particularly sad but
    true is not just the incident itself but the way a lot of fans have 
    reacted to this story.  (MacMullen is a female reporter for the Boston 
    Globe who normally covers the Celtics).  She was waiting outside the 
    Red Sox' locker room after Saturday's big win and claims the exiting 
    fans were yelling things at her like, "Are you Lisa Olson?  Stay out 
    of that locker room; we don't need your trouble, etc..."  Then 
    yesterday comes the disgraceful heckling and taunting of Olson herself 
    after the Pats' game.
    
    I have little doubt that these fans constitute a minority, but
    nonetheless their outspokenness is downright embarrassing to Boston and
    sports fans in general.  One of the writers on that show drew a parallel: 
    what would the reaction have been in that locker room if a racial, rather
    than sexual, inference had been made?  Undoubtedly there would have
    been a tremendous uproar and the participants would have been dealt
    with promptly and harshly, with little protest from the population at 
    large.  What's the difference then?  Why are some male fans going out 
    of their way to openly demonstrate their intolerance and ignorance?  Are 
    a woman's rights to be any less respected than any other segment of the 
    population?  Apparently not to many sports fans...
    
    glenn
     

    Mike, your apology is accepted.  I'm just not in a mood to take a lot
    of kidding around today.  I can take it for a poor on-field performance
    but not for this.
    
    I take it personally because even though it's not my fault and I'm not
    involved, I feel like I'm a part of the Patriots family.  I know over
    the years we've done a lot of stupid things as a team but never has it
    been as bad as this.  It saddens and angers me to see the team trashed
    the way it has and what makes it even worse is to know that most of it
    is self-inflicted.  From a selfish viewpoint, those of you who know me
    know I look forward to the season like a little kid looks forward to
    Christmas.  The on-the-field performance really has nothing to do with
    how I feel right now, all the off-the-field crap has ruined the season
    for me and we still have 12 games to go.
    
    I've worked for that team, albeit as a part-timer, for longer than I've
    worked for any other employer, and that includes Digital.  There are
    some loyalties and friendships built up there that have absolutely
    nothing to do with the money and "perks" I get for the job.  The
    excitement of the involvement, the friendships, the fun of the game and
    the feeling of working in a team and contributing in some small way to
    the team are what really do it for me.  I can't work at that job for
    just the money.
    
    Yesterday was so bad I actually went and sat in the stands for about a
    half hour and I didn't want to go back in.  I didn't even want to be
    there in the first place.  There were a whole bunch of journalists
    there yesterday who wouldn't know whether a football was blown up or
    stuffed.  Lisa Olson was the story.  TV cameras were following her as
    she attempted to do her job and I'm convinced the post-game scene was
    as much due to the presence of the media as anything else (for those of
    you who don't know, the yahoos all gathered near the entrance to the
    Patriots locker room while the press was waiting prior to being
    admitted.  They were saying such nasty things to her that she broke
    down in tears, and regardless of your feelings about what went on, she
    didn't deserve that).  The fans were ugly.  What Victor Kiam did
    yesterday was as bad to me as what Buddy LeRoux did on Tony C Night
    back in 1983.  First he tried to make Patrick Sullivan the scapegoat
    which in my opinion is also totally unfair, regardless of what anyone
    feels about the Sullivan family.  Then, he held a press conference in
    the middle of the press box in the middle of the game.  All this
    detracted very badly from John Hannah day, and that hurt me personally,
    because I know John.  He also seems to be making my boss, the Media
    Relations Director, a scapegoat when it's Victor's own damn fault for
    opening his mouth.
    
    Perhaps I'm wrong to take this as personally as I am but I'm sorry,
    it's the way I feel and I don't feel I should apologize for it.
    
    The one thing I am proud of for yesterday is that our crew really
    pulled together and did as perfect a job as we've ever done.  It was
    something the PR Department really needed - something low profile to go
    right - and I was proud we were able to demonstrate our support for
    them in that way.  Morale in the rest of the front office is really
    very low because everyone is feeling the pain of an incident that was
    stupid to begin with and just won't go away.  People are being bashed
    for things they have nothing to do with and it really hurts me to see
    friends and colleagues having to go through that.
    
    Thanks for giving me the opportunity to vent.  I needed it.
    
    John

    
    
    	Since both sides have now bungled the whole mess and turned
    it into "A_current_affair", the only right thing to do is to make
    the lockerooms off-limits to all except within the organization.
    
    	I like the idea of the central conference room where, say the
    press has 30 minutes to request player or coach x and ask him/her
    questions.  If a writer can't get his story in 30 minutes, well
    he/she will just have to work harder.  30 minutes is plenty of time
    and it will still let the players get out in plenty of time.
    
    	My main fear is that this is not the first time something like
    this has happened...only it's the first time someone has tried to
    press the issue.  One question does bother me a little and that
    is what if male player X said the same things to male reporter X
    and the reporter pressed the issue of harassment.  How would this
    be treated?
    
    	One thing is for sure and that is that the guilty parties should
    be disciplined.  All lockerooms should be banned to the press and
    all teams should be required to set up conference rooms where they
    can talk to a player if requested.
    
    	I have a feeling now that all female reporters no matter how
    good a reporter they are, are going to face some difficulty in getting
    any comments inside the lockeroom.
    
    							bill..g.
    

    John,
       I'm sure any of us that know you, even if it's mostly from in here,
    know how you feel. Many of us have gone through a lot with this team
    over the years. This is absolutely the worst I can remember. I've been
    foloweing this team since the mid 60's, and have had season tickets
    since 1975. The only thing that this reflects on is the management (as
    usual) and a few players (again as usaul). In NO WAY does any fan and
    hopefully any media type hold the game staff in a bad light because of
    this fiasco.
       And your right about the scene in the end-zone. I watched through
    the binoculars. It was the most disgusting scene I've ever seen at a
    'sporting' event.
       Also, I was watching the entourage come out just before the half.
    John Hannah walked ALONE along the front row of seats, shaking hands
    and signing autographs for the fans. Vic had a circus surrounding him
    in the North end zone and seemed to enjoy every minute of it.
                                               Denny

John....

We're with ya, dude.  Hopefully we're like family in here and can give
the support that's needed in trying times.  Stand tall, and be proud,
and no one can take all the good jobs you've done away from you or
the team.


re Vic:

I'm sorry, but I feel the captain of the ship has full responsibility
in any and all cases, even if he's in the head when the hull is hit
with the torpedo.  Vic blew it.  JMHO....


'Saw

       Sammy Wyche refused to allow a female reporter from USA Today in the
    Bengals locker room after last nights game. He says he'll be out of
    football before he allows that.
                                              Denny

    What are the primary objections to having a press room separate from
    the locker room for post-game interviews??
    
    That is the way it is done for tennis, motor racing, horse racing, etc. 
    Why wouldn't it work in other sports??
    
    PJ
    

       ...so, you think there wouldn't be any problem having an 'interview
    room' big enough to hold 50+ assorted players and coaches?
                                    Denny

    most of what the players say isn't worth printing anyway, but I don't
    suppose thats a reason for limiting interviews.
    
    PJ

    
    I can at least see why they have a seperate interview room for horse
    racing.  I think it's shameful to let the press in the stalls after a
    race while the horses are changing, getting rubbed down, etc.
    
    Dickster
    

	John, I doubt that Mike meant any disrespect.  He's like me when it
comes to kidding around in here.  But you have to realize that to people
outside of New England and folks not fans of the team this thing seems like  
a major dog and pony show.  Sunday had all the trappings of a Fellini movie.
I understand where you don't see any humor in this, but the whole situation
gives the appearance of a huge joke, albeit a bad one.

	Personally I hope your feelings wouldn't cause you to leave the
job.  You're a class act and a person of integrity, and the organization
really needs those kind of people, especially now. 

	At first I had a wait and see attitude with this whole affair but
the actions and attitudes of Kiam and Mowatt (now proclaiming his christianity
and innocence) reminds me of a mafia don standing on the 5th ammendment at 
a Senate hearing.  Those involved in this shameful situation will get what 
they deserve.

				/Don

    This is a major dog and pony show to those of us in the organization
    too, no matter whether we're full time or part time, and that's why
    it's such a sensitive issue.
    
    The thing that got me was the implication that I should be in it for
    just the money.  Mike apologized and that's fine.
    
    I'm in a much better mood today.  Got a good night's sleep and didn't
    watch the news.  If I'd watched the news, I probably would have started
    all over again.
    
    John

    Obviously, this whole thing is blown so far out of proportion already
    that all perspective will be lost forever.  Just another incident in a
    world where imperfect people running the press decide that other
    citizens in the public eye should be perfect.  No matter what the
    outcome, it shouldn't be getting this much attention.
    
    It's ironic, isn't it.  This is much like a phenomena that has been
    occurring in recent years....  Namely, ....
    
    All this "live and let live" philosophy that has permeated the world
    over the past couple of decades.  Years ago, "values" were quite
    different than they are now (e.g. more "tolerance" now for things that
    used to be deemed "immoral").  Public figures were allowed to make
    private mistakes in their lives without the press crucifying him/her
    about it, even though they are "joked" about now (Kennedy, etc.).  
    
    Presently, when "morals" seem to be at an all-time low, any public
    figure can't move without the press questioning his/her every move. 
    Public officials cannot have anything in their past which is considered
    "immoral", but by who's standards???
    
    Strange, ain't it????
    
    -- dg

	Who's to say morals are at an all time low?  When were things
better?

				/Don

    Re: -1
    
    Centuries ago!

    
    Exactly how far should public figures be allowed to go before we stop
    covering for their mistakes, dg?  This isn't some Wade Boggs scandal
    story where it could be argued that a man's private life is his own
    business.  The incident occurred in what the courts have ruled is the
    legal domain of women reporters.  If you hadn't noticed it's taken on 
    national attention because the issue is of national importance.
    
    I could ask that isn't it equally as strange that your "moral" position
    condones the downplay of sexual harassment, perhaps a perfect example 
    of the same moral decay you're decrying.  (Didn't we at least have 
    respect for women in the "old days", even if we didn't treat them as
    equals?)  Again, where do you draw the line between what morally should 
    be left alone and what should be extracted and condemned?   
    
    Beyond the cheap sensationism that permeates some publications, my
    ethical values land me on the side of the media on this one.  The other
    side is the one that attempted to cover up the incident and then
    trivialize it, rather than deal with the problem up front.  They've
    made their own bed...  
    
    glenn
    

    
    RE .137
    
       Your comments seem to be off base with what the origianl issue
    is.  It's not that someone stepped out of line a little bit.
    It's a lot more serious than that.

    Well, if we ever get the full facts of the case, then we can determine
    what really happened.  I don't think it'll ever come out totally.
    
    I stated my case earlier that I think it's inappropriate for women to
    be in a men's locker room.  Right now, I feel the NFL is at fault for
    opening it up years ago.  That's my opinion -- I'm sure enough of you
    disagree with me.......
    
    Since it IS an NFL rule, then if whatever happened can be proven, and
    if the players acted poorly, then the onus is on them.  Simple enough.
    
    It's still all getting blown way out of proportion....
    
    -- dg

    Did ya   hear  that James brooks said the other night that woman
    
    ask stupid questions as reporters anyway?  Smart move there James,
    
    that should open up some more cans of worms
    
    
    Jim
    

      <<< Note 368.143 by COBRA::DINSMORE "See ya in Tampa in January! >>>
                                                     ^
                                                     |
                                           Planning your vacation, Dinz?

    Anyone see the interviews with Wyche and a couple of other folks this
    morning??  I think it was on the (Boston area) Channel 7 morning show.
    
    Thoughts??  I think Wyche had some good things to say.
    
    -- dg

    As a matter of fact I did, dg and I entered this in the Patriots
    conference:
    
    According to an interview with Wyche on Good Morning America, he asked
    which players Denise wanted to talk to.  She told him Boomer and Wyche
    sent him right out.  Wyche also said that the Seattle stadium presented
    a special case since the showers are completely visible from the locker
    room.  Given another layout he might not have done the same thing.
    
    Also interviewed were a female reporter from SI and a male journalism
    professor from somewhere.  Wyche and the professor proposed
    alternatives to equal access to the lockerroom (some of which have been
    proposed here).  The woman from SI, amazingly enough, said that Olson
    should have kept quiet.  That that kind of incident happens all the
    time, even with male reporters.  She still feels that locker rooms
    should provide equal access to reporters, however.  She said that
    players wives should not feel threatened by women reporters, but should
    think more about the groupies that hang around.  
    

>    Thoughts??  I think Wyche had some good things to say.
 
Like what?  I heard him say something like 'I didn't think it was a good
idea that she (the female USA Today reporter) be let into the lockerroom
with 50 or so naked guys.  We don't even allow wives in.'  First of all,
wives don't have column deadlines to meet and second, why was this unlike
any other "after the game"?  Were the guys only naked this time?  I am
certain that these women are there to do a job, not to salivate all over 
their pumps. 

I did hear him say, after some reporter said "equal opportunity", that
he wouldn't allow ANY reporters, male or female, into the lockerroom until
everyone was "decent."  

If this crap can't be resolved, which I don't think it can be - anytime soon, 
there should be NO reporters in lockerrooms.  Let them get their story in an 
"interview" room.   

I think he meant it wasn't like any other "after the game" 
because as was said earlier, the entire shower area is visible 
from the lockers in Seattle.

That being the case, I can't fault the Bengals for wanting to 
shower without the press in there.

daryll

    Karen, he did say that the Seattle layout presented a different
    situation, since the shower area is not screened off from the changing
    area.  Women reporters were allowed into the locker room after the
    Bengals/Pats game, for instance.  He didn't deny the USA reporter
    acess.  If anything he gave her preferential treatment (which may be a
    problem in itself).
    
    Wyche has also been known to close the locker room to all members of
    the press, and has been fined for it.

    The shower nonsense didn't even come up until the next day, from the
    reports I've seen.  Wyche is WAY, WAY out of line, pure and simple.
    
    If he sticks to his "I'll quit before I let any woman into the
    lockerroom" stance, tagliabue should suspend his stupid ass.  The
    NFL has rules.  You work in the NFL.  You follow the rules.  If
    you don't like the rules, work within the system to change the rules.
    Try to have a 15 or 20 minute waiting period instituted.  Have all
    press out after and additional 30 minutes.  But just because you're
    pissed after your team played like sh*t is not reason to prevent a
    legitimate reporter from doing her job.
    
    NAZZ

    Unfortunately, I did not catch the "shower visible to all" part of
    his speech.
    
    He denied her access and that's what the media feasted on.  That's
    a good size chunk of this problem... The media.  But, that's another 
    topic.
    
    Anyway, I held off replying to this topic, even though I started it,
    because it's something that gets my Irish up.  
    
      

    He admits that he denied her acess to the locker room, but he denies
    that he denied her access to the players.  He asked her for a list of
    players she wanted to interview and he sent those players out of the
    locker room to meet with her.
    
    Anyone care to comment on the SI writer's claim that Olson shouldn't
    have mentioned the incident in the Pats locker room.  That it comes
    with the territory whether you're a man or woman?

    
    The SI writer also said that she had a like situation occur to her, but
    she kept her mouth shut and said that she thought that it was part of
    the territory, be you male or female.
    
    All told, the exchange on GMA was the most intelligent debate I'd heard
    on the subject (except for in here ;*)  ). The alternative they
    suggested (open the lockerroom until 45 min after the game, then
    everyone leaves) seems to work. The players can stay dressed, the
    reporters (male and female alike) get their stories, and everyone is
    happy. I hope Paul Tagliubue was listening.
    
    Sam Wyche seemed like he bent over backwards for the female from USA
    Today. If I were a beat guy, I'd be very displeased that he pulled
    Boomer away from _my_interview. At this point, a claim that she was
    trying to make trouble rather than report on the game seems legitimate,
    from what I've seen reported.
    
    Dennis
    

    
    A female reporter for ESPN essentially said the same thing as the SI
    reporter.  She also said that Olson should have gotten her interview,
    then gotten out of the locker room as soon as possible.  She said this
    several times.  In several of the stories on the subject you hear about
    Olson hanging around, waiting for someone.
    
    Bruce

       Olson DID try to keep it quiet. All she wanted was an apology and
    investigation by Pat Sullivan. When she got neither it went public.
       As Mike Madden said in the Globe yesterday, "We'll find out if
    Tagiabue is a commissioner, or an empty suit." This was after the Wyche
    incident.
                                     Denny

    All reporters should take showers
    
    jm2c,
    PJ
    

    
    One person's naked, everyone should be naked. That is the naked truth.
    
    
    
    Steve

    Things were much calmer yesterday.  Most people in the press box were
    chuckling over the interviews of both Olson and Kiam on the NBC pregame
    show.  Bob Costas is one tough interviewer.
    
    The game itself was more frustrating because we could have won it but
    I'm in a much better frame of mind today - in fact, I'm not even
    thinking about quitting anymore.
    
    John

John, that's good to hear....

As a kind of humorous aside, I'd like to relate this story...

Last Thursday night, we were practicing for the Boston match.  It was
very windy, and had rained hard off and on during practice.  Rugby
practice only stops for lightening, and even then begrudgingly....

Anyway, near the end of the practice, it began raining torrentially.
You couldn't see, and didn't need any drinks of water, since the
rain would run down your face, into your mouthguard and down your
throat.

After twenty minutes of being totally soaked, practice ended.
In the parking lot we had the dilemma of how to change w/o getting
our car interiors soaked.

Because it was night, because it was completely dark and we were the
only ones there, we all basically stripped at the back of our cars,
then got inside to change into dry clothes...

Just as I'm getting into my truck, I hear some wiseass yell...
"Where's Lisa Olsen when ya need her...."

I guess if you can joke about it, the worst has passed....

frankwa

    Glad to hear you ain't thinkin' of quittin', John ...
    
