A commenter ruffles Roch's feathers

[VeveJones007]

But, yeah, that's great and all. And I dig it. I just wish people would ask these questions on a very, very regular basis. I don't care if they're 4-18 or 18-4, if a manager makes an idiotic decision, I'd like to know why.

If we were Cubs/Yanks/Sox fans, there would be enough of us to exert enough pressure on the media to ask those questions. The problem is that there are only about 10,000 people at games and there isn't enough incentive for the media to push for those answers. The information market is too small for them to stick their necks out like we want them to.

[Arthur_Bryant]

He certainly does.

But if I'm a reporter in the press room, I'm not going to risk that gig to feel like I'm putting the organization's feet to the fire. Every single one of the men and women that cover the O's have a dream job. Why risk it? They've all worked very hard to get where they are, and with the dozens (if not quite litterally hundreds) of folks behind them that would give their [insert quote from Bull Durham here] to be in their position, why would they wear out their welcome?

Besides, Roch is hardly an O's apologist. That quiz last week was a verbal ass-whipping for the players. It bordered on insulting, if you ask me. He's not afraid to put it like it is. But he's also not a baseball professional, he probably doesn't know the extreme interal operations of a baseball organization, and he's professional enough in his position that he won't pretend that he does.

A misconception here, I think.

Most of those in the press room are not employed by the O's, even indirectly, and their employment doesn't--or shouldn't--depend on avoiding penetrating questions or criticism of the team. In fact, their employment should depend on their covering the team and the organization thoroughly and asking tough questions where necessary.

This doesn't apply to Roch, whose paycheck is issued by an entity owned by the Orioles. I don't expect him to function as an independent journalist.

From the perspective of a working journalist and former sportswriter, I thought that the comments by "Jeff" were cogent and very much on the mark, particularly the last couple of lines:

Why can't the media find a whistle blower to find out what exactly goes on in the organization? How can the real story of this debacle not been looked into with some amount of detail?

Nearly 15 years after the last change of ownership, there are still far too many unknowns about how this organization is run, where the lines of responsibility run, and the financial realities. If I were the Sun sports editor, or a TV news director of a local station, I would have made this a priority years ago. (Actually the Washington Post has the most resources for this, but they have abdicated all responsibility re: the O's).

Roch pays the rent with PA money, so I don't expect tough questions from him. I am disappointed that he blew off a great comment into which someone invested a lot of time and intelligent thought.

[stef]

Maybe Roch should tell this guy to meet him in the batting cage!

[nemO821]

The guy wants the media to represent the voice of the fan, and I think that is a good point to make.

Think about the press in NY, Boston, LA, Chicago, etc... They are known to have very critical media guys and share the voice of the common fan. They ask the questions that piss off players, managers and owners.

We don't have that here. Rosenthal was that guy but everyone hated him because he was "too critical". Well he was right.

Now, the Oriole malaise has infected the media too.

Every Sport fan is fan Boston hates all the media in Boston. Especially the Globe and Herald. You can be critical and ask the tough questions but it aint gonna make any difference at all.

[ChaosLex]

Has no one really guessed that Jeff = JTrea yet?

Not one mention of premium talent. Nope, wasn't him.

[Sanfran327]

But, yeah, that's great and all. And I dig it. I just wish people would ask these questions on a very, very regular basis. I don't care if they're 4-18 or 18-4, if a manager makes an idiotic decision, I'd like to know why.

I gotcha. I guess I do, too. I wouldn't mind hearing a few more candid quotes from the O's braintrust.

But it won't solve anything. I won't get any satisfaction out of DT saying, "Well, you know what? I made a really bad move last night. I should have taken him out at the first sign of trouble instead of letting him dangle like a worm on a hook. I guess I'm just lousy at my job."

(I can't belive I'm about to make my second Bull Durham reference in the same thread, but...) It's like the movie says: "You play this game with fear and arrogance."

I think that goes for most things in life. There are times where you need to own up to your mistakes, and there are times where you need to maintain your position as an authority figure and a knowledgeable person. As the manager of a professional baseball team, Dave Trembley needs to maintain his position. Hopefully, he's learning from any mistakes he's made, but doing it behind closed doors.

[Sanfran327]

A misconception here, I think.

Most of those in the press room are not employed by the O's, even indirectly, and their employment doesn't--or shouldn't--depend on avoiding penetrating questions or criticism of the team. In fact, their employment should depend on their covering the team and the organization thoroughly and asking tough questions where necessary.

This doesn't apply to Roch, whose paycheck is issued by an entity owned by the Orioles. I don't expect him to function as an independent journalist.

From the perspective of a working journalist and former sportswriter, I thought that the comments by "Jeff" were cogent and very much on the mark, particularly the last couple of lines:

Nearly 15 years after the last change of ownership, there are still far too many unknowns about how this organization is run, where the lines of responsibility run, and the financial realities. If I were the Sun sports editor, or a TV news director of a local station, I would have made this a priority years ago. (Actually the Washington Post has the most resources for this, but they have abdicated all responsibility re: the O's).

