Caitlin Clark says hate has ‘no place' in WNBA after alleged fan comments
Asked Monday about alleged comments described as 'hateful' by the WNBA players union, Caitlin Clark said 'there's no place for that in our game, there's no place for that in society.'
Article content
The comments were said to have come from the stands during a game Saturday between Clark's Indiana Fever and the visiting Chicago Sky, which features fellow second-year star Angel Reese. Without specifying what was alleged to have been said, the WNBA said Sunday that it 'strongly condemns racism, hate, and discrimination in all forms' and that it was looking into the matter.
Article content
Multiple outlets, including the Associated Press, cited sources in reporting that the comments were directed at Reese during the game at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis. Spokespeople for the Fever and Sky did not immediately respond Monday to requests for confirmation and additional comment.
Article content
The Women's National Basketball Players Association said in a statement Sunday it was 'aware of reports of hateful comments' at the game and that 'such behavior is unacceptable in our sport.'
Article content
According to the Indianapolis Star, a report filed to the WNBA indicated the alleged comments were not related to a much-discussed moment in the game when Clark delivered a hard foul to Reese as the Sky standout went for a layup after grabbing an offensive rebound. Reese tumbled to the court, then got up and approached Clark, who walked away as officials and Indiana teammates intervened. Clark was issued a flagrant-one foul.
Article content
After the game, a 93-58 Fever win, both players downplayed the significance of their interaction. Clark described it as a routine take foul simply meant to send Reese to the free throw line rather than let her make a layup, and Reese said it amounted to a 'basketball play.'
Article content
The moment added another chapter to the on-court history of Clark and Reese after the latter celebrated a 2023 national championship win for her LSU Tigers over Iowa by taunting Clark, then the superstar centerpiece for the Hawkeyes. Reese and LSU subsequently lost to Clark's Hawkeyes in the 2024 NCAA tournament, after which Reese became the No. 7 pick in the WNBA draft. Clark was drafted first overall and took the WNBA by storm, but along the way, the physical treatment she occasionally experienced sparked discussion of how her status as a White phenom in a league composed primarily of Black players could be influencing public reaction to those episodes.
As the players union noted Sunday, the WNBA recently announced a 'No Space for Hate' platform intended, as the league described it, to 'combat hate and promote respect across all WNBA spaces – from online discourse to in-arena behavior.' Regarding the alleged comments in the Fever-Sky game, the WNBPA said it trusted the league to 'thoroughly investigate and take swift, appropriate action to ensure a safe and welcoming environment for all.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how
A U.S. federal judge has approved terms of a sprawling US$2.8 billion antitrust settlement that will upend the way college sports have been run for more than a century. In short, schools can now directly pay players through licensing deals — a concept that goes against the foundation of amateurism that college sports was built upon. Some questions and answers about this monumental change for college athletics: Q: What is the House settlement and why does it matter? A: Grant House is a former Arizona State swimmer who sued the defendants (the NCAA and the five biggest athletic conferences in the nation). His lawsuit and two others were combined and over several years the dispute wound up with the settlement that ends a decades-old prohibition on schools cutting checks directly to athletes. Now, each school will be able to make payments to athletes for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL). For reference, there are nearly 200,000 athletes and 350 schools in Division I alone and 500,000 and 1,100 schools across the entire NCAA. Q: How much will the schools pay the athletes and where will the money come from? A: In Year 1, each school can share up to about $20.5 million with their athletes, a number that represents 22 per cent of their revenue from things like media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships. Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne famously told Congress 'those are resources and revenues that don't exist.' Some of the money will come via ever-growing TV rights packages, especially for the College Football Playoff. But some schools are increasing costs to fans through 'talent fees,' concession price hikes and 'athletic fees' added to tuition costs. Q: What about scholarships? Wasn't that like paying the athletes? A: Scholarships and 'cost of attendance' have always been part of the deal for many Division I athletes and there is certainly value to that, especially if athletes get their degree. The NCAA says its member schools hand out nearly $4 billion in athletic scholarships every year. But athletes have long argued that it was hardly enough to compensate them for the millions in revenue they helped produce for the schools, which went to a lot of places, including multimillion-dollar coaches' salaries. They took those arguments to court and won. Q: Haven't players been getting paid for a while now? A: Yes, since 2021. Facing losses in court and a growing number of state laws targeting its amateurism policies, the NCAA cleared the way for athletes to receive NIL money from third parties, including so-called donor-backed collectives that support various schools. Under House, the school can pay that money directly to athletes and the collectives are still in the game. Q: But will $20.5 million cover all the costs for the athletes? A: Probably not. But under terms of the settlement, third parties are still allowed to cut deals with the players. Some call it a workaround, but most simply view this as the new reality in college sports as schools battle to land top talent and then keep them on campus. Top quarterbacks are reportedly getting paid around $2 million a year, which would eat up about 10 per cent of a typical school's NIL budget for all its athletes. Q: Are there any rules or is it a free-for-all? A: The defendant conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) are creating an enforcement arm that is essentially taking over for the NCAA, which used to police recruiting violations and the like. Among this new entity's biggest functions is to analyze third-party deals worth $600 or more to make sure they are paying players an appropriate 'market value' for the services being provided. The so-called College Sports Commission promises to be quicker and more efficient than the NCAA. Schools are being asked to sign a contract saying they will abide by the rules of this new structure, even if it means going against laws passed in their individual