    Cause you were going to get some serious smacks upside da head if you
    did.   Picture clear enough for ya ???
    
    Bob Hunt

    I would have never quit during the season anyway.  I was just so angry
    at everything that happened last week it just wasn't fun anymore. 
    Yesterday was fun, because all we had was the game to worry about,
    Victor stayed down on the field, we had some tough calls to make and we
    made them right and everything was just so much better.
    
    I would probably leave DEC before I left the Patriots (not that I'm
    about to do either ...)
    
    Thanks all for the support.
    
    John

    Sam Wyche was fined $30,000 for barring the USA Today reporter from the
    Cincy lockerroom.

    	Old Sam put a curtain in the lockerroom yesterday.  The reporters
    could interview players after they came through the curtain and
    Sam asked the reporters not to go through the curtain.  Anybody
    see the movie "It Happened One Night"?  8^)
    
    				/Don

    at least somebody is trying to do something about it!
    
    Mike

    I simply cannot, in my wildest fantasies, imagine a justification for
    Sam Wyche being fined THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS (!!!!!!!!!!!!!) for
    his actions in regards to the USA Today reporter.
    
    Hockey players brain each other with lethal weapons and get a $2,000
    fine.
    
    Baseball players hurl objects at heads at close to 100mph, then respond
    by trudging to the mound with the equivalent of a night stick, and get,
    what, a $2000 fine.  (Maybe.)  
    
    Even the 3rd person in on a basketball fight (an offense regarded as
    close to high treason by NBA lords) doesn't approach $30,000.00.  
    
    Unreal.  Sad.  Ridiculous.
    
    But you know what's even sadder?  At no point have I read a single
    article ANYWHERE by ANY sportswriter that would suggest that the NFL
    was even slightly out of bounds to do what they did.  Not one.  If
    someone knows of one, please let me know.
    
    To me, this is the final proof to the hypothesis that American
    sportswriters are in bed (cuddled up nicely, too) with Sports, USA.
    
    Free Press?  Not in the Sports section, folks.
    
    
    - ACC Chris

       It was Sam's 3rd offense, he's lucky he wasn't also suspended.
                                  Denny

    $30K is around 1/17 of his pay...

    John -
    
    I am delighted to hear that things went so much better yesterday. 
    Quite frankly, the Pats need more people of your integrity and caliber.
    
    
    RE Wyche -
    
    I believe that he's trying, almost single-handedly, to change the
    context of the current debate.  I also believe that this is a "good
    thing".  (Anyone for thousands of us to send $5 to a Sam Wyche
    fine-paying fund?)  Realistically, is there any chance that the NFL
    will try to come up with a win-win solution to the players_need_privacy
    / press_needs_access dichotomy which the (now) 2 cases have exposed? 
    At least Wyche is trying a couple of new ideas, rather than moaning
    about "there's no good answers, we can't do anything".
    
    Was there any press reaction / how did the curtains work to Wyche's
    resolution to the problem yesterday? 
    
    A&W

ITASCA::SHAUGHNESSY "for Mapplethorpe's eyes only"   14 lines   8-OCT-1990 11:57
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Police statist NFL Commisar Paul Tagliabue is at it again, this time
    invading the privacy and violating the consitutional rights of poor
    Zeke Mowatt with a lie detector test. 
    
    Why no test for Lisa Olson?
    
    Since when, in these days of right wing reportage, is it guilty until
    proven innocent?  I mean, isn't it just as possible that she was
    staring hungrily at his equipage?  What drew her to Zeke's locker in 
    the first place, what reeled her in?  
    
    Way to go, Paul. 
    
    MrT
================================================================================
AKOV06::DCARR "HOPEFULLY, you can call me Carr-nac"   6 lines   8-OCT-1990 11:58
                   -< If you believe everything you read... >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    MrT, gots your facks mixed up again?
    
    The Barely Heard reported that Mowatt's agent suggested the test, and
    Zeke agreed, hoping that it would clear him.  Right John?
    
    ML
================================================================================
DECWET::METZGER "Head Northwest young man...."        4 lines   8-OCT-1990 12:05
               -< For those of you that don't read the paper... >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BTW- He passed the test...

Metz
================================================================================
LUDWIG::MERCER                                        4 lines   8-OCT-1990 12:16
                                   -< TEST  >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
       Lisa Olsen volunteered to taker a lie detector test but, she
       told by tagliabue it wasn't necassary
================================================================================
AXIS::ROBICHAUD "TaxCheats,WelfareFrauds,CUFootball"  2 lines   8-OCT-1990 12:20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    	There's a reason why lie detector tests are not admissable in
    court.
================================================================================
PNO::HEISER "ultimate, underlyin', no denyin' motiva" 4 lines   8-OCT-1990 12:24
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Lisa Olson said on yesterday's pregame show that Tagliabue told her not
    to bother with the test because he didn't put much stock in them.
    
    Mike
================================================================================
ITASCA::SHAUGHNESSY "Kansas,Tech,Buffs,Milken,Boesky" 4 lines   8-OCT-1990 12:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This Tagliabue guy's a creep.  If he wants to go Josef Stalin-style
    then I say yank his creeping socialism tax breaks and see how he feels.
    
    MrT
================================================================================
QUASER::JOHNSTON "LegitimateSportingPurpose?E.S.A.D." 5 lines   8-OCT-1990 12:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Lisa Olson said on yesterday's postgame show that she will be studying
   up for the test, anyway.
       
    Mike JN

================================================================================
CSC32::GAULKE                                        14 lines   8-OCT-1990 12:51
                                    -< ex >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
      According to Bob Costas, the inconsistencies in 
    Jimm..oops.. Lisa Olsens story is due to the inaccuracies and
    inconsistency in the journalists covering the story. [????]
    
      
      And another thing, Mike Lupica is a jerk. If there ever was
    such a thing as a 'bandwagon journalist', he is it.
    
    
      Steven
       
    
================================================================================
HOTSHT::SCHNEIDER "Nuke the New Kids!!"               7 lines   8-OCT-1990 12:54
                  -< For some, you might as well flip a coin >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Different people handle lie detector tests differently.  (What a
    surprise!)  Depending on the type of person you are these tests are
    between 52% and 90-some% reliable.
    
    That's why they're inadmissable as evidence.
    
    Dan
================================================================================
WMOIS::RIEU_D "Read his lips...Know new taxes!"       4 lines   8-OCT-1990 13:00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       And Tagliabue hasn't told anyone to do anything as far as the tests
    go. I wonder if Mowatt's lawyer would have made the results public if
    he had failed?
                                  Denny
================================================================================
ITASCA::SHAUGHNESSY "Boesky,Kansas,Tech,Buffs,Milke" 17 lines   8-OCT-1990 13:35
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >Mike Lupica's a jerk.
    
    Lupica has added a new dimension to the adjective "shrill."  The
    other morning on that geeky ESPN sports "journalist" roundtable 
    with fatso Feinstein and over-the-hill Dick Shat (sp?), I thought
    Lupica was gonna blow a hemorrhoid he was puckering and shrieking
    so hard.
    
    Guilty till proven innocent: That's sports law now ain't it.
    
    Lisa Olson, with all the make-up she wears, who's to say she wasn't
    leering at Zeke's membership like a kid eyeing his big brother's
    hot dog on the midway at the state fair?  Who's to say that she wasn't
    harrassing him sexually?  Obviously Zeke was made to feel uncomfortable
    by her oppressive presence and fought back way to go Zeke!
    
    MrT
    

WMOIS::RIEU_D "Read his lips...Know new taxes!"       2 lines   8-OCT-1990 13:39
                            -< Like da Bard sayed >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Maybe she shoulda "laid back and enjoyed it".
                                    Denny
    

    Today on Good Morning America Tommy LaSorda was asked about women in
    the locker room.  He said that women in the locker room has never been
    a problem in the Dodger organization for as long as he has been there. 
    He realizes that reporters are just trying to do their job, and access
    to locker rooms is part of league policy.  Most of his players just put
    a pair of shorts on until the press clears the area.

    It was Mowatt's decision to take the lie detector test.  No one forced
    him to.  I do feel bad for the guy - he's been tried, convicted and
    sentenced without any sort of due process and feels it's in his best
    interests to not play in New England.  
    
    Say what you will about Sam Wyche, with some of the crazy things he's
    done (like the tirade against the fans) but he's at least creative,
    innovative and willing to try to find a solution.  From everything I
    read, it was well received on both sides yesterday.
    
    John

    > but he's at least creative, innovative and willing to try to find a 
    > solution.
    
    And for his progressiveness he gets fined what has to be an
    unprecedented sum of money.
    
    
    - ACC Chris
    

I read a good editorial yesterday about this issue.

Basically it said that the journalists should be the ones pushing for a seperate
media room. It said that going into the locker rooms after the game is pretty
disgusting business because they smell and there are people in various states
of undress. The editorialist believes that these are inappropriate working
conditions for news professionals and they should press for better conditions.

