So, managers can still manage after being ejected?

[NashLumber]

Wow, that's interesting. I love these connections to the distant past, Mack made his major league debut as a player for the Washington NL team in 1886. That was before fouls were strikes, four balls were a walk, and the invention of the pitcher's mound.

It's fun to do six degrees of separation like that. I peppered him with a few questions. I asked him about the Orioles of the time (Brooks only had a handful of games that overlapped in those two seasons, so I'm not sure if any of those games were vs. the A's). I asked him who was the best overall ball player he saw and he said Mantle. He did say one point of pride was striking our Mantle (in his prime either in '55 or '56) once. But his career was fairly short, two full years and part of one. I think had he (Bill Harrington) stuck with it through expansion of the early 60s, I think he'd have had several more years as a relief pitcher. He gave it up as he was not a fan of flying and he had a young family. So farming was a natural fallback for him and he did security guard work for NC's governor for many years. He said he still gets an official letter once a year from Brooks Robinson as a part of the veterans pension committee. I think Brooks still has a big role in that.

I met him for the first time in the early 70s. He was probably around 43 or so then and he pitched in a fathers vs. coaches game. Even then, he was the fastest pitcher I'd seen up to that point. It was stunning to my 10 year old eyes and the coaches looked silly trying to hit him. He was faster than any high school player I'd seen. I didn't see a pro game till I was 21. He's a sweet man and he later coached me on an All-Star team, in fact it was the last game of my youth league career at 18.

[Aglets]

In the beginning the manager was usually a player. Over time that shifted, and I think it was probably common for a 19th century non-playing manager to wear street clothes (i.e. a suit). Maybe to differentiate himself from the players, to be obviously part of management. I think Ned Hanlon wore a suit, and Frank Seele. So what Mack wore was probably common when he started managing, but unique by the time he retired a half-century later. I'm sure someone, somewhere knows the history of why 55-year-old potbellied managers started wearing players' uniforms. Sounds like a question for Ask Bill James.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/23/opinion/greene-baseball-manager-uniforms/

Saw a few articles that all basically said the same thing.

In the real old days, you had a business manager for a team who was in charge of team logistics and finances (he wore a suit) and you had a 'captain' who was more like what we'd call the manager today......and he was usually a player. The different dress obviously distinguished between the two.

This went on for awhile, until the business manager eventually left the dugout and sort of morphed into other positions. Some managers (Mack) felt like if they weren't players, they shouldn't wear the uniform of a player......but it seems like their view was in the minority and never really went anywhere. so most managers just always wore the uniform.

So basically, it's inertia. Blame that.........or Pete Rose.

[DrungoHazewood]

It's fun to do six degrees of separation like that. I peppered him with a few questions. I asked him about the Orioles of the time (Brooks only had a handful of games that overlapped in those two seasons, so I'm not sure if any of those games were vs. the A's). I asked him who was the best overall ball player he saw and he said Mantle. He did say one point of pride was striking our Mantle (in his prime either in '55 or '56) once. But his career was fairly short, two full years and part of one. I think had he (Bill Harrington) stuck with it through expansion of the early 60s, I think he'd have had several more years as a relief pitcher. He gave it up as he was not a fan of flying and he had a young family. So farming was a natural fallback for him and he did security guard work for NC's governor for many years. He said he still gets an official letter once a year from Brooks Robinson as a part of the veterans pension committee. I think Brooks still has a big role in that.

I met him for the first time in the early 70s. He was probably around 43 or so then and he pitched in a fathers vs. coaches game. Even then, he was the fastest pitcher I'd seen up to that point. It was stunning to my 10 year old eyes and the coaches looked silly trying to hit him. He was faster than any high school player I'd seen. I didn't see a pro game till I was 21. He's a sweet man and he later coached me on an All-Star team, in fact it was the last game of my youth league career at 18.

Thanks for that. It stuff like this that makes me cringe when people say stuff like "why the bleep is TJ McFarland on the team he sucks!?!?" Harrington was on a McFarland level. He was probably the best player on many of his youth and minor league teams, was really good in Class D ball, and as you say made normal folks look silly on the ballfield years after he'd left the game.

[NashLumber]

He's got a Wikipedia page - William Womble Harrington. He played parts of 3 seasons in the majors.

Ok, I didn't know there was a Wiki page. I'd seen his stats in old baseball encylcopedias and online on Baseball Reference. I did find this pic awhile ago online. There's another pose from that time he signed and gave to me, but it's probaby at my Mom's house. That background almost looks like Commiskey Park, but the uniform looks like a home one. I never had a good feel for how Connie Mack Stadium looked like.

