I dunno, maybe we’re disagreeing on semantics here.
As part of my day job, I am responsible for facilitating multidisciplinary reviews of scientific documents. At some companies, it is acceptable to do this using e-mail (just send everyone a copy and collect their comments); some others allow use of simple Sharepoint sites.
At my previous job, my boss did not want us using either of those methods. She felt that they caused version control issues and impeded the ability to audit reviews once they were completed. We had a formal document review system. Now, nowhere was it written in any SOP or rulebook that it was required to use this system. And some of our reviewers found it cumbersome to use it, and asked me to send them the document via Sharepoint. My boss told me explicitly not to do this.
Suppose I had done it anyway. It wasn’t against any written-down rules, after all, and maybe I don’t agree with her opinions about the quality concerns with Sharepoint. If my boss wrote on my review that in her opinion, I had created a quality risk by using Sharepoint in place of the management system, is she criticizing me for:
(1) Using Sharepoint per se; or
(2) Violating her explicit instructions?
I’d argue that ultimately it’s the latter, or rather, that it makes no difference either way. She makes the rules, I break the rules, that’s bad regardless of what you think of the rules (as long as the rules themselves aren’t illegal, unethical, or immoral, obviously).
I can’t quite follow the whole analogy, but, to me, as someone reading your review, it would be #1. If her beef was that you, as an employee, disobeyed her, #2 would be the focus, but I’m not entirely sure I’m getting this very specific analogy.
It seems to me that this is an asymmetric argument, meaning the two sides are coming from two different perspectives and therefore arguing two viewpoints that don’t necessarily conflict. One side is saying that unwritten rules are dumb and shouldn’t exist, and therefore Mercedes did nothing wrong, therefore LaRussa was wrong to say anything. The other side seems to be saying that those unwritten rules don’t just get cancelled because we want them cancelled. Each individual team will react the way they want to violations of these “rules”, and that is the world we currently live in. LaRussa knew that the Twins would respond, which is why he gave the take sign. His postgame comments stated as much, that there would be a consequence. It turned out that consequence was a ball thrown behind Mercedes, and nobody got hurt, and the Twins pitcher and manager suspended. Maybe he doesn’t throw behind Mercedes if LaRussa said nothing publicly. Maybe they throw it at his ribs, maybe they throw at Tim Andserson. Maybe somebody gets hit on the wrist and we lose another of our best players. Yes this would be very wrong by the Twins, but LaRussa has no control over what they do, he manages the White Sox, and his job is to put this team in the best position to win in October. Letting the players freelance and do whatever they want whenever they want is a sure way to prevent us winning a championship and probably get some people hurt. Homeruns are good, unwritten rules are dumb, but we can’t just make other teams not care about them and not react to them just because we say so.
I do understand both the “TLR has to manage his team” and the “unwritten rules are stupid” arguments. I tend to favor the latter, because I think that the “swing away to end the game faster” rule is more important than the “don’t swing 3-0 with a big lead” rule, although both rules are kind of dumb.
But to me, having a position player come in and throw eephus pitches and have hitters take massive cuts at them is fun. It’s one of the few reasons to even watch a blowout game. Sometimes they hit massive bombs and sometimes they fly out to center and have to sheepishly walk back to the dugout. Standing there and taking a walk is boring.
This is all that matters. Nothing else matters. If professional baseball is going to survive as a business (let alone gain in popularity over other sports) it needs to get butts in seats, ratings on TV, and fans that care enough to spend their paychecks on merchandise. Hitting is historically bad now. The game is getting more boring.
Well, the solution to that is easy. You hand out big suspensions to the pitchers that retaliate. That will stop it really quick - particularly if you can also get rid of the old timer announcers and managers that make a big deal about the “violations” in the first place.
And listen, I’m a Cardinals fan, so if anybody has a healthy level of respect for Tony LaRussa and “playing the game the right way” it’s me. I just think that trading in fun, excitement, silliness, and celebrations for retaliation, “unwritten rules”, and heads-down base-circling is a losing proposition for the game.
Wade right in. I mean what else are we going to talk about. How Tommy Nido is the Mets best hitter?
For Mercedes the only thing he possibly did wrong was miss a call. Watching the replay Willians Astudillo wasn’ exactly taking his time between pitches. Is it possible that there was a sign in the those few seconds that Mercedes missed. Sure. I don’t find La Russa’s account that he was screaming take from the dugout credible, but maybe someone gave a signal. Should Mercedes have caught the sign in those couple seconds? I don’t know; Do coaches typically give signals up double digits with a position player on the mound? This isn’t a story if Mercedes grounds out. At worst he made a minor error not paying attention is a fairly meaningless situation.
I think you are massively stretching to justify La Russa here. What part do you think will prevent Buxton or whoever signing with the White Sox. One of their players swung at a 3-0 pitch or the manager being okay with a player being drilled. How about comments like "It doesn’t because Lance has a locker, I have an office.” Does that sound like good leadership to you?
I don’t think feeling are unimportant, but the manager’s job is to manage the players feeling and not his own. Clearly his team agrees more with Mercedes here give their subsequent comments. I think you are giving La Russa the benefit of the doubt here that he has not earned. Yeah this is part of his job, but what evidence do we have that he is currently any good at it?
Right. Even if LaRussa’s right (he’s not), going to the media isn’t about disciplining the player, it’s all about his own ego. That’s never been good management style.
Seriously. Who’s the one who’s been whining publicly the most? The old, out of touch white man. Crybaby.
Have any opposing players even complained?
Is there any reason to believe that “revenge” was coming without the cranky old white man mouthing off to the press?
Are you being serious? The Twins announcers were talking about it right as it happened, and the analyst was very upset (another cranky old white man). Yes they were upset and the fact that they threw behind him shows that. Are you really suggesting that LaRussa is the one that put the idea of retribution in their heads? That’s ridiculous. It’s perfectly OK to not like LaRussa or not want him as Sox manager, but the criticism has gone way off the deep end at this point. We are in first place for crying out loud.
True. On the other hand, though it’s a small sample size, the Sox are 1-4 since the game in which Mercedes hit that home run, and just got swept by the Yankees over the weekend. Regression to the mean? The players being unhappy with LaRussa? Just a blip? Hard to say just yet.
Everything right now is an overreaction. There are 162 games in the season. So far we’ve only lost 3 in a row once this year, and I feel like we’re going to break that streak tonight. Have you heard any player on the team express any negativity or indication of bad vibes. I haven’t. Has Tony done a perfect job so far? Clearly not. But we have been playing pretty good baseball all season with two of our best players gone to injury. I think there is just hyperfocus on every single moment and decision right now because we’re good, and there isn’t much else to pay attention to. Also a lot of people hated the hiring of TLR and are now amplifying everything to “prove” they were right. I’m letting the season play out before I judge and so far we are in first, our pitching has been pretty great for the most part, we have the best run differential by a lot, and we may get Eloy or Luis Robert back before the end of the season and for the playoffs. Personally I’m just trying to enjoy a mostly very successful season so far and see where it goes.
In the last week? There have been at least two players publicly supporting Mercedes (and, thus, disagreeing with La Russa).
At this point, IMO, it’s no longer about whether Mercedes should have swung for the fences on that pitch. It’s become about La Russa publicly criticizing his players, which I do not think is doing anything positive for his relationship with them.