It shouldn't be an issue of males or females being admitted into the locker room
rather it should be an issue of why do these journalists feel pressured into 
having to go into the locker room? There should be an appropriate place where
the media can do its job without being subjected to the locker room "atmosphere"

Sort of puts a twist on the entire issue unless the media actually enjoy going
into the locker rooms and this is an isolated opinion...


Metz

   The media insist that the After-game Locker room interviews are
   necessary because the fans `demand' it.

   This is a load of crap. I've never demanded locker room interviews, and
   know of no-one who has. Until films are looked at, most comments are less
   than interesting and informative. They are like interviewing a soldier
   after a battle who has spent the entire time in a foxhole: `Well, it was 
   real loud and real dirty and I beshat myself'.
   Thank you... now let's talk to another clown from a different foxhole.

   Goofy.

   If they were really interested in meeting the demands and desires of
   the football fans, there would be no female reporters covering the
   sport. I have NEVER hear ANY fan request that the Football Sports Scene
   be covered by a female reporter. I have never heard any fan indicate
   that a female reporter was one of their favorites, or was more than
   barely adequate at what she was trying to do.

   The only reason the media demands locker room access is because of the
   insanely competetive mindset which permeates the media. They do it for
   themselves... not for any interest in the people's Right to Know. When
   this country began, the results of a Presidential election were not
   known for weeks, or even months. No problem. Today, news vampires
   cannot even wait for the polls to close before shoving microphones in
   peoples' faces and predicting results. And they just MUST get into the
   locker room AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. For the STORY. Because the fans
   DEMAND IT.

   Whooey
   Mike JN

    
    >> but he's at least creative, innovative and willing to try to find a 
    >> solution.
    
    > And for his progressiveness he gets fined what has to be an
    > unprecedented sum of money.
    
    I think John was talking about the shower curtain thing yesterday, not
    Wyche's actions this past Monday.
    
    Wyche was fined because he was bucking more than the NFL in holding
    back the female reporter; he was bucking the federal courts, and
    potentially opening up lawsuits against himself, the Bengals, and
    the NFL if he continued to separate male and female reporters at the
    locker room door.  I hardly call that progressive.
    
    glenn
    

    John may have been talking about the curtain, but the incident which
    resulted in Wyche being fined found him going out of his way to give
    a female reporter *exclusive* access to any player(s) she wanted.  She 
    chose Esiason who, as far as I know, allowed her to interview him.
    
    Again, Wyche was trying to compromise.  Hardly the stuff of law suits
    or THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLAR fines.  Fact is, Sam dared to buck the NFL
    brass, a most serious of crimes, and one in which the "journalists" are
    only too willing to write stories that read something like
    (paraphrased) "Bah.  Baaaahhh!  BAAAHHH!!!".
    
    To each of these sickening articles I've read, none of which offer nary
    a shred of the insights you'll find on any given day in OURGNG, I truly
    say BAH!
    
    
    - ACC Chris

       The FACT is, Wyche has done it THREE TIMES!! The NFL and the Federal
    Court say he CAN'T do it. That is what would lead to lawsuits. Denise
    Roy was allowed by LAW to go into the Bengals locker room and interview
    anyone she wanted. She was not restricted by any law to interview only
    the players HE wanted her to interview. You can whine and moan all you
    like, but if someone breaks a league policy and violates a Federal
    Court decision that opens up the door for a law suit. The NFL doesn't
    like law suits. THAT is why he was fined an appropriate amount. You
    notice he didn't do it again, don't you? Seemed like a very effective
    deterrant.
                                   Denny

> Denise Roy was allowed by LAW to go into the Bengals locker room and interview
> anyone she wanted. She was not restricted by any law to interview only
> the players HE wanted her to interview. 

You're incorrect in your facts Denny.  Sam allowed her to select any
player(s) she wanted to interview, which in my estimation fulfills
your precious "law" requirements.  In fact she chose Boomer, who did 
the interview.  Again, hardly the stuff of lawsuits, yet alone an outrageous
and ridiculous fine that makes a mockery of the $2,000 fines the NFL
hands out for far more serious matters. 


> The NFL doesn't like law suits. 

No argument from me on this one.  It's clear that the "National Fantasy
League" likes law suits like the rest of like hemeroids.  Far better to
fall in line and be a good soldier than stand your moral ground and
propose solutions to problems they're not even willing to admit exist!


> THAT is why he was fined an appropriate amount. 

Ho, ho, ho!  If you consider 30 grand appropriate for an offense like 
this I'd like to be your accountant, cause you must have awful deep
pockets.  


> Seemed like a very effective deterrant.

So why don't we fine speeders $30,000 for violating the speed limit.  Or
fine people who throw their trash out the window driving down the highway
$30,000 for littering.  They'd be pretty effective deterrants, don't ya
think?

And anyways to Sam's credit he still didn't back down from the NFL
regime the following week, proposing yet another creative solution (the
curtain) to solve a problem the NFL brass (and, not-so coincidentally, the 
nation's "journalists") pretends doesn't exist.


- ACC Chris
    

          You still don't git it! it was his THIRD offense. He showed a
    blatant disregard for league and public rules. Trying to change the
    system AFTER you break the rules, doesn't work. Even if he allowed her to
    interview Boomer, he STILL barred her from a legally accessible area.
                                  Denny

I think one reason the media pushes for access is to get at the 
players asap after the game.  I realize there's a 15 minute (30?)
period, but it's like this....


A team has just lost.  The reporters get into the locker room.  Player
X is pissed off because he thought Player Y blew an easy touchdown which
would have won the game.  Player X loudly berates Player Y etc etc.

If the players had time to shower, and go to a media room, then they're
out of their environment and more likely to think before they fly off
the handle.  Obviously, this is not conducive to media's wants and needs.

Hell, the Lisa Olson story broke in the first place, because her competitor
didn't have anything better to write about....

'Saw

    Good point, Saw.
    
    What I'd like to see is one player stand up and say that allowing
    these interviews is a violation of HIS privacy, then sue the NFL.
    
    Of course, he'd have to define what a locker room is meant to be, not 
    what it's become.
    
    On an aside to this, are media personnel, male or female, allowed
    in the locker room BEFORE a game, while the players are dressing?
    
    Lee
    Lee

    Regarding whoever it was back however many saying "no fans he knows of
    want women reporters anyway".  
    
    You now know at least one.  ME!
    
    I happen to like Gale Gardner's reportage - lots.  The woman on ESPN is
    also good.  Neither of them started out great, but they learned.  Leslie 
    Visser, for me, is a lot like Brent Musberger - they're both dorks and 
    ask inane questions.  It doesn't require a former player to cover a sport,
    or even to be an expert.  It does require an opportunity to get started 
    someplace and to learn.  Very few *men* do the job all that well, quite
    frankly.  I'd like to see more women have the opportunity.
    
    I've edited this pretty strongly so that the flames I'm feeling don't
    roast anyone too badly.  I'm a woman.  I love spectator sports.  I
    understand the games pretty well.  I've had women friends who knew the
    games better than I did and tried to get into sports journalism. 
    Policies and practices which inhibit those women brave enough to try
    this field are illegal, and should be.  "Fans" who don't believe that
    women can be or would want to be competent, capable members of this
    field of journalism are simply displaying their own narrowness of mind
    and attitude.
    
    A&W

    In the NFL, no one from the media is allowed in the locker room before
    the game.  Period, end of discussion.  In Major League Baseball, they
    are allowed in up until a certain point before the game and are allowed
    on the field.  Not sure about the NBA and NHL.
    
    John

    
    
    	Even if it was Sam's third offense, does that justify the fine?
    What is the fine for drug abuse after being caught a couple of times?
    What about drunken driving or worse yet, involuntary manslaughter?
    I don't disagree with a fine, but 30K in this instance is out of
    line.
    
    	Basically, the press in general supports the lockerroom interviews
    because they are in a business to sell papers.  All to often, the
    comments we read in the paper are centered around "why did the coach
    do this, or why did the coach pull you out of the game?  Or, did
    player x blow the catch? etc.  The press is real good at pitting
    one player against his coach or another player.  All you have to
    do is look at NY and the situation around the Yankees when Martin
    was managing.  90% of the stories from the "lockerroom" dealt with
    what Martin thought about player x, or what player x thought about
    Martin's decisions.  This type of stuff sells.  
    
    	The media room is no good to the press because they can't catch
    player x off guard saying something about another player or coach
    in a fit of anger.  
    
    	I would love to see the players collectively boycott all interviews
    in the lockerroom.  Carlton was successful with "no comment" and
    I'd like to see all the players give a "no comment."
    
    	The media room is still the best solution.  Of course, the press
    won't see chairs, or punches thrown, but they will still get comments
    from the players....only that doesn't sell papers!
    
    							bill..g.
    

     
    >         -< NFL wins mind control battle over Waugaman.  :^( >-
    
    Dream on, Knorr.  I could give a rat's ass about the NFL.  It's my
    least favorite professional league.  I haven't even seen an NFL game
    this year.
    
