Coaching Credentials

[sccrdad]

Is there a way to find out what coaches have certain credentials? I have been told by some that there are coaches who fatten up resumes with licenses and courses never taken. I would like to explore this more but I do not know where to start. Any help will be great.

umm, why? Isn't that the job of the club that hires the coach?

MYSA should have a list of each coach and what licnese they have reached.

[in the know]

I'm pretty sure MYSA get a yearly list from US soccer and the NSCAA, it the foreign qualification that they have no clue about.

When running a soccer program I approached MYSA to get licensing information in all of the Coaches interested in Coaching. I had it in my hands within days. It did include all US Coaching license information.

[sccrdad]

umm, why? Isn't that the job of the club that hires the coach?

umm....because the clubs may not realize a coach has false credentials. A fairly simple question Taylor, I don't see the need for "umm, why?". It would be nice to be able to check on the licenses people are advertising. You can just take anyones word but as mentioned in my original post I have knowledge of coaches making false claims on licensure. Thanks for all your help.

[Red99]

sccrdad - first you say you "have been told by some" then you say you "have knowledge" of false licensing claims by coaches.

Which is it? Second/third hand gossip or actual, first hand knowledge? Those are two very different things.

Secondly, that is a very dangerous accusation to make, so I am glad that you are not naming names. Personally I find it hard to believe that a reputable club would allow this and I agree with Taylor that if you look first to the club and are satisfied with the directors of the club and the way it is run, it would be reasonable to expect to be able to rely on the club's background checks of its coaches (certainly before they posted it on their website, for example).

Anyway, others in this thread are giving you concrete ways to track down what you are looking for, so why continue to make the accusation on an open forum (though at least you are discussing in general terms).

Personally I find it hard to believe that a reputable club would allow this and I agree with Taylor that if you look first to the club and are satisfied with the directors of the club and the way it is run, it would be reasonable to expect to be able to rely on the club's background checks of its coaches (certainly before they posted it on their website, for example).

It is an important issue. More than just lying about License there was a coach a few years ago that not just lied about licenses but about his criminal record . He made the rounds with many clubs. Some checked him out and others didn't He did fool one parent who supported him to the death who is a frequent poster here. He was hired by one of the top clubs in Mass. as one of there first full time coaches. He did not last long. He usually last a very short time and recently a high school job lasted one season. Some will say he paid his dues to society and it happen when he was young. They will not tell you things were more serious than he would let on. No names are used as he threatens to sue anyone that every speaks of it ( Bring it on I am a lawyer) but the points to bring out is the following from these posts.

1. If they are lying about licenses you don't know what else they are lying about.

2. If a top girls club could hire him only after to realize there error please don't assume the clubs are always doing complete checks on background etc.

[FSM]

SoccerMan, as an attorney you may or may not be aware of the following suits. In the Minnesota case there were accusations of pedophilia and extra marital affairs which resulted in a total award of over three quarters of a million dollars. The Florida case resulted in an award of $11.3 million. These two cases suggest that people should be very careful what they post or e-mail about others that can affect a person's reputation or livelihood.

http://www.mnyouthsoccer.org/lawsuit/summary.cfm

Some of you know that MYSA, David Ericson (MYSA VP of Administration) and Ellie Singer (former MYSA President) filed a defamation lawsuit late last year against six defendants: Eric Hawkins, Kathleen Hallaway, Annette Durst, Gwen Myers, Gerald Jones and Stephen Bianchi.

MYSA ’s objectives in filing the lawsuit were to stop the sending of defamatory emails, and to find the people responsible and hold them accountable so that the emails would not continue and/or start up again. I believe we were successful with respect to both objectives for two main reasons: 1) We had the truth on our side; and 2) The knowledge and expertise of our attorneys and their law firm. Listed below are the results:

MYSA Defamation Lawsuit Summary
Defendant Outcome Documents

Kathleen Hallaway A unanimous jury awarded Plaintiffs $425,000 for their defamation claims, $75,000 for their intentional infliction of emotional distress claims, and $50,000 in punitive damages – November 2006 Special Verdict Form

