Hard-fought tennis game at the Open de Rouen. French player Loïs Boisson dominating. British player Harriet Dart struggling. As they changed ends, Dart spoke to the umpire. “Can you tell her to use deodorant because she smells really bad?”

This was picked up by a microphone so lots of people got to hear it, though probably not Boisson, who continued to trounce Dart. 6-0, 6-3. Game over.

Later, Dart posted on Instagram, “Hey everyone, I want to apologise for what I said on court today, it was a heat-of-the-moment comment that I truly regret. That’s not how I want to carry myself, and I take full responsibility. I have a lot of respect for Lois and how she competed today. I’ll learn from this and move forward.”

Good or bad apology?

It’s probably true that it was heat-of-the-moment stupidity, rather than some kind of diabolical middle-school strategy. Umpires don’t pass messages between players. Opposing tennis players aren’t in sniffing range of each other.

But if Dart genuinely wants to take responsibility, she should apologize directly to Boisson, and not only to the public “everyone” who heard this silliness. And then, as she said, learn from this. And only then, “move forward.”

Boisson did hear about it, after all, and posted a photo of herself into which a container of deodorant had been Photoshopped, captioned “@dove apparently need a collab”

Amusing, and de-escalating. Well played.

Another deodorant brand hopped into the conversation, saying their product is better than Dove’s.

Battle of the brands? That’s where things could get underhanded.

Hat tip to our Tennis Correspondent, Wendy G.

Boy, the Houston Astros’ apology for cheating was EPIC in its vileness, no? (Here is SorryWatch in the Houston Chronicle, discussing just how epic.) Why, it seems like just yesterday we were gaping at this team’s propensity toward crap apologies. In the Astros’ honor, let’s take this opportunity to look at a GOOD sports-related apology from the annals of history.

Peter Norman was an Australian track & field star who won a silver medal at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City. The other two medalists  on the podium with him were Americans John Carlos and Tommie Smith, who gave the Black Power salute as the Star-Spangled Banner was played. (You see, youngsters, Colin Kaepernick is not the first Black athlete to protest racial inequity.) Norman was supportive of their protest, which Carlos and Smith had told Norman they were planning. “We knew that what we were going to do was far greater than any athletic feat,” Carlos told Aussie sportswriter Martin Flanagan. “He said, ‘I’ll stand with you.'” Carlos said that he’d expected to see fear in Norman’s eyes, but he didn’t. “‘I saw love,” he said.

On the way to the podium, Norman spotted an American athlete wearing an Olympic Project for Human Rights pin (Carlos and Smith co-founded the organization to protest racism in sports and in general) and asked to borrow it. He wore it on his lapel during the medal ceremony.

All three athletes faced swift backlash. Like Kaepernick, the African-American athletes received death threats. Both were kicked out of the Olympics and sent home, where they had trouble finding work. Eventually, though, both created fulfilling careers: Smith as a track coach and sociology professor at Oberlin College, and Carlos as a high school track coach, sportswear brand consultant and organizer for the 1984 Olympics committee. Both were inducted into the National Track & Field Hall of Fame. But Norman’s career never recovered. Even though he qualified multiple times for the 1972 Olympics in Munich, the Australian Olympic Committee wouldn’t allow him on the team. Even though his national record in the 200 meters is still standing (a record! set in 1968! is still standing!), his name was kept out of books about the greatest Australian athletes or greatest moments in Australian sports. He was invited to the 2000 Olympics in Sydney as a guest not of the Australian Olympic Foundation, but of the US Track & Field Federation. The AOC didn’t acknowledge him at all. Norman struggled with depression and addiction and died in 2006 at the age of 64. The US Track & Field Federation named the day of his funeral Peter Norman Day; Australian sporting authorities called it nothing.

But finally, six years after his death, Norman received a unanimous apology from Australian Parliament. The apology said that Parliament:

(1) recognises the extraordinary athletic achievements of the late Peter Norman, who won the silver medal in the 200 metres sprint running event at the 1968 Mexico City Olympics, in a time of 20.06 seconds, which still stands as the Australian record;

(2) acknowledges the bravery of Peter Norman in donning an Olympic Project for Human Rights badge on the podium, in solidarity with African-American athletes Tommie Smith and John Carlos, who gave the ‘black power’ salute;

(3) apologises to Peter Norman for the treatment he received upon his return to Australia, and the failure to fully recognise his inspirational role before his untimely death in 2006; and

(4) belatedly recognises the powerful role that Peter Norman played in furthering racial equality.

This apology is good in its level of detail. It’s better if you don’t know that point #3 originally apologized explicitly “for the wrong done by Australia in failing to send [Norman] to the 1972 Munich Olympics, despite repeatedly qualifying.” The apology became less specific, presumably as a sop to the Australian Olympic Committee. In 2018, the committee awarded Norman an “Order of Merit,” but it wasn’t accompanied by an apology. But as for the Australian government, not bad. (Kudos especially to MP Andrew Leigh, who spearheaded the drive for a national apology.) The bar for sports apologies, honestly, is pretty low.

But Smith and Carlos never forgot that Norman stood with them. Both men served as pallbearers at Norman’s funeral in 2006. Smith said in his eulogy that Norman was “a man who believed right could never be wrong” and told Norman’s family that their loved one’s “legacy is a rock. Stand on that rock.” Carlos spoke too, urging Australia: “Go and tell your kids the story of Peter Norman.”