states. Q: What about players who played before NIL was allowed? A: A key component of the settlement is the $2.7 billion in back pay going to athletes who competed between 2016-24 and were either fully or partially shut out from those payments under previous NCAA rules. That money will come from the NCAA and its conferences (but really from the schools, who will receive lower-than-normal payouts from things like March Madness). Q: Who will get most of the money? A: Since football and men's basketball are the primary revenue drivers at most schools, and that money helps fund all the other sports, it stands to reason that the football and basketball players will get most of the money. But that is one of the most difficult calculations for the schools to make. There could be Title IX equity concerns as well. Q: What about all the swimmers, gymnasts and other Olympic sports athletes? A: The settlement calls for roster limits that will reduce the number of players on all teams while making all of those players – not just a portion – eligible for full scholarships. This figures to have an outsize impact on Olympic-sport athletes, whose scholarships cost as much as that of a football player but whose sports don't produce revenue. There are concerns that the pipeline of college talent for Team USA will take a hit. Q: So, once this is finished, all of college sports' problems are solved, right? A: The new enforcement arm seems ripe for litigation. There are also the issues of collective bargaining and whether athletes should flat-out be considered employees, a notion the NCAA and schools are generally not interested in, despite Tennessee athletic director Danny White's suggestion that collective bargaining is a potential solution to a lot of headaches. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been pushing Congress for a limited antitrust exemption that would protect college sports from another series of lawsuits but so far nothing has emerged from Capitol Hill. Eddie Pells, The Associated Press
National Post
9 hours ago
- National Post
Blue Jays continue to roll, rallying to topple the Twins in series opener
The red-hot Blue Jays show no signs of cooling down. Article content Following a 6-1 homestand, the Jays took their act on the road and continued their recent surge with a come-from-behind 6-4 win over the Minnesota Twins at Target Field in Minneapolis. Article content Article content In a potential wild-card playoff preview, the Jays came back to topple the Twins, 6-4, at Target Field in Minneapolis. Article content Since being swept in Tampa late last month, losing 13-0 in the series finale, the Jays have gone 9-2 in their past 11 games and remain tied for second place in the AL East with the Devil Rays. Article content Article content The team is playing its best baseball of the season, despite missing two big bats, while managing a pitching staff dealing with issues to its starting rotation. Article content The following are three takeaways on a night when George Springer took the club lead in home runs with nine, when he went deep for a solo shot in the sixth inning and both teams emerged from the game with 34-29 records. Article content 1. Bam bam Barger Article content Whenever Anthony Santander returns to the lineup, under no circumstances should Addison Barger move down in the order. Article content Hitting third has suited Barger, who deserve credit for taking advantage of the opportunity with Santander injured. Article content He's reached this stage where every plate appearance is a must-see, each swing, even when he's chasing, is liable to leave the yard. Article content He came close in his first at-bat against Twins starter Bailey Ober and then, with the Jays down 3-0, crushed a two-run no-doubter for his seventh homer of the season. Article content During the team's recent homestand, Barger launched a home run in four straight games. Article content When Santander does return from his shoulder injury, the Jays' lineup should be even deeper considering Daulton Varsho (hamstring) will also be back at some point. Article content The surprise bat, however, has belonged to Barger, who has emerged as a legitimate power presence. Article content The elephant in the Jays' room continues to be Andres Gimenez, whether he likes it or not. Article content It's not his fault the Cleveland Guardians gave him seven-year contract extension worth $106.5 million US two years ago. It's not his fault the Blue Jays acquired his services this past off-season in a trade. Article content The problem has been his bat. And despite his prowess with the glove at second base, his offensive contributions — aside from those three home runs in his first five games for Toronto — have been minimal.
National Post
12 hours ago
- National Post
Canada defeats U.S. to advance to CONCACAF Women's U-20 Championship final
ALAJUELA — Lea Larouche's 56th-minute goal lifted Canada to a 1-0 victory over the seven-time champion United States in semifinal play Friday at the CONCACAF Women's Under-20 Championship. Article content It was just the Americans' fourth loss in 66 games at the CONCACAF tournament (57-4-5). And it marks the first time in tournament history that the U.S. will not be part of the championship game. Article content Canada will face defending champion Mexico in Sunday's championship game at Estadio Alejandro Morera Soto. Mexico, which defeated Canada 4-2 in earlier Group B play, blanked Costa Rica 4-0 in the other semifinal. All four teams had already accomplished their goal of qualifying for the 2026 FIFA U-20 World Cup in Poland by reaching the semifinals. Article content Canada's goal came after Teegan Melenhorst's attempted chip deflected off one American defender past another to Larouche, who slid a shot under goalkeeper Caroline Birkel. Article content Canada was awarded a penalty in the 67th minute after Annabelle Chukwu was taken down in the U.S. penalty box. But the call was negated by offside after video review. Three minutes later, U.S. substitute Mary Long hit the Canadian crossbar with a shot. Article content Canadian goalkeeper Noelle Henning made a diving save in stoppage time to preserve the win. Article content The U.S. outshot Canada 12-9 (5-2 in shots on target) and had 64.6 percent possession. Article content Canada returns to the final for the first time since 2015, when it lost 1-0 to the U.S. It marks Mexico's fourth consecutive final, having won two of the previous three (2018 and 2023). Article content Article content Canada won the CONCACAF tournament in 2004 and 2008. Article content Canada has taken part in nine of the previous 11 editions of the FIFA U-20 tournament, missing out in 2010 and 2018. The Canadians lost 2-1 to Spain in the round of 16 at last year's FIFA U-20 World Cup in Colombia. Article content Canada booked its ticket to the CONCACAF tournament by winning its qualifying group with ease in February. The Canadians outscored their qualifying opposition 43-0, dispatching Dominica 22-0, Bermuda 9-0 and host Trinidad and Tobago 12-0.