[NashLumber]

Thanks for that. It stuff like this that makes me cringe when people say stuff like "why the bleep is TJ McFarland on the team he sucks!?!?" Harrington was on a McFarland level. He was probably the best player on many of his youth and minor league teams, was really good in Class D ball, and as you say made normal folks look silly on the ballfield years after he'd left the game.

I hear ya! My final year of any kind of baseball was in an over 30s league in 2000 and some of the pitchers were former Durham Bulls who chose to live in the area. They were tough! This was 16 years ago when I was 38. Doug Glanville's brother was our center fielder. He never came to practice. He was our "ringer". The first time I ever saw him, he hit a long high home run on the first pitch he saw.

Yeah, I'd have loved to have seen what Harrington could have done had he stuck it out. Maybe he'd have made it to play in the postseason in the late 60s. He had been traded or purchased by the Tigers but that's when he called it a day.

[DrungoHazewood]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/23/opinion/greene-baseball-manager-uniforms/

Saw a few articles that all basically said the same thing.

In the real old days, you had a business manager for a team who was in charge of team logistics and finances (he wore a suit) and you had a 'captain' who was more like what we'd call the manager today......and he was usually a player. The different dress obviously distinguished between the two.

This went on for awhile, until the business manager eventually left the dugout and sort of morphed into other positions. Some managers (Mack) felt like if they weren't players, they shouldn't wear the uniform of a player......but it seems like their view was in the minority and never really went anywhere. so most managers just always wore the uniform.

So basically, it's inertia. Blame that.........or Pete Rose.

Okay, that's reasonable enough. In the 19th century the team captain (a respected player) was usually the guy who picked lineups and shifted people around and made pitching changes (even if that was often just getting the RFer and pitcher to switch positions). And as you said sometimes there was also a business manager. The captain and business guy and owner often had overlapping responsibilities, and they included things that today would be the responsibility of the GM or scouts. By the 1890s Hanlon and Selee and Mack and others were more like hybrid manager/GMs/owners. But well into the 20th century the roles were still evolving.

[DrungoHazewood]

Ok, I didn't know there was a Wiki page. I'd seen his stats in old baseball encylcopedias and online on Baseball Reference. I did find this pic awhile ago online. There's another pose from that time he signed and gave to me, but it's probaby at my Mom's house. That background almost looks like Commiskey Park, but the uniform looks like a home one. I never had a good feel for how Connie Mack Stadium looked like.

Could be Municipal Stadium in KC. Harrington played all but one of his MLB games for the Kansas City A's.

[NashLumber]

Could be Municipal Stadium in KC. Harrington played all but one of his MLB games for the Kansas City A's.

That's got to be it. I forgot the A's were in KC by then.

[Tx Oriole]

Valentine turned us down for an interview, although I don't think he was the Orioles' top choice anyway. Still, that was one less obstacle standing in Buck's way.

Sure glad they didnt hire Bobby Valentine.

[Morgan423]

Most astonishing part of that article: Connie Mack's last ejection was in 1895. He managed until 1950.

I wonder if he was ejected as a player. According to his managerial record, he spent his first three seasons (with the Pirates) as a player / manager.

[spiritof66]

In the beginning the manager was usually a player. Over time that shifted, and I think it was probably common for a 19th century non-playing manager to wear street clothes (i.e. a suit). Maybe to differentiate himself from the players, to be obviously part of management. I think Ned Hanlon wore a suit, and Frank Seele. So what Mack wore was probably common when he started managing, but unique by the time he retired a half-century later. I'm sure someone, somewhere knows the history of why 55-year-old potbellied managers started wearing players' uniforms. Sounds like a question for Ask Bill James.

Back in the nineteenth century, the "managers" who dressed in street clothes were more akin to what we think of as general managers, with overall responsibility for running the team; team captains made most of the in-game decisions. As the role of captains diminished and the in-game authority of managers increased, one possible reason that even non-playing managers wore uniforms is that in many instances they served as base coaches (and it may be that some who didn't wanted to be available to fill in as base coaches, in place of bench players, if a high-leverage situation arose).

In addition to Connie Mack, the other most recent non-uniformed manager was Burt Shotton, known by the acronym KOBS for Kindly Old Burt Shotton. Branch Rickey hired the 62-year-old Shotton to manage the Dodgers in 1947, Jackie Robinson's rookie year, when Leo Durocher was suspended. Shotton didn't wear a uniform but in four years won two pennants and just missed a third. (Shotton's reported explanation for not wearing a uniform tends to support my earlier suggestion about managers serving as base coaches: I took it off for the last time several years ago. Anyway, with the bunch of coaches we have on this club, why should I??)

