WNBA silence on DiJonai Carrington's 'White privilege' post exposes Sandy Brondello double standard
Three weeks ago, the WNBA needed less than 24 hours to suspend Toronto Tempo head coach Sandy Brondello for making a comment that wasn't explicitly racial.
More than two days after Chicago Sky guard DiJonai Carrington explicitly invoked race by posting "WHITE PRIVILEGE @indianafever" on Threads moments after being ejected from a game against the Fever, the league apparently had nothing to say.
Carrington then suited up and played for the Sky against the Seattle Storm on Monday night.
FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL OFFERS HIS RESPONSE TO BRUTAL FOUL ON SOPHIE CUNNINGHAM
Seems like a pretty clear double standard.
Let's start with Brondello.
During a July 17 game against the Atlanta Dream, Brondello became upset after officials called a foul on Nyara Sabally while she battled Angel Reese for a rebound. Sabally went down in pain, and Brondello complained that Reese was a "protected species."
Brondello is Australian, where "protected species" is a common sports expression used to describe an athlete perceived to receive favorable treatment from officials. The context made her meaning pretty clear, too. She was complaining about a foul call.
Still, because Reese is Black, the comment was quickly given a racial interpretation. Reese also leaned into the racial narrative by posting "ARE WE SURPRISED" shortly after the game.
Brondello apologized the following morning, saying her frustration was with the officiating and acknowledging that her words had an impact beyond what she intended, "particularly for Black women in our league."
Apparently, that wasn't enough.
On July 18, less than a day after Brondello made the comment, the WNBA suspended her without pay for one game. The league called it an "inappropriate comment" and said coaches and team personnel are expected to uphold the "highest standards of professionalism and respect."
Reese later thanked the WNBA for taking action and said there is "no place for discrimination or hate" in the league.
Keep that standard in mind.
On Saturday afternoon, Carrington struck Fever guard Sophie Cunningham across the head while Cunningham attempted a layup. Officials reviewed the play, upgraded the foul to a Flagrant 2 and ejected Carrington late in the first quarter.
Minutes later, while the game was still being played, a post appeared on Carrington's Threads account.
"WHITE PRIVILEGE @indianafever."
Not "protected species," which is an Australian sports phrase that someone else interpreted through a racial lens.
"WHITE PRIVILEGE."
Carrington made an explicitly race-based comment and tagged another WNBA franchise almost immediately after being ejected from a WNBA game.
ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. TAKE THE DON'T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW!
OutKick and Fox News Digital contacted the league shortly after Carrington's post Saturday and asked whether the WNBA viewed it as an allegation that race or racial bias played a role in her ejection, whether the league had spoken with Carrington and whether it was reviewing the matter for potential discipline.
No response.
OutKick followed up with the WNBA again Monday morning and Monday night, giving the league another opportunity to explain its position before publication.
Again, no response.
The Chicago Sun-Times also reported Monday that the WNBA didn't respond to its request for comment.
Meanwhile, Carrington wasn't backing away from her use of the phrase.
Responding Monday to Emmanuel Acho, who criticized the idea that her ejection represented white privilege, Carrington insisted people were misunderstanding her.
"I've never once claimed that the assessment of the foul was white privilege (that was your assumption)," Carrington wrote.
OK.
Then what was?
Carrington didn't say.
Instead, she defended her qualifications to discuss white privilege, saying she attended "one of the top universities" to educate herself on the subject and would never use the term as a "rhetorical weapon" without "the proper evidence to substantiate it."
Evidence of what?
Carrington posted "WHITE PRIVILEGE," tagged the Fever and did so almost immediately after an ejection. She now says she wasn't referring to the assessment of the foul and insists she has evidence to substantiate whatever accusation she was making.
Yet neither Carrington nor the WNBA has explained what that accusation actually is.
Maybe the league believes the situations involving Brondello and Carrington are completely different.
It’s hard to identify a material distinction that explains the dramatically different responses, and the WNBA hasn’t offered one. The league could argue that Brondello’s comment was made by a head coach during live game action, while Carrington’s came from her own social media account after she was ejected.
WNBA MEDIA DEFENDS DIJONAI CARRINGTON AFTER DANGEROUS SOPHIE CUNNINGHAM HIT REVEALS GLARING BIAS
Still, is the league OK with one of its players posting on social media about an incident moments after being ejected, while the game is still being played, especially when the post makes a race-based allegation whose target remains unclear?
Maybe the league is perfectly fine with it.
Then it should say that.
The league didn't offer Brondello days of silence while it figured out how to handle an ambiguous phrase. It acted the next day, even though Brondello publicly apologized and explained that her comment had nothing to do with race.
Carrington, meanwhile, used an unmistakably racial term, tagged an opposing franchise, later said she had evidence to support using that term and still hasn't explained exactly whom she was accusing of white privilege.
More than two days later, she took the floor for another WNBA game without the league publicly acknowledging the situation at all.
That's particularly notable given what WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert recently told Congress when lawmakers questioned whether the league fairly protects and disciplines all of its players.
"In all instances, the League seeks to apply the WNBA rulebook and applicable disciplinary processes consistently across all games and for all players," Engelbert wrote.
Well, this would be a good time to demonstrate that consistency.
This isn't an argument that Carrington automatically deserved the exact same one-game suspension Brondello received. Perhaps the WNBA reviewed the situation and concluded Carrington violated no league rule.
If so, say that.
But the league can't aggressively police one comment because of its perceived racial implications, then simply look the other way when a player explicitly invokes race during a game and pretend nobody is going to notice the difference.
Brondello was suspended for words that weren't explicitly racial but were interpreted that way.
Carrington explicitly wrote "WHITE PRIVILEGE."
So far, only one of them has faced consequences from the WNBA.
And until the league explains why, its supposed commitment to consistent standards falls completely flat.
The only thing consistent about the WNBA is its uncanny ability to get in its own way.