Has the lack of information provided regarding a wild sequence of events been a brazen disregard of transparency or has it simply been the justifiable limits of information sharing?
The 85-10-5 Rule of Thumb
When you write about handball in the United States for nearly 20 years you learn a few things about where the sport is situated relative to all the other sports in this country. In terms of pecking order, team handball is very near the very bottom. Aside from our quadrennial increase in awareness due to the Olympics very few Americans care or even give a second thought about handball.
And, then, even within our very small community of handball devotees, the people who really care about the governance and handball politics of our sport is an even smaller number of people. Based on experience/observation, I would assess that of the 1,000 or so people who care about handball in this country around 85% could care less about who’s running the sport. They just want to play, coach, ref or watch. Their only question is typically, “Just tell me where to send my money.” Another 10%, if pushed, will engage some. Typically, this is a coach or team leader, that recognizes that the top level organization of the sport impacts what they are doing. They don’t like getting involved, but they understand that somebody on their team has to, to some extent. Essentially, they dip a toe in the water and then get out of that water as quickly as they can.
And, then there is the 5% that genuinely care about the politics and governance of the sport. They care about who is in charge of what and they care about what is planned in terms of grass roots development, national team performance, marketing efforts and other organizational matters. As to why they care, that answer varies. Sometimes it’s simply personal… they want to be in charge of something. Sometimes it’s out of frustration… they don’t like how things have been done and want to see changes. And, almost always… it’s because they are truly very passionate about the sport of handball.
So the 85-10-5 Rule of Thumb is:
- 85% don’t care about governance and politics at all and are very unlikely to to get involved.
- 10% care somewhat about governance and politics and they will get involved if they need to,
- 5% genuinely care about governance and politics and they get involved as much as they can.
So we could quibble about the percentages. Maybe it’s 80-10-10 or 90-8-2 or some other variation, but if you’ve been around awhile… you’re probably thinking that it’s a pretty accurate binning of our small community.
Can the 5% be Ignored?
If there are around 1,000 people who care about handball in the U.S. this means that only around 50 people are fully engaged in political/governance matters. Or to put it another way only around 50 people would really be interested in finding out more about something like the “sequence of events” sooner and in greater detail. Heck, I’ve even been told before that this number is even smaller and that I (John Ryan) am literally the only person that cares. I don’t think that’s quite true, but the number is small enough that a brazen total disregard for basic transparency has at times been a very effective strategy for USA Team Handball. Yes, if USA Team Handball wants to do something shady/unorthodox/questionable and not tell anyone about it… there’s a solid chance that no one will be the wiser. But… just because that’s an effective strategy… doesn’t make it right!
Outside Entities: Also Left in the Dark?
Beyond the small USA Handball Community there are also other players that probably have been left in the dark. The USOPC has been informed via grievances, but one wonders if the IHF and USA Team Handball’s largest sponsor, Verizon would also liked to have been fully informed as to what had been taking place. Certainly, one can speculate as to whether any lower level concern that those entities might have had regarding disputes between the Handball Union and USA Team Handball would have been easily trumped by higher concerns regarding an unorthodox “sequence of events” that was unfolding.
The Lack of Transparency
Here’s a chronicling… of some significant events that either have never been mentioned or were reported only long after they happened as a news items on the USA Team Handball website:
- No mention whatsover regarding the multiple actions related to Board Member, Ebiye Udo-Udoma
- His removal by the Athlete’s Advisory Council (AAC) and, in turn, his removal from the Board of Directors
- The determination by the Judicial Committee that his removal was improper and his reinstatement to the Board
- The determination by the Judicial Committe that decisions made in his absence were still valid
- Somewhat bizarrely the only oblique reference has been a notice for an election for his replacement that ended up never taking place due to his reinstatement
- No mention whatsoever regarding the “sort of” merger between USA Team Handball and the US Handball Union? Or dissolution of the Union? (I’m still not sure what that was all about)
- No mention whatsoever of Martin Branick’s removal from the CEO position and subsequent departure from the organization.
- No announcement of Mike King’s appointment to the CEO position until 24 October (almost 2 months after the 27 August meeting)
- No mention whatsoever of Camille Nichol’s and Lawrence Taylor’s resignations from the Board of Directors
- No mention whatsover of David Buckman’s resignation from the chair of the Nominating & Governance Committee
A Personal Breaking Point
As a pseudo-journalist and the de facto, unofficial lead for the “5 Percent” I’ll have to admit to some complacency in regards to all this. I had heard some rumors and had been told that it was a little messy, but I was somewhat resigned to the Board’s decisions.
And, then someone sent me Camille Nichol’s and David Buckman’s resignation letters. I don’t know either very well, but we’re all retired military and service academy graduates. Do not try and tell me that a retired 2 Star General and Colonel don’t know how to play in the sand box. That’s just silly and isn’t going to fly with me.
So, I reluctantly put on my investigative journalist hat and the more I found out, the more I was troubled by all that had happened and pretty upset with the secretive nature of it’s implementation.