The bicep-enabled young man with the microphone is Charlie, son of Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Brad Hall, a walk-on player at Northwestern. He is amusing. But let us take this opportunity to note that his teammate Nathan Taphorn’s unsolicited apology for failing to pass him the ball (Hall did grab the rebound, so no harm done) is good. Taphorn is right: Apologies don’t “make it OK” when you’ve done a bad thing, but they are “the right thing to do.”

SorryWatch is still in recovery from Lance Armstrong‘s and Ray Rice‘s godawful apologies. However, at the urging of a longtime baseball fan and blogger who was not authorized to speak on the record, SorryWatch agreed to wade into the Houston Astros mess. A mess of the team’s own making. A mess that doubled and tripled like a wad of fermenting dough, thanks to executives’ decision to lie and obfuscate about it. When their lies were called out, they opted not to apologize; instead, they chose to up the awfulness with a sprinkling of shitty apologies like poppy seeds except mouse turds and the bakery should be shut down by the Department of Health. Snarly does not know why she is suddenly mired in a bread metaphor. Maybe because The Great British Bake Show is a balm in these troubled times.

The story, as told by badass Sports Illustrated reporter Stephanie Apstein: After winning the pennant, the Astros were partying in their locker room when Assistant General Manager Brandon Taubman spotted three female reporters, one of whom was wearing a purple bracelet for Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Taubman began to scream at them, “Thank God we got Osuna! I’m so fucking glad we got Osuna!”

An odd cheer, given that pitcher Roberto Osuna “had been, by Baseball Reference’s calculations and any intelligent observer’s assessment,” as Apstein pointed out, “the least valuable Astro that night.” Osuna had just allowed a two-run homer at the top of the ninth inning that tied the game. By these metrics, Snarly could have been the most valuable Astro that night, and she is a middle-aged woman in New York City.

The backstory, which (again) Apstein provides (again, read her story here): The Astros had acquired Osuna from the Blue Jays toward the end of the pitcher’s 75-game suspension. He’d been charged with assaulting the mother of his three-year-old. She refused to return to Canada from Mexico to testify against him, so prosecutors ultimately dropped the charges, and Osuna merely had to agree to counseling and to stay away from the woman in question. For the Astros, the price for Osuna was right, since few teams wanted the PR hit of hiring this dude. Many Astros’ fans, as well as anti-domestic-violence advocates, were dismayed.

But why did Taubman start howling about Osuna to three female reporters, anyway? “None of those women were talking to him,” Apstein said. “They weren’t even talking about Osuna. Taubman brought him up.”

When Apstein asked the Astros’ PR office if she could interview Taubman about what, precisely, he meant with his banshee-like shrieking, they refused to make him available. They also told Apstein not to write about what happened. She did anyway. The Astros then issued a statement:

It was a fearsome minor league matchup, a doubleheader pitting the El Paso Chihuahuas against the home team, the mighty mighty Fresno Grizzlies.

The Chihuahuas team name was selected in a contest, and we think it’s better that the name Aardvarks did not win. Aardvarks aren’t American. We’ll get to the history of the Grizzlies’ team name later.

In the first game, the Chihuahuas shouldered the Grizzlies aside, winning 3 to 2. Time for between-game entertainment! There may have been music. There may have been a marching band. There may have been a dancing taco. (We’ll get to that later.) We don’t know, because all anyone can talk about is the video that was played.

This video had been posted on YouTube a few days earlier, titled “Reagan – Memorial Day Tribute – We are Americans.” Three and a half minutes long, it features Ronald Reagan’s voice, some music that a YouTube commenter said “was lifted from Fantasy Flight Games’ Road to Legend app”, and some reasonably well-edited still images that have been given Ken-Burnsian slow pans and zooms.

For three minutes, it’s inoffensive, though some of the choices seem odd.

Reagan gasses on about prosperity, the dignity of the individual, and the price of freedom. Then he turns to “the enemies of freedom.” He doesn’t get more specific than “those who practice terrorism and prey upon their neighbors.” He warns “those who are potential adversaries” that although “peace is the highest aspiration of the American people,” and we will “negotiate for it, sacrifice for it – We will NOT surrender for it, now or ever.” Fine.

But the images around the words “potential adversaries” are not ones Reagan could have approved. We see a masked protester with a watch cap labeled ANTIFA. Then Kim Jong-Un. Then, right with the words “potential adversaries,” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), representative of New York’s 14th congressional district. Then Fidel Castro. Then some protesters with anarchy symbols, carrying signs the most prominent of which says “NO TRUMP NO KKK NO FASCIST USA.” Then some Antifa marchers.

Then some shots of Reagan at different ages and thank goodness the thing is over. It’s a muddled and vicious choice of “enemies”/ “potential adversaries.” Can we just note that Fidel Castro is dead? So not potentially an adversary, unless y’all know something about the afterlife we don’t. Kim Jong-Un is alive, but the current president claims to be in love with him.

Antifa and anarchist protesters are not terrorists, but citizens exercising freedom of speech. It’s worth noting that in the earlier war scenes there was nothing that identified who we were fighting against – no swastikas, no mention of fascism or Nazism. That means the only mention of fascism in the video is the anarchist’s sign that says “NO FASCIST USA.” If our “potential enemies” are against fascism, does that mean the video supports it?

