MLB Bans Rookie Hazing

[ArtVanDelay]

I'm not really into banning things. Let the players decide and let them do what they want. There's too many rules.

[MntneerLegion]

31 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

I'm not really into banning things. Let the players decide and let them do what they want. There's too many rules.

 

That's a mantra to live by.

[epic]

The suits up top telling players how to live when they're just trying to have a little fun. Can't say it's much of a surprise these days.

[canonfaz]

Dumb dumb dumb dumb.

[PaulFolk]

13 minutes ago, epic said:

The suits up top telling players how to live when they're just trying to have a little fun. Can't say it's much of a surprise these days.

It's not just "the suits." I think plenty of players are in favor of this change, too, including most of the Orioles. See the quotes from Tyler Wilson and Brady Anderson here: http://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2016/12/leftovers-for-breakfast-56.html

I think Wilson put it pretty well: "I think that the whole hazing process is, why would we make it any more difficult for a rookie or somebody that’s just coming in the league, why would we make that transition any more difficult? They’re part of the team, we’re all in it together and we have the same unified cause, so any type of hazing or negligence toward respecting the other person, I don’t think that’s going to be a problem for our organization."

Do you think most players want to see pictures of themselves on social media being forced to wear silly costumes? I wouldn't be surprised if the players were the ones pushing for this ban. 

And FYI, the ban doesn't apply to all costumes -- only offensive ones. So you could still force someone to dress as, say, Captain America if it was that important to you. 

[PaulFolk]

9 hours ago, MntneerLegion said:

So when a bunch of rookies are urged to put on dresses that's unacceptable but shoving a pie up someones nose from behind isn't?  Sorry I don't follow that logic.  I'll make it a little easier...if one of them was going to lead to a charge of assault which one would it be?

The Orioles stopped doing pies last year.

[canonfaz]

To me it's just extraneous (is that a word?) red tape and rules. The managers, coaches, and team leaders should be the ones policing this kind of stuff.

Does Buck need to fill out a report now every time a rookie helps Jones or Davis carry their luggage from the plane?

IMO, the stuff that this is designed to prevent is stuff that already is "illegal" under state and federal laws.

It's not that big of a deal, but I just think it's not needed.

[StottyByNature]

29 minutes ago, epic said:

The suits up top telling players how to live when they're just trying to have a little fun. Can't say it's much of a surprise these days.

Is it fun, though?  Perhaps it is fun for the veterans.  There is a very fine line when it comes to hazing, and it is the line between having fun and intimidation/bullying.  I have been "good hazed" and "bad hazed" before.  I would happily give up the experiences of the good hazing to have never been subjected to the bad hazing.  I think the public hazing that we see is probably OK, but it only takes a few tormentors to take it to another level (and which would probably never be made public.)  I think this is a good rule.  

[Tony-OH]

Good that MLB got in front of this horrible behavior that causes so much emotional distress. I mean, look at the distraught on their faces due to the humiliation.

Look, I know there are a lot of guys who haven't really been in a male world like professional sports, the military, motorcycle clubs, etc, but 99.9% of the guys who have have no issue with this and actually find it a bonding experience. A right of passage as they say. Hazing becomes an issue when people are physically harmed or forced to do illegal activities. Asking a rookie to put on some ridiculous custume is just pat of the fun, and those that chose to be offended over this kind of stuff probably get offended pretty quickly over a lot of stuff.

[PaulFolk]

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

Good that MLB got in front of this horrible behavior that causes so much emotional distress. I mean, look at the distraught on their faces due to the humiliation.

Look, I know there are a lot of guys who haven't really been in a male world like professional sports, the military, motorcycle clubs, etc, but 99.9% of the guys who have have no issue with this and actually find it a bonding experience. A right of passage as they say. Hazing becomes an issue when people are physically harmed or forced to do illegal activities. Asking a rookie to put on some ridiculous custume is just pat of the fun, and those that chose to be offended over this kind of stuff probably get offended pretty quickly over a lot of stuff.

