Coaches Fired for Cause

[Farfromgeneva]

People who post here and think they have the right to know about private personnel matters as well as the medical condition of a player (another issue) are mistaken.

I mean, not really a "private personnel matter." The termination of a very successful head coach mere months before a highly-anticipated season (and in the wake of aforementioned scandal swirling around the team) is hardly private.

And I'm not sure I mentioned anything about the medical condition of a player. Is this some hint as to other reasons behind his firing? If so, are you trolling us by being the one to bring it up? ("Medical condition of a player? What medical condition of a player?!?"...lol). I mean, do tell...

But yes, I agree that I have no right to any private information re: the medical conditions of players, and I don't believe I've ever claimed otherwise.

I was clear that the medical condition issue is separate from Ben's situation. That's just another example of a situation that remains private, yet some on this website think they have the right to know about. We'll have to agree to disagree regarding personnel matters. If you just have to know, just phone Ben at Delaware and ask him. I'll refrain from commenting on MD76's usual "War & Peace" post. Let this thread die!

Can't call it private

https://cnycentral.com/news/local/forme ... out-firing

I'm beginning to suspect you are a troll Farfromgeneva. Did you read the article you linked? Ben says this: " "For reasons which still remain unclear to me, after seventeen years as a student-athlete and coach in the Men's Lacrosse program at Cornell University, I will be parting ways with the University and move on to the next chapter in my professional career." So the article fails to confirm the circumstances that precipitated his departure. There is also some speculation in the article which also fails to confirm the circumstances. So it remains private over 10 years later.
Enough said (I hope).

sheesh, the University has a legal obligation to not discuss termination reasons, DeLuca is making a choice not to do so. Believe him or don't believe him, up to the reader.

But the facts of the termination are public.
DeLuca's statement saying he doesn't know the reasons (from at least one perspective casting shade on University) is also public.
The other issue re a hazing incident was/is public, though the details of individuals were quite properly not disclosed by the University.

There very well could be other factors leading to his termination, but I think we can all agree it wasn't the W-L record.

Agreed?

This is evidence it’s not private-1313 is not using any gray matter at all.

[laxfan1313]

People who post here and think they have the right to know about private personnel matters as well as the medical condition of a player (another issue) are mistaken.

I mean, not really a "private personnel matter." The termination of a very successful head coach mere months before a highly-anticipated season (and in the wake of aforementioned scandal swirling around the team) is hardly private.

And I'm not sure I mentioned anything about the medical condition of a player. Is this some hint as to other reasons behind his firing? If so, are you trolling us by being the one to bring it up? ("Medical condition of a player? What medical condition of a player?!?"...lol). I mean, do tell...

But yes, I agree that I have no right to any private information re: the medical conditions of players, and I don't believe I've ever claimed otherwise.

I was clear that the medical condition issue is separate from Ben's situation. That's just another example of a situation that remains private, yet some on this website think they have the right to know about. We'll have to agree to disagree regarding personnel matters. If you just have to know, just phone Ben at Delaware and ask him. I'll refrain from commenting on MD76's usual "War & Peace" post. Let this thread die!

Can't call it private

https://cnycentral.com/news/local/forme ... out-firing

I'm beginning to suspect you are a troll Farfromgeneva. Did you read the article you linked? Ben says this: " "For reasons which still remain unclear to me, after seventeen years as a student-athlete and coach in the Men's Lacrosse program at Cornell University, I will be parting ways with the University and move on to the next chapter in my professional career." So the article fails to confirm the circumstances that precipitated his departure. There is also some speculation in the article which also fails to confirm the circumstances. So it remains private over 10 years later.
Enough said (I hope).

sheesh, the University has a legal obligation to not discuss termination reasons, DeLuca is making a choice not to do so. Believe him or don't believe him, up to the reader.

But the facts of the termination are public.
DeLuca's statement saying he doesn't know the reasons (from at least one perspective casting shade on University) is also public.
The other issue re a hazing incident was/is public, though the details of individuals were quite properly not disclosed by the University.

There very well could be other factors leading to his termination, but I think we can all agree it wasn't the W-L record.

Agreed?

This is evidence it’s not private-1313 is not using any gray matter at all.

Why is it so difficult for you to concede he said he didn't know why his Cornell job ended. You are correct though. It doesn't require any gray matter to understand it.

[Farfromgeneva]

People who post here and think they have the right to know about private personnel matters as well as the medical condition of a player (another issue) are mistaken.

I mean, not really a "private personnel matter." The termination of a very successful head coach mere months before a highly-anticipated season (and in the wake of aforementioned scandal swirling around the team) is hardly private.

And I'm not sure I mentioned anything about the medical condition of a player. Is this some hint as to other reasons behind his firing? If so, are you trolling us by being the one to bring it up? ("Medical condition of a player? What medical condition of a player?!?"...lol). I mean, do tell...

But yes, I agree that I have no right to any private information re: the medical conditions of players, and I don't believe I've ever claimed otherwise.

