PDA

View Full Version : Moronotti wrong again


gosox41
03-16-2003, 11:58 AM
Anyone see the Tribune article about the steroid testing issue in Sunday's paper. It clarifes some questions and shows how wrong Jay Marriotti is.

Frank was the third person to take his drug test on the day of the test. He later heard about the protest from the players and said it was wrong and that he supports the drug testing policy.

This is far from what Jay "reports' when he says that Frank was one of the ring leaders using his clubhouse power to pull rank over the rookies.

This is just another exasmple of the media bias against Frank.

Problem in the clubhouse? Let's blame Frank.

But at least the media is right there to kiss Sammy's selfish a**.

Bob

Unregistered
03-16-2003, 12:07 PM
I saw that article yesterday on chicagosports.com and was kind of amazed how understated the fact that Frank had NOTHING to do with the testing boycott was.
Not only Mariotti, but almost EVERY media outlet when covering the story at least MENTIONED Frank, implying that he had something to do with it. Even here, we were like ''OK, so 16...that's Frank + 15 others.".

PaleHoseGeorge
03-16-2003, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Anyone see the Tribune article about the steroid testing issue in Sunday's paper. It clarifes some questions and shows how wrong Jay Marriotti is.

Frank was the third person to take his drug test on the day of the test. He later heard about the protest from the players and said it was wrong and that he supports the drug testing policy.

This is far from what Jay "reports' when he says that Frank was one of the ring leaders using his clubhouse power to pull rank over the rookies.

This is just another exasmple of the media bias against Frank.

Problem in the clubhouse? Let's blame Frank.

But at least the media is right there to kiss Sammy's selfish a**.

Bob

Yep, I saw that too, and was thinking the EXACT same thing.

The dirty secret is most of the Chicago media can't stand how Jay's irresponsibility tarnishes everything they attempt to do to appear objective in their own reporting. Mariotti doesn't even visit the clubhouse, that is how disconnected from reality he is.

So Teddy G. "outs" Moronotti with a report that reveals the fabrications Jay created in his column last week. I guarantee they are laughing their ***es off at Tribune Tower right now!

We pound on the Cubune around here all the time, but Moronotti is 100-times worse and 1000-times more dangerous. He's willing to be irresponsible with a few hundred thousand Scum-Times readers every day.

Mariotti has been disgraced. Gee, couldn't happen to a nicer guy, too!

:gulp:

RichH55
03-16-2003, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Yep, I saw that too, and was thinking the EXACT same thing.

The dirty secret is most of the Chicago media can't stand how Jay's irresponsibility tarnishes everything they attempt to do to appear objective in their own reporting. Mariotti doesn't even visit the clubhouse, that is how disconnected from reality he is.

So Teddy G. "outs" Moronotti with a report that reveals the fabrications Jay created in his column last week. I guarantee they are laughing their ***es off at Tribune Tower right now!

We pound on the Cubune around here all the time, but Moronotti is 100-times worse and 1000-times more dangerous. He's willing to be irresponsible with a few hundred thousand Scum-Times readers every day.

Mariotti has been disgraced. Gee, couldn't happen to a nicer guy, too!

:gulp:


Don't you have to have a level of grace to be disgraced? IMO this only plays into the hands of the Moron. What is they say about wrestling pigs? You both get dirty, but the pig likes it?

PaleHoseGeorge
03-16-2003, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Don't you have to have a level of grace to be disgraced? IMO this only plays into the hands of the Moron. What is they say about wrestling pigs? You both get dirty, but the pig likes it?

Though he tries to project the independent-minded big tough guy image, Mariotti is hypersensitive to criticism from other print media members.

Don't be surprised if sometime this week Moronotti writes one of his patented "I hate the Tribune, and you should too" columns.

The guy is a complete joke.

FanOf14
03-16-2003, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by gosox41
Anyone see the Tribune article about the steroid testing issue in Sunday's paper. It clarifes some questions and shows how wrong Jay Marriotti is.

Frank was the third person to take his drug test on the day of the test. He later heard about the protest from the players and said it was wrong and that he supports the drug testing policy.

This is far from what Jay "reports' when he says that Frank was one of the ring leaders using his clubhouse power to pull rank over the rookies.

This is just another exasmple of the media bias against Frank.

Problem in the clubhouse? Let's blame Frank.

But at least the media is right there to kiss Sammy's selfish a**.