The worst of it all is the image of AOC, a democratically elected representative. How is she a “potential enemy”? Because she’s a prominent member of the Democratic party, apparently. Maybe because she’s a woman. (And photogenic.)

So this is a piece of dull patriotism that suddenly morphs into confused, politically twisted, ugly partisan bile. Not the kind of thing that the public expects to be subjected to between games.

People were outraged. Some took it to social media. The Fresno Grizzlies hurried to calm things down. “We are aware of the problem with the Memorial Day tribute video shown in the ballpark between games of Monday’s double-header,” they began.

A pre-produced video from outside our front office was selected; unfortunately what was supposed to be a moving tribute ended with some misleading and offensive editing, which made a statement that was not our intent and certainly not our opinion.

We apologize to our fans and to our community for the error and for not properly vetting the video. We also apologize to those who have served and are currently serving our country for the undue distraction on such a solemn day.

Then:

We’re embarrassed we allowed this video to play without seeing it in its entirety first. We unconditionally apologize to Rep. Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) in addition to our fans, community and those we hurt. It was a mistake and we will ensure that nothing like it ever happens again.

AOC was not happy. “What people don’t (maybe do) realize is when orgs air these hateful messages, my life changes bc of the flood of death threats they inspire,” she tweeted. “I‘ve had mornings where I wake up & the 1st thing I do w/ my coffee is review photos of the men (it’s always men) who want to kill me.”

Some Grizzlies sponsors didn’t want to be associated with this fiasco. Heineken withdrew sponsorship of their brands Tecate and Dos Equis. Sun-Maid Raisins did too, and that has to hurt in the raisin-producing epicenter that is Fresno – why, in Fresno’s illustrious minor league past, going back to 1898, the local team has been the Fresno Suns, the Fresno Giants, the Fresno Sun Sox, the Fresno Cardinals, and the Fresno Raisin Eaters.

After a day or two, the team got more specific:

The Fresno Grizzlies once again apologize for a video shown in our ballpark… What was supposed to be a day to remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice in service to our country was overshadowed by a grievous error for which we are truly sorry. The criticism we have received is deserved.

The video was not produced, created or commissioned by the Fresno Grizzlies. It was carelessly taken from YouTube. There are multiple versions of this video available on the internet, the version that our employee selected contained offensive content. The airing of the video in the ballpark was the result of an unintentional oversight by an employee who did not view the video in its entirety. The employee responsible has been reprimanded by the organization.

We understand the dangers and ramifications of what was shown. We have publicly apologized to Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez. Regardless of your political viewpoint, we believe that all people who dedicate their lives to public service deserve respect.

We fully acknowledge that nothing we say at this point can take back the harm and pain that this has caused. We have implemented new internal protocols to ensure that this never happens again.

Team president Derek Franks told the Fresno Bee that the person who picked the video wasn’t pushing an ideology. They just bungled massively. Franks said another, almost identical, version had been used before. This time the employee watched only two minutes, figured it was the same old same old, and cued it up.

Franks said he wants to rebuild community trust, but thinks it’ll take work. “This isn’t a slap-on-the-wrist-and-let’s-move-on thing.”

SorryWatch wasn’t happy with the first round of apologies. It was mysterious, leaving everyone guessing who, precisely, wanted to send that weird ugly message. It fails our Apology Checklist because it doesn’t explain what is being apologized for. Was it incompetence? Was it sending an ugly partisan message to people who aren’t ugly partisans? Who vetted it? Who did the “misleading and offensive editing”?

So we’re glad of the explanation in the apology Franks gave to the Bee. Though we do think that tweeting is an inadequate ‘public apology’ to AOC, so we hope they also apologized to her privately.

We’re fairly certain the next time the Grizzlies grab a video off YouTube they’ll watch it all the way to the end – no matter how boring it is – before they broadcast it. So as not to be an “undue distraction” on a solemn day.

Which is also a distraction from the important news that the Fresno Grizzlies regularly morph into the Fresno Tacos.

Perhaps for similar reasons, the Chihuahuas regularly become the El Paso Margaritas.

In the second game, by the way, the Chihuahuas tore the Grizzlies to bits, winning 6 to 1.

Thanks to Ron L.

When Dr. Larry Nassar pleaded guilty to first-degree criminal sexual conduct last week in Michigan, he was facing 7 counts. Three of the crimes were against girls under 13, the rest against girls between 13 and 15. Nassar was an osteopathic physician seeing patients – rising gymnasts – through USA Gymnastics, Michigan State University, and the Twistars gymnastics club. He was an Olympics team physician. He regularly and repeatedly molested girls under the guise of treatment.

He’s scheduled to be sentenced in January, and additional victims are to be allowed to speak about the impact of his actions against them. Because there are more who’ve come forward. ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTEEN of them. Even more are speaking up now that it’s all in the open. Some have been encouraged by the attention given to the Harvey Weinstein scandal.

The number of his crimes and the many years during which he got away with it are horrifying. In court, he asked if he could make a statement. The word “sorry” appeared. Would that apology help?

Oh hell no.

Nassar said he was pleading guilty to help the community heal. He seemed to want credit.

I think this is important, what I’ve done today to help move the community forward and away from the hurting, let the healing start….