I was clear that the medical condition issue is separate from Ben's situation. That's just another example of a situation that remains private, yet some on this website think they have the right to know about. We'll have to agree to disagree regarding personnel matters. If you just have to know, just phone Ben at Delaware and ask him. I'll refrain from commenting on MD76's usual "War & Peace" post. Let this thread die!

Can't call it private

https://cnycentral.com/news/local/forme ... out-firing

I'm beginning to suspect you are a troll Farfromgeneva. Did you read the article you linked? Ben says this: " "For reasons which still remain unclear to me, after seventeen years as a student-athlete and coach in the Men's Lacrosse program at Cornell University, I will be parting ways with the University and move on to the next chapter in my professional career." So the article fails to confirm the circumstances that precipitated his departure. There is also some speculation in the article which also fails to confirm the circumstances. So it remains private over 10 years later.
Enough said (I hope).

sheesh, the University has a legal obligation to not discuss termination reasons, DeLuca is making a choice not to do so. Believe him or don't believe him, up to the reader.

But the facts of the termination are public.
DeLuca's statement saying he doesn't know the reasons (from at least one perspective casting shade on University) is also public.
The other issue re a hazing incident was/is public, though the details of individuals were quite properly not disclosed by the University.

There very well could be other factors leading to his termination, but I think we can all agree it wasn't the W-L record.

Agreed?

This is evidence it’s not private-1313 is not using any gray matter at all.

Why is it so difficult for you to concede he said he didn't know why his Cornell job ended. You are correct though. It doesn't require any gray matter to understand it.

What are you talking about? Abounding around. You said it’s private, because eh claims by his interpretation of events to not “know” by which he means “understand” not that he wasn’t informed. Are you kidding? You said it’s a private matter. It’s heck not you clown. I’d argue implicitly when you agree to allow your employer to put out press releases about you that it is no longer private (could get pedantic and argue that any title IV federally funded institution personnel matters aren’t private). But once he put his own out by election and applied an interpretive perspective to the public by choice then it was absolutely NO LONGER PRIVATE. Doesn’t matter what he said in the release. Not…one…but

And he was informed of a why when it happened. Damn you’re full of turd here. He may have a different interpretation of what happened and whether they are justified but he was told why he was fired.

My simple point is this is not a private matter and you are wrong but will bounce around and try to have me follow you like your fishing while calling others a troll because you got off topic real quick which is whether it’s a private matter or not.
If you even bother to respond to anything other than how you deem it to be private still, and if your only evidence is repeating his self released press release publicly stating that he doesn’t know why he was fired I get that and easily dismissed because it’s his interpretation, have fun with those callouses and raw spots.

The idea a fear driven higher ed admin would fire someone without giving a reason is so silly.

[laxfan1313]

People who post here and think they have the right to know about private personnel matters as well as the medical condition of a player (another issue) are mistaken.

I mean, not really a "private personnel matter." The termination of a very successful head coach mere months before a highly-anticipated season (and in the wake of aforementioned scandal swirling around the team) is hardly private.

And I'm not sure I mentioned anything about the medical condition of a player. Is this some hint as to other reasons behind his firing? If so, are you trolling us by being the one to bring it up? ("Medical condition of a player? What medical condition of a player?!?"...lol). I mean, do tell...

But yes, I agree that I have no right to any private information re: the medical conditions of players, and I don't believe I've ever claimed otherwise.

I was clear that the medical condition issue is separate from Ben's situation. That's just another example of a situation that remains private, yet some on this website think they have the right to know about. We'll have to agree to disagree regarding personnel matters. If you just have to know, just phone Ben at Delaware and ask him. I'll refrain from commenting on MD76's usual "War & Peace" post. Let this thread die!

Can't call it private

https://cnycentral.com/news/local/forme ... out-firing

I'm beginning to suspect you are a troll Farfromgeneva. Did you read the article you linked? Ben says this: " "For reasons which still remain unclear to me, after seventeen years as a student-athlete and coach in the Men's Lacrosse program at Cornell University, I will be parting ways with the University and move on to the next chapter in my professional career." So the article fails to confirm the circumstances that precipitated his departure. There is also some speculation in the article which also fails to confirm the circumstances. So it remains private over 10 years later.
Enough said (I hope).

sheesh, the University has a legal obligation to not discuss termination reasons, DeLuca is making a choice not to do so. Believe him or don't believe him, up to the reader.

But the facts of the termination are public.
DeLuca's statement saying he doesn't know the reasons (from at least one perspective casting shade on University) is also public.
The other issue re a hazing incident was/is public, though the details of individuals were quite properly not disclosed by the University.

There very well could be other factors leading to his termination, but I think we can all agree it wasn't the W-L record.

Agreed?

This is evidence it’s not private-1313 is not using any gray matter at all.

Why is it so difficult for you to concede he said he didn't know why his Cornell job ended. You are correct though. It doesn't require any gray matter to understand it.

What are you talking about? Abounding around. You said it’s private, because eh claims by his interpretation of events to not “know” by which he means “understand” not that he wasn’t informed. Are you kidding? You said it’s a private matter. It’s heck not you clown. I’d argue implicitly when you agree to allow your employer to put out press releases about you that it is no longer private (could get pedantic and argue that any title IV federally funded institution personnel matters aren’t private). But once he put his own out by election and applied an interpretive perspective to the public by choice then it was absolutely NO LONGER PRIVATE. Doesn’t matter what he said in the release. Not…one…but

And he was informed of a why when it happened. Damn you’re full of turd here. He may have a different interpretation of what happened and whether they are justified but he was told why he was fired.