Eric Hawkins Plaintiffs settled their claims against Hawkins for $220,000
– October 2006 Offer of Judgment and Notice of Acceptance

Annette Durst Plaintiffs settled their claims against Durst for $10,000
– October 2006
General Release

Gwen Myers Plaintiffs settled their claims against Myers for $1,500
plus a letter of apology – June 2006
Settlement Memorandum

Gerald Jones Plaintiffs settled their claims against Jones for $1,500
plus a letter of apology – June 2006
Settlement Memorandum

Stephen Bianchi Plaintiffs released Bianchi – May 2006

This has been a long and difficult process, but we are extremely pleased with the result. As stated at the AGM last month, this lawsuit was not filed against a club, but rather six individuals based on actions those individuals took outside of their role as a volunteer. Last fall, the MYSA board voted unanimously to take this action as repeated attempts to resolve the matter failed, and, in fact, the defaming behavior continued. The defamatory emails were being sent out about past and present board members, as well as others. In addition, the emails were being sent with more frequency, and to larger and larger distribution lists.

Listed below are some additional documents:

Letter to MYSA Member Club Presidents – November 30, 2006
Statement read by MYSA Executive Director at AGM 2006 – November 4, 2006

We have recouped our legal costs and at no time during this lawsuit did MYSA programs or services suffer as a result of this action. MYSA remains committed to promoting the game of soccer for all youth in Minnesota in a fun, safe environment. In fact, it is precisely because of this commitment that MYSA pursued the lawsuit. MYSA believes it is essential to not only protect the youth, but also the adults, who are involved in soccer in Minnesota.

MYSA would like to thank all of its members for their patience and support over this past year.

Candace C. Daley
MYSA Executive Director

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oct 2006

A court in Florida has awarded US$11.3m in damages and costs to a woman who suffered a campaign of abusive harassment on an online bulletin board.Despite legal attempts to silence Scheff in 2002, the case got to court following a personal vendetta by a former acquaintance, Carey Bock, who posted a series of malicious accusations on the Fornits bulletin board.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tangled Web We Weave
Internet libel cases more common than you thought


The choice between having nothing nice to say and saying nothing at all, at least on the Web, is becoming increasingly easier by the day. Say nothing at all.

When the 1996 Communications Decency Act (CDA) was struck down to allow indecent, as opposed to obscene speech, the effect – unintended or otherwise – was to give online service providers immunity from the actions of its customers. While the act was created with obscenity in mind, the CDA was part of the larger Telecommunications Act of 1996, and that piece of law says that your service provider is not liable should you knowingly or unknowingly commit libel on your Web site.

However, if you knowingly or unknowingly commit libel on your Web site, you could be in deep trouble. On the other hand, if you suspect somebody has committed libel against you online, you have the same recourse as if the person had defamed you in the morning paper. In other words, just because the Web seems like a no-rules environment, don’t think for a second that you’re not protected.

Any fourth-year journalism student can tell you that libel is comprised of the following elements:[*]Defamation – includes accusations of criminal behavior, moral turpitude or professional incompetence. It can be direct or inferred defamation.[*]Publication – includes a printed newspaper article, a Web page or a campus flyer. Technically, it can include graffiti, something written in a bathroom stall or doodling on a napkin.[*]Damage – includes damage both actual and perceived, and is not necessary to show libel although it helps to assess award. The reason showing damage is not necessary in libel cases is that by printing something shown to be defamatory, the damage is assumed.[*]Identification – includes both individual and group identification, when the group is under 15 people. When the group is between 15-100 people, defamation should be shown to point to each person in the group. If the group is more than 100 people strong, there is no identification. For example, claiming that all piano players are clinically insane will not result in a successful libel suit; however, claiming that all the musicians at your local church are insane just might.[*]Fault – includes a couple of degrees of fault, the first of which is assumed if there is libel. However, a higher degree of fault can be found should the writer have published defamatory information knowingly or with reckless disregard. And, according to a famous 1964 court case, journalists can be found guilty of libel if their actions are found to be malicious.[*]Truth – includes an interpretation of whether the alleged defamation is actually true. If the alleged defamation turns out to be true, then there is no libel.[/list]Truth is that there is a lot of gray area as it pertains to what constitutes libel on the Web. Online business proprietors not only concern themselves with what’s printed about their ecommerce stores and their products, but also themselves. The potential that somebody sometime will publish something online that casts you, your company or your product in something less than the best light is high. Your best bet is to play nicely, work with the individual and the ISP to resolve any differences or concerns amicably and with diplomacy.