For all those involved, I’m so horribly sorry that this was like a match that tuned into a forest fire, out of control. And I pray the rosary every day for forgiveness… I want them to heal. I want this community to heal. I have no animosity toward anyone. I just want healing…. We need to move forward in a sense of growth and healing and I pray for that. It’s time.

As one young athlete said afterward, “I do not buy his apology, I don’t accept it, I don’t think it’s real at all.” Another, Rachael Denhollander, said, “He will take every opportunity to shift the attention back onto himself to try to make himself look less evil than he really is.” One athlete’s mother eloquently tweeted “You hold no animosity?!?!? …Fuck You.”

They’re absolutely right. It’s a horrible, horrible apology. Nassar portrays himself as the noble initiator of healing. But he didn’t initiate anything. He didn’t turn himself in. When accused over the years, he denied everything. He has been an agent not of healing, but of great harm, all along. He is not entitled to congratulate himself for “[doing] something important to help.”

It’s also ridiculous to praise himself for having “no animosity” toward people he hurt. Why would he have animosity? Because they told the truth about what he did to them? Does he, can he, imagine them saying ‘I’m so glad Dr. Nassar’s not mad at us!’?

He also wins no points for portraying himself as a helpless forest fire victim. “Out of control”? He had too much control, that’s what let him get away with it. He started the fires himself, day after day, year after year. Decade after decade.

I’m not sure who cares about his prayers. Maybe the organizations who let him get away with these crimes for years – do they care how prayerful he is?

Michigan State University spent years ignoring, brushing off, or quieting complaints about Nassar, according a timeline put together by the Indianapolis Star, which broke this story. A cursory investigation (aka whitewash) in 2014, which cleared Nassar, said he should have a third party present when he examined patients. He didn’t. They never checked. MSU has been keeping the results of their own investigations secret.

USA Gymnastics enabled Nassar until 2015, when an internal investigation caused them to fire him and contact the FBI. Recently, they gave a statement to 60 Minutes, talking about new policies on reporting sexual abuse and on contact between adults and athletes. With a bystander’s-regret type apology:

USA Gymnastics is very sorry that any athlete was harmed by Larry Nassar. Upon first learning of athlete concerns about Nassar in 2015, USA Gymnastics reported him to the FBI and relieved him of any involvement with USA Gymnastics…. Federal and state authorities ultimately charged Nassar with multiple crimes, leading to his incarceration and now his admission of guilt to charges of criminal sexual conduct. We note that affected women contacted by Michigan prosecutors supported resolution by plea, and USA Gymnastics also views Nassar’s guilty plea as an important acknowledgment of his appalling and devious conduct that permits punishment without further victimization of survivors.

They’re very sorry? WE’RE ALL VERY SORRY. What about taking responsibility? There’s none of that in there. Apparently they agree that Nassar’s guilty plea fixes all the things. Nothing to see here!

We hope it’s true about the new policies, and that the new policies exist outside of the manual. The Star investigated four other cases in which USA Gymnastics didn’t act on sexual abuse charges against coaches, all four of whom were later convicted.

Writing in Slate, former gymnast Rebecca Schuman describes how the culture of gymnastics makes girls abandon autonomy over their bodies in order to rise in that intense, competitive sport. Read Schuman. Or read Aly Raisman‘s Fierce to understand the urgent ambition that lets children excel at the same time it leaves them defenseless.

We’re not sure what you could read to understand people who exploit that defenselessness.

Guest post from SorryWatch Senior Tennis Correspondent Wendy Grossman.

One of the most commonly heard complaints of the suspicious tennis fan is this: the draw is fixed. The suspicious tennis fan is delusional, as I established last year. Draws are public. The press is there, also at least one professional player and representatives of other players to watch for foul play. They do whatever they can to dress up these draw ceremonies – draw rituals? – into something vaguely entertaining. One or two tournament representatives make speeches. At London’s Queen’s Club, a formally dressed steward in white gloves asks randomly selected audience members to draw a slip of paper out of a silver bowl; at other events someone hits a button on a computer. But there’s always some fanfare.

This year, the men’s tour (the ATP/Association of Tennis Professionals) opened a new event in Milan, the second-to-last-week-of-the-year “Next Gen” event for the best eight players aged between 18 and 21. The idea was to try to open up the game, which has been dominated by four now-30-somethings for more than a decade, to a new generation of players and fans. Like the tour finals, this is a round robin event in which each member of two four-man groups plays against each other to determine the semifinalists. The “draw,” therefore, consists of determining who goes in which group.

Someone decided to make this more interesting to view. So, yes, an apology will soon be needed.

The Milan organizers opted to have the players publicly discover their groups by choosing among a group of female models, then walking to the end of a runway with the model of his choice, and watching while she provocatively revealed either “A” or “B” from somewhere inside her clothing. One model pulled up her dress to reveal the letter written on her thigh. One required her player, South Korea’s Hyeon Chung, looking intensely uncomfortable, to pull off her long, black glove with his teeth to reveal it. The whole thing is so much horrifyingly worse than it sounds when you see the video.