Board Meeting Minutes (A Window of Transparency)
Board Meeting Minutes are often frustrating in that they usually tell only part of the story, but nevertheless they are typically the only source of official information as to what is taking place in terms of USA Team Handball matters. They’ve always been tucked away in a corner on the website and are typically quietly posted with no mention on the website or social media. Because of this I’ve gotten in the habit of periodically checking the USA website to see if any new minutes have been posted.
You might be “shocked” to learn that after former Board President Michael Wall’s resignation that Board Minutes were not posted for several months. And, that the availaiblity of video for the open portion of board meetings also quietly disappeared. As rumors that things were starting to get a “little messy” began popping up, I started to check the USA website more regularly and on 23 October I discovered that some Board Meeting Minutes had finally been posted. And, when they were later taken down I decided that it was time for a little sunshine so I posted them on the Team Handball News website. This then resulted in a request from the new CEO, Michael King to take some of them down due to their publishing via illegal behavior.
The Missing Minutes (What Changed?)
Here’s a table summarizing the Meeting Minutes in question:
There was no issue with 4 of the meeting minutes and these were left up on the Team Handball News website and posted on the USA Team Handball website (I’m not sure of the date, but I think it was in early November).
The minutes from the 10 July 2024 meeting have not been posted again by USA Team Handball. The stated purpose of the meeting was to afford US Handball Union leadership an opportunity to present its current situation and vision to members of the USATH board. They look like Meeting Minutes, but include this disclaimer on the bottom of each page: “Meeting minutes taken for the purpose of follow-up conversation – not intended for publication” I’m not sure why this is the case, but here’s one little interesting tidbit. The new, recently appointed USA Team Handball Independent Director, Andre Carter is listed in these minutes as part of the US Handball Union Leadership. That would seem to really stretch the definition of “independent” but, at this point why would anyone be surprised anymore.
The remaining 3 Meeting Minutes were eventually posted on the USA Team Handball website on 15 November, but not after undergoing some editing. This is concerning as it relates to the 8 August meeting minutes since they were formally approved by a Board motion at the 27 August meeting.
The nature of the changes fit broadly in to two categories:
- Contractual dispute: Both the old and the new minutes discuss an ongoing contractual dispute. The old minutes mention the name of the company and provide more details. The new minutes omit the name of the company and are less specific in nature.
- Naming of Board Members: The old minutes often used the first names of board members and indicated how board members voted on certain motions. The new minutes use last names and the record of how each board member voted has been replaced with a simple tally of the vote result.
In general, I’m fine with the changes that were made. In regards to the contractual dispute, the old minutes provided more detail than was necessary. Meeting minutes should also refer to people by their last names. For key votes of consequence it would certainly be preferable to know how Board Members voted, but I guess if there are privacy requirements that need to be followed it should be anonymous. I’m not sure what the requirments are exactly, but maybe a change to the bylaws is warranted to consider the possibility of making key votes public. I could be wrong, but it wouldn’t surprise me if most Board Members are totally comfortable with that. Finally, it goes without saying… don’t formally approve minutes and then change your mind. It’s bad form even if the reasons for changing said minutes are valid.
Red Herrings to Keep Info on the Down Low
I think most people are familiar with the concept of red herrings, which are intended to distract from what’s actually relevant. Contractual disputes and how people vote are of some interest, but they are pale in comparison to the wild “sequence of events” that had been taking place. A sequence of events that in it’s entirety could at best be described as unorthodox. And, at it’s worst described as Mickey Mouse dysfunctionality.
Maybe it’s possible to rationalize this “means” as absolutely necessary to getting to the desired “ends.” It seems like a real stretch, though, and it’s certainly a tough proposition to sell. So, if one can hide behind red herrings to keep the real story on the down low… well, that is very, very convenient. And, of course, that’s just for the Meeting Minutes. There was nothing preventing USA Team Handball from reporting more (actually anything) as to what had been going on. To deal with the uncomfortable explaining that comes with transparency.
But, doing so could very well have resulted in an early crash out of the sequence of events. Certainly, it would have made things very uncomfortable. Yes, for all intents and purposes secrecy seems to have become the chosen course of action. Because if all you care about is the end state, here’s the standard Machiavellian playbook to follow:
- Keep all the bad information secret as long as possible. The fewer people that find out anything the better… because those people start asking questions and taking action
- Minimize the amount of bad information that seeps out. If you can’t keep everything secret dribs and drabs of information are better than a total release. (Such a strategy didn’t work for Nixon, but it can work if the 80-15-5 rule applies.) If some people just know some of the story the notion of things being just a “little messy” is still sellable
- Delay information release as long as possible. The more time that passes the better. This is especially true if everything can be normalized as quickly as possibly. Ideally it becomes a fait acompli where people might say, “WTF! That was really crazy, but everything seems OK now. I guess there’s no sense in rocking the boat.”
Is this what happened? Is what is still happening? Well, outward signs in terms of how information was mostly not shared the past few months mimics this playbook very closely. And, as the old saying goes if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck… It’s probably a duck.