My simple point is this is not a private matter and you are wrong but will bounce around and try to have me follow you like your fishing while calling others a troll because you got off topic real quick which is whether it’s a private matter or not.
If you even bother to respond to anything other than how you deem it to be private still, and if your only evidence is repeating his self released press release publicly stating that he doesn’t know why he was fired I get that and easily dismissed because it’s his interpretation, have fun with those callouses and raw spots.

The idea a fear driven higher ed admin would fire someone without giving a reason is so silly.

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

[ICGrad]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

[laxfan1313]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

You are free to be a skeptic. The bottom line is that there is no public knowledge of why Ben was relieved of his duties.

[MDlaxfan76]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

You are free to be a skeptic. The bottom line is that there is no public knowledge of why Ben was relieved of his duties.

This is pedantic, but it is simply not accurate to say "no public knowledge of why". There's quite a bit of public knowledge.

What we do NOT have is an official confirmation from the University of the exact cause or set of causes that led to his dismissal.

The University is bound by HR regulation to publicly only give the dates of employment, his hiring and dismissal facts.

However, there are a whole set of facts that ARE public, his history as a student athlete and coach, the W-L record, various public statements he made about the team at various points in time, this public statement, and the University's prior statements about the hazing incident, the University's prior statements about their hazing policy, the loss of the fall season, various reporting about same...of course, there are details that the University rightly withheld on various topics, and there may well be other matters that contributed to the dismissal other than the hazing incident that have not had public reporting.

There's also been reporting in various other venues and forums about the longstanding practices which we now call hazing, as well as various public statements of support or the opposite.

Lots of public information...but not an official confirmation of an HR matter...again, bound by HR regulation not some desire to be less than transparent as his supporters have frequently insinuated.

If you imagine that he really didn't get directly told the reasoning for his dismissal, ok, that's your prerogative.

I just think it's obvious that it wasn't because of the W-L record. It was quite good, right?

[MDlaxfan76]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

That was a PM

[laxfan1313]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

Based on experiences at Harvard, my view is that he's deeply dishonest and self-serving, to the detriment of others around him including the players and other coaches.

But knows the game and can produce W's when in full command.

When you were a goalie, did you wear a helmet? Now you descend into defamation. After Harvard, he was assistant Coach for Danowski winning a National Championship and was later assistant coach for the USA team in the World Games. If what you say were remotely true, he could never have represented the USA as a coach. After he departed Cornell, a letter supporting him was signed by a large number of those who played for him. One signatory was Rob Pannell. Ask him his opinion. His tenure at Delaware has been blemish free. It now appears your opposition to Ben is personal. Give it up. All the innuendo by third parties including members of the press doesn't prove anything. This whole thread is disgusting and I wish the moderator would delete the whole thing.

[MDlaxfan76]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

But knows the game and can produce W's when in full command.

When you were a goalie, did you wear a helmet? Now you descend into defamation. After Harvard, he was assistant Coach for Danowski winning a National Championship and was later assistant coach for the USA team in the World Games. If what you say were remotely true, he could never have represented the USA as a coach. After he departed Cornell, a letter supporting him was signed by a large number of those who played for him. One signatory was Rob Pannell. Ask him his opinion. His tenure at Delaware has been blemish free. It now appears your opposition to Ben is personal. Give it up. All the innuendo by third parties including members of the press doesn't prove anything. This whole thread is disgusting and I wish the moderator would delete the whole thing.

Sorry, that was intended as a PM.

I deleted it on here, happy to have you do same.

That's my personal opinion based on insights from numerous players and families of players at Harvard and my direct interaction experiences. But inappropriate on here.

I agree that this discussion of individuals is unseemly at best, which is why I suggested discussing more hypothetically...and yet it continued, with you engaging heavily, right?

That said, you are incorrect on at least some of what you wrote.

He was at Duke prior to Harvard, not after. He went to Delaware after his contract was not renewed at Harvard. Excellent move and he's done well.

Yes, many supported him from Cornell, which I mentioned earlier in the various things that are indeed publicly known. That's why I mentioned it. Public. Others did not support him. Also accurate.

I have no knowledge of his tenure at Delaware other than he and is team are objectively winning games at a higher clip and I've not read nor talked to anyone who has said anything negative about his management of that team. I sincerely hope he's learned from prior experiences and is a much better manager of people than prior. People do learn and change.

As to his selection to coach the USA Team, I don't think there are any rules that would be an impediment to any coach who was fired for cause from being appointed to such position. Nor to get hired by Delaware. So, I have no idea why you would think he couldn't have been.

Last, you are clearly not a lawyer. What I've said is true and/or opinion. Opinion is not defamation. Nor are true statements.

You are entirely free to express your own opinions and their rationale.

[Farfromgeneva]

People who post here and think they have the right to know about private personnel matters as well as the medical condition of a player (another issue) are mistaken.