Where are you getting that 99.9% figure? That's a severe overestimate. So far, based on reactions to the ban, there seems to be a pretty even split among MLBers -- some think hazing is all just harmless fun, while others think it's detrimental and useless. Several of the Orioles quoted so far seem to lean toward the second one. And yes, hazing can be demoralizing, even when well-intentioned. IIRC, when Buck took over as manager, he put a stop to veterans hazing Matt Wieters because he felt it was detrimental.

Sandy Alderson has familiarity with being in a male world, as a former Marine. He said this about hazing: "I’ve seen it in the military. For all the camaraderie it’s supposed to promote, it’s divisive and I think undercuts morale." http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/sandy-alderson-applauds-new-hazing-restrictions-1.12751825

I just don't see how forcing people to dress up in ridiculous and sometimes offensive costumes is fun, at least not for the ones dressing up. If you want to build morale and camaraderie, there are hundreds of more productive ways to do so. Buy someone dinner. Go out to a bar. Go on a fishing trip. 

[MntneerLegion]

20 minutes ago, PaulFolk said:

Where are you getting that 99.9% figure? That's a severe overestimate. So far, based on reactions to the ban, there seems to be a pretty even split among MLBers -- some think hazing is all just harmless fun, while others think it's detrimental and useless. Several of the Orioles quoted so far seem to lean toward the second one. And yes, hazing can be demoralizing, even when well-intentioned. IIRC, when Buck took over as manager, he put a stop to veterans hazing Matt Wieters because he felt it was detrimental.

Sandy Alderson has familiarity with being in a male world, as a former Marine. He said this about hazing: "I’ve seen it in the military. For all the camaraderie it’s supposed to promote, it’s divisive and I think undercuts morale." http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/sandy-alderson-applauds-new-hazing-restrictions-1.12751825

I just don't see how forcing people to dress up in ridiculous and sometimes offensive costumes is fun, at least not for the ones dressing up. If you want to build morale and camaraderie, there are hundreds of more productive ways to do so. Buy someone dinner. Go out to a bar. Go on a fishing trip. 

That sure sounds like there is already a safety net for players, the manager, who is much more aware of the social dynamics on his team.  I guess MLB is saying managers are incapable of discerning good natured teasing from truly detrimental behavior since they took the decision from the managers.  Could someone help me out and provide a list of the masses of players who have filed complaints over hazing?  This rule is political correctness run amuck.  I wonder how long it will be before throwing the ball around the infield after a bases empty strikeout is banned because it's insensitive to the poor fellow who struck out?

[backwardsk]

11 minutes ago, MntneerLegion said:

That sure sounds like there is already a safety net for players, the manager, who is much more aware of the social dynamics on his team.  I guess MLB is saying managers are incapable of discerning good natured teasing from truly detrimental behavior since they took the decision from the managers.  Could someone help me out and provide a list of the masses of players who have filed complaints over hazing?  This rule is political correctness run amuck.  I wonder how long it will be before throwing the ball around the infield after a bases empty strikeout is banned because it's insensitive to the poor fellow who struck out?

http://www.si.com/mlb/2016/11/21/texas-rangers-prospects-sexual-assault-hazing-investigation

It's just bros jerking each other off.

[PaulFolk]

1 hour ago, MntneerLegion said:

That sure sounds like there is already a safety net for players, the manager, who is much more aware of the social dynamics on his team.  I guess MLB is saying managers are incapable of discerning good natured teasing from truly detrimental behavior since they took the decision from the managers.  Could someone help me out and provide a list of the masses of players who have filed complaints over hazing?  This rule is political correctness run amuck.  I wonder how long it will be before throwing the ball around the infield after a bases empty strikeout is banned because it's insensitive to the poor fellow who struck out?

I'm pretty sure that information isn't available to the public.