After the 1950 season (the Dodgers' near-miss when they finished behind the the heroes of my youth, the Whiz Kid Phillies), Mack retired and Shotton was fired. I don't think there's been a non-uniform-wearing manager since then. I had thought that the rules now require managers to wear the team uniform, but a few internet items I've read say that's not so clear. What is clear, though, is that non-uniformed personnel cannot come onto the field. So, as a practical matter, a manager today has to be in uniform, so that he can delay the game while his video crew advises him whether to challenge an umpire's call.

[DrungoHazewood]

Back in the nineteenth century, the "managers" who dressed in street clothes were more akin to what we think of as general managers, with overall responsibility for running the team; team captains made most of the in-game decisions. As the role of captains diminished and the in-game authority of managers increased, one possible reason that even non-playing managers wore uniforms is that in many instances they served as base coaches (and it may be that some who didn't wanted to be available to fill in as base coaches, in place of bench players, if a high-leverage situation arose).

In the 19th century there was little history or precedence so they were often inventing things on the fly. There were playing captains who ran things on the field. But there were also non-playing managers who took the same role from the bench while also serving as de facto GMs and scouts and sometimes part owners.

After the 1950 season (the Dodgers' near-miss when they finished behind the the heroes of my youth, the Whiz Kid Phillies), Mack retired and Shotton was fired. I don't think there's been a non-uniform-wearing manager since then. I had thought that the rules now require managers to wear the team uniform, but a few internet items I've read say that's not so clear. What is clear, though, is that non-uniformed personnel cannot come onto the field. So, as a practical matter, a manager today has to be in uniform, so that he can delay the game while his video crew advises him whether to challenge an umpire's call.

I wonder if the ban on non-uniformed personnel on the field was to keep meddling owners and other front office types out of the games? I'd bet there was some precipitating incident, with a Bill Veeck or Charlie Finley type and some kind of stunt that led to this.

[DrungoHazewood]

I wonder if he was ejected as a player. According to his managerial record, he spent his first three seasons (with the Pirates) as a player / manager.

From his SABR bio:

Pittsburgh posted a 12-10 record the rest of the way and remained in seventh place among the 12 teams in the expanded N.L. Never the same after the 1893 injury, Mack appeared in just 14 games as a player in 1895, and though the Pirates finished seventh again, they improved to 71-61-3 and even led the league briefly in August. But they faded quickly, and on September 6 at the Polo Grounds, the frustrated Mack argued a call at second base, and veteran umpire Hank O’Day tossed him out of the game, the only official ejection of the Tall Tactician’s long career. After being thrown out of the game, Mack refused to leave the field. O’Day asked a New York City policeman to remove him, but Mack shook him off and didn’t leave until other officers arrived at the scene. He later said he was embarrassed by the incident. Though extremely passionate and highly competitive, the pragmatic Mack managed to maintain his composure through the rest of his career, because he thought it best for his team.

Also, I found this funny:

(Lefty) Grove was a loudmouth and a hot-head. His manager, Connie Mack, was a quiet, soft-spoken man who didn’t drink, didn’t smoke, swear, or raise his voice. In 1932, after a tough defeat, Grove was in the clubhouse raising Cain, throwing chairs, screaming at people and menacing lockers. Finally, Connie Mack came out to try to quiet him down. Grove was having none of it. “The hell with you, Mack,” he screamed. “To hell with you.” To which Mack responded quietly, as Grove stormed off to the shower, “And to hell with you too, Robert.”

[Redskins Rick]

In the 19th century there was little history or precedence so they were often inventing things on the fly. There were playing captains who ran things on the field. But there were also non-playing managers who took the same role from the bench while also serving as de facto GMs and scouts and sometimes part owners.

I wonder if the ban on non-uniformed personnel on the field was to keep meddling owners and other front office types out of the games? I'd bet there was some precipitating incident, with a Bill Veeck or Charlie Finley type and some kind of stunt that led to this.

Drungo,

I found this, and thought you would enjoy it:

During the origins of the game, the business manager -- who made travel arrangements, handled the books and ensured players received appropriate compensation -- was called the "manager." He wore street clothes.

The ?captain," who typically was a uniformed player, determined the batting order, made player substitutions and pitching changes, etc. He was basically what would be later known as a player/manager.

Around 1900, according to Thorn, the term "manager" stopped referring to the business manager and began referring to the person making strategic moves, player substitutions, etc.

The original "manager" would evolve into the modern-day general manager, and the player/manager would eventually fall out of vogue. (Only six -- Hank Bauer, El Tappe, Frank Robinson, Joe Torre, Don Kessinger and Pete Rose -- have occupied the latter role since 1960.)

[DrungoHazewood]

Drungo,

I found this, and thought you would enjoy it:

Thanks. I consider John Thorn to be the authoritative source on all things early baseball. That basically confirms that there was about a half century or more where the managerial responsibilities of a baseball team were evolving and changing and not consistent from team-to-team even in the same eras.