I mean, not really a "private personnel matter." The termination of a very successful head coach mere months before a highly-anticipated season (and in the wake of aforementioned scandal swirling around the team) is hardly private.

And I'm not sure I mentioned anything about the medical condition of a player. Is this some hint as to other reasons behind his firing? If so, are you trolling us by being the one to bring it up? ("Medical condition of a player? What medical condition of a player?!?"...lol). I mean, do tell...

But yes, I agree that I have no right to any private information re: the medical conditions of players, and I don't believe I've ever claimed otherwise.

I was clear that the medical condition issue is separate from Ben's situation. That's just another example of a situation that remains private, yet some on this website think they have the right to know about. We'll have to agree to disagree regarding personnel matters. If you just have to know, just phone Ben at Delaware and ask him. I'll refrain from commenting on MD76's usual "War & Peace" post. Let this thread die!

Can't call it private

https://cnycentral.com/news/local/forme ... out-firing

I'm beginning to suspect you are a troll Farfromgeneva. Did you read the article you linked? Ben says this: " "For reasons which still remain unclear to me, after seventeen years as a student-athlete and coach in the Men's Lacrosse program at Cornell University, I will be parting ways with the University and move on to the next chapter in my professional career." So the article fails to confirm the circumstances that precipitated his departure. There is also some speculation in the article which also fails to confirm the circumstances. So it remains private over 10 years later.
Enough said (I hope).

sheesh, the University has a legal obligation to not discuss termination reasons, DeLuca is making a choice not to do so. Believe him or don't believe him, up to the reader.

But the facts of the termination are public.
DeLuca's statement saying he doesn't know the reasons (from at least one perspective casting shade on University) is also public.
The other issue re a hazing incident was/is public, though the details of individuals were quite properly not disclosed by the University.

There very well could be other factors leading to his termination, but I think we can all agree it wasn't the W-L record.

Agreed?

This is evidence it’s not private-1313 is not using any gray matter at all.

Why is it so difficult for you to concede he said he didn't know why his Cornell job ended. You are correct though. It doesn't require any gray matter to understand it.

What are you talking about? Abounding around. You said it’s private, because eh claims by his interpretation of events to not “know” by which he means “understand” not that he wasn’t informed. Are you kidding? You said it’s a private matter. It’s heck not you clown. I’d argue implicitly when you agree to allow your employer to put out press releases about you that it is no longer private (could get pedantic and argue that any title IV federally funded institution personnel matters aren’t private). But once he put his own out by election and applied an interpretive perspective to the public by choice then it was absolutely NO LONGER PRIVATE. Doesn’t matter what he said in the release. Not…one…but

And he was informed of a why when it happened. Damn you’re full of turd here. He may have a different interpretation of what happened and whether they are justified but he was told why he was fired.

My simple point is this is not a private matter and you are wrong but will bounce around and try to have me follow you like your fishing while calling others a troll because you got off topic real quick which is whether it’s a private matter or not.
If you even bother to respond to anything other than how you deem it to be private still, and if your only evidence is repeating his self released press release publicly stating that he doesn’t know why he was fired I get that and easily dismissed because it’s his interpretation, have fun with those callouses and raw spots.

The idea a fear driven higher ed admin would fire someone without giving a reason is so silly.

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Your other part is a non sequitor and you must be a moron to believe he wasn’t given an official reason whether he agreea or not. I can’t believe you are that stupid unless Cornell has revoked your diploma. Alternatively you are being dishonest as to be a joke. Just a petty argument to defend your side and intellectually bankrupt.

1313

People who post here and think they have the right to know about private personnel matters as well as the medical condition of a player (another issue) are mistaken. GO BIG RED!

[Farfromgeneva]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

But knows the game and can produce W's when in full command.

When you were a goalie, did you wear a helmet? Now you descend into defamation. After Harvard, he was assistant Coach for Danowski winning a National Championship and was later assistant coach for the USA team in the World Games. If what you say were remotely true, he could never have represented the USA as a coach. After he departed Cornell, a letter supporting him was signed by a large number of those who played for him. One signatory was Rob Pannell. Ask him his opinion. His tenure at Delaware has been blemish free. It now appears your opposition to Ben is personal. Give it up. All the innuendo by third parties including members of the press doesn't prove anything. This whole thread is disgusting and I wish the moderator would delete the whole thing.

Sorry, that was intended as a PM.

I deleted it on here, happy to have you do same.

That's my personal opinion based on insights from numerous players and families of players at Harvard and my direct interaction experiences. But inappropriate on here.

I agree that this discussion of individuals is unseemly at best, which is why I suggested discussing more hypothetically...and yet it continued, with you engaging heavily, right?

That said, you are incorrect on at least some of what you wrote.

He was at Duke prior to Harvard, not after. He went to Delaware after his contract was not renewed at Harvard. Excellent move and he's done well.

Yes, many supported him from Cornell, which I mentioned earlier in the various things that are indeed publicly known. That's why I mentioned it. Public. Others did not support him. Also accurate.