    The heavy fine was due because Wyche was crossing a fine line whereupon 
    he was in danger of violating a person's undeniable, written-in-law 
    civil rights.  Unlike the other silly cases where he was only bucking 
    the good ol' NFL, Wyche was moving into another league, a trip that the 
    NFL has rightly refused to accompany him on.  Whether or not he sent
    sent select players out to talk to her is irrelevant (and how long do
    you really think that would last?).  It's a noble gesture, but it
    ain't equal access as already defined by the federal courts.    
    
    You appear to believe that the NFL should applaud Wyche and back him
    against the government.  Why?  Because your personal views happen to
    coincide with Wyche's and you can't believe others would feel 
    differently on an issue that is a lot more serious than *you* seem to
    feel.  Open your eyes.  This is quite possibly the most attention the
    NFL has ever received from the general public, and you better believe
    they ain't liking it.  
  
    Don't kid yourself.  Lisa Olson is talking lawsuit against the 
    Patriots, and that is only over what perhaps was an isolated incident
    beyond management control.  An instititionalized action like Wyche's, 
    supported in any way by the league, most definitely would become a hell 
    of a lot more serious than $30,000.
    
    glenn
    

    
    As an aside, has anyone ever read anything Lisa Olsen has written?
    
    Bob V.
    

    
    > This is a sad case of affairs when a man can be fined 30,000 dollars
    > for a pretty meaningless offense in light of 2,000 dollar fines for
    > people who are trying to do bodliy harm.  I ask you Mr Waugaman which
    > is the greater offense?
    
    As the question is intentionally vague and misleading, I'd answer that
    since bodily harm is the name of the game in the NFL, potential violation 
    of a person's civil rights is the greater offense.
    
    What those who decry the extent of Wyche's fine in comparison to
    first-time drug offenses, etc. fail to see is that the latter
    is basically a personal matter that can be dealt with on a personal
    level, while Wyche was extending his values as a matter of policy
    beyond himself, the league, and even the law of the land.  Do you see a 
    difference?  For example, would you, as league commissioner, levy a
    heavier fine to a player who used steroids or to his coach who demanded 
    their use by his players but never actually touched them himself? 
    Which affects more people?
    
    glenn
    
    

    re .185
    
    I couldn't agree with you more, A&W. If you looked at this another way,
    suppose you substituted "Black" (or any other non-white characterization) 
    for "woman" in this case, and see how dangerous this sounds. Don't
    laugh, it wasn't THAT long ago that this attitude was the rule, not the
    exception.
    
    Lesley Visser = a female Brent Musburger? I'm roooling! I guess you
    gotta take into account that she's married to Dick Stockton! What is
    that theory about married people taking on the characteristics of their
    spouses over time?
    
    Tom

> For example, would you, as league commissioner, levy a
> heavier fine to a player who used steroids or to his coach who demanded 
> their use by his players but never actually touched them himself? 

Truly a bad analogy, but it highlights your failure to understand my
position.  Sam made a *moral* decision, not a legal one.  There is a
difference.  As is so often the case in our society (or any society,
for that matter) the person who takes the moral stand is punished to the
fullest extent of the law, while the immoral get hand-slapped.

Just to clarify though, I have no problem with Sam being fined.  He did
break NFL rules.  (I'm in total agreement with Wyche and many others 
in saying I think the rule is bad and needs to be modified, but that's
neither here nor there.)

I have a *BIG* problem with two (2) things:

1. The amount of the fine is totally ridiculous, unparalleled, and 
   outrageous.

2. The press refuses to even address this and instead is just waging
   their tails saying the NFL needs open access, blah, blah, blah.
   Blatantly self-serving and one-sided, and alot of people agree with
   me.  (WLW in Cincinnati has started a fund, thanks to an enormous
   public outcry, to pay Sam's fine, for example.)


- ACC Chris

       So Chris, how come Sam hasn't protested the fine?
                                      Denny

    re:.193 >and a lot of people agree with me
       So, a lot of people disagree with you too. So they must be right
    too, eh?
                                              Denny

       Give it up Bob and Glenn. Some people just don't get it.
                                   Denny

   So... Bob thinks we oughta bomb Lisa Olson?

   Hmmmmph! Usually he's more tolerant in these matters.

   Mike JN

> They think and believe that they are right but they've broken the law 
> *regardless* of their beliefs.

Exactly Bob.  As you may recall I did not argue with the fact that Wyche
deserved punishment.  It was the degree of the punishment (far, far, 
far too severe) and the reaction of the media (self-serving and one-
sided) that I object to.


> Some people just don't understand Civil Rights

Oh I understand them just fine.  Trouble is this is not a civil rights
issue.  Allowing female reporters into a lockerroom full of naked men falls
under the category of moral issues in my book.  

This "debate" is just like the Jesse Helms one over in 25.  In that one
I dared to suggest that Jesse wasn't responsible for the education woes of
North Carolina.  All I got were sermons on what a jerk Helms is.  Had
zero to do with the issue.  Now we've got an issue about me feeling that
a man has been overpenalized and the press has reacted inappropriately
and I get the Civil Rights flag sermon.  (Again and again and again ...)

Am I making myself clear?!  (If the response is "Forget it Bob.  He
doesn't understand Civil Rights, I'll know the answer.  :^( )


- ACC Chris

    

    
    
    I read in the rag this morning that a congressman is writing up a bill
    somewhere, to eliminate all reporters from locker rooms.
    
    
    Lou

    FWIW I felt Sam got the fine more for his grandstanding approach than
    anything else. And for that, I agree with the fine.
    
    Hell, this problem had been going on for a while, and Sam decides to
    make it a crusade - where was he for the past 5 years ????
    
    I see one positive - at least he got the glare of the spotlight off of
    the Pats for now ...

    Doc, Sam Wyche was accused, point-blank, of "crusading", as you say,
    last week on the Donohue show by several guest reporters.  He defended
    himself by saying that he got together with his players sometime before
    the game that he barred the woman reporter to get their feelings on
    this whole issue, and that his players all agreed that they felt
    uncomfortable with a woman reporter in the lockerroom and they'd prefer
    that women wouldn't be allowed in.  That's why he did what he did, not
    to get his face on the news, but to simply carry-out his players'
    wishes.  I believe he was sincere and evidently, so did the reporter
    who poited the finger at him in such a huff because Sam's explanation
    shut him up pretty quick.
    
    Hawk

    
>    I see one positive - at least he got the glare of the spotlight off of
>    the Pats for now ...


 but obviously Mr. Fryar couldn't deal with that and put the spotlight right
 back on the Pats....

 one thing about this Taligubue he must be making quick friends with the owners.
 30K fine for Sam 500K for Debartalo he sure is quick and heavy with the fines.

 mike

       What if Sam's players decide they don't want to go to Pittsburgh and
    play some December because it's too cold, would that be okay too?
                                      Denny

       I think the Debartalo fine was for making the 9ers part of his other
    Corp. A violation of league rules.
                                     Denny

 He got fined 500k at the start of the season for putting his team under
 the coporate ownership of the Debartalo Enterprises (or whatever they
 call themselves). It was a direct violation of league policy because
 his Dad owns a baseball team(?) or some other major league outfit. The
 other owners complain that it gives him unfair advantages because he can
 write off the lavish parties he throws for his players as well as the
 salaries. Like anyone of them is really hurting....

mike

    Don't be ridiculous, Denny.  Lockerroomms are heated on cold December 
    days, even in PittsburgH!  Besides, it would be a civil rights
    violation (cruelty to football players) if it wasn't heated.
    
    HTH.
    
    Hawk

    
> Sam made a *moral* decision, not a legal one.  There is a
> difference.  As is so often the case in our society (or any society,
> for that matter) the person who takes the moral stand is punished to the
> fullest extent of the law, while the immoral get hand-slapped.
           
    Whose morals, Chris?  As I said before, Wyche's and *yours*, that's
    whose.  Some of us actually think that Wyche not only violated the law,
    but was *wrong*, too.  Is that unbelievable or what?  Guess what?  
    That's why we have the courts.
    
    If Wyche had thrown all the reporters out, then he's got a problem with
    the league and the league only.  That's fine.  It'd be his little
    battle with the NFL, and I could care less.  But from what I've heard,
    I'm not sure that Wyche understands the difference between the two
    scenarios.
    
    glenn
    

	The postgame lockerroom interview was nonexistent in the old days.
Reporters would give thier account of the game and add their own commentary
about a crucial play etc.  The late Dick Young was one of the first reporters
to literally lead the charge for lockerroom access to reporters.  When he
was covering the Yankees he would physically try to gain access to their
lockerroom to get postgame quotes for his readers.  That started the trend
that exists today.  Personally I could do without the inane canned quotes
that players and managers give, but it's a competitive business and if
one paper does it they all have to, or so it is perceived. 

	As for the sudden "christian goody two shoes" Zeke Mowatt, you
mean it took over two weeks and trips to his lawyer and a public relations
firm before he realized he didn't approzch Lisa Olsen and is being framed?
Interesting.   

	      			/Don

    re .205
    
    Fair enough Hawk. I still support the fine, but maybe Wyche does have
    the right idea. But in the future, it may be a better idea to explain
    himself first, then act ???

    Well, whether or not what Sam did was right, I'll reserve judgement.  I
    do believe, however, that he was sincerely acting for the benefit of
    his players and not to gain notoriety, as many suggest.  I look at it
    as at least he's doing something to solve the problem that others are
    ignoring.......
    
    Hawk

    
    
    > I do believe, however, that he was sincerely acting for the benefit of
    > his players and not to gain notoriety, as many suggest. 
    
    I'll make this my last word on this, because it has been overkilled,
    but why did Wyche then come out Sunday dressed only in a towel to talk
    to reporters?  Seemed like he thinks it's a big joke to me...
    
    glenn
    

    re: Sam in a towel
    
    This is the 1st I've heard of this.
    
    Hawk

       There was a picture in one of the papers Hawk. He was dressed in a
    towel and a reporter had on a dress and wig. Big hijinx for such a
    'moral' guy, eh?
                                          Denny

    Clearly, that was Sam's head superimposed on a picture of Oprah 
    dressed in a towel........
    
    Hawk

>	The postgame lockerroom interview was nonexistent in the old days.
>Reporters would give thier account of the game and add their own commentary
>about a crucial play etc.  The late Dick Young was one of the first reporters
>to literally lead the charge for lockerroom access to reporters.  When he
>was covering the Yankees he would physically try to gain access to their
>lockerroom to get postgame quotes for his readers.  That started the trend
>that exists today. 
    
    Hey, /Don, if you're going to regurgitate my old notes, at least get
    the story straight.  Young covered the Brooklyn Dodgers back then and
    not the Yankees.
    
    Dan

    Anyone see the lastest SI?  It has a shot of Wyche in a towel. 
    The towel has a picture of a lower torso with a figleaf on it.
    
    Lee

    Isn't it so very very sad (and chilling) that a civil rights 
    rumble breaks out over some gal's access to a room full of dangling
    fire hoses and nary a peep about drug testing to assure job performance
    (and therefore financial performance) of pro athletes.
    
    Twisted priorities, Nero's fidding, myopia and Orwell was a_optimist.
    
    Also sick is the up-front assumption that Zeke did something wrong
    and Olson nothing wrong.  This "guilty until proven innocent" bias no 
    doubt was facilitated by the situation's white woman/black man aspect 
    but c'mon!  
    
    Wanna talk civil rights?  How 'bout if a black man was in a woman's
    locker room and stood there licking his lips staring at the
    interviewees buttocks or crotch or breasts?  If, at that point, the
    black male journalist was axed, sarcastically, so as to make him quit
    doing it, "like what you see? want some?," do you think there'd be this
    phony self-serving hue and cry all about us?
    
    Two things have been settled for me in all of this: 1) I'll never buy any
    product associated with the gutless Victor Kiam, 2) I've read my last 
    Mike Lupica column and I'll use my remote control the next time that
    shrill little panderer shows up on my Sony.
    
    MrT

    
    > Isn't it so very very sad (and chilling) that a civil rights 
    > rumble breaks out over some gal's access to a room full of dangling
    > fire hoses and nary a peep about drug testing to assure job performance
    > (and therefore financial performance) of pro athletes.
    
    I'll take your side on this.  Yes, the NFL is hypocritical on this
    count.
    
    > Wanna talk civil rights?  How 'bout if a black man was in a woman's
    > locker room and stood there licking his lips staring at the
    > interviewees buttocks or crotch or breasts?  If, at that point, the
    > black male journalist was axed, sarcastically, so as to make him quit
    > doing it, "like what you see? want some?," do you think there'd be this
    > phony self-serving hue and cry all about us?
    
    So sad, so very, very sad that you would twist any of the few facts
    that have come to light to suggest that anything like this actually
    happened.  Or that you would dishonestly apply the civil rights
    discussion that was centered around Sam Wyche and what he did in
    Seattle to what may or may not have happened in Foxboro.  Yes, sad is
    indeed the proper word.
    
    glenn
     

    There's nothing dishonest about applying the civil rights argument
    made about Wyche's lockerroom access restriction to the guilty-until-
    proven-innocent hysteria where proven innocent.
    
    What's sad is that your lowbrowed NFL fan can only insist that his
    precious constituion be put into action to guarantee lockerroom access
    to women reporters and will let it lay where it destroys careers and
    reputations and the fundamental right to not be subjected to invasion
    of privacy by bodily search under the presumption of guilt.
    
    Sorry, glenn.  The glaring inconsistencies in your .224 amount to a
    strike out flailing at a low outside bouncer.  Understand that what's
    at issue here is the blindered hypocrisy and uneven application of the
    rules in such a way that 1) makes a story for the media, 2) serves the
    interests of the media, and 3) programs sheep-like sports fans with yet 
    more bad precedent and practice especially beholden to the narrow unfair
    goals of pushy feminists in a way that reeks of racial bias.
    
    Batter up!
    
    MrT

    Glenn, you apparantly haven't been around a couple months ago when MrT
    gave his his views on the Matt Sewell Little League uniform deal......
    
    BTW, I received a thank you card from Matt the other day.
    
    Hawk

    T berates Doc (and others) over trying to bring racial motives to
    light where he feels they aren't a factor, yet we have instances of him
    trying to dredge them up in the death of a college hoopster, the
    awarding of a Little League jersey, and sexual assault charges made by
    a reporter.
    
    You're right T, hypocrisy must stop.

    > What's sad is that your lowbrowed NFL fan can only insist that his
    > precious constituion be put into action to guarantee lockerroom access
    > to women reporters and will let it lay where it destroys careers and
    > reputations and the fundamental right to not be subjected to invasion
    > of privacy by bodily search under the presumption of guilt.
    
    Your lowbrowed NFL fan (apparently me) says no such thing.  Take it to
    an interview room.  Take it to the parking lots.  Take it to the
    streets.  I don't care.  But wherever you take it it is open to *all*.
    Period.  *That* is the civil rights issue being debated over Wyche's
    actions, which was settled by the courts in 1978.
    
    While of course the media will take advantage of this situation to
    its own best interests, the real issue is between the NFL (or any
    league) and its players.  They, through negotiation or whatever means,
    need to come up with a solution amenable to both parties.  The solution
    of stopping females at the door has already been found unacceptable.
    
    glenn
     

    Sorry the reply is a little late but........
    
    So, you won't buy any of Kiam's products ? On the radio here last
    night, they mentioned that a womans protest group is lobbying all
    women not to buy any of the Remmington products.
    
    Do you/they really think that by doing this, Kiam will be hurt badly ?
    
    Assuming the boycott works, then the workers who currently work in the
    factorys making these items will be out of a job. They will then have
    to find some other way to feed, clothe and house their family.
    
    I am sure they will be pleased though, that a womans *right* to enter a
    sportsMAN's lockerroom, after a game, has been protected. Real pleased.
    
    I am sorry to say this, but it could only happen in America.
    
    Wayne.
                                         

    >Do you really think that by doing this, Kiam will be hurt badly ?
    
    No.
    
    re .227
    
    Whaddya smokin' Mac?  Nowhere did I ever tie race into Matt-the-Mooch
    getting his undeserved tee-shirt, nor did I say that Gaithers was run
    to death cuz a his race (he was run to death cuz a sheer unmitigated
    careerism and greed).
    
    I didn't berate Midnight, I just laughed in his face at his utterly
    indefensible, silly-assed assertion that Kermit Washington lost to Rudy 
    in court cuz he was a soul brutha and not cuz he took a running start 
    and crushed Tomjanavich's face in causing permanent damage.
    
    If Doc sez somthing as stupid again (and that would be hard to top) 
    then look for MrT's main-to-main arm-waving hip-checking chest-bumping
    defense (of reason).
    
    And glenn, "your lowbrowed NFL fan" is the conceptual beer-chugging
    geek who don't think for himself but sits there and relies on a bunch
    of self-serving shrill sports "journalists" and manipulative feminists
    to tale them what to be upset this week about. 
    
    Your charge of dishonesty on my part was itself dishonest cuz I made no
    analogy explicit or implicit, but only pointed out that ACCrook's
    ridiculous application of Mr. Constitution was misplaced but that the 
    phony hue and cry against a man trying to protect his dignity from a 
    ruthlessly ambitious leering Lois Lane painted up like a street walker
    was a damned shame and it wouldn't have gone nearly this far if it had
    been, say, Joe Montana (she probly woulda made a date with him ;^).
    
    Say, Hawk, did you get Moochy Matt's return address?  I'd like to share
    my thoughts with him...
    
    MrT

    
    Tagliabue has spoken:
    
          Patriots - fined $50,000
          Mowatt   -   "   $12,500
          Timpson  -   "   $ 5,000
          Perryman -   "   $ 5,000
    
    This was the result of the Lisa Olson investigation.
    