After universal and widespread condemnation, including among those watching at the scene, the apology:

ATP and [tournament sponsor] Red Bull apologise for the offence caused by the draw ceremony for the Next Gen ATP Finals. The intention was to integrate Milan’s rich heritage as one of the fashion capitals of the world. However, our execution of the proceedings was in poor taste and unacceptable. We deeply regret this and will ensure that there is no repeat of anything like it in the future.

On the Tennis Podcast, Catherine Whitaker pointed out the first thing wrong with that statement: they apologized for the offense, not the thing. I suspect that it’s PR people who try to rob such statements of any detail of what actually happened lest the details reach and anger people who don’t already know. Citing inside sources, the Tennis Podcast‘s David Law suggests the finger of blame should be pointed at new tennis sponsor Red Bull and that neither the Italian Tennis Federation, which organizes the tournament, nor the ATP knew much about the plan.

“In poor taste and unacceptable” is good. Less good is the implication that there might have been some way of “integrating” Milan’s history of fashion that would have been less unacceptable. I doubt that proposition.

Also bad: who are they apologizing to? One reason writers are instructed to avoid the passive voice is that it lacks attribution (see?). The statement implies that the ATP and Red Bull are only apologizing to people they’ve offended. People who weren’t offended – presumably because they don’t know about the event – may still be damaged. Tennis is the pre-eminent sport for aspiring professional female athletes worldwide, and it’s damaging to all of them if the governing body of the male half of the sport thinks it’s a good idea to “sex up” tournaments by giving the opening the look and feel of a seedy strip club.

They could also apologize to the eight young male players for dragging them into a controversy they didn’t create (none of whom have said anything publicly about the incident – though they haven’t posted pictures, either). ATP head Chris Kermode intervened when the players were asked for reactions and said, “They were put in an impossible position” – which only makes things worse. They can’t speak for themselves? Is the ATP trying to protect the players from foot-in-mouth disease, or itself from what they might say?

The ATP has a lengthy book of rules and standards that tournaments have to meet, but past editions have not included the admonition, “Do not present women as sex objects,” just as the late columnist and playwright Jean Kerr omitted to tell her sons not to eat the daisies in the centerpiece on the dining room table.

Now, I guess they will.

(SorryWatch asks: Have they distracted conspiracy theorists from the subject of fixing the draw?)

Fabio Fognini was having a bad moment at the U.S. Open in Flushing Meadows, New York. Actually, 3 bad moments. In the singles, Stefano Travaglia, was beating him. In the process of losing he had 3 temper tantrums.

These were directed at umpire Louise Engzell. Fognini, who is Italian, disputed her decisions by calling Engzell, who is Swedish, “troia” and “bocchinara.”

Engzell knows more Italian than we do. Perhaps from umpiring? Perhaps from umpiring Fognini, who’s well-known for yelling, flinging his racket, etc.? She reported him to the International Tennis Federation, because those words translate to “whore” and “cocksucker.”

Two days later the Federation assessed fines of $4,000, $15,000, and $5,000. One for each hissy fit, SorryWatch guesses. Fognini’s reported response was “Today, they’re all moralists.”

As for the U.S. Open officials, they pondered the matter. Meanwhile Fognini and partner Simone Bolelli played a couple of doubles matches, and won.

After 3 days the officials, who said they had been getting things translated, “provisionally” suspended Fognini, which mean the teams he and Bolelli had beaten in doubles were provisionally reinstated…. Provisional until they decide if Fognini committed a “major offense.” (Hard on Bolelli.)

Rafael Nadal said it was ridiculous that it took 3 days to get a translation. Maybe they don’t know any Italians. And are too proud to ask the International Tennis Federation. And don’t have internet.

In the meantime Fognini had [apologized]. The night after the tempestuous singles match he tweeted:

Vorrei inanzitutto chiedere scusa a voi tifosi, all’arbitro per quanto accaduto oggi. E’ semplicemente stata una giornata molto negativa, ma ciò non perdona il comportamento avuto nel match!!! Nonostante io sia una testa calda (e se pur secondo me avendo avuto ragione nel più delle circostanze…) HO SBAGLIATO. Che poi alla fin dei conti e’ sola una partita di tennis. Fogna

Or:

I would first apologize to you fans, [and] the referee about what happened today. It’s just been a very bad day, but this does not forgive the behavior in the match!!! Although I’m a hothead (and though in my opinion having been right in most circumstances …) I MADE A MISTAKE. Then at the end of the day it’s only a game of tennis.

Even given leeway for translation issues (and we ran this through several translation programs to be fair), this is a bad apology. If the “bad day” doesn’t excuse his behavior, then it doesn’t belong in the apology. It should be “my behavior,” not “the behavior.” The claim that he’s usually right when he ‘hotheadedly’ disputes calls also does not belong in an apology. (Also we are skeptical about that claim.)

Does “it’s only a game of tennis” mean he should be forgiven for cursing out umpires? No. I doubt he was thinking “only a game” 2 days later when he was fined, or 3 days later when he was suspended.

Later he uttered another apology on Italian Sky TV:

I apologize to everyone, not only the chair umpire, to whom I already apologized in New York, but to everyone who felt offended – women above all.

Being described as sexist hurt me, because it’s not true.

I understand the gravity of my gesture and I know I did something seriously wrong. I’m prepared to enter a tennis school, or any school, and speak to the kids and say what I think – which is that I made a mistake and it won’t happen again.