I have no knowledge of his tenure at Delaware other than he and is team are objectively winning games at a higher clip and I've not read nor talked to anyone who has said anything negative about his management of that team. I sincerely hope he's learned from prior experiences and is a much better manager of people than prior. People do learn and change.

As to his selection to coach the USA Team, I don't think there are any rules that would be an impediment to any coach who was fired for cause from being appointed to such position. Nor to get hired by Delaware. So, I have no idea why you would think he couldn't have been.

Last, you are clearly not a lawyer. What I've said is true and/or opinion. Opinion is not defamation. Nor are true statements.

You are entirely free to express your own opinions and their rationale.

It’s just throwing specious turd against the wall and hoping something will stick-aka flooding the box

[laxfan1313]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

But knows the game and can produce W's when in full command.

When you were a goalie, did you wear a helmet? Now you descend into defamation. After Harvard, he was assistant Coach for Danowski winning a National Championship and was later assistant coach for the USA team in the World Games. If what you say were remotely true, he could never have represented the USA as a coach. After he departed Cornell, a letter supporting him was signed by a large number of those who played for him. One signatory was Rob Pannell. Ask him his opinion. His tenure at Delaware has been blemish free. It now appears your opposition to Ben is personal. Give it up. All the innuendo by third parties including members of the press doesn't prove anything. This whole thread is disgusting and I wish the moderator would delete the whole thing.

Sorry, that was intended as a PM.

I deleted it on here, happy to have you do same.

That's my personal opinion based on insights from numerous players and families of players at Harvard and my direct interaction experiences. But inappropriate on here.

I agree that this discussion of individuals is unseemly at best, which is why I suggested discussing more hypothetically...and yet it continued, with you engaging heavily, right?

That said, you are incorrect on at least some of what you wrote.

He was at Duke prior to Harvard, not after. He went to Delaware after his contract was not renewed at Harvard. Excellent move and he's done well.

Yes, many supported him from Cornell, which I mentioned earlier in the various things that are indeed publicly known. That's why I mentioned it. Public. Others did not support him. Also accurate.

I have no knowledge of his tenure at Delaware other than he and is team are objectively winning games at a higher clip and I've not read nor talked to anyone who has said anything negative about his management of that team. I sincerely hope he's learned from prior experiences and is a much better manager of people than prior. People do learn and change.

As to his selection to coach the USA Team, I don't think there are any rules that would be an impediment to any coach who was fired for cause from being appointed to such position. Nor to get hired by Delaware. So, I have no idea why you would think he couldn't have been.

Last, you are clearly not a lawyer. What I've said is true and/or opinion. Opinion is not defamation. Nor are true statements.

You are entirely free to express your own opinions and their rationale.

To correct your misperception, I've been a trial lawyer for over 40 years. Your comment: "he's deeply dishonest and self-serving, to the detriment of others around him including the players and other coaches." I believe could survive a motion to dismiss. Not a slam dunk but over the top offensive. There are cases on both sides of this issue. People sometimes try to avoid defaming by adding "In my opinion" to the defamatory words. That doesn't work. II'll leave it at that.

[laxfan1313]

People who post here and think they have the right to know about private personnel matters as well as the medical condition of a player (another issue) are mistaken.

I mean, not really a "private personnel matter." The termination of a very successful head coach mere months before a highly-anticipated season (and in the wake of aforementioned scandal swirling around the team) is hardly private.

And I'm not sure I mentioned anything about the medical condition of a player. Is this some hint as to other reasons behind his firing? If so, are you trolling us by being the one to bring it up? ("Medical condition of a player? What medical condition of a player?!?"...lol). I mean, do tell...

But yes, I agree that I have no right to any private information re: the medical conditions of players, and I don't believe I've ever claimed otherwise.

I was clear that the medical condition issue is separate from Ben's situation. That's just another example of a situation that remains private, yet some on this website think they have the right to know about. We'll have to agree to disagree regarding personnel matters. If you just have to know, just phone Ben at Delaware and ask him. I'll refrain from commenting on MD76's usual "War & Peace" post. Let this thread die!

Can't call it private

https://cnycentral.com/news/local/forme ... out-firing

I'm beginning to suspect you are a troll Farfromgeneva. Did you read the article you linked? Ben says this: " "For reasons which still remain unclear to me, after seventeen years as a student-athlete and coach in the Men's Lacrosse program at Cornell University, I will be parting ways with the University and move on to the next chapter in my professional career." So the article fails to confirm the circumstances that precipitated his departure. There is also some speculation in the article which also fails to confirm the circumstances. So it remains private over 10 years later.
Enough said (I hope).

sheesh, the University has a legal obligation to not discuss termination reasons, DeLuca is making a choice not to do so. Believe him or don't believe him, up to the reader.

But the facts of the termination are public.
DeLuca's statement saying he doesn't know the reasons (from at least one perspective casting shade on University) is also public.
The other issue re a hazing incident was/is public, though the details of individuals were quite properly not disclosed by the University.

There very well could be other factors leading to his termination, but I think we can all agree it wasn't the W-L record.

Agreed?

This is evidence it’s not private-1313 is not using any gray matter at all.

