data.3news-bydate.train.rec.sport.baseball.104996 Maven / Gradle / Ivy
From: [email protected] (Mark Singer)
Subject: Re: Juggling Dodgers
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Distribution: all
Lines: 65
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Jeff Goldsmith) writes:
>In [email protected] (Mark Singer) writes:
>
>>>if this is true (note that i don't think it is), lasorda should be
>>>fired for at least two reasons:
>>>
>>> 1) publicly humiliating his players;
>>> 2) knuckling under to his players wishes.
I DID NOT WRITE THAT! In fact, those statements were a rebuttal to
an earlier posting that I made, and this was culled from my *strong*
rebuttal to those statements. PLEASE! Slander. Shame.
>There is a fine line between "getting players' input" and "knuckling
>under to players' demands." A manager, much like a military officer,
>needs to have his (her) players' complete obedience and respect during
>a game. After the game, it's no big deal, but when there is no time
>to do more than react, players must trust the manager or the team often
>falls apart (see: Boston Red Sox, ff. :) )
"after the game, it's no big deal" ???? After the employees leave
the workplace, it doesn't matter what they say about the boss or the
company? Puhlease.
>Strawberry's demeanor as represented by the media, often sounds like
>demands. I suspect that a comment like "I enjoy hitting fourth; I'm
>used to it" would get pretty brutally misinterpreted by the media if
>it came from Strawberry. Russ Porter quoted Strawberry as saying,
>"I feel more comfortable hitting cleanup and I think I perform best
>in that role." (Paraphrased by my memory and bias.) That seems like
>a fairly non-petulant answer to what was almost certainly a question
>like, "How do you feel about being moved to the third spot in the order?"
First, it's Ross Porter. Second, I am really tired of seeing the kind
of response that indicates that all I do is parrot what some media
person says or writes. I have a brain. If I choose to characterize
something in a certain fashion, it's because that is what I believe
to be accurate. It is not just because some unnamed "mediot" made
the characterization.
>A more media-sensitive player might answer "The manager knows what he is
>doing. If he thinks that batting me third will help the team, then I
>am all for it." We'd ignore that answer as brown stuff, so it seems a
>little bit of an overreaction to brand Darryl's response as petulant.
I did *not* brand Darryl's response as petulant, because I never heard
any response from Darryl. I did call him a name. I referred to him
as a primadonna. Someone else concluded that I did that because I
"hate" him. I don't hate him. I think he's a primadonna. If you
disagree, fine. But stop putting words in my mouth.
-- The Beastmaster
>
>
--
Mark Singer
[email protected]