Bob

Um, now I am confused. I thought everyone here was saying Frank was definitely part of it. The media resports the same thing and they are a-holes? What does that make the people who were claiming the same thing? (I know Moronoti can be an a-hole, but I am just trying to make a point.)

PaleHoseGeorge
03-16-2003, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by FanOf14
Um, now I am confused. I thought everyone here was saying Frank was definitely part of it. The media resports the same thing and they are a-holes? What does that make the people who were claiming the same thing? (I know Moronoti can be an a-hole, but I am just trying to make a point.)

With a few very notable exceptions, nobody here is a member of the press. We rely on journalists to provide us ACCURATE information. Mariotti failed in this role, as he often does, and clearly doesn't care much about to begin with.

Frankly, I'm not sure what your point could be. Are we suppose to apply to the White Sox for our own press passes?

FanOf14
03-16-2003, 02:22 PM
George - my point is very obvious. 99% of posters here said Frank was part of the 16 - including myself. And this was before the media said the thought Frank was part of it. Most articles I read said that considering how outspoken Frank was about steriod testing, they too were guessing (yes, they said guessing) that he was part of it. They also noted that no player lists (those that initially refused to take the test) were released so that it putting Frank in that camp was a guess. IIRC, Bob was one of the first "patting" Frank on the back for doing this.

It just seems like we are being hypocritical calling one person in the media out when most of the media was thinking the same thing we did - Frank was part of it. Yes moronotti is an idiot and doesn't seem to know how to write, but he was far from the only media guy who said that Frank was part of it. Why don't we call out ESPN and the Trib as well since they said the same thing?

In the long run, I am saying that I agree with Unregistered.

PaleHoseGeorge
03-16-2003, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by FanOf14
George - my point is very obvious. 99% of posters here said Frank was part of the 16 - including myself. And this was before the media said the thought Frank was part of it. Most articles I read said that considering how outspoken Frank was about steriod testing, they too were guessing (yes, they said guessing) that he was part of it. They also noted that no player lists (those that initially refused to take the test) were released so that it putting Frank in that camp was a guess. IIRC, Bob was one of the first "patting" Frank on the back for doing this.

It just seems like we are being hypocritical calling one person in the media out when most of the media was thinking the same thing we did - Frank was part of it. Yes moronotti is an idiot and doesn't seem to know how to write, but he was far from the only media guy who said that Frank was part of it. Why don't we call out ESPN and the Trib as well since they said the same thing?

In the long run, I am saying that I agree with Unregistered.

The point Mariotti advanced in that ridiculous column (http://www.suntimes.com/output/mariotti/cst-spt-jay121.html) wasn't that Frank was pro-testing. Frank in fact *is* pro-testing, has been pro-testing for a number of years, and has never been shy in offering his opinion on the subject. Everyone reported this fact, and everyone here noted the same. There is no news here.

Where Mariotti is proven the fraud is additional nonsense his column included, namely that Frank was the ringleader for the dissident group. This is PRECISELY what he meant when he wrote:

But more significantly, we have to wonder if this early split vote will leave poison in a delicate clubhouse. In the middle of the muck, of course, is none other than Frank Thomas, who has been outspoken about the importance of testing and how baseball would be embarrassed by positive findings from big-name players. It's the usual self-serving stand by Thomas, whose numbers have suffered in the Big Boom power era while crosstown rival and former teammate Sammy Sosa has become a future Hall of Famer. His outcry against steroids is his way of suggesting, indirectly, that some sluggers who have bypassed his production are dirty.

Read Greenstein's report (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-030315sox,1,4595813.story?coll=cs%2Dwhitesox%2Dhea dlines). He quotes Alomar and details the facts PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE from Moronotti!

Frank Thomas arrived at the White Sox's spring training complex early Tuesday and was the third player to submit to a drug screen for steroids.

About 2 p.m., Thomas heard the buzz that was sweeping through the clubhouse: 16 players initially had refused to be tested because they wanted to be counted as positive results.

Thomas turned to veteran catcher Sandy Alomar and said, "Shoot, there's going to be some controversy if they did that."

Now, who are we to believe? Mariotti hasn't shown his fat sorry ass inside the Sox clubhouse in years. Greenstein is in Tucson and getting the quotes straight from Alomar.

Somebody doesn't have their facts straight. Now, who do you think that is, hmm?