Why is it so difficult for you to concede he said he didn't know why his Cornell job ended. You are correct though. It doesn't require any gray matter to understand it.

What are you talking about? Abounding around. You said it’s private, because eh claims by his interpretation of events to not “know” by which he means “understand” not that he wasn’t informed. Are you kidding? You said it’s a private matter. It’s heck not you clown. I’d argue implicitly when you agree to allow your employer to put out press releases about you that it is no longer private (could get pedantic and argue that any title IV federally funded institution personnel matters aren’t private). But once he put his own out by election and applied an interpretive perspective to the public by choice then it was absolutely NO LONGER PRIVATE. Doesn’t matter what he said in the release. Not…one…but

And he was informed of a why when it happened. Damn you’re full of turd here. He may have a different interpretation of what happened and whether they are justified but he was told why he was fired.

My simple point is this is not a private matter and you are wrong but will bounce around and try to have me follow you like your fishing while calling others a troll because you got off topic real quick which is whether it’s a private matter or not.
If you even bother to respond to anything other than how you deem it to be private still, and if your only evidence is repeating his self released press release publicly stating that he doesn’t know why he was fired I get that and easily dismissed because it’s his interpretation, have fun with those callouses and raw spots.

The idea a fear driven higher ed admin would fire someone without giving a reason is so silly.

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Your other part is a non sequitor and you must be a moron to believe he wasn’t given an official reason whether he agreea or not. I can’t believe you are that stupid unless Cornell has revoked your diploma. Alternatively you are being dishonest as to be a joke. Just a petty argument to defend your side and intellectually bankrupt.

1313

People who post here and think they have the right to know about private personnel matters as well as the medical condition of a player (another issue) are mistaken. GO BIG RED!

Since you don't understand the meaning of "another issue", I have nothing further to add except to say I won't descend to your level & compare diplomas from Cornell & Hobart.

[44WeWantMore]

The Ivy League word of the day is Apophasis.

[ICGrad]

The Ivy League word of the day is Apophasis.

I know, right?

1313, two pages ago: "I hope this thread dies"
1313: Proceeds to post 20+ times to the thread over the next 24 hours

[MDlaxfan76]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

But knows the game and can produce W's when in full command.

When you were a goalie, did you wear a helmet? Now you descend into defamation. After Harvard, he was assistant Coach for Danowski winning a National Championship and was later assistant coach for the USA team in the World Games. If what you say were remotely true, he could never have represented the USA as a coach. After he departed Cornell, a letter supporting him was signed by a large number of those who played for him. One signatory was Rob Pannell. Ask him his opinion. His tenure at Delaware has been blemish free. It now appears your opposition to Ben is personal. Give it up. All the innuendo by third parties including members of the press doesn't prove anything. This whole thread is disgusting and I wish the moderator would delete the whole thing.

Sorry, that was intended as a PM.

I deleted it on here, happy to have you do same.

That's my personal opinion based on insights from numerous players and families of players at Harvard and my direct interaction experiences. But inappropriate on here.

I agree that this discussion of individuals is unseemly at best, which is why I suggested discussing more hypothetically...and yet it continued, with you engaging heavily, right?

That said, you are incorrect on at least some of what you wrote.

He was at Duke prior to Harvard, not after. He went to Delaware after his contract was not renewed at Harvard. Excellent move and he's done well.

Yes, many supported him from Cornell, which I mentioned earlier in the various things that are indeed publicly known. That's why I mentioned it. Public. Others did not support him. Also accurate.

I have no knowledge of his tenure at Delaware other than he and is team are objectively winning games at a higher clip and I've not read nor talked to anyone who has said anything negative about his management of that team. I sincerely hope he's learned from prior experiences and is a much better manager of people than prior. People do learn and change.

As to his selection to coach the USA Team, I don't think there are any rules that would be an impediment to any coach who was fired for cause from being appointed to such position. Nor to get hired by Delaware. So, I have no idea why you would think he couldn't have been.

Last, you are clearly not a lawyer. What I've said is true and/or opinion. Opinion is not defamation. Nor are true statements.

You are entirely free to express your own opinions and their rationale.

To correct your misperception, I've been a trial lawyer for over 40 years. Your comment: "he's deeply dishonest and self-serving, to the detriment of others around him including the players and other coaches." I believe could survive a motion to dismiss. Not a slam dunk but over the top offensive. There are cases on both sides of this issue. People sometimes try to avoid defaming by adding "In my opinion" to the defamatory words. That doesn't work. II'll leave it at that.

uh huh

4th 551 (“A public official or a limited public figure must prove the defendant published defamatory statements about the plaintiff with actual malice, or, in other words, with knowledge of the statements' falsity or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity. “).

I'm confident that this is "my view", which is what I wrote, and I'm confident that it is NOT "with knowledge of the statement's falsity or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity". I'm also quite confident that he's a 'public figure'.

So, bring it, 1313. You sure your opinion, contrary to mine, would stand up to scrutiny?
I'm confident mine would and I predict it wouldn't be comfortable for many who would prefer to turn a blind eye.

Again, I cut the offending post immediately upon learning it was out in the wild and I suggested you do so as well...and yet you repeat it...