    Dickster
    

    
    >You wouldn't happen to have this figure in $/inch would you?
      
    
    With or without an inflation factor?
    
    Dickster
    

    Hey - to really do this right, we also have to include timing
    factors....
    
    Like speed and duration.
    
    A&W

    Seriously roollliiinnggg!!! Reminds me of the time me and a buddy of
    mine were at a bar and went up to these girls who told us to get
    <intercoursed>, we told them that's what we were trying to do, Then
    Danny flips one a quarter and says "thanks for the effort", to which
    the girl said, "oh, how did you know I charge by the inch".

    Michael Timpson is a WR who attended school at Penn State and who is
    now on injured reserve.
    
    John

    > A Sad Day for me
    
    Yeah but, think of it as over and done with, John.  Time to move on
    from this ugly incident..........  And hopefully, you can find a
    chuckle from today's replies, as I'm sure hundreds will......  :-)
    
    Hawk  

    'Saw,
    
    From what was said on the news last night, the 25K will be used
    to defray the costs of brochures for the WHOLE NFL on how to
    handle the media.

    
    Further expenses include:
    
            $200 per man per semester - Class: Loin Girding 101
    
            $1,000.00 - Extra trainers tape for mouths and hands as
                        needed for obscene words and gestures
    
            $10.00 per man per game - Saltpeter
    
            $40.00    -  Installation of pegs for towell racks, so
                         players will have somewhere else to hang
                         them when saltpeter takes effect.
    
    Dickster
    

re Whole NFL:

	Okay.  Our news down here, both last night, and this morning
	were reporting that the program was to be instituted by the
	Patriots for the Patriots.

	Probably will be corrected this evening.....


With that in mind, here's my crack at the brochure:



	To ALL NFL Players
	From Zeke and Vic, Friends of the Press


	You will have 25 seconds to put these tips into practice.
	If you should exceed 25 seconds, you will be flagged for
	Delay of the Interview.


	First, come directly off the field at the close of play.
	Head to the locker room, and disrobe.

	Head directly to the showers, wash all body parts as quickly
	as possible.  Turn off the shower.

	After showering, towel off.  Remember to wash and dry thoroughly
	between your toes to avoid athletes foot.  Remember to wash your
	mouth out with soap to avoid Interviewers Mouth.  Remember NOT
	to put your foot into your mouth.

	After toweling off, put on a robe.  Close the robe and tie it.

	Emerge from the shower room.

	Answer all questions in a clear and distinct voice.  Be polite.

	Enjoy yourself.


					Your pals,

					Zeke and Vic


All of this is accompanied by instructional photos.....

    I found out yesterday that Ms. Olson is from the Phoenix suburb,
    Paradise Valley.  She went to Shadow Mt. H.S. and Northern Arizona
    Univ. in Flagstaff.
    
    Mike

    
    Her father is a Cardinal season-ticket holder (poor guy!), and was in
    the stands for last Sunday's game with the Patriots.
    
    It seems that a few journalistic shills, most notably Mister
    All-NFL-Insider Will McDonough, missed the boat completely on this one.
    No mention in the report of exaggeration, fabrication, or leering Lois 
    Lane-ism (this last one was T's, not McDonough's).  What a shocker...
    
    glenn
      

                        Rollin'  yur `Sawness!
              .. but would you consider $12,500 for beer
                                        $12,500 for B-B-Q Ribs
                                         ... and scr*w the consultant?

                Then we could get the Slasher involved:

             /DON AND ZEKE'S MEET THE PRESS WORKOUT VIDEO
                                  or
                       Dick Shows Jane A Woodie

Mike JN

    speaking of shrooms...
    
    'Saw, what are you and Jimi doing today for his birthday?
    
    Mike

    I would have replied to this sooner but yesterday was a hectic day and
    I needed some time to sort out how I felt about the entire thing.  This
    isn't something that is going to go away for me for a long time and
    it's something I'll probably never be able to laugh about.  An
    organization that I've been proud to be a part of for a long time has
    been shamed and there's no defense for it.  None.  What the players did
    was wrong and the attempt to cover it up, whether intentioned or
    accidental, was wrong.
    
    That being said, my biggest concern is now for the organization itself. 
    It needs to get the incident behind it, learn from it and move on.  Its
    priority is to improve and get back to the upper echelon of NFL teams. 
    I don't think the media is going to let it get this behind it for a
    long time and I'm afraid this Sunday's game is going to once again be
    in circus mode, like the Jets game was in September.  I'm already
    gearing up for it.
    
    I don't really care what happens to the players involved at this point,
    in fact I'm very angry at them.  They have hurt an innocent person
    trying to do her job and have hurt an organization that I care deeply
    about.  They may have also cost a couple of my friends in the front
    office their careers.
    
    My emotions are mixed towards Lisa Olson.  I don't blame her for what
    happened and I see her as a victim.  I'm very sorry for what happened
    to her.  I'm glad she pursued it and didn't let it die, more women have
    to do this when things like this happen.  Yet at the same time, her
    future is kind of extraneous to me.  It doesn't concern me.  I don't
    know her and I don't care to know her.  I don't care about the
    newspapers or the TV stations nor do I really care about the people who
    work there.  I feel bad for her and I hope she can get this behind her
    and go on with her career, but at the same time, my true concern is for
    the team and what goes on there.  I realize this may be small and
    narrow minded, but I can't help it.  
    
    I really do care about what happens with Pat Sullivan and Jim Oldham. 
    I have trouble separating my personal feelings for these folks from
    what happened.  I consider both of them friends, although I'm closer to
    and work closer with Jim.  I'm afraid Victor Kiam is going to hang both
    of them out to dry and in particular, Jim, because he's cheaper to get
    rid of than Pat.  If I read the report correctly, Jim is less to blame
    than Pat, because if I understand it correctly, Jim reported it to Pat
    right away and then whatever happened to cover it up happened there.  I
    feel Jim did his job.  He was in the unfortunate position of having
    seen it so he was in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Here's a guy
    who spent 6 months here on an internship, didn't get paid and was lucky
    enough to get a job doing what he really wanted to do.  After 3 years
    as an assistant he got this job and look what happened.  He's being
    crucified when he's guilty of inexperience and making a mistake.
    
    It's difficult for me because Jim is great to work for and with.  We
    are on the same wavelength regarding what has to be done and how I do
    my job.  I handle all personnel matters regarding the crew, interview
    all people who are interested in working at games, we like each other
    and we respect each other.  Our tacit agreement is that he leaves me
    alone to do my job, I call all the shots with the crew and with the
    computerization and as long as I produce the results, I'll keep that
    style of working, which is how I work best.  If he goes, I'm not
    worried about keeping my job, but I am worried about adjusting to all
    new people in the PR staff who I don't know (since the whole PR staff
    may go too, and that's never happened since I've been there).
    
    More to the point, a good man is going to lose his job over something
    that's not entirely his fault, and that's what I care about more than
    anything that ever happens to Lisa Olson or Victor Kiam.
    
    John

re Jimi --

	Well, Jimi came over last night, and we kicked back a few 
	beers.  Then we just jammed.  Had a bunch of folks in 
	and that little house in Hebron was rockin'.  Stevie Ray
	was there, and even ol' Jim Croce stopped by, just to throw
	in a few light sets to spell the hard rockers.

	But the highlight of the evening was when Otis Redding sang
	Happy Birthday to Jimi.  Too cool....


re the Pats --

	Chin up John.  I might not be as bleak as it looks now.  Wait
	a couple of weeks and see how it all falls out.  Hopefully
	the Pats front office will realize that the important thing
	is turning a pitiful football club into a contender, and not
	looking for heads to roll over an unfortunate incident...


'Sa w

    Saw,
    
    I realize the priority is to turn the team around, but my priority and
    Victor Kiam's priority may not necessarily be the same thing.  He has
    an organization headed by a GM he doesn't want and can't get rid of
    without cause, and the vast majority of the front office was hired by
    said GM.  It could be the opening he needs to purge the whole place.
    
    In my final paragraph in my previous note, I didn't mean to say Jim
    would lose his job.  I should have said he's got a chance to lose his
    job, but it's by no means certain.
    
    John

    
    John,
    
    What "mistake" is Jim Oldham guilty of?  I don't understand his
    supposed role in this at all.  Was he supposed to go directly to the
    league?
    
    If anything, from the newspaper reports, Oldham helped to get to the
    truth in the matter and should be commended for that.  He immediately 
    confirmed Lisa Olson's interpretation of what was going on around her, 
    recognized the seriousness, and promised her that he would take it to 
    management, which he did.  From there, it sounds like Sullivan bungled 
    things to an extent, but to me the chief culprit is still Kiam, who 
    shot his mouth off even after being provided with the details.
    
    If Oldham is made the scapegoat and fired while Sullivan is allowed to
    keep his job by virtue of his "guaranteed" contract, it'll be yet
    another joke on the Patriots by the Patriots.  I'm hard-pressed to find
    a reason to return to that stadium as long as Kiam owns the team as it
    is, but this would be the final straw.
    
    glenn
     
    

    Jim is being accused of not informing his superior (ie, Kiam) of what
    happened, for being in the lockerroom and not doing anything to stop it
    and for a couple of other things.
    