FSM,

No names were used at all. Looks like you are still a defender for some reason. The main reason behind the post was not to bring up the past history of the coach but to continue the thread that each parent still has to be aware and do not assume the state or clubs will do the extra work to check the coaches coaching for them.........

Looks like she is trying to bully & threaten again herself. If you all look back on her thousand of posts many teams, clubs and people could have a great slander/libel case. At least when she was finally called under the table she has been more descret about things. Looks like she is having a bad post day on line. Maybe she should put herself into another hibernation. The first one never lasted very long...............

[Red99]

Yesterday morning this thread had a post on it that did in fact name a club and a "joking" reference to "false advertising" which in the context of accusations of coaches lying about licenses achieved was a very dangerous statement to write. A reply poster warned the original poster that they needed to be careful writing stuff like that because it could in fact approach the fringes of legality. Admin took both posts down shortly thereafter, but the original poster quickly re-posted the original "joke" about the club. Admin again correctly removed it. Admin is smart to be monitoring stuff like that for exactly the examples FSM pointed out. The bottom line is that you CAN'T just say anything you want in these forums and as MASC noted elsewhere, you can be found via URL or whatever. And as pointed out in one of FSM's examples, the forum itself is at risk just by virtue of allowing this open discussion. It's a shame it takes legal threats/concerns to force civility, but it's a fact.

[Red99]

And by the way, I wish I had the thick skin that FSM must have to have put up with all the mean-spirited comments directed her way over the years on Touchline. She offers up lots of info from other sources that people can either read and find interesting or simply ignore, it's up to them. Her opinions are always that, just opinion, and I don't ever recall seeing her write one thing that is mean or nasty, certainly not anywhere near to things directed at her. She disagrees with folks, but she's also quick to note her agreement with the same folks on different issues. And anyway, pick on her all you want, as I said, her skin seems awfully rugged and I doubt it bothers her one bit.

FSM,

No names were used at all. Looks like you are still a defender for some reason. The main reason behind the post was not to bring up the past history of the coach but to continue the thread that each parent still has to be aware and do not assume the state or clubs will do the extra work to check the coaches coaching for them.........

SoccerMan, I'm referencing the general postings and was willing to let it end there, but since you have brought up this coach, anyone in Central Mass would know who you speak as Juventus, Puma and the Fuller Hamlets all circulated e-mails to their parents regarding an incident that occurred in 1990 when this coach was a college student. I do believe there are hard copies of those e-mails including many e-mail addresses, sent IMO with the intent to scare parents and keep them from leaving their clubs. At the time, 2003 - 2004, the coach in question chose to let it go, but as it continues, he may not choose to do so in the future, particularly since serious rumors now circulate that involve at least one other coach in his club. It is amazing how far people are willing to go to ruin a person's reputation all over youth soccer issues.

[quote-"SoccerMan"]"More than just lying about License there was a coach a few years ago that not just lied about licenses but about his criminal record....He was hired by one of the top clubs in Mass. as one of there first full time coaches. He did not last long. He usually last a very short time and recently a high school job lasted one season. Some will say he paid his dues to society and it happen when he was young. They will not tell you things were more serious than he would let on."[/quote]

You've made some accusations, SoccerMan. Now substantiate them.

[FSM]

Last post was mine.

And BTW, the accusations of which you speak resulted in the Auburn Sportsplex having the Auburn Police Department do a check on this individual. His record was clean. And if you are questioning his licensing, I think you will find by contacting USSF and NSCAA that all is as presented. I really do wish this individual would file suit and put an end to this rumor mongaring once and for all. You may or may not like him personally, but this has gone way beyond casual gossip.