This could have been avoided altogether had you just not sweated so hard trying to defend his reputation as if entirely blameless.
My advice, let it go. It happened, it's past, it wasn't because he can't produce winning teams, and presumably he's older and wiser in other ways.
He certainly has many supporters and he certainly has been winning games.

So, chill on the defense. And offense.

And unless there's something you actually want to say about someone's "medical condition" how about not alluding to something no one else seems to know about?

[Brownlax]

How about you guys taking your “lover’s quarrel” to private messaging. You can go at it to your heart’s content.

[laxfan1313]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

But knows the game and can produce W's when in full command.

When you were a goalie, did you wear a helmet? Now you descend into defamation. After Harvard, he was assistant Coach for Danowski winning a National Championship and was later assistant coach for the USA team in the World Games. If what you say were remotely true, he could never have represented the USA as a coach. After he departed Cornell, a letter supporting him was signed by a large number of those who played for him. One signatory was Rob Pannell. Ask him his opinion. His tenure at Delaware has been blemish free. It now appears your opposition to Ben is personal. Give it up. All the innuendo by third parties including members of the press doesn't prove anything. This whole thread is disgusting and I wish the moderator would delete the whole thing.

Sorry, that was intended as a PM.

I deleted it on here, happy to have you do same.

That's my personal opinion based on insights from numerous players and families of players at Harvard and my direct interaction experiences. But inappropriate on here.

I agree that this discussion of individuals is unseemly at best, which is why I suggested discussing more hypothetically...and yet it continued, with you engaging heavily, right?

That said, you are incorrect on at least some of what you wrote.

He was at Duke prior to Harvard, not after. He went to Delaware after his contract was not renewed at Harvard. Excellent move and he's done well.

Yes, many supported him from Cornell, which I mentioned earlier in the various things that are indeed publicly known. That's why I mentioned it. Public. Others did not support him. Also accurate.

I have no knowledge of his tenure at Delaware other than he and is team are objectively winning games at a higher clip and I've not read nor talked to anyone who has said anything negative about his management of that team. I sincerely hope he's learned from prior experiences and is a much better manager of people than prior. People do learn and change.

As to his selection to coach the USA Team, I don't think there are any rules that would be an impediment to any coach who was fired for cause from being appointed to such position. Nor to get hired by Delaware. So, I have no idea why you would think he couldn't have been.

Last, you are clearly not a lawyer. What I've said is true and/or opinion. Opinion is not defamation. Nor are true statements.

You are entirely free to express your own opinions and their rationale.

To correct your misperception, I've been a trial lawyer for over 40 years. Your comment: "he's deeply dishonest and self-serving, to the detriment of others around him including the players and other coaches." I believe could survive a motion to dismiss. Not a slam dunk but over the top offensive. There are cases on both sides of this issue. People sometimes try to avoid defaming by adding "In my opinion" to the defamatory words. That doesn't work. II'll leave it at that.

uh huh

4th 551 (“A public official or a limited public figure must prove the defendant published defamatory statements about the plaintiff with actual malice, or, in other words, with knowledge of the statements' falsity or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity. “).

I'm confident that this is "my view", which is what I wrote, and I'm confident that it is NOT "with knowledge of the statement's falsity or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity". I'm also quite confident that he's a 'public figure'.

So, bring it, 1313. You sure your opinion, contrary to mine, would stand up to scrutiny?
I'm confident mine would and I predict it wouldn't be comfortable for many who would prefer to turn a blind eye.

Again, I cut the offending post immediately upon learning it was out in the wild and I suggested you do so as well...and yet you repeat it...

This could have been avoided altogether had you just not sweated so hard trying to defend his reputation as if entirely blameless.
My advice, let it go. It happened, it's past, it wasn't because he can't produce winning teams, and presumably he's older and wiser in other ways.
He certainly has many supporters and he certainly has been winning games.

So, chill on the defense. And offense.

And unless there's something you actually want to say about someone's "medical condition" how about not alluding to something no one else seems to know about?

It's always a mistake to engage in a conversation with a poster who has too much free time. The question of whether what you said about Ben is defamatory is arguable. Whether or not it is defamatory, it is highly offensive. And it reflects poorly "in my opinion" upon you. To correct your further ignorance, I have not "defended" Ben's reputation. I have merely pointed out that there is no public confirmation about the circumstances of his departure from Cornell and all the speculation as to the reasons is just that - speculation. Some people here don't seem to understand the distinction. It's not my job to educate them. To IC Grad: I don't want to have to post on this thread but I think it is important to defend the principle that people should not use the anonymity of the keyboard warrior to speculate about a personnel matter (or a medical condition having nothing to do with Ben) without documentation that it is true. I hope this website doesn't become a sewer.

[MDlaxfan76]

OK I'll concede that it isn't "private" that Ben doesn't know why he was relieved of duty. Does that tell you why he was relieved of duty? LOL!

Well, color me skeptical. Ben was fired mid-contract. I simply don't believe he didn't know why he was fired.

But knows the game and can produce W's when in full command.