It’s my limit, I realize it and I’m working on it with a mental trainer. We were doing pretty well lately and then comes this outburst, which can’t be explained.

Still terrible. ‘I ALREADY APOLOGIZED. It hurts that people think I’m sexist, just because I curse women with sexist insults. I’m not afraid to go to schools and tell children I’m not sexist!

But SorryWatch thinks well of the last paragraph, where he describes working on his temper with a trainer. That sounds more like taking it seriously.

Thanks to Sean P. for pointing this one out.

 

By the end of this horrible, un-yogic apology you will be lying in savasana on your floor. (See what I did there.)

THE BACKSTORY:

Earlier this week, in a 20,000-member closed Facebook group for yoga teachers, a fat yoga teacher (I use the word “fat” as a descriptor, with no value judgment) posted this: 

What is svadhyaya, you may ask? Yoga Journal defines it as “self-reflection.” Yoga is mental as well as physical; svadhyaya helps us see our true selves. “If we are willing to look at behaviors, motivations, and strategies we habitually use to maintain our own self-image, we can use svadhyaya to pierce through the veil that this self-image creates and into the nature of our own essential being,” the magazine writes. “Svadhyaya suggests that we can use all of our activities—solitary and relational—as mirrors in which to discover something important about ourselves and that we can use what we discover as valuable information in the process of arriving at a deeper self-understanding. Finally, the ultimate purpose of svadhyaya is to function as a mirror reminding us of our higher potential—in other words, as a way into the interior where our true Self resides.”

That sounds very elevated! Alas, while many teachers liked the post, many others felt that it was not worded nicely! The tone was too aggressive! One respondent declared, “90% of the people here are offended by your post.” The original poster (henceforth to be known as OP) replied calmly, 

WELP. That set our 90-percenter off. Behold. THE “APOLOGY”

Randy posted the following on his own FB page, not in the group. He has not apologized to the OP, unless she somehow missed his emails and DMs while she was off imbuing a four-state area with her vaginal fragrance.

THE OP’s RESPONSE (as told to Snarly in a telephone interview):

“That’s not an apology; that’s a blame-pology. He blames me for his complete loss of control. I just thought, ‘Oh, honey, no — you picked the wrong bitch.’ This kind of fat-shaming happens all the time. The way the social contract works is that if you’re a person in a larger body, you’re not supposed to make a fuss; you’re not supposed to make anyone uncomfortable about their fat-phobia; you’re never supposed to be angry…because you’re supposed to be ashamed. And that’s a script I’m not willing to engage in anymore.”

THE ANALYSIS OF APOLOGY SUCKAGE:

1. “inconsiderate of how other people may feel”: Minimize much, Randy? People “may feel” bad to be told they have a smelly cunt? The word “may” does not belong in your apology. You DID offend.
2. Second paragraph: Good apology words, except “weighs very heavy on my heart.” Not about you, fella. And if it actually did weigh heavy on your heart, you’d apologize to the woman you suggested had stopped engaging with you because she’d died from choking on food.
3. Third paragraph: OFF THE RAILS AGAIN! Telling someone they offended “90 percent of the people” in a group is not “friendly.” The “insulting rebuttals” were a mere, mild request to examine your fury and word choices. Other people in the group noted that what you said was horrifying; she did not.
4. WHAT THE FUCK WITH THE FRUIT METAPHOR, RANDY. It took a few tries for me to understand your “colorful, humorous, and fruitful” analogy, but it seems you are saying that the strawberry is “soooo offended” by other fruit because other fruit have internal rather than external seeds, and strawberries demand more attention even though they are only five feet of them in a whole orchard. I cannot believe I’m about to analyze a metaphor this shitty, but here goes: If strawberries are fat people and other fruits are “normal” people, strawberries who are upset that their internal seeds are not respected is NOT THE SAME as fat people who are upset that they are not welcome or accommodated in yoga classes. Your metaphor sucks because ALL FRUIT HAVE SEEDS. Not all people are welcome in yoga classes. Inside vs outside seeds is a visual difference; fat people are not just visually different — they have different exercise needs. Other fruit — I mean, yoga teachers, DAMMIT RANDY — have to be aware of how to adapt poses for students with big boobs or bellies. Back in the day when I practiced Iyengar yoga, the instructor was open to practitioners with specific concerns about knees or hips, carpal tunnel issues, poor balance, old age. The classes were still hard as hell (Iyengar is about strength and proper form and holding poses until you freeze like a lava-covered dog in Pompeii) but they were not dismissive of physical difference. And Randy? Are ALL THE OTHER FRUIT the same fruit? Are you aware that in reality fruit come in different colors and shapes and ripening schedules and some are hard to grow and some are not, and MAYBE EACH KIND OF FRUIT TAKES UP ONLY FIVE FEET IN THE METAPHOR ORCHARD BUT THEY ARE ALL DELICIOUS AND DESERVE RESPECT AND TOGETHER THESE FIVE-FOOT PLOTS MAKE UP THE WHOLE GARDEN? Unless you’re saying aaaalllll the other fruit are thin, white and able-bodied, like…DAMMIT WHAT THE HELL IS A THIN WHITE FRUIT? (If anyone in the comments makes a David Bowie joke you are permanently banned.) FUCK IT LET’S PRETEND WHITE ASPARAGUS ARE A FRUIT AND SAY IF YOU’RE ONLY CHOOSING TO PLANT, EAT AND TEACH WHITE ASPARAGUS YOU ARE MAKING YOUR CULINARY WORLD TOO DAMN SMALL.
5. The original poster did not “insult” or “attack” you. Other people were horrified by what you said and responded accordingly, but you seem to understand that the woman you spewed misogyny and sizeism at deserves an apology. You did call your words to her “disgusting,” “offensive” and “rude.” And yet you haven’t apologized to her. You’ve only contributed this performative fruit-centric post.
6. “the whole an eye for an eye thing” — really? You see equivalence here?
7. “we all still have a great bit of learning and growing to do” — nope. “All?” Again with the equivalency. A good apology is about what you did. Not other people. Only you.
8. “I have struggled with bullies my whole life”: TINY VIOLIN, NOT RELEVANT.
9. “any hurt I may have created”: No may, bud. You did.

