MDCardsFan wrote:That may be true. But MLB has a reponsibility to the product they are putting on the field. It is their direct responsibility to both insure the integrity of the game and even more important, to not tacitly encourage its players to break the law in order to drive better ratings/attendance.
Neither MLB or the Cardinals encouraged LaRussa to go to dinner, consume too much alcohol and drive home. He is a grown man and was arrested for activites committed on his own time. Since his arrest is a misdemeanor, I see no reason to expect his employer to suspend him. I'm quite sure the Florida Judge will show him no deferrence.
Right.
And I think that Law basically agrees with you:
We don't want your liability, we don't want your bad press and we especially don't want to condone or enable such selfish and dangerous behavior.
He is saying that events like this are an unnecessary burden on fellow players, on the team and on the league as a whole. Institute rules within the game to discourage it. And no, just because there are not rules does not mean they encourage it... it just means that there are not enough consequences.
GatewaySnayke wrote:Yes, but the problem is that it has no business being in the article in the first place. There's always going to be someone who has a radical opinion. Out of the millions or so Cardinal fans across the globe, how many actually believe that La Russa should have gotten off?
The opinion is far from extreme. I heard numerous people give similar excuses. Maybe not along the lines of him getting off completely, but them downplaying it big time. In fact, I specifically remember those exact lines being given ("he was tired," "he has long days," etc).
You really think there's a significant number of Cardinal fans who think drunk driving is acceptable and makes you a folk hero? Because that's exactly what Law was implying in his article. That Cardinals Fans think the death of thousands of people every year is acceptable, and participating in behavior that leads to this makes you a folk hero.
So it appears that engaging in a reckless and stupid activity that kills thousands of people every year is not only acceptable but also makes you some sort of folk hero.
Oh wait, he used the word "appears". That makes it all better...
What Law had done in this article is written a deceptive piece to try and prove his point - that an unacceptable practice by someone who wants to be called a journalist.
That's really the only statement in the whole article that I had a problem with. I said that earlier ("He does not lump the entire fan base together with quotes (maybe in the "the crowd gave an ovation" part, but not there).")
But nothing else comes to mind and I agree with the general idea of the article.
Popeye_Card wrote:Steroids are a bigger threat to the game, which is why baseball has a more stringint policy on the matter.
It depends on if you view it from a "role model" point of view or not. I think a player getting a DUI is worse than taking steroids from that aspect.
Let's break down the role model thing.
Kids see great athletes excel at sports. These athletes make tons of money, live an awesome life, and are reportedly taking steroids. If a kid wants to someday become a famous, rich baseball player, he will probably be tempted to take steroids to improve his game to get to that level. His/her decision to take steroids is directly affected by what he thinks is required to be a great athlete.
Now, a kid has a decision to get behind the wheel after drinking too much. Whether famous baseball players have been busted for drunk driving or not, it will have little effect on whether or not that kid is going to get behind the wheel of that car. More likely, the values and support his parents and friends have or have not given him will affect his decision one way or the other.
The more and more we see and hear about famous people getting DUI's, the more and more we as a country are going to perceive it to be an acceptable thing to do.
You can argue that if you want but that's what I believe.
So yes, I do believe a DUI is more severe than an athlete taking steroid, even if we're basing upon impact as a role model alone.
Last edited by Bo Hart on March 27 07, 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We don't want your liability, we don't want your bad press and we especially don't want to condone or enable such selfish and dangerous behavior.
He is saying that events like this are an unnecessary burden on fellow players, on the team and on the league as a whole. Institute rules within the game to discourage it. And no, just because there are not rules does not mean they encourage it... it just means that there are not enough consequences.
I'm sorry, but the embarassment and legal ramifications of a DUI far outweigh a slap-on-the-wrist suspension from MLB. If a player is going to drink and drive, I don't think any punishment from MLB is going to change that much.
Kyle wrote:The more and more we see and here about famous people getting DUI's, the more and more we as a country are going to perceive it to be an acceptable thing to do.
You can argue that if you want but that's what I believe.
So yes, I do believe a DUI is more severe than an athlete taking steroid, even if we're basing upon impact as a role model alone.
I'm not going to not drive drunk because athletes do or do not do it.
I'm not going to drive drunk because of personal morals and the big-time threat of losing my liscence, etc.
You either have those morals, or you don't. You either fear the consequences of the law, or you don't. Athletes being suspended for DUI's isn't going to change that.
We don't want your liability, we don't want your bad press and we especially don't want to condone or enable such selfish and dangerous behavior.
He is saying that events like this are an unnecessary burden on fellow players, on the team and on the league as a whole. Institute rules within the game to discourage it. And no, just because there are not rules does not mean they encourage it... it just means that there are not enough consequences.
I'm sorry, but the embarassment and legal ramifications of a DUI far outweigh a slap-on-the-wrist suspension from MLB. If a player is going to drink and drive, I don't think any punishment from MLB is going to change that much.
--P--
I won't argue that.
But Law says that a first-time steroid offender receives a 50 game suspension, which is hardly a "slap on the wrist." He also suggests that a DUI is a lot worse than steroids.
I'm not suggesting that a player/manager should be suspended more than 50 games (or even 50 games) for a DUI. But I do think they should do something that carries some pretty steep consequences.
Whether or not this should apply to the "average Joe" at whatever random job shouldn't really matter. These guys are viewed by millions of people everyday and have a responsibility to be good role models. Therefore, they should be held to different standards.
Kyle wrote:The more and more we see and here about famous people getting DUI's, the more and more we as a country are going to perceive it to be an acceptable thing to do.
You can argue that if you want but that's what I believe.
So yes, I do believe a DUI is more severe than an athlete taking steroid, even if we're basing upon impact as a role model alone.
I'm not going to not drive drunk because athletes do or do not do it.
I'm not going to drive drunk because of personal morals and the big-time threat of losing my liscence, etc.
You either have those morals, or you don't. You either fear the consequences of the law, or you don't. Athletes being suspended for DUI's isn't going to change that.
--P--
Just like the value and support of your parents is going to influence whether or not you take steroids.
You will fear the consequences of being suspended from the sport you love so dearly.
The argument can be made for both situations.
PS: I'm going to work so I'll continue this tonight (or tomorrow) if you guys want.
Kyle wrote:
Just like the value and support of your parents is going to influence whether or not you take steroids.
You will fear the consequences of being suspended from the sport you love so dearly.
The argument can be made for both situations.
But the lure of money and fame may make me chuck my morals to the side. It won't do me a whole lot of good though if I'm caught and suspended, not making money anymore.
Steroid use is also a long-term, calculated mistake you are making. Getting behind the wheel drunk is an isolated, spur-of-the-moment decision. Just like 1st degree murder vs. 2nd degree, the consequences for your actions are different.
I just think steroid use and sports are closely related. Drunk driving and sports may be connected, but all walks of life are involved with drunk driving. Why call out baseball for not having tougher policies than all other careers? Just like I expect baseball to have a tougher steroid policy than a trucking company, I expect a trucking company to have a more serious drunk driving policy than baseball. And they do--DOT regulated industries have very strict drug and alcohol policies.
