Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
so now, this idiot bringing his stupid kid to work, has now set a precedent.. now the players want to start a kerfluffle and protest it. see what happens when you allow a stupid kid to be allowed? now thanks to this, if they cause trouble, it opens up a Pandoras box and now the Sox manager will set a rule - NO KIDZ ALLOWED. thanks, idiots for starting something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Paolella
Nonsense, forget the public PC pronouncements. Behind the scenes, many of the players were unhappy that he brought his dopey kid into the clubhouse every single day. Something that they would never presume to do, since it is inappropriate and ridiculous.
We now see that this guy is a Duck Dynasty class holy roller type. And that irrational personality type generally has no problem imposing itself on others and demanding compliant behavior from others around them. So I can imagine the nonsense that was going on.
The White Sox did the right thing, and he should be sent packing back to the swamp as it were.
As I understand it, his employer agreed to his demands when originally negotiating his contract.
They could have said "no" at any time during that process.
They didn't.
All of these negative comments are starting to sound like jealousy and sour grapes to me.
I am quite frankly surprised at all of the people who are deriding the man for doing what he felt was right for his family, both initially and now.
Seems like a lot of people believe that one can only love one's family if it isn't inconvenient for others.
Sorry Mr. LaRoche - that'll teach you to march to the beat of a different drummer.
Conformation is the name of the game and don't you forget it.
The problem is the inappropriate and abusive behavior exhibited by the player who wants to impose his kid on others around him in the workplace on a daily basis. That is NOT OK. So he has to go. We know that plenty of other payers are happy about this reprimand. They just won't Trump up and say the politically inconvenient truth.
But on City-Data, we can partake in the truth and revel in its brilliance. It's just how we roll.
This is a rathole, but does anyone have a relative or friend who thinks it's just peachy to travel the world with their dog? Bringing it everywhere and expecting you to be happy about it and just let it be? I think that is so rude. I would never DREAM IN A MILLION YEARS of bringing my pet to someone else's house without utter and complete permission and blessing. This is the same principle as the White Sox situation. Bad manners. Imposing and abusive behavior. It's rampant!
Supposedly he had it in his contract that his son could come, so it is't really imposing anything if he said he would do it before he started employment. We haven't seen the details, but if, as an employer, you agree to something you should probably uphold your part of the bargain or you will create discontent with other employees.
As I understand it, his employer agreed to his demands when originally negotiating his contract.
They could have said "no" at any time during that process.
They didn't.
All of these negative comments are starting to sound like jealousy and sour grapes to me.
I am quite frankly surprised at all of the people who are deriding the man for doing what he felt was right for his family, both initially and now.
Seems like a lot of people believe that one can only love one's family if it isn't inconvenient for others.
Sorry Mr. LaRoche - that'll teach you to march to the beat of a different drummer.
Conformation is the name of the game and don't you forget it.
Because one "feels" something is right, does not mean that it is right. Feelings are not how we learn right and wrong. For that we use our brain. And if one uses even a small portion of his brain, he will see that it is objectively incorrect to bring his child into the workplace on a daily basis. We don't do that because it is ludicrous. The workplace is not where we hang out with our family members. The workplace is where we trade our time and talent for money. It is incorrect to bring distractions into that universe. And it is incorrect to bring minor children into the workplace when there is a job to be done that requires 100% focus and undivided attention. So feelings do not count here. Brains do. The kid should visit only very occasionally, but should stay home the rest of the time. That is how normal thinking people handle a job and a workplace. That's why they call it a "work" place. Judgment for White Sox.
Supposedly he had it in his contract that his son could come, so it is't really imposing anything if he said he would do it before he started employment. We haven't seen the details, but if, as an employer, you agree to something you should probably uphold your part of the bargain or you will create discontent with other employees.
I doubt that the contract allowed for 100% daily access to the locker room and clubhouse. If it did, bad on the White Sox for agreeing to such a stupid stipulation. In any case, it is imposing regardless of the contract. Imposing on the fellow players. Whether they say they like it or agree with it to be PC, or not, which you won't hear about. It is preposterous to think that you can bring family members to the job in a major league environment. That is not practical, not customary, not common, and not even healthy. In fact, it might be considered a form of child abuse, but that's for others to argue. In any case, he's been sent packing and hopefully the White Sox will stick to their guns so the irrationality does not spread to other players who will soon be gliding into the parking lot in their Escalades with their mothers-in-law, dogs, posses, or what-have-you.
I wonder if they let the kid work as a batboy at Sox home games, he was old enough.
Recall Barry Bonds' son was his personal batboy at times with the Giants (though I think it was only during the summer).
I remember Cecil Fielder and his son who was the batboy for the team. I think its neat. I'm sure it's a great privilege to be able to bring your kids around and it does seem there are players who take this opportunity. As long as the rest of the team is okay with this arrangement, which in this case they were, I don't see the problem.
I remember Cecil Fielder and his son who was the batboy for the team. I was surprised to see that same son become a ballplayer in his own right. I think its neat. I'm sure it's a great privilege to be able to bring your kids around and it does seem there are players who take this opportunity. As long as the rest of the team is okay with this arrangement, which in this case they were, I don't see the problem.
Can you people please read between the very wide and spacious lines? If it was peachy and all the other players were on board, it wouldn't have blown up. SOME PLAYERS WERE OBVIOUSLY NOT HAPPY WITH IT. Which would be logical, expected, and correct. C'mon people! Pay attention!
His dad was quoted here in the Chicago Tribune as saying " The wife and I aren't real big on school, he can learn more about life here with me". And to top off this idiot , some of the Sox players wanted to boycott because of this. Just as the old saying goes " Sports doesn't build character, in reveals character."
I doubt that the contract allowed for 100% daily access to the locker room and clubhouse. If it did, bad on the White Sox for agreeing to such a stupid stipulation. In any case, it is imposing regardless of the contract. Imposing on the fellow players. Whether they say they like it or agree with it to be PC, or not, which you won't hear about. It is preposterous to think that you can bring family members to the job in a major league environment. That is not practical, not customary, not common, and not even healthy. In fact, it might be considered a form of child abuse, but that's for others to argue. In any case, he's been sent packing and hopefully the White Sox will stick to their guns so the irrationality does not spread to other players who will soon be gliding into the parking lot in their Escalades with their mothers-in-law, dogs, posses, or what-have-you.
Agreed.
Some people are stuck on the reports saying the players were ok with it. Well of course when asked they are going to say they are ok with it. Is someone really going to say, "Actually, I'm not ok with it". They say it privately but tell the reporters they are ok with it. This isn't that difficult. If you ask me about my co-workers at a meeting, I'll say they are all great!
This whiny entitled pain in the neck is going to take his baseball glove and go home. They are paying him 13.5 MILLION to play a kid's game, and this miserable ingrate wants to whine and cry because they won't let him take his kid to work every day.
Talk about first world problems...
Ugh it's annoying. It's the only thing on Chicago sports radio right now. People are making a mountain out of a molehill.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