Unregistered
03-16-2003, 03:13 PM
PHG, I think you and Fanof14 are arguing the same point. The only difference is that Fanof14 (as well as myself) is saying that Mariotti isn't the ONLY one who assumed Frank was one of the ringleaders of the testing boycott. Most of us on this board and throughout the media made the exact same assumption...only it took the world's biggest horse's ass in Mariotti to put an insanely negative spin on it. Big shocker there. And while many of us gave praised Frank for this action, we were still all wrong in assuming that he was involved.
In regards to us relying on the media to provide us with accurate information - I think it's safe to say we ALL assumed Frank was involved given his outspoken stance on the issue, even without the media spin.

RKMeibalane
03-16-2003, 03:43 PM
We did assume that Frank was involved, but the difference is that we were not criticizing him for it. Mariotti has some explaining to do. I'm shocked that he hasn't been fired yet, especially considering how often he distorts the truth. I realize that he is entitled to his own opinions, but these opinions are affecting his judgment. He is not doing his job properly; therefore, he should be fired.

PaleHoseGeorge
03-16-2003, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by Unregistered
PHG, I think you and Fanof14 are arguing the same point. The only difference is that Fanof14 (as well as myself) is saying that Mariotti isn't the ONLY one who assumed Frank was one of the ringleaders of the testing boycott. Most of us on this board and throughout the media made the exact same assumption...only it took the world's biggest horse's ass in Mariotti to put an insanely negative spin on it. Big shocker there. And while many of us gave praised Frank for this action, we were still all wrong in assuming that he was involved.
In regards to us relying on the media to provide us with accurate information - I think it's safe to say we ALL assumed Frank was involved given his outspoken stance on the issue, even without the media spin.

I still don't get it. Are you saying Frank *was* a ringleader? I never said that, and I don't recall anybody in the media besides Moronotti saying it either. If I'm wrong, provide a link.

I can't speak for others, but if anybody made comments around here that assumed Frank was a ringleader, why wouldn't we lay the misinformation square at the feet of the person who served it to the rest of us in the first place?

Mariotti is the one to be held to the higher standard, not those you would confuse as his equal. None of us (besides Grobber, progers, and several lurkers) has access to the clubhouse to base our opinion on facts, not conjecture.

If Frank was involved in leading the dissidents, I want somebody in a position to know to go on the record and say so. So far, only one person has taken that step. And now it turns out he's a big fraud. Well, none of us are too surprised at that news I'm sure.

TornLabrum
03-16-2003, 04:03 PM
Anybody remember the last time Moronotti set foot in a clubhouse? There was some great tape of it as Tony Phillips just about threatened to kill the little creep.

WinningUgly!
03-16-2003, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by Unregistered
PHG, I think you and Fanof14 are arguing the same point. The only difference is that Fanof14 (as well as myself) is saying that Mariotti isn't the ONLY one who assumed Frank was one of the ringleaders of the testing boycott. Most of us on this board and throughout the media made the exact same assumption...only it took the world's biggest horse's ass in Mariotti to put an insanely negative spin on it. Big shocker there. And while many of us gave praised Frank for this action, we were still all wrong in assuming that he was involved.
In regards to us relying on the media to provide us with accurate information - I think it's safe to say we ALL assumed Frank was involved given his outspoken stance on the issue, even without the media spin. Many here probably arrived at their assumption of Frank somehow being involved, after reading Moronatti's column. Which is worse...simply making the wrong assumption or writing a column based entirely on that wrong assumption? Jay should put as much effort in to getting his facts straight, as he does working that "insanely negative spin" on everything. Hell, a nice place to start would be with a few facts, period.

TornLabrum
03-16-2003, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by WinningUgly!
Many here probably arrived at their assumption of Frank somehow being involved, after reading Moronatti's column. Which is worse...simply making the wrong assumption or writing a column based entirely on that wrong assumption? Jay should put as much effort in to getting his facts straight, as he does working that "insanely negative spin" on everything. Hell, a nice place to start would be with a few facts, period.

I agree. Being third in line to take your test and completing it long before the attempted rebellion is a whole lot different than being right in the middle of it, and Moronotti didn't just imply that Frank was there in the thick of it. He said it flat out. And he was wrong.

Unregistered
03-16-2003, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I still don't get it. Are you saying Frank *was* a ringleader? I never said that, and I don't recall anybody in the media besides Moronotti saying it either. If I'm wrong, provide a link.