I would bet there are more than a few players who have taken issue with being hazed. That could mean they filed a complaint, or had a talk with their manager, or just internally stewed about it. But clearly it was an important enough issue to be included in the CBA that both MLB and the players' union agreed to.

[Great8]

I'll speak up as a female fan, and I'll actually let former Sporting News reporter Jesse Spector say it for me, because he's spot on. From his Twitter:

 

Quote

A note to former MLB players upset about the ban on making rookies dress up as women: It’s not about you. It's barely even about the players who still will go through rookie rituals, which are mostly harmless fun and a good laugh. It's about the fact that this once was a private or semi-private thing, now seen all over thanks to social media. It's about the large number of fans who see the pictures, and see women being treated as lesser. It's about MLB saying that is not OK. It's not people coming into the locker room and saying, "hey, clean this up." The locker room was brought to the public. The public reacted. So, to the players now: Have fun. Let rookies do silly, harmless things. Make sure they're really OK with it. Grow the game by showing fun.

That's basically it. When these guys are hazed, and part of that hazing is dressing up as women, as Jesse said, women are being shown as "lesser." Maybe as guys you don't or even can't get that, but to a lot of women, that's not OK. I buy tickets, I pay for the MLB app, I have cable mainly so I can watch the O's, and I'm sure I'm not alone. It comes down to the fact that MLB doesn't want to alienate any current or potential customers. As always, it's about the bottom line.

[Tony-OH]

2 hours ago, PaulFolk said:

Where are you getting that 99.9% figure? That's a severe overestimate. So far, based on reactions to the ban, there seems to be a pretty even split among MLBers -- some think hazing is all just harmless fun, while others think it's detrimental and useless. Several of the Orioles quoted so far seem to lean toward the second one. And yes, hazing can be demoralizing, even when well-intentioned. IIRC, when Buck took over as manager, he put a stop to veterans hazing Matt Wieters because he felt it was detrimental.

Sandy Alderson has familiarity with being in a male world, as a former Marine. He said this about hazing: "I’ve seen it in the military. For all the camaraderie it’s supposed to promote, it’s divisive and I think undercuts morale." http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/sandy-alderson-applauds-new-hazing-restrictions-1.12751825

I just don't see how forcing people to dress up in ridiculous and sometimes offensive costumes is fun, at least not for the ones dressing up. If you want to build morale and camaraderie, there are hundreds of more productive ways to do so. Buy someone dinner. Go out to a bar. Go on a fishing trip. 

I made up the number obviously and of course it's an exaggeration. There are always going to be outliers like Alderson or the wet sock guy who doesn't like it, but I think most see the fun of it. I just find it ridiculous that MLB would have to ban it. What's next, will they ban putting gum on the top of hats or throwing sunflower seeds at players in celebration? Where does this end? If it undercuts the morale of any player, you should immediately get rid of the that snowflake because he'll probably crack in pressure situations as well.

By the way, no one is forced to do anything. A player could always refuse. It's not like they were going to get a sock party in the middle of the night for not playing along. It's harmless fun. 

By the way, anyone who thinks that by making the rookies dress as ladies makes them lesser "people" is ridiculous. I know some you live in the world where you are supposed to be offended by everything, but in the real world, the world where men still are men, and woman are woman, dressing like a lady is funny because they are a man and they normally wouldn't dress that way. 

This is not homophobic, or anti-women, or misogynistic or anything else some people will try to come up with, it's just guys having some fun with their rookies. The rookies can refuse if it's hurt their pride so much, but as a guy who's been in the military, athletic teams, and a motorcycle club, I can tell you that if you want to hurt morale, get all butt hurt the first time someone jokes around with you. 

Whether you want to call it hazing or initiation or whatever, what is really is is a right of passage that says "You are now one of us!" I realize there are people who will never understand this, and I realize that I've probably offended some of out there, but at the end of the day, this getting offended by everything culture is what needs to change, not these kind of fun little games.