When you were a goalie, did you wear a helmet? Now you descend into defamation. After Harvard, he was assistant Coach for Danowski winning a National Championship and was later assistant coach for the USA team in the World Games. If what you say were remotely true, he could never have represented the USA as a coach. After he departed Cornell, a letter supporting him was signed by a large number of those who played for him. One signatory was Rob Pannell. Ask him his opinion. His tenure at Delaware has been blemish free. It now appears your opposition to Ben is personal. Give it up. All the innuendo by third parties including members of the press doesn't prove anything. This whole thread is disgusting and I wish the moderator would delete the whole thing.

Sorry, that was intended as a PM.

I deleted it on here, happy to have you do same.

That's my personal opinion based on insights from numerous players and families of players at Harvard and my direct interaction experiences. But inappropriate on here.

I agree that this discussion of individuals is unseemly at best, which is why I suggested discussing more hypothetically...and yet it continued, with you engaging heavily, right?

That said, you are incorrect on at least some of what you wrote.

He was at Duke prior to Harvard, not after. He went to Delaware after his contract was not renewed at Harvard. Excellent move and he's done well.

Yes, many supported him from Cornell, which I mentioned earlier in the various things that are indeed publicly known. That's why I mentioned it. Public. Others did not support him. Also accurate.

I have no knowledge of his tenure at Delaware other than he and is team are objectively winning games at a higher clip and I've not read nor talked to anyone who has said anything negative about his management of that team. I sincerely hope he's learned from prior experiences and is a much better manager of people than prior. People do learn and change.

As to his selection to coach the USA Team, I don't think there are any rules that would be an impediment to any coach who was fired for cause from being appointed to such position. Nor to get hired by Delaware. So, I have no idea why you would think he couldn't have been.

Last, you are clearly not a lawyer. What I've said is true and/or opinion. Opinion is not defamation. Nor are true statements.

You are entirely free to express your own opinions and their rationale.

To correct your misperception, I've been a trial lawyer for over 40 years. Your comment: "he's deeply dishonest and self-serving, to the detriment of others around him including the players and other coaches." I believe could survive a motion to dismiss. Not a slam dunk but over the top offensive. There are cases on both sides of this issue. People sometimes try to avoid defaming by adding "In my opinion" to the defamatory words. That doesn't work. II'll leave it at that.

uh huh

4th 551 (“A public official or a limited public figure must prove the defendant published defamatory statements about the plaintiff with actual malice, or, in other words, with knowledge of the statements' falsity or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity. “).

I'm confident that this is "my view", which is what I wrote, and I'm confident that it is NOT "with knowledge of the statement's falsity or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity". I'm also quite confident that he's a 'public figure'.

So, bring it, 1313. You sure your opinion, contrary to mine, would stand up to scrutiny?
I'm confident mine would and I predict it wouldn't be comfortable for many who would prefer to turn a blind eye.

Again, I cut the offending post immediately upon learning it was out in the wild and I suggested you do so as well...and yet you repeat it...

This could have been avoided altogether had you just not sweated so hard trying to defend his reputation as if entirely blameless.
My advice, let it go. It happened, it's past, it wasn't because he can't produce winning teams, and presumably he's older and wiser in other ways.
He certainly has many supporters and he certainly has been winning games.

So, chill on the defense. And offense.

And unless there's something you actually want to say about someone's "medical condition" how about not alluding to something no one else seems to know about?

It's always a mistake to engage in a conversation with a poster who has too much free time. The question of whether what you said about Ben is defamatory is arguable. Whether or not it is defamatory, it is highly offensive. And it reflects poorly "in my opinion" upon you. To correct your further ignorance, I have not "defended" Ben's reputation. I have merely pointed out that there is no public confirmation about the circumstances of his departure from Cornell and all the speculation as to the reasons is just that - speculation. Some people here don't seem to understand the distinction. It's not my job to educate them. To IC Grad: I don't want to have to post on this thread but I think it is important to defend the principle that people should not use the anonymity of the keyboard warrior to speculate about a personnel matter (or a medical condition having nothing to do with Ben) without documentation that it is true. I hope this website doesn't become a sewer.

I agree, it was "offensive" and as I said, it was not intended to be out there publicly. I suggested that you edit out as I did. Instead, you keep forcing the issue.

Sure, we quite rightly don't have an official University confirmation of the cause of his dismissal and he himself purports to not know why he was dismissed. Find that plausible if you must, but surely you understand why many would find it implausible? And why the other public information regarding hazing issues would be considered at least relevant for an otherwise apparently unexpected dismissal mid-contract?

Do you agree that it is highly likely wasn't because of his W-L record or is that too mere speculation?

Obviously there could be an alternative explanation. You are correct that it's speculation...but why is that a "principle" to "defend" that people shouldn't "speculate", whether anonymously or not? It's a discussion board after all.

That said, I think the general topic of valid or invalid reasons for coaches being dismissed 'for cause' would be better discussed without specific individuals being used, especially given that none of us is likely to have perfect information on individual matters. For instance, I certainly don't and presumably you don't.

And why in the world do you keep bringing up a 'medical condition' that you say is not related to this coach's dismissal...is it supposed to be relevant to something else?