I can't speak for others, but if anybody made comments around here that assumed Frank was a ringleader, why wouldn't we lay the misinformation square at the feet of the person who served it to the rest of us in the first place?

Mariotti is the one to be held to the higher standard, not those you would confuse as his equal. None of us (besides Grobber, progers, and several lurkers) has access to the clubhouse to base our opinion on facts, not conjecture.

If Frank was involved in leading the dissidents, I want somebody in a position to know to go on the record and say so. So far, only one person has taken that step. And now it turns out he's a big fraud. Well, none of us are too surprised at that news I'm sure. OK, PHG...we're going in circles here. Sorry for all the confusion. I never meant to imply that YOU said ANYTHING about Frank in this situation because frankly, I don't remember. It's not important to me to go back and catalogue what was said about the issue. I say this because my point has nothing to do with who specifically said what about Frank, it's the fact that it seemed like the overall assumption (good or bad) that he was part of this boycott.

As far as him being the "Ringleader", I don't know if anyone (Media or on this board) specifically stated that. But just about EVERY story I read about this, from ESPN to the Arizona daily paper, included statements about Frank's push for steroid testing and in some cases had direct quotes made WEEKS before by Frank on the subject. None of these stories don't say flat out "Frank Thomas led this mob.", but it sure as hell IMPLIES it...

Unregistered
03-16-2003, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
I agree. Being third in line to take your test and completing it long before the attempted rebellion is a whole lot different than being right in the middle of it, and Moronotti didn't just imply that Frank was there in the thick of it. He said it flat out. And he was wrong. Regardless of the subtle nuances, I think we can all agree that Mariotti is an idiot, and this recent episode only proves what was already abundantly clear.
When a journalist has such an obvious hatred for a team or player, it would be nice if one of the editors just said "Look, Jay. Everyone knows you hate the White Sox. Why don't you just NOT write about them anymore, OK?".

RichH55
03-16-2003, 06:46 PM
Originally posted by Unregistered
OK, PHG...we're going in circles here. Sorry for all the confusion. I never meant to imply that YOU said ANYTHING about Frank in this situation because frankly, I don't remember. It's not important to me to go back and catalogue what was said about the issue. I say this because my point has nothing to do with who specifically said what about Frank, it's the fact that it seemed like the overall assumption (good or bad) that he was part of this boycott.

As far as him being the "Ringleader", I don't know if anyone (Media or on this board) specifically stated that. But just about EVERY story I read about this, from ESPN to the Arizona daily paper, included statements about Frank's push for steroid testing and in some cases had direct quotes made WEEKS before by Frank on the subject. None of these stories don't say flat out "Frank Thomas led this mob.", but it sure as hell IMPLIES it...

In the middle of the muck, of course, is none other than Frank Thomas


Does he actually have to say Ringleader verbatim for you?

Unregistered
03-16-2003, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
In the middle of the muck, of course, is none other than Frank Thomas


Does he actually have to say Ringleader verbatim for you? I'm confused as to why you think I'm debating the fact that Mariotti called Frank the "ringleader" (or whatever), in so many words. It's fairly obvious what Mariotti thinks of Frank, and just as obvious that he said Frank was to "blame" for all of this.
What I am saying is that there were OTHER stories by OTHER news sources (that were not editorials) that put Thomas in the middle of this controversy simply by including his name and his preference to make steroid testing mandatory.
For example, by including this Frank Thomas quote:"Hopefully all of that will be controlled in the future," Thomas said. "Guys are dying in this game from working out and running. It has changed, and we need to get back to being healthy."
in a story about the Sox players boycotting the testing process, don't you think that's at least IMPLYING that Thomas had something to do with the boycott?

The difference between an idiot like Mariotti flat out saying that Thomas was involved and a news source like A.P. IMPLYING it by merely putting a quote by Thomas in the story is that we KNOW Mariotti is editorializing. We assume A.P. is giving us unbiased NEWS.

Again, there is no argument that Mariotti is a moron. He obviously has a vendetta, and shows it everytime he feels like "writing" about the Sox. But he was NOT the only one to imply that Thomas had something to do with this testing boycott, he was just one of the few who decided to shun him for it. And thats what REALLY makes him an idiot.

On another note, like it was posted earlier, a lot of us were under the impression that Thomas was in the middle of it simply because we knew his stance on the issue, and we knew he was passionate about testing. This was long before Mariotti decided to write a column about it....

joecrede
03-16-2003, 08:02 PM
Mariotti's latest hatchet job on Thomas is completely irresponsible journalism. Columnists are paid for their opinion, but shouldn't those opinions at least have the supporting facts correct? He enjoys full access to the clubhouse, he could've gotten the correct story in 15-20 minutes. Mariotti is one of the laziest columnists I've ever read. Think he will write a retraction?

TornLabrum
03-16-2003, 08:59 PM
Originally posted by joecrede
Mariotti's latest hatchet job on Thomas is completely irresponsible journalism. Columnists are paid for their opinion, but shouldn't those opinions at least have the supporting facts correct? He enjoys full access to the clubhouse, he could've gotten the correct story in 15-20 minutes. Mariotti is one of the laziest columnists I've ever read. Think he will write a retraction?

Do bears sleep in hotels? Is the Pope Irish? As for clubhouse access, he hasn't bothered to utilize that since Tony Phillips practically took his head off nearly a decade ago.

TornLabrum
03-16-2003, 09:01 PM
Originally posted by Unregistered
I'm confused as to why you think I'm debating the fact that Mariotti called Frank the "ringleader" (or whatever), in so many words. It's fairly obvious what Mariotti thinks of Frank, and just as obvious that he said Frank was to "blame" for all of this.
What I am saying is that there were OTHER stories by OTHER news sources (that were not editorials) that put Thomas in the middle of this controversy simply by including his name and his preference to make steroid testing mandatory.
For example, by including this Frank Thomas quote: in a story about the Sox players boycotting the testing process, don't you think that's at least IMPLYING that Thomas had something to do with the boycott?

The difference between an idiot like Mariotti flat out saying that Thomas was involved and a news source like A.P. IMPLYING it by merely putting a quote by Thomas in the story is that we KNOW Mariotti is editorializing. We assume A.P. is giving us unbiased NEWS.

Again, there is no argument that Mariotti is a moron. He obviously has a vendetta, and shows it everytime he feels like "writing" about the Sox. But he was NOT the only one to imply that Thomas had something to do with this testing boycott, he was just one of the few who decided to shun him for it. And thats what REALLY makes him an idiot.

On another note, like it was posted earlier, a lot of us were under the impression that Thomas was in the middle of it simply because we knew his stance on the issue, and we knew he was passionate about testing. This was long before Mariotti decided to write a column about it....

The quote from Thomas regards ephedrine, not steroids.

WinningUgly!
03-16-2003, 11:53 PM
Originally posted by TommyJohn
The bad part about it is that the damage is done. Mariotti is a
popular, widely-read columnist, and a lot of people who read
him probably won't read Greenstein. They'll just believe that
Thomas was a ringleader in this regardless of the facts. Which
was Mariotti's intention in the first place, to carve up Thomas again and make him look bad. There's a saying that I can't re-
call about a rumor or a lie travelling halfway around the world
before the truth gets out. It's appropriate to this situation.

"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes."

-Mark Twain

FanOf14
03-17-2003, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by Unregistered
PHG, I think you and Fanof14 are arguing the same point. The only difference is that Fanof14 (as well as myself) is saying that Mariotti isn't the ONLY one who assumed Frank was one of the ringleaders of the testing boycott. Most of us on this board and throughout the media made the exact same assumption...only it took the world's biggest horse's ass in Mariotti to put an insanely negative spin on it. Big shocker there. And while many of us gave praised Frank for this action, we were still all wrong in assuming that he was involved.
In regards to us relying on the media to provide us with accurate information - I think it's safe to say we ALL assumed Frank was involved given his outspoken stance on the issue, even without the media spin.

Thanks Unregistered! :) That's exactly what I was saying.

Steroids Testing (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17808)

In this thread people went so far as to say we should pat frank on the back for the steroids testing and this was before mariotti did what he did. What mariotti did was stupid and irresponsible and I am surprised that he has never been sued for slander, but let's face it, we all were thinking what he was, we were just smart enough to not slander Frank over it.

gosox41
03-17-2003, 10:32 AM
Originally posted by FanOf14
George - my point is very obvious. 99% of posters here said Frank was part of the 16 - including myself. And this was before the media said the thought Frank was part of it. Most articles I read said that considering how outspoken Frank was about steriod testing, they too were guessing (yes, they said guessing) that he was part of it. They also noted that no player lists (those that initially refused to take the test) were released so that it putting Frank in that camp was a guess. IIRC, Bob was one of the first "patting" Frank on the back for doing this.

