Why MLB can go fuck itself

Everything else
#1

This is just absurd.

[i]Sitting in non-playing anonymity, Christiansen thought he might still serve some good purpose. He would write two letters and two numbers on the back of his cap – “DK 57” – and make it seem like his dear friend, the late Cardinals’ pitcher Darryl Kile, was there with him.

For this, baseball’s executives threatened to revoke Christiansen’s rights to wear that uniform and sit in that dugout. In one of those mindless, maddening executive moments that baseball can seemingly summon at will and produce in infinite numbers, commissioner Bud Selig’s top two hatchetmen, Sandy Alderson and Bob Watson, confronted Christiansen while the World Series was still in Anaheim and told him his tribute to Kile violated a baseball rule that mandates that all uniforms must look the same.[/i]

#2

After Walter Payton died Marshall Faulk wanted to wear his jersey numbers for one game as a tribute, but the NFL (No Fun League) said he couldn’t.

#3

What makes that even more ridiculous is that one of the most memorable World Series teams–the We Are Family Pittsburgh Pirates of 1979–earned a place in MLB history partly because Willie Stargell gave out cap stars to his fellow players. Every member of that team had customized caps; some were so starred up that they looked like they’d been won at a carnival. Yet now Selig and his fellow morons want to prevent one non-player from writing a tribute to a dead guy on the back of his cap?

#4

I can understand them not letting Faulk Mark… I mean, what connection does Faulk have to Payton? (Aside from his job and his talent.) Plus, if Faulk can do it, why can’t every RB change his number as a tribute?

What I don’t get is why the league, this year, didn’t allow Peyton Manning (QB of the Colts) to wear black socks in honor of black-sock wearing (Colt QB) Unitas. I remember that weekend, every broadcaster was telling him to do it. Bradshaw even offered to pay the fine.

#5

It was black hi-tops cleats, not socks. But they didn’t allow it because Art Modell is a big dick. He wanted the Baltimore Ravens to be the only team to be able to memorialize Unitas in such a manner.

Why? Because Unitas played for the Baltimore Colts. Never mind that the Baltimore Colts moved to Indianapolis, and it’s Modell’s once stationed in Cleveland team that is now in Baltimore. Never mind that the Indy Colts still hold all of the record-lineage of the old Baltimore Colts. Nevermind that the Baltimore record lineage started anew when the Browns moved to town (almost overnight abandoning Cleveland), and that the NEW Cleveland Browns kept their own record lineage (albeit with a several year empty gap).

Nope, Art Modell demanded (and got) the right to be the team that got to memorialize Unitas. Chris Redman (Raven’s QB) wore the black hi-tops. There were a pair of black hi-tops in a glass case in front of a painted Colts uni (with Unitas’ number on it, of course) on the Raven’s sideline that day.

Ah, the internal logic of backroom politics. Never gets better then that.

#6

I bumped into Darryl Kile (almost literally) and his wife a few years ago picking up Christmas presents at the Toys R Us ‘big stuff’ pickup window. He had just been traded from the Rockies to the Cardinals.

Short story: good guy, happy couple.

MLB sucks. I continue to become more and more of a former baseball fan.

#7

While I agree they probably should have made an exception, what if Barry Bonds decided to sell his cap space to Nike. And Troy Glaus to Adidas etc? Olberman never really brings that issue up as a reason MLB might be draconian on this policy.

MLB might want to be able to sell the ad space, which is within its right (and is tacky), but it’s probably better than each player being able to turn their own bodies into billboards. Some NBA player was allegedly looking into getting tattoos of some corporate sponsor on his body for money… that would get way out

#8

While I agree they probably should have made an exception, what if Barry Bonds decided to sell his cap space to Nike. And Troy Glaus to Adidas etc? Olberman never really brings that issue up as a reason MLB might be draconian on this policy.

MLB might want to be able to sell the ad space, which is within its right (and is tacky), but it’s probably better than each player being able to turn their own bodies into billboards. Some NBA player was allegedly looking into getting tattoos of some corporate sponsor on his body for money… that would get way out[/quote]

True, but that’s why they’re called exceptions.

#9

What I don’t get is why the league, this year, didn’t allow Peyton Manning (QB of the Colts) to wear black socks in honor of black-sock wearing (Colt QB) Unitas. I remember that weekend, every broadcaster was telling him to do it. Bradshaw even offered to pay the fine>>>>>>

Of course, Peyton’s mistake was asking permission. Never ask permission and never volunteer :)

#10

True, but as soon as you allow exceptions, you end up with all sorts of people gunning for the same exception, and if they don’t get it you get cries of discrimination, bias, blah blah blah. Not that I don’t support this notion, mind you, but I can also understand why people setup these kinds of things.

