Devil Rays prospect throws bat at plate umpire

[LMan]

Originally Posted by Peruvian

I don't care who you are, what profession you're in or how the hell you feel about 'scab' umpires - no one deserves to be hit with a thrown bat by any player. Your view is just such an asinine way to look at it. Good one, PWL.

I wouldn't even wish a bat thrown at PWL during a game....but he can't extend that courtesy to others. I guess he checks the union card of each of his partners to see if he's going to have their back on the field that night or not.




PWL, why don't you just quit pussyfooting around and call for a good riot or two at the ole ballpark?


You know you want to.....

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by PanamaCityBrian

Originally Posted by PanamaCityBrian
But I do feel in the articles I had read about wages I do find that they are not fair or compensatory in the least way for what job the umpires at the MiLB level do... but I do not think striking or you acting like a moron when another human takes a baseball bat to the chest and trying to find someway to justify it by saying he is a SCAB is at all mature!!! GROW UP

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Thank you for the "inflammatory" language. I thought no one on your side name called?

So, let me get this straight.....you don't think defending this hoodlum, out of control athlete is moronic? How is that "inflammatory?" What it is is truth.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

So, let me get this straight.....you don't think defending this hoodlum, out of control athlete is moronic? How is that "inflammatory?" What it is is truth.

I do not think anyone was defending the athlete. I think people feel there are many reasons for why things happen. This situation did not just happen in a vacuum and nothing else was at play. For all you know the frustration of the players dealing with umpires that are not used to this kind of ball. If I see varsity players and coaches get upset with umpires you think this is not going to apply in the pros?

Also lighten up Steve, part of my comments were a joke. You did exactly what I expected you to do. You responded to a post that I knew would get a response.

Peace

[umpduck11]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

For all you know the frustration of the players dealing with umpires that are not used to this kind of ball. If I see varsity players and coaches get upset with umpires you think this is not going to apply in the pros?


Peace

"Get upset" ? Frustration comes with nearly every occupation,
certainly not just sports. The issue to me is how you handle the
stresses and frustrations. I damn sure can't throw something at
someone during the course of my workday. It's a little thing called
"self-control".
I don't give a rip if he was called out on three straight in the
freakin' dirt, there is no excuse to throw a bat at anyone. Obviously,
some here believe that it's ok, as long as they have a low opinion
of the victim. It's kinda like bigots: "Oh, it's ok, it's only (insert any
ethnic group here).

[ToGreySt]

Originally Posted by umpduck11

It's kinda like bigots: "Oh, it's ok, it's only (insert any
ethnic group here).

very well put, I agree completly

Joe

[SanDiegoSteve]

The pitch looked a bit outside, but I've seen a lot worse called a strike, especially when certain Atlanta pitchers used to pitch.

Young definitely said something to get tossed. Up until then the umpire had shown great patience with the surly rat just standing there. I think the umpire handled it every bit as good as any pro umpire would have.

I hope this guy gets the maximum allowable suspension for this unexcusable act. It was far from just a "toss," he winged it pretty hard. Ought to be in jail right now.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by umpduck11

"Get upset" ? Frustration comes with nearly every occupation,
certainly not just sports. The issue to me is how you handle the
stresses and frustrations. I damn sure can't throw something at
someone during the course of my workday. It's a little thing called
"self-control".
I don't give a rip if he was called out on three straight in the
freakin' dirt, there is no excuse to throw a bat at anyone. Obviously,
some here believe that it's ok, as long as they have a low opinion
of the victim. It's kinda like bigots: "Oh, it's ok, it's only (insert any
ethnic group here).

Please let us not compare sports to other occupations. No one goes around yelling at authority figures because a situation does not go their way in real life. Also sports is about the only place where it is acceptable for people to yell at anyone and call them all kinds of names or heckle them because they are with another company (team) or by customers (fans). Also no one said it was acceptable to throw a bat at someone.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Please let us not compare sports to other occupations. No one goes around yelling at authority figures because a situation does not go their way in real life. Also sports is about the only place where it is acceptable for people to yell at anyone and call them all kinds of names or heckle them because they are with another company (team) or by customers (fans). Also no one said it was acceptable to throw a bat at someone.

Peace

Oh, I beg to differ JRut...I've yelled at a few security guards, even cussed one out last week. I've also raised my voice to a few of my bosses in my days in the military. I've also shown my displeasure with restaurant and store managers.

[Kaliix]

Your union workers were given a contract which they didn't like so they didn't show up for work. You call it a strike, I say they quit because they don't have a contract. The semantics don't matter because the result is the same, they had a job and didn't show up for work.

The union doesn't give a crap about anyone but themselves. You want to strike/quit for better pay, fine. But everyone else has a right to earn as much money as they can to pay their bills, and feed and cloth their families. Who are you or anyone in the union to tell anyone where they can or can't work. If the work is available, it is because the union members aren't there to do the job.

