PDA

View Full Version : Which Sox Player Do You Think Will Wear Number 42?


Thome25
04-04-2007, 06:43 PM
MLB just announced that on April 15th a player from each team will be allowed to wear the number 42 in honor of Jackie Robinson.

Which Sox player do you think might wear it?

Here's the link:

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20070404&content_id=1879309&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

sox1970
04-04-2007, 06:46 PM
First, I'd like to say how dumb I think it was to retire the number in the first place. I thought it was more of honor to Robinson's memory to hear about players that wanted to wear 42 because of him.

That said, I'd put my money on Jermaine Dye. Just a wild guess.

pearso66
04-04-2007, 06:46 PM
My guess would be Jermaine Dye. Although I could see Jose Contreras wearing it if he started that game.

TheOldRoman
04-04-2007, 07:07 PM
I also think it is dumb to retire the number. It takes nothing away from Robinson, but nobody is worthy of that honor.

Besides, when are we going to retire Lary Doby's number? When are we even going to talk about him? He went through every bit as much pain and oppression as Robinson. He was the first black player in the AL, and no AL players had seen Robinson. Doby was every bit the pioneer Robinson was.

getonbckthr
04-04-2007, 07:08 PM
Isn't Dye the only African american on our team? Everyone else is either Hispanic or Caucasion so it has to be Dye.

Lip Man 1
04-04-2007, 07:10 PM
Ron Kittle?

:D:

Lip

Thome25
04-04-2007, 07:32 PM
Isn't Dye the only African american on our team? Everyone else is either Hispanic or Caucasion so it has to be Dye.

Hopefully this thread doesn't get roadhoused but, why the hell couldn't anyone regardless of race choose to honor Robinson?

Arguably, Robinson opened the door for every race to play baseball not just his own. Baseball wouldn't be the multi-cultured sport it is today without him.

areilly
04-04-2007, 08:51 PM
What if you're the Houston Astros and don't have any black players? Then what?

As far as Sox players go, I imagine it'll be Jermaine Dye.

TheOldRoman
04-04-2007, 08:58 PM
Baseball wouldn't be the multi-cultured sport it is today without him.That is a HUGE overexaggeration. You can't take anything away from Robinson and what he put up with, but even if he never played baseball, there would still be black players today somehow. Someone would have broken the barrier before 2007.

Whitesox029
04-04-2007, 09:00 PM
Hopefully this thread doesn't get roadhoused but, why the hell couldn't anyone regardless of race choose to honor Robinson?

Arguably, Robinson opened the door for every race to play baseball not just his own. Baseball wouldn't be the multi-cultured sport it is today without him.
I agree. I don't even see why it couldn't be a white player if that's the way it were to shake out on any given team.

Thome25
04-04-2007, 10:59 PM
That is a HUGE overexaggeration. You can't take anything away from Robinson and what he put up with, but even if he never played baseball, there would still be black players today somehow. Someone would have broken the barrier before 2007.

How is it an overexaggeration? He was the FIRST who paved the way for players of different backgrounds. He took the punishment for not just his race but multiple ones.

TheOldRoman
04-04-2007, 11:38 PM
How is it an overexaggeration? He was the FIRST who paved the way for players of different backgrounds. He took the punishment for not just his race but multiple ones.
I agree, but you can't say there would be no black players today if not for Robinson. Eventually the barrier would have been broken, and that doesn't take anything away from what he did.

Jaffar
04-05-2007, 08:27 AM
I agree, but you can't say there would be no black players today if not for Robinson. Eventually the barrier would have been broken, and that doesn't take anything away from what he did.

Lets not forget about Branch Rickey but to follow your point had Branch not signed Jackie somebody else would have eventually signed another player.

ewokpelts
04-05-2007, 08:33 AM
I doubt contreras will wear it, since he's CUBAN.

It'll most likely be the only black player on the team, Dye.

Jjav829
04-05-2007, 09:31 AM
It doesn't say a "player" on each team, it says a "member." I wonder if Ozzie would wear the number for a day. :dunno:

Mr.1Dog
04-05-2007, 09:34 AM
Out of a sign of respect, I think every player should wear the number with their number on a patch on a sleeve. Why limit it to one person?

soxfan13
04-05-2007, 09:37 AM
Out of a sign of respect, I think every player should wear the number with their number on a patch on a sleeve. Why limit it to one person?


They did that for a year already if I recall correctly.

JohnTucker0814
04-05-2007, 10:02 AM
They did that for a year already if I recall correctly.

Out of a sign of respect, I think every player should wear the number with their number on a patch on a sleeve. Why limit it to one person?

I think he was saying everyone wear #42 as thier number and put thier original number as a patch. Not to put 42 as a patch.

Mr.1Dog
04-05-2007, 10:05 AM
I think he was saying everyone wear #42 as thier number and put thier original number as a patch. Not to put 42 as a patch.

:nod: That's a better phrasing of it.

TDog
04-05-2007, 10:26 AM
How is it an overexaggeration? He was the FIRST who paved the way for players of different backgrounds. He took the punishment for not just his race but multiple ones.

A Hispanic pitcher pitched against the White Sox in the 1919 World Series and actually won the Series championship game 12 seasons later. The Hall of Fame plaque for Chief Bender, who pitched one game for the White Sox in 1925, calls him "a famous Chippewa Indian." Jackie Robinson didn't open the doors for Hispanics or Native Americans. John McGraw at the turn of the 20th century tried to pass off African American Charlie Grant as a Native American to get him on his team. Jackie Robinson didn't earn acceptance for Asians. For that matter, a deaf mute played for the White Sox at about the time John McGraw was trying to pass off Charlie Grant as Charlie Tokohama.

