Maybe I Am Too Old School But IMHO Crisp Should Be Given Chin Music His First AB Today

[radar303]

You are wrong. I'm old enough to have seen Earl manage 5 or 6 years. I learned an awful lot from him. I would be very surprised if he agreed with your misguided sentiments as expressed in this thread.

I have no idea how how old Drungo is or Old No.5, but I saw Earl manage and I followed the Orioles everyday. I also have read a lot of first person accounts of Earl's style and his belief systems when it came to managing.

I was also told by Ken Singleton that at his very core Earl was a players manager. He was gruff, swore at them, called them out, bullied, cajoled them. That being said he loved HIS guys, and in the era of the 69-71 teams he also knew that NO team was better than his. That was the basis for his "no bean ball", no fights, no "old school" retribution. AS he told one young pitcher famously after the pitcher mentioned on the bench that he was "going to get" a Cleveland Indian. Earl exploded on him, he went down the bench and said that's "Frank f****** Robinson, that's Boog f****** Powell, that's Brooks f****** Robinson. if you throw at one them, they throw at one of ours and WE ARE WAY BETTER THAN THEM", don't take a chance of getting one of our superior players injured.

These old school rules are NOT played by every team and most have become dangerous. No matter how you slice it, most guys DO NOT want to injure their fellow players. No Ty Cobbs around any longer. He was a proven coward and probably most who want to throw at people are also.

Drungo is correct and Old #5 is wrong wrong wrong.

[BRobinsonfan]

OMG - While not as low as Crisp's - Ryan Flaherty's hand slap of the third base coach on his home run trot was clearly below the belt.

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/index.jsp?gid=2013_08_24_oakmlb_balmlb_1&mode=recap_away&c_id=oak#gid=2013_08_24_oakmlb_balmlb_1&mode=video

[BRobinsonfan]

Hey OldFan:

"The late Earl Weaver was as feisty as they came, but he wasn't too fond of beanballs. In fact, he wanted nothing to do with them.

According to Kurkjian, Weaver told his pitchers never to throw at opposing batters because:

...you might get ejected, or you might get in a fight. And if you get ejected or get hurt in fight, you are going to miss games. Our players are better than their players. So we are going to lose in that exchange. So don't throw at anyone. And don't fight.

Weaver's point was that the games matter more than revenge, and that's a point that even pitchers who are obligated to exact some revenge in a beanball war need to be mindful of. Even those who really, really want to hit somebody need to make sure that the game comes first." http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1610983-pitchers-guide-to-handling-a-beanball-war-in-todays-mlb

[BRobinsonfan]

You do have a point, but sometimes enough is enough. Although I dislike him now, I recall Mike Mussina as an Oriole standing his ground against Seattle when that famous brawl broke out. I would actually think that sometimes the current version of the Orioles should show that kind of heart.

With regard to Seattle here's an interesting take by Ken Rosenthal recounting what Jim Palmer said about the brawl and about Earl Weaver's attitude:

"The ugliest brawl I ever saw was a 20-minute donnybrook between the Orioles and Mariners on June 6, 1993. The benches emptied after Mike Mussina hit Bill Haselman in the left shoulder and Haselman charged the mound. That night, writing for The Baltimore Sun, I praised the Orioles, saying they had shown admirable fight. Maybe the dumbest thing I have ever written. The next day, Hall of Fame pitcher Jim Palmer pulled me aside, explaining that former Orioles manager Earl Weaver never wanted his pitchers to engage in beanball exchanges, fearing they would get injured. Sure enough, Mussina ended up missing significant time with back and shoulder injuries. At the time, he was the Orioles' version of Porcello, a phenomenal talent at the dawn of his career, though slightly older. And to this day, I carry Palmer's words with me. I understand the code, the time-honored baseball justice secretly preached by La Russa and Jim Leyland and practically every manager. But Weaver did not subscribe to the code, and if you ask me, he had the right idea. Common sense, people. Please. Before someone gets hurt." http://msn.foxsports.com/home/story/Beanballs-are-a-part-of-the-game,-but-senseless

[Redskins Rick]

Hey OldFan:

The late Earl Weaver was as feisty as they came, but he wasn't too fond of beanballs. In fact, he wanted nothing to do with them.