Baseball wasn't going to stop being played because the union didn't show up for work. You want other umpires to support your cause but if baseball wasn't being played, what about all the other people you would be screwing out of a days pay. The ticket takers, concession stand workers, grounds crew and everyone else associated with the game would be out of work if the games didn't go on. What about them? Would you care that those people who likely live paycheck to paycheck couldn't make rent or buy food. What about their spouses and children? Do you care about them?

The answer is a big fat NO! If AMLU cared about any of them, their asses would be on the field making the calls. Don't give me rhetoric, show me by your actions. Talk means nothing when people aren't getting paid.

You call the replacement umpires scabs. I say they are filling a need that AMLU left open so everyone associated with minor league baseball can keep their job and get paid.

AMLU has a right to strike and try and get better pay and wages. AMLU has a right to work and make a living but so does everyone else. For the union to expect other workers, their families and children to suffer so you the union can make more money is just plain wrong. Get over yourselves!

Originally Posted by PWL

I wouldn't have gotten a bat thrown at me because you couldn't pay me enough to cross the AMLU picket line. Money isn't a motivation for me, morals are. I respect the working man and what they have to deal with, especially unreasonable management. They are a recognized union by the NLRB which is their right, too. I didn't know it was a constitutional right to "scab".

I am not condoning the action of the player, just the morals of the umpire who felt he needed to be there.

Until these "scabs" accept the same conditions and pay PBUC was offering the AMLU umpires, then their not really fulfilling the role. Quit your other job or take a leave of absence and drive all over the country, eat crappy food, sleep in a Motel 6, and do your own laundry. Oh yeah, in your spare time go umpire a ball game. Don't sit at home living the good life.

[PanamaCityBrian]

KALIIX, you said what i couldnt say earlier, i am just not as good with saying how i am feeling about a subject i couldnt agree more.... Unions just dont think about anything but themselves. Thank you for saying it so well

[lawump]

My various thoughts:

1) I see in this thread a post from 9:00 a.m. this morning attributed to Chris Hubler. Chris and I started our pro careers in the same PBUC class and were in extended spring training together. This is not a quote I would expect him to make. So, I went to the AMLU website this afternoon and could not find this quote. I allow for the possibility that he did say this, and I just can't find the quote. Could you please post a link to the quote? (I'm not accusing a poster of making up a quote, I just want to see it on amlu.org, before I believe it. Or if they have taken it down on that website, can anyone else here say that they saw it on amlu.org earlier today?)

2) Strike vs. quit is not a matter of semantics, not in any legal sense. If you think its semantics ask Eric Gregg. That statement is way, way off-base. A person on strike has certain legal protections ("rights") etc. A person who quits, generally does not. Go do an internet search about the 1999 MLB umpire fiasco and you'll find a good Federal Court of Appeals opinion that will show you the difference between a person on strike and a person who quits.

3) There are a lot of posters on many different boards who keep making the assertion that these MiLB umpires are going down the same road as the MLB umpires in 1999...and that it is all going to blow up in the face of the MiLB umpires.

First, as I alluded to above, this is a completely different situation. MiLB has the legal right to strike. MLB umpires had contracted away their right to strike during the summer of 1999 and tried to get around it by "quitting".

But ask yourself why did the MLB umpires attempt this tactic when any lawyer (even a non-labor relations lawyer) could have seen that it was a seriously flawed tactic? The Answer: Because the MLB Umpires Union had beaten MLB around at the bargaining table for the previous 20 years. Richie Phillips had so many successes going up against MLB that his ego got so big (IMHO) that he thought he could never loose. He was wrong.

So, many posters are quick to remember the failure of the union in 1999...but very few have brought up ALL THE SUCCESSFUL STRIKES THEY HAD starting in 1979.

I mean, damn gentlemen, MLB umpires went from making less than $30,000 in 1978 with no vacation time and able to be fired at any time for any or no reason, to being paid more than a quarter of a million dollars (veterans), with tenure, with guaranteed playoff games after being in MLB for a certain number of years, and with in-season vacation.

I'd call that 20 years of pretty damn successful labor negotiations...including successful strikes. Yes, Richie blew it in 1999....but he was pretty damn good for 20 years.

So, ask yourself is this MiLB strike more like 1999 or 1979. Oh, back in 1979 they had to stay on strike for 8 weeks. And, yes, MLB issued edicts to the players and managers to "have patience". And, yes, umps had to picket at stadiums. And, yes, umps had to try to generate media interest when the media didn't care.

But after eight weeks, their strike was successful. The media starting paying attention. The media agreed that they were woefully underpaid. The media agreed that six-months without any vacation was a joke. And yes, the players and managers starting complaining about the replacements.

It was a slow process, but the umps eventually won. They got pay raises. They got vacation. The only thing they consented on was allowing some of the replacements to become permanent members of the staff...most of whom, except three (or so), were fired in 1981.