    He did inform his superior.  He told Pat Sullivan.  He couldn't go
    around Pat to inform Kiam because that's going over his boss' head.
    
    I'm upset about the report because I believe Jim did his job mostly
    correctly, although he made a couple of mistakes (again, probably due
    to some inexperience) and is probably going to get unjustly nailed for
    it.
    
    My conclusions are my own and are drawn from what I read in the paper.
    
    John

    John,
    
    In the "big picture", the Patriots are not the *ONLY* organization that
    has to bear the blame.   The NFL itself handled this thing very poorly. 
    No clear direction, no sense of urgency, no definition of any kind of a
    standard of behavior, and so on ...
    
    And this "report" just highlights these problems.   It amounts to no
    more than just a "boys will be boys" slap on the wrist to Mowatt,
    Timpson, and Perryman.
    
    I mean Zeke Mowatt gets fined *only* $12,500 for "adjusting his
    genitals" in her presence.
    
    Meanwhile, Sam Wyche broke a rule and got fined $30,000.    I got some
    advice for Sam.  Sam, buddy, next time, strip down and then strut on
    over to a woman reporter, then grab your crotch and ask her if she
    wants it.   You would have saved yourself over $17,000 in fines.  Geez,
    the NFL is more concerned with enforcing its stupid rules to keep it
    out of court than it does preventing sexual harassment.   Bah.
    
    I feel saddened for *YOU* that this has happened to the Patriots.  But
    the right thing should have been done regardless of who was involved. 
    Mowatt, Timpson, and Perryman should have been fired from their jobs if
    not brought up on criminal charges.   And those responsible for
    *willfully* trying to cover it up should also be disciplined
    accordingly.
    
    Not this haphazard and "oh well" crap that the NFL handed down.  For
    your sake only, I hope your friends learn the lessons they should learn
    with the correct amount of pain associated with those lessons.   But,
    based on your impressions of Kiam, I would assume you're not optimistic
    about that happening.
    
    Bob Hunt

    I'm not debating the amount of Zeke Mowatts' fine and whether it
    was right, or Sam Wyches' fine and whether it was right, but wasn't
    Sams' offense his second or third rule violation, thus explaining
    the higher fine.
    
    The Wizard

    re: .-1 and Sam Wyche comments
    
    Amen BobHunt.  Amen.
    
    
    - ACC Chris

    Bob,
    
    There's nothing I can say to rebut what you said.  In fact, I agree
    with most of it.  And in fact if any of my friends are guilty of a
    willful coverup, I can put my personal feelings aside on that one because
    then they're just as guilty as the players.
    
    From reading the newspapers (I haven't read the report), I don't think
    Jim is at all guilty of a willful cover up.  I think, however, he is
    going to be perceived as guilty of one and potentially used as a
    scapegoat both by the team and by the NFL.  From what I've heard and
    read, and from what I know of him, he did his job.  He probably didn't
    handle it perfectly, and this was probably due mostly to inexperience
    (after all, no textbook teaches anyone how to handle this properly) but
    the sad thing is that he may not be able to profit from this
    experience.
    
    In Pat's case, I can't say he's guilty of a willful coverup but I can
    say whatever he did was done in what he thought was the best interests
    of the team.  I'm not saying that's right and it doesn't excuse what
    happened, and I better not go beyond that.
    
    As far as the NFL's handling of this, you've got that right.
    
    John

    John -
    
    As you've got to know, in spite of my teasing entries, I've been
    thinking of you all week.
    
    You are a class act.  I'm afraid that I agree with you that Jim will
    probably be the scapegoat.  I sincerely hope that Jim's replacement
    recognizes the jewel he has in his stats team, amidst some of the mud
    and dreck that appear to be covering those in the front office.  (And
    I'd go all the way to the top of the organization with that.)
    
    The incident kind of typifies the Pat's season to me - total
    misunderstanding of the environment, requirements, and effort needed to
    get the job done.  :-(
    
    Best of luck Sunday.  Hope this all passes over quickly for you.
    
    A&W

    Thanks for all the kind words.
    
    When it comes to me, I'm not really worried about keeping my job.  I
    feel if the team does clean house and the PR staff is completely
    replaced, a letter that day introducing ourselves plus a follow up
    phone call plus recommendations from both the Elias Sports Bureau and
    the team in the league where I know the PR Director the best (because
    he was the assistant when I first started, and he's asked me to train a
    new person because he's firing my counterpart after the season so I
    don't want to say who it is) will cement things for us.  If someone is
    coming in from the outside like that, s/he is going to have 1,000,000
    problems to deal with (getting to know the team, the territory, the
    media and so forth) and if I can go to him/her and say "we have a great
    crew already to go here but don't take my word for it, here are
    recommendations from around the league", that knocks the amount of
    problems down to 999,999.
    
    The problems I foresee for me are in getting to know this person and
    getting used to working with each other.  I've evolved a certain style
    for doing my job and am used to working a certain way and while I can
    adjust, I don't really want to because it works.  There is a getting to
    know each other type of learning curve to climb (or what I refer to as
    getting the new person broken in) and I've never had to face that
    before since in all other previous changes, someone was promoted from
    within.  In my case, the PR Director ends up working more closely with
    me than any of the other day of game employees (we talk at least twice
    a week, sometimes more) and a good working rapport is essential.
    
    The other problem is that no matter what happens, my feelings about the
    team have been forever changed and regardless of what may happen in the
    front office, it ain't gonna be the same and it ain't gonna be as much
    fun anymore.  :-(
    
    John

    John,
    
    Didn't Kiam add someone to the Pats payroll, when there was talk of
    firing Pat Sullivan, with the intention of this guy taking over Pat's
    role?  If so, is he still there, and do you see him taking over the
    role of GM?
    
    					Steve

    I don't know what his role is and I don't know what is going to happen. 
    What I do know is that as long as Pat is there, they can't fire him
    without cause because he has a big "golden parachute" and they can't
    give anyone else the title of general manager.  They can put someone in
    to do the job but they can't take away the title.
    
    John

    The Pats should fire Pat Sullivan for gross incompetence and not pay
    his golden parachute.  Fight it in court if Sullivan is crass enough to
    demand it (as it there's any question of Sullivan's crassness).  Ladies
    around the world should boycott the Lady Remington, hitting Kiam where
    it hurts most.
    
    Dan

>    ... Ladies
>    around the world should boycott the Lady Remington, hitting Kiam where
>    it hurts most.

How about all the other women in the world?

TTOm

    Since Perryman is now playing for the Cowboys, some might say that he
    was fired for his role in the incident.  It's not the first time the
    Pats dumped a perceived problem.

    Well, I'm in.  I took yesterday off.  I wanted everyone to know the
    weekend sort of went OK.  I went to the Celtics game last night and saw
    Doc run onto the court in an attempt to touch his two idols, Johnny
    Most and Larry Bird, but was hustled away by security.  The most
    interesting thing last night was the ovation for KC Jones and then
    having the fans give him a mock cheer for having gotten a technical
    foul.  The Boston fans really, really like KC.
    
    The high school Super Bowls went very well on Saturday but Sunday was
    bad.  The atmosphere around the press box wasn't bad but several weird
    things happened.
    
    Paul Zimmerman from Sports Illustrated sat in front of us.  Paul is one
    of the few sportwriters who actually know the statistical rules.  In
    the updated version of his Thinking Mans Guide to Pro Football,
    published in 1984, he called us the worst stats crew in the league and
    talked about several run-ins and alleged misunderstandings of the rules
    that never happened.  We exchanged several letters over it and worked
    it out later, but having him there puts me under extra pressure.
    
    It's important for me to have the beginning of the game go smoothly. 
    If nothing weird happens in the beginning then we can sort of get into
    football mode, everyone settles down and feels comfortable and then the
    rest of the game goes smoothly even if weird things happen on the
    field.  Conversely, if something bad happens at the beginning, more
    weird things seem to happen and we never get ourselves back together.
    
    It happened that was on Sunday.  Scoring plays on the first play of the
    game are never good because we're still trying to get starting lineups
    checked.  This was compounded by a gross mishandling of the ball on the
    kickoff after the scoring play that I called wrong - Paul corrected me.
    Later in the game, we had another mishandled kick, a phantom sack
    (where Steve DeBerg ducked under a rush, Rod McSwain sailed over him
    without touching him and referee Bob McElwee called him down anyway)
    and a reversal of a touchdown catch with a personal foul penalty on the
    same play.
    
    If there had been as many distractions around this game as there were
    at the Jets game, I would have been a babbling idiot afterward.  As it
    was, I was semi-spastic.  I gave everything a sound review when I got
    home.  We got it all right, but we sure looked ugly getting there.
    
    John

    re .268
    
    John, may your call to a Boston College escort service be met with
    penicillin ..... :-)