Does Becky hate America or like playing basketball for money?
(This is my headline from the column I’m talking about in this post… because that’s what they really wanted to write, it’s just too long).
I wanted to show off this column because it touches on a different aspect of the Becky Hammon-Olympics fiasco. Are people really seeing this Russia as the old-school Soviet Union? Is that what’s driving this controversy?
For me, the main question I thought had arisen was simply having Becky play for another country. Why wasn’t there this much of an uproar over minor league baseball players with some small sliver of ancestry playing in the last Olympics and/or World Baseball Classic?
It’s hypocritical… and while yes, the spirit of the Olympics with professionals being bought for their services is being eliminated, it wasn’t Becky who sold the country out.
What are your thoughts? Leave a comment and let us know.
Some column highlights from Newsday.
Hammon has no Russian ancestry and had never been to the country before singing a contract to play professionally there. Yet, under Russian rules, a player who has not played for another country internationally can become a naturalized citizen and then play for the Olympic team.
And that’s what Hammon, the MVP of last year’s WNBA season, decided to do after she was not one of the first 23 players invited to contend for spots on the U.S. team. She decided she was going to go where she was wanted.
“I didn’t say no to USA Basketball,” Hammon recently told the Houston Chronicle. “The option for me to play for USA Basketball really wasn’t an option. … I don’t think people would be as upset if I was playing for Switzerland. God loves Russia just as much as God loves America.”
Again, let us know.
Tags: 2008-Olympics, becky-hammon, beijing olympics, FIBA, Olympics, WNBA, wnba-basketball, womens-basketball
3 opinions for Does Becky hate America or like playing basketball for money?
Lisa Bohm
Jun 14, 2008 at 9:45 pm
When Becky first decided to become a Russian Citizen to play basketball (the boys who played baseball for other teams did not have this little detail hanging over their heads), I must confess that it freaked me out a little bit. I’m a middle-aged woman who grew up as a kid with the Civil Defense bomb shelters all over my town. But why would this decision affect me or have any affect on me? It shouldn’t, and I didn’t let it.
What really bothers me about this whole thing is, why didn’t Ann Donovan and the U.S. Team put her on the first list of candidates for the team? Are they playing favorites, perhaps? I think so. And for those who think she did it for the money, well - think again. Becky’s motivation was solely for the opportunity to play basketball in the grandest stage that it can be played in. It should be as a member of the U.S. Team, but no one gave her that opportunity. I really feel that the late invite by Donovan and Co. was just another attempt to throw darts at Becky and to make her appear to be a traitor.
Okay - when it comes down to patriotism. Becky is probably one who can line up to represent U.S. Patriotism, probably moreso than I can. While it would not have been my choice to do so, I fully support Becky in her quest for an Olympic medal. The issue of money is a joke. If women were earning the same salaries as men, then it would be easy to perhaps examine whether or not money was an issue. Becky could be easily making more money in a different job (NCAA coach?), but she loves playing the game. No, the money is not an issue.
To anyone who thinks that Ms. Hammon is a traitor, well then, I’d encorage you to take a look at Ann Donovan and her inability to make a true list of deserving candidates for the team. The mere fact that Hammon was not offered a tryout on the first go-round as one of the most talented players in the WNBA points at personal opinion and bias rather than taking players based on her merit. And that’s a terrible shame!
dan
Jun 15, 2008 at 8:45 am
The Olympics is a political event, even though the sports people like to pretend, when it’s to their benefit to do so, that it isn’t. Ms. Hammon’s decision to play for Russia and likely against the US is in the finest tradition of capitalism. For Ms. Hammon, the Olympic tradition is not about representing her country but about representing herself. It is difficult to support this decision, but seeing as how the US is not at war with Russia and seeing as how the Soviet Union has fallen and Russia now has a putative form of democracy it seems unfair to label Ms. Hammon as a traitor. But when one thinks of the hockey players who played against the Soviets some decades ago, it is difficult to dismiss the memory. An athlete, like any other citizen ought to have some loyalty to their own country when it comes to international competition. I understand that Ms. Hammon now has dual citizenship. Perhaps she will move to Moscow if her team is victorious in the Olympics? One can only speculate. But there is little to remove the ugliness from this story, the self-aggrandizement of it in particular. The Olympics is about nation states competing with each other so that war and conflict are less likely. Ms. Hammon and her border-hopping colleagues blur the lines and undermine the concept of the Olympic tradition. As an opportunist making a buck for herself, one can only applaud the opportunity that she has created- but as an American it is difficult to find the situation something very much less than appropriate or patriotic. I can only hope that the US team trounces Ms. Hammon and her Russian teammates in the finals. If she is on the winning team, the Russian winning team, there will be no victory celebrations for her here in the US. If she loses, there will be no tears for her loss. This seems a serious mistake of thinking on Ms. Hammon’s part, but only she can decide. Go USA!
Lisa Bohm
Jun 15, 2008 at 7:23 pm
I don’t find anything ugly about it, except that her own country denied her the opportunity to play. And I don’t find the Olympics a political event any longer. Don’t you think that Becky would much rather be playing for team USA? anyone who questions that is, well, biased himself. I will always hope that team USA wins, but I will be happy for Becky should her team come away with gold. I don’t care which team wins. It it two groups of women duking it on the grandest stage there is. The political aspect of the Olympics is no longer an issue as it was 30 years ago. Self Aggrandizement? Please. All she wanted was the opportunity to play. Her own country denied her that opportunity to play. (Ask Ann Donovan why she left Becky off the tryout list. I doubt she’ll have an appropriate answer for you.)
Becky was gutsy to make the decision to play for the Russian team when the opportunity arose. She knew that few in the U.S. would support her decision. And the “ugliness” of it all is that her own country denied her a chance to make our own team.
As a sports enthusiast, I appreciate good play regardless of the team. Back in the old days of history when the tradition of the Olympics started, there was nothing about it that had to do with country, patriotism or loyalty. It was a sporting event pitting athlete against athlete. I think it should stay that way. I cannot and will not subscribe to the idea that we are fighting against some other country with a haugthy air of superiority. It is a sporting event, period.
I pull for underdogs, talent and competition. Not country vs. country. All that does is perpetuate the separation between people. Last I looked, I could stand in Moscow Square and no one would be any the wiser of my U.S. citizenship unless I opened my mouth and they saw that I didn’t speak the language. At the end of the day, I applaud all athletes who give it their all in the Olympic events. Win or lose, there is pride in a job well done.
But remember to ask Ann Donovan why Becky’s name was left off the primary roster of players trying out for the team. Perhaps it was she with the patriotic issue? Probably.
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: