Many resources are needed to download a project. Please understand that we have to compensate our server costs. Thank you in advance. Project price only 1 $
You can buy this project and download/modify it how often you want.
From: [email protected] (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: White and black - racism: was about the phillies.
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
Distribution: na
Lines: 135
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Jonathan King) writes:
>There's too many >'s here for my taste by now, which means I've
>reached my maximum depth on this thread. I've cut out some things
>below, but nothing that should affect the sense of the discussion.
I agree. I'll delete more as well.
>[email protected] (Mike Fester) writes:
>>[email protected] (Jonathan King) writes:
>>Perhaps you can give a more recent citation of any player mentioned as a
>>malingerer? Thanks.
>I guess I don't understand your question. I was trying to imply that
>the accusations of Glenn Davis' malingering were certainly not played
>up very much.
Still, if the 'whispers' reached San Francisco, it is certainly possible they
were stronger elsewhere. Also, it was teammates making the aspersions. In any
event, I know of no other player to be maligned in the last couple years.
>But, in any case, I believe Mike Lavalliere has been accused of poor
>work habits and general sloth recently (probably not malingering),
>just as he was being released. It's interesting that nobody heard
>much about these problems before if they were so important.
>>I have heard Sanders called many things as well. I have NOT heard him called
>>lazy. Given the 2-sport phenomenon, it would be difficult to label him as
>>such.
>
>Exactly so. Which means his media detractors have had to say other
>things about him. I believe it's a general phenomenon that if writers
>don't like you, they'll find a label that will stick no matter who you
>are. I find myself more interested in the selection of labels than in
>why writers feel they need to act this way. (Not that this fascinates
>me that much, either.)
Uh, the original author's point was that black and white players were por-
trayed differently by "the media", and towards this, he gave a highly selected
list to "prove" his case. Sanders' name showed up eventually. I dispute that
Sanders has ever been called lazy by "the media".
>>Hmm, big ego, possible club house disturbance, etc. Is that GOOD press?
>
>No, but it isn't the total extent of the press he received in
>Pittsburgh, where he was called all kinds of things including lazy and
>spoiled by the local columnists. Again, the actual words used may
>shift around with time and expediency, but "lazy" tends to be higher
>on the list for non-white players, at least in my subjective opinion.
>
>[Aside: it might be interesting for somebody to do an archival study
>on player descriptions before and after the color barrier was broken,
>and on teams like the Red Sox which have been traditionally white.
>Nowadays, most people think of Carl Yastrzemski as one of those
>blue-collar, hard-working guys, but in the early 70s he was often
>portrayed as a lazy bum. Really.]
>>>>Hmm. I never heard anyone accuse Canseco of being lazy. Nor Sierra.
>>>I've heard accusations that Canseco was a bad fielder, but could be a
>>>great one "if he put his mind to it". Ignoring whether or not he is a
>>Actually, Dave Stewart is (was) one of the most vocal about this. In any
>>event, that is not "lazy".
>At least one poster in the last week has fired off a major screed on the
>Canseco-is-lazy issue, so I think your point is at best a quibble, and
>probably weaker than that.
Uh, that poster specifically stated "allow me to be the first". It is NOT a
quibble, then, to state that "the media" did not portray Canseco as being
lazy. If the other person chooses to so accuse him, after my post, that does not
make it a quibble. And in fact, the media around here tend(ed) to play up his
time in the wieght room. Hardly "lazy", and hardly a "quibble". Have you ever
seen any "mediot" portray Canseco as "lazy"? Unconcerned with his fielding, yes.
Lazy, no.
>>>bad fielder, I think this is still interesting. For that matter, I
>>>think Canseco's colorful off-field antics get lots more national
>>>attention than those of, say, Roger Clemens.
>>
>>Well, he's had a few more of them.
>
>At least more that you've heard about. I think one of the questions
>here surrounds selective reporting. Having said that, I have to say
>that the selective reporting hypothesis has the potential to be
>unfalsifiable, at least by those of us who aren't reporters, police,
>or private investigators.
Well, Canseco has been involved in several felonies, including his high-speed
record, carrying concealed fire-arms, and of course the domestic violence.
Clemens had a run-in at a bar. Canseco had that, as well, and in both cases, the
coverage was relatively minimal.
>>Puckett? Stewart? Jackson?
>
>I said "over-represent" non-whites. Three anecdotal data points don't
>make an interesting counter-argument. BTW--which Jackson are we talking
>about here? Reggie, Bo, Darrin, Danny, or ...?
Uh, if the only evidence offered is anecdotal, how can it be objected that the
counter to it is also anecdotal?
>>>And it seems like everybody who has ever won a batting title (among
>>>others) has been accused at some time of "caring more for his own
>>>stats than for the good of the team". It also seems to me that you're
>>
>>Kirby Puckett? I have NEVER heard this accusation made of Puckett. I
>>have heard it of Boggs. Actually, I believe it of him, but that's another
>>matter.
>
>Not living in Minnesota, I can't say whether or not this line has ever
>been used against Kirby there. As far as Boggs goes, I'm not sure why
>you bring him up, since he's one of the obvious prototypes for the line
>I quoted (along with Ted Williams, Rod Carew, and many others).
Uh, yes, and I agree with your assesment of Boggs, rather specifically. However,
you did say "everybody who has ever won a batting title" has been accused of
selfishness. I have not ever, anywhere, heard this said of Puckett. Pendleton,
either. Similarly, Brett, B Williams, and others.
>>How about Daryl Strawberry? And I think the plus or minus refers more to
>>the "born again" types, ie, Butler and Gaetti.
>
>Again, you seem to be making an argument from anecdotes. On the other
>hand, my argument by is of the because-jon-says-so variety if we have
>no other data. I have to admit I have problems generating lists of
>non-white players who became (in)famous for their religious or
>political beliefs, while names like Butler, Gaetti, Dravecky, Knepper,
>Hersheiser, et al. come rolling out.
There are others. Perhaps they are simply not as outspoken, except in the
case of the "born-again" types I mention.
Mike