THE REACTION (+ A SUGGESTION FROM THE SORRYWATCHERS):

Many teachers defended Randy. He apologized! What do the haters want, a pound of flesh? It’s not yogic to be so angry! Move on! Some folks who knew him noted that he loves and worries about fat people in his life. They noted that he and his girlfriend have a small baby and he is probably tired. You know what? From an apology perspective, BIG WHOOP. A good apology names the sin instead of alluding vaguely to it, takes responsibility, makes no excuses, explains how and why the behavior won’t recur.  It might sound something like this:

“I am so sorry. I’m sorry to OP and to everyone who witnessed the horrible, misogynistic, fat-phobic things I said here yesterday. I called OP unforgiveable names. I said I could smell her cunt four states away. I said I suspected she was refusing to engage with me because she’d choked to death on her third breakfast. I said a lot more. There are no excuses. It’s ironic, perhaps, that what set me off was OP’s call for svadhyaya; svadhyaya is precisely what I failed to engage in. I can’t apologize enough to all of you…and [girlfriend], I am so sorry about what I did to you. You gave me the gift of letting me teach in your studio, and I betrayed you with my despicable name-calling. I realize that my behavior puts your business and good name at risk. I promise I will not teach at your studio — or anywhere else — until I’ve done a lot of soul-searching, as OP originally recommended. I’m going to watch the videos she mentioned. I’m going to read books about bias in the health-care, diet and fitness industries. I welcome everyone’s suggestions of sources. And I know this isn’t enough. The fact that so many of you rushed to forgive me, and lashed out at her for expressing a valid point of view that was actually proved by what ensued here, means you should be engaging in svadhyaya too. But this is about me, not you. OP, I’m sorry. If there’s something else I should be doing to try to make things right, please DM me or take me to task here, publicly.

THE AFTERMATH: 

For a few hours, the studio where Randy taught — which is co-owned and run by the person whose name I covered in Randy’s post, who is also his girlfriend — took down its page. Then Randy took down or hid his personal page, on which he’d shared that gross apology (and where he’d deleted all critical comments, leaving only those calling him a prince among men). The studio’s page returned, with this post:

The owner of the studio, Randy’s girlfriend, also reached out the OP directly. To apologize. Her words were lovely and a bit heartbreaking (because why was she apologizing for her partner’s bad behavior?) and showed that she actually is clueful about fat bias and what yoga can and should be. Unlike OP, though (who is a friend of a friend of a friend), she did not give me permission to share. (I have no compunction about sharing Randy’s social media bullshit because we spotlight good and bad apologies here, and in fact we DESPERATELY SEEK GOOD ONES, should you hear of any, and we would have loved to applaud Randy for apologizing well, and the fact that he denied us this pleasure is ON HIM.)

Suffice it to say that by insuring that her boyfriend will not teach at her studio, and contacting OP with truly lovely expressions of sorrow and thoughtfulness, girlfriend has gone above and beyond. Her studio shouldn’t be penalized for her boyfriend’s behavior, and she should know that a lot of people see her as a good person in a bad situation.

Svadhyaya for everyone, please.

 

 

SaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSaveSaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

You may recall our dismay at one of the worst media “apologies” of the last year — The Daily Beast’s half-assed, defensive, self-aggrandizing responses to criticism of Nico Hines’s “story” about pretending to be gay to pick up Olympic athletes on Grindr during the 2016 Summer Games. Hines offered enough teasing detail about the athletes — some of whom came from countries where homosexuality is a crime, not all of whom were out of the closet — to make them identifiable. The Daily Beast defended the story long past defensibility — oh wait, it was never defensible — then apologized shittily.

Read a recap of the offense and the almost-as-offensive rejoinder(s) from the Beast here.

Nico never apologized. The Daily Beast ran no stories by him after the horrid gay-athlete-entrapment piece, but it also never announced that he had quit or was fired.

But now, Nico apparently “returns full-time” to the Daily Beast! (So he un-joined? partly? voluntarily? was there any penalty? was there conscious uncoupling? WHO CAN SAY?? ) The forever-together-and-never-apart-together-forever-we-two announcement comes in an editor’s note after a piece — published seven long, apology-free months after Nico’s entrapment piece ran/was pulled —  called “What I’ve Learned” (under the wee red words: “AN APOLOGY”)! By Nico!