It just seems like we are being hypocritical calling one person in the media out when most of the media was thinking the same thing we did - Frank was part of it. Yes moronotti is an idiot and doesn't seem to know how to write, but he was far from the only media guy who said that Frank was part of it. Why don't we call out ESPN and the Trib as well since they said the same thing?

In the long run, I am saying that I agree with Unregistered.

I was basing any opinion of Frank being part of the 16 on what I read. Mariotti clearly said this. I'm sure there were other outlets that implie Frank was part of it, and if they did they deserve the same criticism. I don't recall guys like Phil Rogers saying Frank was one of the 16. I'll also be the first to admit that there is a specific anti-Mariotti bias here. He deserves it. This was just one of many examples of Mariotti making up what he wants in order to create a column. He has a history of making innaccurate assumptions. I can't say the same for ESPN.com writers. They tend to be rumor based, and while I do read them I don't keep track of all that unless it's locally based.

As for me, I did pat Frank on the back for doing this. Of course I was going off false information from a supposed reputable newspaper. I also 'patted' all 16 players on the back for making a stand. Nothing wrong with that, it's my opinion.

Bob

Juan Pizarro
03-17-2003, 10:35 AM
There's a big difference between us jumping to conclusions and popping off and a member of the press doing so.
They are paid to be credible and must be held to a higher standard. All they have as credibility is what they write and say, and when they blow that, they blow it all. Your only currency as a reporter is your word.

gosox41
03-17-2003, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by Unregistered
PHG, I think you and Fanof14 are arguing the same point. The only difference is that Fanof14 (as well as myself) is saying that Mariotti isn't the ONLY one who assumed Frank was one of the ringleaders of the testing boycott. Most of us on this board and throughout the media made the exact same assumption...only it took the world's biggest horse's ass in Mariotti to put an insanely negative spin on it. Big shocker there. And while many of us gave praised Frank for this action, we were still all wrong in assuming that he was involved.
In regards to us relying on the media to provide us with accurate information - I think it's safe to say we ALL assumed Frank was involved given his outspoken stance on the issue, even without the media spin.

I never assumed that. In fact, I even asked the question in another thread (criticizing Mariotti) of how a player so hated in the clubhouse was able to convince 15 other teammates to follow him.


Bob

gosox41
03-17-2003, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Yep, I saw that too, and was thinking the EXACT same thing.

The dirty secret is most of the Chicago media can't stand how Jay's irresponsibility tarnishes everything they attempt to do to appear objective in their own reporting. Mariotti doesn't even visit the clubhouse, that is how disconnected from reality he is.

So Teddy G. "outs" Moronotti with a report that reveals the fabrications Jay created in his column last week. I guarantee they are laughing their ***es off at Tribune Tower right now!

We pound on the Cubune around here all the time, but Moronotti is 100-times worse and 1000-times more dangerous. He's willing to be irresponsible with a few hundred thousand Scum-Times readers every day.

Mariotti has been disgraced. Gee, couldn't happen to a nicer guy, too!


Do you thing it would help if all the members of WSI called/wrote the Sun Times on this and applied pressue on them to dump Mariott? I would love to see him get canned and love even more if I had something to do with it.

Bob
:gulp:

Unregistered
03-17-2003, 10:48 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
I don't recall guys like Phil Rogers saying Frank was one of the 16. I'll also be the first to admit that there is a specific anti-Mariotti bias here. He deserves it. This was just one of many examples of Mariotti making up what he wants in order to create a column. In all fairness, Bob, Phil Rogers wrote a column in a style similar to what i referred to in an earlier post, in which he didn't go out and literally say that Frank was one of the sixteen players, but included the fact that he was a strong advocate of steroid testing in his story about the boycott. Not to accuse Phil of anything, as this may or may not have been intentional, but my point is that by just including Frank in that article seems to make him "guilty" by association. That article included this quote: MLBPA Executive Director Donald Fehr and his staff always have been staunch opponents of testing, which they oppose on constitutional grounds. Marvin Miller, who was the union's original director, recently criticized Fehr for agreeing even to limited testing in the current agreement.