Today, the vast majority of media editorials have been pro-AMLU. (For example read the New York Times article from a day or two ago.) Slowly but surely, more and more complaints from players and managers are creeping into the media.

I say the historical evidence points that this strike is more like 1979 and not like 1999. It will take time, but eventually AMLU will be back on the field with some hard-earned consessions gained at the bargainning table.

That is just my opinion. Time, of course, could prove me wrong.

[wsttxump]

Originally Posted by lawump

My various thoughts:

1) I see in this thread a post from 9:00 a.m. this morning attributed to Chris Hubler. Chris and I started our pro careers in the same PBUC class and were in extended spring training together. This is not a quote I would expect him to make. So, I went to the AMLU website this afternoon and could not find this quote. I allow for the possibility that he did say this, and I just can't find the quote. Could you please post a link to the quote? (I'm not accusing a poster of making up a quote, I just want to see it on amlu.org, before I believe it. Or if they have taken it down on that website, can anyone else here say that they saw it on amlu.org earlier today?)

2) Strike vs. quit is not a matter of semantics, not in any legal sense. If you think its semantics ask Eric Gregg. That statement is way, way off-base. A person on strike has certain legal protections ("rights") etc. A person who quits, generally does not. Go do an internet search about the 1999 MLB umpire fiasco and you'll find a good Federal Court of Appeals opinion that will show you the difference between a person on strike and a person who quits.

3) There are a lot of posters on many different boards who keep making the assertion that these MiLB umpires are going down the same road as the MLB umpires in 1999...and that it is all going to blow up in the face of the MiLB umpires.

First, as I alluded to above, this is a completely different situation. MiLB has the legal right to strike. MLB umpires had contracted away their right to strike during the summer of 1999 and tried to get around it by "quitting".

But ask yourself why did the MLB umpires attempt this tactic when any lawyer (even a non-labor relations lawyer) could have seen that it was a seriously flawed tactic? The Answer: Because the MLB Umpires Union had beaten MLB around at the bargaining table for the previous 20 years. Richie Phillips had so many successes going up against MLB that his ego got so big (IMHO) that he thought he could never loose. He was wrong.

So, many posters are quick to remember the failure of the union in 1999...but very few have brought up ALL THE SUCCESSFUL STRIKES THEY HAD starting in 1979.

I mean, damn gentlemen, MLB umpires went from making less than $30,000 in 1978 with no vacation time and able to be fired at any time for any or no reason, to being paid more than a quarter of a million dollars (veterans), with tenure, with guaranteed playoff games after being in MLB for a certain number of years, and with in-season vacation.

I'd call that 20 years of pretty damn successful labor negotiations...including successful strikes. Yes, Richie blew it in 1999....but he was pretty damn good for 20 years.

So, ask yourself is this MiLB strike more like 1999 or 1979. Oh, back in 1979 they had to stay on strike for 8 weeks. And, yes, MLB issued edicts to the players and managers to "have patience". And, yes, umps had to picket at stadiums. And, yes, umps had to try to generate media interest when the media didn't care.

But after eight weeks, their strike was successful. The media starting paying attention. The media agreed that they were woefully underpaid. The media agreed that six-months without any vacation was a joke. And yes, the players and managers starting complaining about the replacements.

It was a slow process, but the umps eventually won. They got pay raises. They got vacation. The only thing they consented on was allowing some of the replacements to become permanent members of the staff...most of whom, except three (or so), were fired in 1981.

Today, the vast majority of media editorials have been pro-AMLU. (For example read the New York Times article from a day or two ago.) Slowly but surely, more and more complaints from players and managers are creeping into the media.

I say the historical evidence points that this strike is more like 1979 and not like 1999. It will take time, but eventually AMLU will be back on the field with some hard-earned consessions gained at the bargainning table.

That is just my opinion. Time, of course, could prove me wrong.

The quote was on the AMLU website this morning, at the top above the first picture. Guess they figured out how stupid this quote sounded and removed it.

[BloggingRefGuy]

LawUmp:

In response to your earlier question, Baseball America is now quoting Hubler saying what the 9:00 AM poster said he did.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...ws/261152.html

[DIV2ump]

Originally Posted by BloggingRefGuy

LawUmp:

In response to your earlier question, Baseball America is now quoting Hubler saying what the 9:00 AM poster said he did.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...ws/261152.html

Another Baseball America article said Young threw a bat last year and it landed 20 feet from an ump. That game and the bumping game I assume were being done by union guys, so I don't understand the stupid quote. I don't know this Triple-A umpire and he may be great, but the way they are celebrating a fellow umpire getting hit with a bat is just wrong.

[lawump]

Originally Posted by BloggingRefGuy

LawUmp:

In response to your earlier question, Baseball America is now quoting Hubler saying what the 9:00 AM poster said he did.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today...ws/261152.html

Thanks guys...I only took one Public Relations course in my life...so I'm no expert...but I think that is just a dumb thing to say.