I do not want The Daily Beast to get clicks for this mishegas, so I shall give you a screen shot of the apology and the note. Then we shall discuss why this apology and editor’s note still blow chunks EVEN AFTER WE GAVE THESE SCHMUCKS THE TEMPLATE FOR AN APOLOGY AND HELD UP ANOTHER MEDIA SITE AS A GOOD EXAMPLE FOR THEM AND ALSO POINTED OUT WHY THE APOLOGY OF A SMALL BOY WHO THREATENED A FRIEND WITH A BOOGER WAS BETTER THAN ANY OF THEIR APOLOGIES GOOD GOD DAILY BEAST HOW MUCH MORE CAN WE DO FOR YOU??????

OK, Nico. In the first graf you say “should not have been conceived, written or published.” You are using passive voice (NO) and attempting to spread the blame around (ALSO NO). You did not publish the piece; your employer did. You wrote it. Say that. Apologize for that. Do not airily hand-wave at all the things that should not have happened. Battlefield Earth should not have happened. Olestra potato chips should not have happened. Your story was not a thing that happened. It was a THING YOU WROTE.

Wait, your second graf also starts with passive voice! Is this your signature move, Nico? Nowhere in this paragraph do you say I DID A SPECIFIC THING. You say there is a thing that should be talked about but not a thing that should be talked about without consent. You say what the article did. YOU DO NOT SAY WHAT YOU DID.

You need to acknowledge that you put human lives at risk. You coyly and sniggeringly wrote a story, deliberately dropping hints about innocent people’s identities, that could have caused irreparable harm to their families, that could have gotten these athletes fired or even killed. You might want to MENTION THIS in your apology. Just a thought.

And what is this fakakta business about “As I wrote about the dating lives of Olympians, gay and straight, men and women”? WUT. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AN ARTICLE IN WHICH YOU A STRAIGHT DUDE PRETENDED TO BE GAY AND LURED GAY DUDES INTO HOOKUPS. (You didn’t actually follow through, but YOU LIED AND MANIPULATED AND USED HUMAN LIVES AS FODDER FOR YOUR WRITERLY DUMBASSERY.) Did you write articles about straight people and women? I DUNNO BUT WHO CARES, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THIS APOLOGY! What you owe us, the athletes, and the world is an apology for GAYBAITING AND HOMOPHOBIA. Read the tweets from gay Tongan athlete Amini Fonua, who comes from a country where it is illegal to be gay, whose friends you outed, who kept trying to make you and the Daily Beast see the light when neither of you would acknowledge how horrifying your behavior was.

Oh, and bunny? It doesn’t matter what “some viewers” felt. What matters is WHAT YOU DID. Apologize to us all. FOR WHAT YOU DID. Not what we might or might not feel.

And did you apologize individually and personally to the athletes whose lives you shattered? Hmm? I’m gonna bet that’s a no.

FINALLY, do I really have to point out that the problem is not “the difference between logging on to Tinder and logging on to Grindr”? First of all, that phrase needs an “I.” Second of all, “logging on” (by whom?) was never the problem. Deception, manipulation, homophobia, and glee at your own “I’m so baaaad!” naughtiness were the problem. Yours, you disingenuous weasel. USE A FUCKING FIRST PERSON PRONOUN, YOU FUCKING FUCK. And again, shut up about “any dating app”! NOT RELEVANT!

And now the editor’s note:

You did not “regrettably” publish, then remove. You published, defended, touted your own awesome ally status to the LGBT community, droned on about your noble journalism, re-edited the piece at least twice, THEN took it down. (In most cases, SorryWatch advises leaving up stories that require apologies, along with the appended editor’s note, so that everyone can see precisely what the apology is for, and learn. In this case, though, it was essential that the story, which had no news value and could only cause harm, come down. Which is irksomely convenient for the history-erasing Daily Beast and Nico, but still.)

Moving on. Beastikins, “regrettably” is not the same thing as “we regret.” (“Regrettably,” orange circus peanuts exist. “We regret” eating them.) (“Regrettably,” Nico’s outing story saw the light of day. “We regret” publishing it…except that you must not, since you do not say so.) Furthermore, “we regret” is not the same thing as “we’re sorry.” It’s not as good. Regret is about YOU. Apology is about acknowledging the impact of what you did on other people. And once again, you do not actually apologize. Just like last time, you pull the ol’ “we will continue to stand up to bullies and bigots” horn-blowing, touting your values and your noble independent journalism.

But.

YOU ARE NOT HEROES. YOU GET NO COOKIES. You cannot call yourself “a proud and supportive voice for the LGBTQ community” IN YOUR (NON)APOLOGY FOR A HOMOPHOBIC STORY. Disconnect much? The word “proud” does NOT BELONG IN THIS EDITOR’S NOTE. Do not conclude this anthem to your own nobility by telling us you will “continue to” (!!!) be awesome in an editor’s note that purportedly makes clear that you HAVE NOT BEEN AWESOME.

You do not tell us what you’ve learned. You do not tell us what safeguards you’ve put in place to make sure something like this doesn’t happen again. You offer no explanation for how this story ran in the first place. You do not acknowledge that you initially defended this vomit-puddle of a story. You tell us that you and Nico have internally reflected so we should just trust you. Oh, OK! And then you DARE invoke “our current national climate” when that climate has been caused by someone else offering no specifics, trumpeting his own greatness, and telling the public “just trust me.”