Roch pays the rent with PA money, so I don't expect tough questions from him. I am disappointed that he blew off a great comment into which someone invested a lot of time and intelligent thought.

This is the issue.

I'm a contractor for a federal agency. My company could LOVE me, but if my customer isn't happy with me, I'm gone.

Who the media's customer is is debatable. Sure, we pay for their work. But the Orioles create the news they report.

[Going Underground]

Roch is a good guy, but he is a MASN employee. Did he break one story this off season? He is only allowed to say so much. He was able to critcize the players last week because they let him. I want to see him say anything about MacPhail or Angelos. I know he is not that happy in his job but the media jobs are far and few between.

[Sanfran327]

It's like I said in my first post of this thread. It's not about whether someone should or should not be holding the Orioles accountable. It's about being professional.

You wouldn't want me to walk into your office and stand over your shoulder telling you all of the things that you're doing wrong. Particularly if I'm not in your line of work.

[Sanfran327]

Roch is a good guy, but he is a MASN employee. Did he break one story this off season? He is only allowed to say so much. He was able to critcize the players last week because they let him. I want to see him say anything about MacPhail or Angelos. I know he is not that happy in his job but the media jobs are far and few between.

This is intersting... do you know him?

[Dipper9]

Roch is a good guy, but he is a MASN employee. Did he break one story this off season? He is only allowed to say so much. He was able to critcize the players last week because they let him. I want to see him say anything about MacPhail or Angelos. I know he is not that happy in his job but the media jobs are far and few between.

I like Roch, but if you are implying that you have inside knowledge that he doesn't like his job, I have to ask...WTF? You get to travel around and write about a BASEBALL team! I realize this is not easy work, and I am not trying to diminish the long hours he has to put in, but writing about a baseball team would be a dream come true for many people in America.

Grim, please tell me I am reading your post wrong!!!!:scratchchinhmm:

[TiredofLosing20]

I am almost expecting to hear from Drew Forrester here. If given the opportunity WNST would love to ask the tough questions. It is odd that we are lambasting "the media" for not asking tough questions but WNST's popularity here is zilch. WNST asked tough questions and was critical and they were essentially black balled.

My point (which isn't to defend or advertise for WNST who I stopped listening too years ago because there self loathing became untolerable) is that reporters walk a fine line. If they become to critical they run the risk of losing access which to a reporter is their lifeline. Without access there is nothing to report. Now this clearly doesn't pertain to Roch as he is bascially an Oriole employee. I am guessing his set of rules are even more restricted than that of Schmuck or Zriebec.

I like Roch he is a great source of general Oriole information but it isn't fair to look towards him for critical questions or uncomfortable comments about AM or PA.

[Sanfran327]

I like Roch, but if you are implying that you have inside knowledge that he doesn't like his job, I have to ask...WTF? You get to travel around and write about a BASEBALL team! I realize this is not easy work, and I am not trying to diminish the long hours he has to put in, but writing about a baseball team would be a dream come true for many people in America.

Grim, please tell me I am reading your post wrong!!!!:scratchchinhmm:

I think the implication is that there is a tradeoff: Roch gets an awesome job, but maybe is not given carte blanche in his content. For a professional writer of his ability, that could be pretty frustrating. I experience similar stuff everyday, but it's all in the name of staying employed.

[Dwight Schrute]

I am almost expecting to hear from Drew Forrester here. If given the opportunity WNST would love to ask the tough questions. It is odd that we are lambasting "the media" for not asking tough questions but WNST's popularity here is zilch. WNST asked tough questions and was critical and they were essentially black balled.

My point (which isn't to defend or advertise for WNST who I stopped listening too years ago because there self loathing became untolerable) is that reporters walk a fine line. If they become to critical they run the risk of losing access which to a reporter is their lifeline. Without access there is nothing to report. Now this clearly doesn't pertain to Roch as he is bascially an Oriole employee. I am guessing his set of rules are even more restricted than that of Schmuck or Zriebec.

I like Roch he is a great source of general Oriole information but it isn't fair to look towards him for critical questions or uncomfortable comments about AM or PA.

This. If you are reporting on the baseball team and get replaced because you ask them a tough question, than you weren't really a reporter to begin with. You were a glorified PR rep.

[Going Underground]

I think the implication is that there is a tradeoff: Roch gets an awesome job, but maybe is not given carte blanche in his content. For a professional writer of his ability, that could be pretty frustrating. I experience similar stuff everyday, but it's all in the name of staying employed.

I guess you love your job but get frustrated by not always being able to say what you want. We all have to bite our tongues sometines. He does love the Oriole park weight room.:laughlol: