Thomas asked cheerleaders to flirt with refs
 

Report: Woman claims Thomas asked cheerleader to flirt with refs

Assocaited Press

<!-- end story header --><!-- begin left column --> <!-- begin page tools --> Updated: June 30, 2007, 11:47 AM

<!-- end page tools --><!-- begin story body --> <!-- template inline -->NEW YORK -- The former New York Knicks executive who is suing coach Isiah Thomas for sexual harassment alleged in court papers that Thomas urged a cheerleader to flirt with referees and guard Stephon Marbury cursed at her, according to newspaper reports Saturday.

Anucha Browne Sanders, a former senior vice president of marketing and business operations, filed documents to answer the Knicks' attempt to have her lawsuit dismissed.

In the papers, which were unsealed Friday, Browne Sanders alleges cheerleader Petra Pope told her Thomas encouraged Pope to flirt with officials before a game against the Nets in 2004, the Daily News reported.

"What she told me was that Isiah asked her to go into the referees' locker room and make them happy," Browne Sanders testified.

Sanders said Marbury directed an obscenity at her after she complained about the player's cousin -- who was also employed by the team -- had made graphic sexual comments to her staff.

Marbury, in a January deposition, acknowledged calling Browne Sanders a derogatory name, according to the New York Post.

Sanders also claimed a member of her staff admitted to consensual drunken sex with Marbury after a night at a "gentlemen's club" and said "she did not believe she could say no because of who Marbury is."

Sanders said her decision to inform officials about the encounter led to her being fired, according to the New York Post.

Thomas and Madison Square Garden are listed as the defendants in the lawsuit, which charges them with sex discrimination and retaliation. Marbury is not a defendant in the lawsuit.

Browne Sanders filed the lawsuit last year, claiming she was fired "for telling the truth" while going through internal channels to stop the harassment. She has accused Thomas of telling her he was "very attracted" to her and "in love" with her and tried to kiss her.

The 44-year-old former Northwestern basketball star is seeking reinstatement to her job and unspecified damages.

Madison Square Garden said she was fired because she "failed to fulfill professional responsibilities." MSG said in a statement Saturday that the lawsuit was "riddled with fabrications."

In seeking a dismissal of the lawsuit, Thomas said Browne Sanders brought the action to harm him and secure a financial payout from him and Madison Square Garden.

This seems highly suspect. Having the cheerleaders bat their eyes at the refs out on the court - maybe. Cheerleaders having access to the refs' locker room? Doubtful.

Knock, knock, knock. If you do that, usually the person on the other side will open the door. ;)

I've heard that access to the NBA officials' locker room is heavily restricted. NO VISITORS is posted on the door.

I doubt that such a comment, if made, was serious.

Report: Woman claims Thomas asked cheerleader to flirt with refs

Do you think this would work in the WNBA? ;)

No. But not for the reasons that you probably intended.

Are you lawyer or a publicist for Isiah?

Actually, a good number of WNBA refs are men. (Including one from my local board - he'd be pretty pissed if he knew you assumed he was a woman!)

The whole behind the scenes area is under serious security. We had some HS games in coordination with the local NBDL team. They follow NBA security policies to the letter and it was very, very strict.

Obviously not. My point is that since Isaiah has been a player, coach and executive in the NBA, he is well aware that cheerleaders would not be allowed access to the officials' dressing area. Therefore, if the comment was indeed made, it was made with the knowledge that the cheerleader could not carry it out.

Why is that obvious?

I can't see how your point lets you conclude that the comment was not made or if it was it was just an innocent joke. Unless of course you're a lawyer or publicist for Isaiah.

I concluded neither of those things. I said merely:

It seems more likely to me, given that Isaiah undoubtedly knows the extremely low possibility of a cheerleader gaining access to the officials' locker room and then "making them happy", that he did not make such a suggestion with the intent that it be carried out.

I said

You responded by saying

IOW you concluded it was not an innocent joke and he probably did say it.

You elaborated further
So in your opinion a high ranking executive of a multi-billion dollar corporation told a low level female emplyeee to go flirt with someone even though he knew it would be impossible and he was serious about it (ie not joking).

Yeah, good thing you're not his lawyer after all.

From the above sentence, I conclude that your skills of deduction need some fine tuning. The fact that I do not conclude something does NOT entail that I conclude the opposite. What I said, and still believe, is that if the comment was made, I doubt that it was intended to be taken seriously.

(1) I think this possible. But it's also possible that the story is completely fabricated by a disgruntled employee. I have no idea which is true.

(2) If the statement was made, I doubt that it was meant to be taken seriously.

That's what I've been saying all along. I'm not sure why you're trying so hard to give me a hard time about it.

OK, so educate me.

Where did I say you conclude the opposite?

All I did was point out based on what you wrote that you reject both of the possible conclusions I offered. I merely eliminated those 2 from the potentially limitless list of what you could have possibly been thinking.

How does my eliminating those mere 2 out of the many possibilities entail that you actually conclude only the opposite of those 2 guesses?

Because you're using an completely independant and irrelevant fact (pre-game security is high) to defend Isaiah's stupid behavior. I believe he did tell that cheerleader to go flirt with the referees. I don't think he cared one bit about how possible or impossible that might have been to accomplish. I believe he actually thought he could have gotten at least some tiny benefit out of it and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say that at best he was half-serious. To me, he came just short of jokingly telling the cheerleader to promise to f@ck the officials after the game because it might help him win. And you're defending that. Oh well...

Of course, given what you and I both know about the case my opinion is as good as yours...or maybe there's some other little known skill of deduction you can help me understand...