a700hitter

With the Number 1 pick, the Tigers selected Spencer Torkelson, 3B out of Arizona State. The Red Sox have the 17th pick.

They let him pitch in the WBC and he blew out his arm. He was through after that.

Have the Italians and Irish stopped killing each other in Boston yet?

I can't say that I have seen that type of behavior as being prevalent at Fenway. I can say that it is the only ballpark where I have seen that type of behavior. I saw it as late as 1977 when Jim Rice hit a ball to the gap and a guy got up and yelled "Run N--!" over the rest of the crowd. I am from Brooklyn, NY and that would have started a race riot where I am from. My first reaction was to get ready to run for the exit because my fight or flight instinct kicked in. But nothing happened. No one reprimanded him or confronted him. He was not removed initially. It was appalling. It would be unfair to accuse the crowd of accepting the behavior. Clearly, from my observation, most people in the crowd were offended and did not approve. As the guy continued harping on Rice, my recollection is that he was booed and that he did not last the entire game. The same leather throated ******* was also screaming at Yaz calling him a Pollack. It was only one guy, but it was an eye-opening experience for me. I haven't witnessed anything like that at Fenway in over 43 years, but I don't doubt that it has happened since then. It only takes 1 ******* to poison the environment. In NY, there would have been blacks in the crowd, and the guy would have been violently confronted immediately. Back then at Fenway, the crowd was almost entirely white. This guy got booed and eventually was removed from Fenway. I always felt that he was not from Boston and not a Red Sox fan as his attacks were entirely directed at the home team. The good news is I have not seen that type of behavior at Fenway or any ballpark in more than 40 years.

I think he was the biggest dog to wear the Red Sox uniform.

Crawford might be at the top of my list of least favorite Red Sox players.

Not to be political, but if there aren't spikes in infections in about a week from today in the cities where there have been the largest protests, that will be very encouraging evidence for allowing mass gatherings like sports.

They have to make a decision soon if they are going to play at all.

That’s right and if we find other entertainment, they are screwed. You are right that the consumers are the biggest stakeholder, because we do fund the whole thing and if they lose sight of the consumer they will be shooting themselves.

It doesn’t matter whose side you take in this. People just want to see baseball. If it doesn’t happen because of $, people will find other things to do and other interests to pursue and many will be pissed off and mad. And when they restart baseball in 2021 after all major sports have restarted, the sport’s popularity will take a major hit. And it will not matter who was at fault.

If the owners have the ultimate decision on whether the season will be played, they have the leverage regardless of what the agreement says. That's not a legal opinion, but just an observation. Both sides lawyers should have been prepared for and made provision for the possibility that there would be empty stadiums.

Thanks for the explanation. That clears it up. Did they sign an agreement about a shortened season or was that a handshake type agreement?

I don't get this part of Pillar's comment. ^ I thought the owners were not responsible to pay on the MLB contracts if there was no season.

And broken down journeymen with one foot or both feet in their baseball grave.

I don't think the owners want to dip down to their prospects and start their service clocks.

I would argue that baseball undertook many fan friendly initiatives to win back the fans because they knew they had damaged the sport. I'll take the word of people like Glavine who lived through it rather than an interpretation by you of attendance stats.

Wouldnt there be a danger that too many would opt out?

That’s an interesting possibility — that some players would go against the union and refuse to play. It’s like they would be striking scabs crossing the labor line.

No one will sympathize with either side. If money keeps them off the field, the fans will punish both sides and stay away when they return. Jad is wrong that the fans returned after the ‘94 strike. It wasn’t until the overhyped drug fueled Home Run record chase by MGwire and Sosa in 1998 that popularity returned for baseball.

Glavine was a well respected and fierce advocate for the players union so his warning carries great weight imo.

Last Saturday, I heard an interview with Tom Glavine. He had a prominent role in the 1994 season-ending strike as a player rep. He recalled the lasting damage to the sport afterward and that it took time to win back the fans. He also recalled a labor dispute after 2001 and said that both sides realized that they would permanently lose the fans if they had another strike. He remembered that after 9/11 that there was such excitement by the fans when baseball returned as it was a return to normalcy. He sees a parallel with this pandemic. People want a return to normalcy and baseball is part of that. He strongly warned that if the doctors and health officials give the go ahead to start the baseball season and the season doesn't get played because of money issues, there will be long lasting damage done to the sport. Like after 1994, he warns that many fans will not come back.

This forum has become an unhealthy place. Taking a break is probably a good idea. I think you have my contact info if you want to drop me a line.

If they start playing to empty stadiums, the Astros will not have to bang the garbage can so hard.

Exhausting.

I am still not clear on this point. If the season gets cancelled, do the players still get paid?