For example, should a guy be able to put something on his cap about his wife if she just died? How about if he was a big fan of some musician? What if he is bemoaning Nike’s poor Q4 results by putting their swish on his hate? Which exception do you allow?

#11

While I agree they probably should have made an exception, what if Barry Bonds decided to sell his cap space to Nike. And Troy Glaus to Adidas etc? Olberman never really brings that issue up as a reason MLB might be draconian on this policy.[/quote]

Sorry, I don’t give them any slack for mindlessly following a ‘zero tolerance’ policy just so no one will ever have to make a decision. That’s the same kind of cowardice that gets kids suspended from school for getting caught with aspirin or a butterknife in the back of their car.

If a player asks for a small temporary exception to honor a friend who was a part of the game, you grant it.
If a player asks for an exception that conflicts with league obligations or is tasteless or serves no positive purpose, you deny it.

Frighteningly, there will be many cases that my general examples don’t cover, and someone will have to take responsibility for making a reasonable decision when that happens. Sometimes it actually will be difficult, but that’s a weak reason to make an obviously wrong call on an easy case.

#12

A foolish consistancy is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little
statesmen and philosophers and divines.

I said that over a hundred years ago and it’s still true. Although, now I might add the fucking NFL and MBL to that list of offenders.

#13

Sorry, “MLB.”

Typos are the hobgoblins of genius.

#14

Sure, I agree, but if one of the players is white and the other is black, and the white player is allowed something and the black one isn’t, it’s a race issue. And someone sues.

We’ve created a “zero tolerance” society thanks to our wonderfully litigious nature. Can’t get what you want? Things don’t turn out perfectly? Looking to blame others? Sue!

#15

Fair point, Steve, although I bet MLB is more concerned with PR problems from such perceived discrimination than legal liability (not to say that’s a small problem).

On a related note what about this:
Baseball might ban kids from dugout

I didn’t see the game where J.T. Snow grabbed Dusty Baker’s kid Darren out of the way of a play coming to home, but I saw a picture of him stretching to touch home as he picked him up right out of the batter’s box.

I think that prohibiting kids would be (another) mistake. I did see the end of game 7 and I thought Darren Baker bawling his eyes out on Daddy’s shoulder after the loss was a very sweet and poignant image. I’m sure those two moments are the only thing I’ll remember about this series in a few years. Maybe also the one home run I saw Barry Bonds hit and then a shot of Tim Salmon mouthing “That’s the farthest ball I’ve ever seen hit.”

At some point, worrying about potential problems will mean everyone should just stay home and forget the whole thing.

#16

Some commentator on NPR radio yesterday made the point that MLB needs to start the playoff games earlier in the afternoon, especially on the weekends. Starting at 8:20pm on the West Coast eliminates most of the East Coast fans from watching.

Considering that this was one of the least watched World Series of the past 20 yhears, he probably has a point.

#17

I heard today that Bud is going to pass a rule banning the kids from the dugout. Does he just not get it? That was the coolest part of the series was seeing all these rich guys we tend to think of as spoiled arrogant jerks being fathers with their kids. Taking that away is just another knife in the heart of “America’s Ex-Pastime”.

#18

Oh please. I personally thought the kids being there was inappropriate, though that may be because I’m not a father. Why would we assume athletes aren’t good fathers? Frankly, I could care less, I’m there to see Barry Bonds perform on the field, not kiss his kid.

Considering the language on the field, the potential violence, the potential for one of those kids to be seriously hurt by a foul ball, I don’t think they should be out there. This isn’t “father-son” day, it’s the freakin’ World Series. How cute would it have been if JT Snow had run over Baker’s kid, or even worse, had the Bengie Molina been receiving a throw from the outfield and run into him, screwing up a potentially important play at the plate? Why even make that a possibility?

Bring the kids to the all-star game, which doesn’t matter because it’s really an exhibition, but keep 'em out of the games that matter.

Bah!

Of course the downside is that Fox would have to scour the stands for the wives and families to get that “touching” side of the telecast down…

#19

Absolutely, I’m not sure what baseball is thinking here… well, I do know what they’re thinking, and it’s (as usual) about money. If they started at, say, 7:30EST, that’s 4:30PST, and if it’s a quick, 2-hour game, they’d miss prime time, and miss out on major bucks from the network (and not be included in the weekly ratings).

I think prime time starts at 7:00.

#20

I am not assuming they are not good fathers. Its just nice given the various scandals around ball players to see them doing something “normal”.