WNBA says it cannot substantiate claims that racist remarks were made by fans at Sky-Fever game
NEW YORK (AP) — The WNBA says it cannot substantiate claims that racist fan behavior took place during a game in Indianapolis between the Chicago Sky and Indiana Fever earlier this month.
The league said its investigation included gathering information from fans, team and arena staff, as well as an 'audio and video review of the game.'
The league said, 'we have not substantiated it.'
The WNBA, according to a person familiar with the investigation, was probing claims that racist comments were directed toward Chicago's Angel Reese by fans during the loss to WNBA rookie of the year Caitlin Clark and the Fever.
Reese, who is Black, and Clark, who is white, were meeting for the seventh time in their ongoing — and much-talked-about — rivalry. Clark later said she did not hear any racist remarks during that game, but acknowledged that it was loud in Indiana's arena throughout the game.
'It's super loud in here, and though I didn't hear anything, I think that's why they're doing the investigation,' Clark said earlier this month. 'That's why they're looking into it. That doesn't mean nothing happened, so I'll just trust the league's investigation, and I'm sure they'll do the right thing.'
Both teams had issued statements supporting the investigation, as did the WNBA Players Union.
'We appreciate the swift and thorough process undertaken by the WNBA to investigate these allegations, which were not substantiated,' Pacers Sports & Entertainment CEO Mel Raines said Tuesday in a statement distributed by the Fever. 'At Gainbridge Fieldhouse, we are committed to providing the best possible basketball experience for players and fans where hate speech has absolutely no place. Indiana is home to the world's greatest fans, and we look forward to an exciting season of Fever basketball.'
___
AP Basketball Writer Doug Feinberg in New York also contributed to this report.
___
AP WNBA: https://apnews.com/hub/wnba-basketball
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
29 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Direct pay to college athletes starts July 1. Some key dates tied to implementation of settlement
It took five years for the $2.8 billion antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA and five major conferences to reach a settlement. Now comes the process for implementing it. Following are significant dates: Settlement approved; settlement-related NCAA rules are effective, as adopted by the NCAA Division I Board on April 21, 2025. NIL Go portal launches. Opt-in deadline for non-defendant schools to fully commit to revenue sharing. First date for direct institutional revenue-sharing payments to student-athletes. Opt-in schools must 'designate' student-athletes permitted by the settlement to remain above roster limits. With the exception of the 'designated' student-athletes, fall sports must be at or below roster limits by their first day of competition. With the exception of 'designated' student-athletes, winter and spring sports must be at or below roster limits by their first day of competition or Dec. 1, whichever is earlier. ___ AP college sports:
Forbes
30 minutes ago
- Forbes
Musk Follows Harvard In Biting The Hand That Feeds
Elon Musk and Harvard Both Bite the Governmental Hand that Feeds Them From an early age, children are taught essential lessons: do not play with fire, do not pet strange dogs, and if one cannot swim, stay out of the deep end. Another timeless rule—often forgotten by those in positions of immense wealth and influence—is this: do not bite the hand that feeds you. This lesson, while simple, has profound implications in the real world. It applies just as readily to billionaires and institutions as it does to children on a playground. Yet recent actions by both Elon Musk and prominent academic institutions—most notably Harvard, but also Columbia, MIT, and others—suggest that even the most successful individuals and organizations are capable of ignoring foundational wisdom. Harvard set the tone. Amid growing political scrutiny and a shifting cultural landscape, the university has drawn intense criticism over its handling of campus protests, particularly those involving slogans such as 'from the river to the sea.' The administration's decision to defend even the most controversial speech—widely viewed by many as antisemitic—has triggered investigations and jeopardized billions in tax-exempt status and government research funding. This raises a critical question: is this truly the hill worth dying on? Is preserving the right to controversial protest slogans worth risking Harvard's institutional future? It is doubtful that most students and faculty would knowingly trade funding, grants, and prestige for this fight. Elon Musk, the world's richest man, has now followed suit—this time turning his attention toward President Donald Trump, with whom he has launched a high-profile and personal feud. What makes this move especially striking is that President Trump is not a distant figure or a fading influence. He is once again sitting in the White House, wielding executive authority over regulatory agencies, defense contracting, and infrastructure initiatives—all areas that directly affect Musk's companies. Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI have flourished in part because of government partnership. SpaceX alone holds multibillion-dollar contracts with NASA and the Department of Defense. Tesla has benefitted from years of energy subsidies and EV tax incentives. Picking a fight with the sitting president—regardless of personal conviction—puts this entire ecosystem at risk. And again the question must be asked: is this battle worth the damage? Whatever principle Musk may be defending, the consequences extend far beyond himself. Shareholders, employees, and retail investors—many of whom placed their trust and savings in his leadership—are the ones left exposed. The parallel between Harvard and Musk is striking: both have been immensely successful, aided in large part by government funding, favorable regulation, and public goodwill. And both have, for different reasons, chosen to confront the very institutions and leaders that have helped sustain their growth. There is precedent for how this ends. Jack Ma, once the most powerful entrepreneur in China, famously criticized the Chinese government. The backlash was immediate and absolute. His companies were dismantled. His IPO was cancelled. His wealth and influence evaporated almost overnight. Even in less authoritarian systems, the lesson holds: those who antagonize the systems that support them may not survive the consequences. While Musk's personal net worth has dropped from nearly $450 billion to approximately $300 billion, the impact is more symbolic than practical for him. But for millions of investors, employees, and stakeholders, these battles matter. Market volatility, regulatory backlash, and reputational risk all come with tangible financial costs—costs borne not just by Musk himself, but by those who have trusted and invested in his vision. The same applies to Harvard and peer institutions. Their leadership may believe they are standing on principle, but the price of alienating government agencies and key financial backers could reshape the long-term trajectory of these universities. The erosion of public trust, the loss of bipartisan support, and the potential withdrawal of federal funding pose existential threats. Leadership—whether in business or academia—requires more than conviction. It requires judgment, timing, and the discipline to separate personal ideology from institutional responsibility. Founder-led companies often outperform when leaders are focused, visionary, and measured. But when ego replaces strategy, the consequences can be swift and severe. No one is demanding absolute political alignment or silence in the face of controversy. No one is asking Elon Musk to wear a MAGA hat. But his recent actions have been so volatile, so self-destructive, that investors may soon be tempted to hand him something else entirely—a MEGA hat: Make Elon Great Again. In today's polarized environment, the margin for error has narrowed. And for those who owe much of their success to public support—whether in Silicon Valley or the Ivy League—biting the hand that feeds is not just unwise. It is unsustainable. ---------------------------------- Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Please refer to the following link for additional disclosures: Additional Disclosure Note: The author has an affiliation with ERShares and the XOVR ETF. The intent of this article is to provide objective information; however, readers should be aware that the author may have a financial interest in the subject matter discussed. As with all equity investments, investors should carefully evaluate all options with a qualified investment professional before making any investment decision. Private equity investments, such as those held in XOVR, may carry additional risks—including limited liquidity—compared to traditional publicly traded securities. It is important to consider these factors and consult a trained professional when assessing suitability and risk tolerance.
Fox News
30 minutes ago
- Fox News
Aaron Rodgers officially signs one-year contract with Steelers worth over $13 million: report
Aaron Rodgers is officially headed to Pittsburgh next season. The four-time league MVP officially signed a contract with the Pittsburgh Steelers on Saturday and will address the media on Tuesday for the first time following the team's first minicamp practice, the Steelers' senior director of communications Burt Lauten announced on X. Rodgers, 41, signed a one-year deal worth up to $19.5 million with incentives, which includes a $10 million guarantee, ESPN reported, citing sources. The news, first reported on Wednesday, ended months of speculation as to whether Rodgers would return for another NFL season or enter retirement after a failed two-year stint with the New York Jets. Rodgers addressed the rumors about his decision and his time with the Jets, during an appearance on "The Pat McAfee Show" in April. He said he had spoken to several teams, including New York Giants head coach Brian Daboll and Minnesota Vikings coach Kevin O'Connell, whom he is in regular contact with. "I'm open to anything and attached to nothing. Retirement could still be a possibility, but right now my focus is and has been and will continue to be on my personal life … there's still conversations that are being had." Ultimately, the veteran NFL quarterback decided Pittsburgh would be where he would play his 21st season. Rodgers' arrival solves the Steelers' quarterback problems – at least for now – after Russell Wilson and Justin Fields both signed with New York Teams. Now Rodgers will battle Mason Rudolph, who signed a two-year contract in March, for the starting position. Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