According to Kurkjian, Weaver told his pitchers never to throw at opposing batters because:

...you might get ejected, or you might get in a fight. And if you get ejected or get hurt in fight, you are going to miss games. Our players are better than their players. So we are going to lose in that exchange. So don't throw at anyone. And don't fight.

Weaver's point was that the games matter more than revenge, and that's a point that even pitchers who are obligated to exact some revenge in a beanball war need to be mindful of. Even those who really, really want to hit somebody need to make sure that the game comes first. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1610983-pitchers-guide-to-handling-a-beanball-war-in-todays-mlb

Dang, somebody using facts to support their side.

Nice post, BTW.

[OFFNY]

With regard to Seattle here's an interesting take by Ken Rosenthal recounting what Jim Palmer said about the brawl and about Earl Weaver's attitude:

"The ugliest brawl I ever saw was a 20-minute donnybrook between the Orioles and Mariners on June 6, 1993. The benches emptied after Mike Mussina hit Bill Haselman in the left shoulder and Haselman charged the mound. That night, writing for The Baltimore Sun, I praised the Orioles, saying they had shown admirable fight. Maybe the dumbest thing I have ever written. The next day, Hall of Fame pitcher Jim Palmer pulled me aside, explaining that former Orioles manager Earl Weaver never wanted his pitchers to engage in beanball exchanges, fearing they would get injured. Sure enough, Mussina ended up missing significant time with back and shoulder injuries. At the time, he was the Orioles' version of Porcello, a phenomenal talent at the dawn of his career, though slightly older. And to this day, I carry Palmer's words with me. I understand the code, the time-honored baseball justice secretly preached by La Russa and Jim Leyland and practically every manager. But Weaver did not subscribe to the code, and if you ask me, he had the right idea. Common sense, people. Please. Before someone gets hurt." http://msn.foxsports.com/home/story/Beanballs-are-a-part-of-the-game,-but-senseless

Thanks, especially for the Rosenthal article.

[The Wedge]

You act like you are an expert on Earl, and probably weren't even old enough to see him manage. Gimme a break.. You have a lot to learn about the actual game. It is played by men, not stats geeks.

OMG, ageism? Again? I thought you had gotten that out of your system.

Newsflash: you can be an expert on something without having seen it. Especially things from the past that can't be actually seen again (though you can see old clips in this case). If you had to see it to be an expert, there'd be no expert authority on any thing historical.

[Old#5fan]

OMG, ageism? Again? I thought you had gotten that out of your system.

Newsflash: you can be an expert on something without having seen it. Especially things from the past that can't be actually seen again (though you can see old clips in this case). If you had to see it to be an expert, there'd be no expert authority on any thing historical.

Look, I would never disagree that there cannot be historical experts but that isn't the point of what I was espousing.

What I am saying is what would you prefer, reading about something that happened or actually being there to see it first hand? IMO there is no comparison. I will give you an example even though it is the NFL. I attended a Jets vrs Ravens game two years ago, and all you read nowadays is how bad Mark Sanchez and yada, yada, whether he should be replaced.

I saw first hand with my own eyes Sanchez flinching so badly under a pass rush that he was ducking his head before throwing a pass routinely in the second half of that game. He basically might as well have adopted the fetal position, yet I never read any description of that anywhere by any writer. Now why would that be?

Simple answer, writers document only what they see or want to describe to you. The "filter" things through their own observations, which may not even give the little details that I saw in that example. That alone told me that Mark Sanchez was done, stick a fork in him.

No stats geek writing about him is going to matter, I could easily see the writing on the wall.. Now do you at least understand a bit of what I am trying to explain?

[Old#5fan]

I will give you another example. All you ever see as a highlight of Brooks Robinson routinely is his great fielding plays in the WS. Yet, he made incredible plays like that on almost a weekly basis, some even better! Also, you just don't get the impact watching it on film as actually seeing him do those things live, and in person.. Again, there is no comparison.

Your historical example, say you had a chance to be a civil war solder and experience what it was like (or WWII or whatever) versus reading about the experience. Wouldn't your own being present be far better?

[The Wedge]

Read about it. Less chance of dying. You might want to pick a better example.

Believe it or not, I do understand your point, and I understood it before you devoted all those words to explaining it. My problem is that you don't even allow for the possibility that someone who hasn't seen it could understand it better, and that's just not true. In fact, a lot of times you need to have the distance to truly interpret what has happened.

[JustMyOpinion]

Why blame anyone else for this punk's arrogant behavior? That is the problem, nobody today wants to call anybody out for being arrogant and showing terrible sportsmanship. Too many people think it is fine. It sends a terrible message to our youth to act like jerks and it is acceptible behavior. I mean where do you draw the line. Next thing you know Crisp will be moonwalking backwards if he hits a grand slam or does something even more great in his peabrain.

I believe majority of our youth already think this sport is boring as hell, so I doubt it sends any sort of message to our youth. Maybe seeing that a player may be having some sort of fun, and showing some sort of emotion helps the sport.

Personally I'm not a fan of the pussification of american youth...it's comical in a way.

Anyway this isn't the little league. I think bother you more than anyone else.

[Old#5fan]

Read about it. Less chance of dying. You might want to pick a better example.

Believe it or not, I do understand your point, and I understood it before you devoted all those words to explaining it. My problem is that you don't even allow for the possibility that someone who hasn't seen it could understand it better, and that's just not true. In fact, a lot of times you need to have the distance to truly interpret what has happened.

Nah, I allow for the possibility that someone who hasn't seen it could understand it better, but only when the person who is seeing it doesn't fully understand or comprehend what they are seeing.

I will give you another example. Suppose you have two writers who are doing a piece on the Battle of Antietam (which happened very near where I live). One writes his piece without ever actually visiting the battle field and the other has visited it many times. In general, who will have a better understanding of what actually went on (I use Antietam, because unlike Gettysburg, it is essentially the same ground as it was during the war with little modern encroachment).

[Old#5fan]

With regard to Seattle here's an interesting take by Ken Rosenthal recounting what Jim Palmer said about the brawl and about Earl Weaver's attitude:

"The ugliest brawl I ever saw was a 20-minute donnybrook between the Orioles and Mariners on June 6, 1993. The benches emptied after Mike Mussina hit Bill Haselman in the left shoulder and Haselman charged the mound. That night, writing for The Baltimore Sun, I praised the Orioles, saying they had shown admirable fight. Maybe the dumbest thing I have ever written. The next day, Hall of Fame pitcher Jim Palmer pulled me aside, explaining that former Orioles manager Earl Weaver never wanted his pitchers to engage in beanball exchanges, fearing they would get injured. Sure enough, Mussina ended up missing significant time with back and shoulder injuries. At the time, he was the Orioles' version of Porcello, a phenomenal talent at the dawn of his career, though slightly older. And to this day, I carry Palmer's words with me. I understand the code, the time-honored baseball justice secretly preached by La Russa and Jim Leyland and practically every manager. But Weaver did not subscribe to the code, and if you ask me, he had the right idea. Common sense, people. Please. Before someone gets hurt." http://msn.foxsports.com/home/story/Beanballs-are-a-part-of-the-game,-but-senseless

Earl was a very smart man that we all agree, and his reasoning was sound, as he did have some of the best players around at the time.

However, during the epic Seattle brawl, I think the Oriole Manager at the time was fine with Mussina doing what he did. That was all started by the Seattle pitcher. He plunked an Oriole (forget who) and stood out there and laughed about it. He didn't even try to hide it. Trying to remember, but I believe Mike Hargrove was managing the O's at the time or was it Lee Mazzilli? Either way, they were former players unlike Earl, who never made it past the minors as a player. So maybe they understood more than Earl, how important it was to take a stand...

[Old#5fan]

I believe majority of our youth already think this sport is boring as hell, so I doubt it sends any sort of message to our youth. Maybe seeing that a player may be having some sort of fun, and showing some sort of emotion helps the sport.

Personally I'm not a fan of the pussification of american youth...it's comical in a way.

Anyway this isn't the little league. I think bother you more than anyone else.

I actually agree with you in that I think pussification of american youth is a big problem. When I played little league you didn't get to play automatically. My first year I sat the bench the entire season and got to PH twice. I earned my way up to starting in RF as a 5th grader. There was no such thing as a minor league back then.

Where I disgree with you though is in supporting hot dog antics as "exciting" or less boring. IMO the only way that would be exciting would be for something bigger to escalate because of it.

[Old#5fan]

I will give you another example Wedge, would you rather be able to see a live dinosaur or wooley Mammoth or read about them? If I had a choice between going back in time for a few hours to see them, I would take that opportunity anyday over reading any book or watching any video or movie.