The union's membership—players, that is—prompted Fehr to be open-minded about including some testing in the new agreement. Frank Thomas and former Cubs catcher Joe Girardi were among the players who were outspoken in favor of testing.
Now obviously Phil isn't saying ''Hey, Frank was the ringleader.", but it's a guilt-by-association scenerio it would seem.

FanOf14
03-17-2003, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
I was basing any opinion of Frank being part of the 16 on what I read. Mariotti clearly said this. I'm sure there were other outlets that implie Frank was part of it, and if they did they deserve the same criticism. I don't recall guys like Phil Rogers saying Frank was one of the 16. I'll also be the first to admit that there is a specific anti-Mariotti bias here. He deserves it. This was just one of many examples of Mariotti making up what he wants in order to create a column. He has a history of making innaccurate assumptions. I can't say the same for ESPN.com writers. They tend to be rumor based, and while I do read them I don't keep track of all that unless it's locally based.

As for me, I did pat Frank on the back for doing this. Of course I was going off false information from a supposed reputable newspaper. I also 'patted' all 16 players on the back for making a stand. Nothing wrong with that, it's my opinion.

Bob

My point is that most of the posts in the attached thread (19 out of 23) were written on 03/11 and the article was released on 03/12, so to blame Mariotti is a little weak (especially considering that none of us here have ever believed anything in his columns and to say all of a sudden we took it to be truth is a little goofy). Like I said, Mariotti is a dumbkopf, and I am surprised that he hasn't been sued for slander yet, but in this case we (most (myself included), not all of the posters) jumped before his article was released.

Unregistered
03-17-2003, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by gosox41
I never assumed that. In fact, I even asked the question in another thread (criticizing Mariotti) of how a player so hated in the clubhouse was able to convince 15 other teammates to follow him. Again, I'm not calling out anyone specifically, but as Fanof14 said (and posted the link to the thread), MANY of us assumed Frank had something to do with this, BEFORE Mariotti's column came out.

And of course, we're not journalists, etc., etc., but all I'm saying is that not many of us we're thinking ''Wow, FRANK is involved?!?!?!'' after reading Mariotti's column... we were thinking ''Wow, Mariotti is a tool for badmouthing Frank about this." I read many posts initially talking up Frank's newfound leadership and team unity, etc. even before that Alomar comment came out where he was upset at the veterans for bringing the new guys into this...

PaleHoseGeorge
03-17-2003, 11:36 AM
Originally posted by Unregistered
Again, I'm not calling out anyone specifically, but as Fanof14 said (and posted the link to the thread), MANY of us assumed Frank had something to do with this, BEFORE Mariotti's column came out.

And of course, we're not journalists, etc., etc., but all I'm saying is that not many of us we're thinking ''Wow, FRANK is involved?!?!?!'' after reading Mariotti's column... we were thinking ''Wow, Mariotti is a tool for badmouthing Frank about this." I read many posts initially talking up Frank's newfound leadership and team unity, etc. even before that Alomar comment came out where he was upset at the veterans for bringing the new guys into this...

I'm not going to speculate about anybody's reaction but my own.

After hearing about the dissident Sox' stand, I thought, "Wow, the Sox must really be tired of sharing the city's headlines with the biggest juicing hypocrite in all of MLB. Good for them." I never singled out ANYBODY from the Sox, and I'm surprised any other Sox Fan would, too. After all, that wasn't Frank Thomas doing mock two-fingered kissies for the Wrigley crowd two years ago.

That was Valentin and Lee, remember?

Later, after reading Moronotti's falsehoods, I shook my head and wondered how Jay could make such a baseless charge and noted how he alone spun it up as a direct slap at Sosa. If defending Sosa was his point, why wasn't Jay taking Valentin and Lee to task? THEY are the ones who have openly mocked Sosa, not Thomas. I chalked it up as another pointless piece of trash by the most irresponsible sports columnist in this city. What else is new?

Greenstein proves Mariotti is an irresponsible jerk with his column, and I thought that would be the end of it.

Now having read this thread, the only thing I'm wondering is how many Sox Fans have truly been sucked in by the garbage the media perpetrates for the sake of creating controversy, ratings, and circulation. I guess there is no news in this either, but I had hoped Sox Fans wouldn't be dismissed in this fashion--especially in this forum that spends sooooo much time setting the record straight on the media's misconceptions about our thoughts and allegiances.

Yeah, Frank is a jerk, jealous of Sammy, and a complete disgrace in the eyes of any right-thinking baseball fan. Tell me another one.