What Jackie Robinson did was so important for America that it transcends baseball. The fact that people don't understand how important is sample reason for baseball to retire his number.

1917
04-05-2007, 12:16 PM
Wonder who will wear it on the Yankees...ah yes Rivera since he is the only player not to give it up....If it has to be a player, I would say JD....if not I can see Baines wearing it

The Dude
04-05-2007, 01:58 PM
MLB just announced that on April 15th a player from each team will be allowed to wear the number 42 in honor of Jackie Robinson.

Which Sox player do you think might wear it?

Here's the link:

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20070404&content_id=1879309&vkey=pr_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb

Probably Jim Thome

russ99
04-05-2007, 04:11 PM
Hopefully no one on the Sox wears 42, out of respect.

What kind of egomaniac is Griffey to take Robinson's number that was justly retired for every team, and put it on his own back?? :angry:

kraut83
04-05-2007, 04:29 PM
Out of a sign of respect, I think every player should wear the number with their number on a patch on a sleeve. Why limit it to one person?

I thought I heard that the Dodgers are doing this on the 15th.

Mr.1Dog
04-05-2007, 04:31 PM
I thought I heard that the Dodgers are doing this on the 15th.

If so that's how it should be done. Don't limit it to one player.

pmck003
04-05-2007, 05:16 PM
It doesn't say a "player" on each team, it says a "member." I wonder if Ozzie would wear the number for a day. :dunno:

I would think it would be Ozzie or one of the coaches.

CWSpalehoseCWS
04-05-2007, 08:04 PM
Hopefully no one on the Sox wears 42, out of respect.

What kind of egomaniac is Griffey to take Robinson's number that was justly retired for every team, and put it on his own back?? :angry:

You forgot to mention Bonds. He wants to too.

spawn
04-05-2007, 08:31 PM
I also think it is dumb to retire the number. It takes nothing away from Robinson, but nobody is worthy of that honor.

Jackie Robinson is definitely worthy of that honor. Jackie's impact wasn't limited to the baseball diamond. His was the first step in the march towards civil rights. Jackie transcended baseball. And I think it's ridiculous to compare Larry Doby and Jackie Robinson. Larry may have gone through a lot of **** to get to the majors, but it was because of Jackie that he was able to.

An yes, eventually blacks would've been allowed to play in the majors...but we don't know when that would've happened, and if that player would've done what Rickey said...to not retaliate for two years. How many of you can say if you're chastised, humiliated, threatened physically and mentally that you wouldn't fight back?

spawn
04-05-2007, 08:35 PM
Hopefully no one on the Sox wears 42, out of respect.

What kind of egomaniac is Griffey to take Robinson's number that was justly retired for every team, and put it on his own back?? :angry:
Why does that make him an egomaniac? Because he wants to honor Robinson on the 60th anniversary of him breaking the color barrier in baseball? He wants to honor him. It's only one game. He's not trying to do it for the entire season. Hell, on that day every member of the Dodgers will be wearing the number. Does that make them egomainiacs as well?

Speaking of honors, Robinson Cano wears number 24 which is 42 in reverse. He has that number because that's his way of honoring Jackie Robinson.

TheOldRoman
04-06-2007, 02:08 AM
Larry may have gone through a lot of **** to get to the majors, but it was because of Jackie that he was able to.
Larry Doby debuted 11 weeks after Robinson. While Jackie was the all-important first to open the door, it wasn't like he gained acceptance for blacks that allowed Doby to play. Doby likely went through every bit as much as Robinson. He was still the first black player that half of baseball's players and fans had ever seen.

IndianWhiteSox
04-06-2007, 04:58 AM
Hopefully no one on the Sox wears 42, out of respect.

What kind of egomaniac is Griffey to take Robinson's number that was justly retired for every team, and put it on his own back?? :angry:

Wouldn't it be showing even more respect if he did wear the number?
:?:

TDog
04-06-2007, 11:49 AM
Larry Doby debuted 11 weeks after Robinson. While Jackie was the all-important first to open the door, it wasn't like he gained acceptance for blacks that allowed Doby to play. Doby likely went through every bit as much as Robinson. He was still the first black player that half of baseball's players and fans had ever seen.

Bob Feller says Larry Doby didn't have any problem with his teammates. The Indians treated Doby like one of the guys, without regard to his race. Larry Doby said he didn't know what Indians team Bob Feller was playing for because that wasn't the way Doby remembered it. I'm sure Doby went through a lot, even if his surviving Indians teammates don't want to admit it 60 years later. Certainly Jackie Robinson didn't end the ugly racism that black players would continue to experience for decades. Dick Allen wore a batting helmet on defense in the 1970s because of the way fans treated him at AAA Little Rock in 1963. At old Comiskey in 1970, I witnessed racial slurs being hurled at Emmett Ashford, the first black umpire in the majors. When I was playing pickup hockey as a kid on ice rinks in Northwestern Indiana around 1970, I overheard two friends talking about why they liked hockey, and they agreed it was "the last white sport left."

It's true that if it hadn't been Jackie Robinson, it would have been someone else. Most informed people expected it to be Monte Irvin, who did end up having a Hall of Fame career himself. But there is no question that a lot of the garbage Jackie Robinson endured and how he handled it made things easier for the black players that followed.

1917
04-06-2007, 12:43 PM
Why does Rivera get a free pass on this?

Taz
04-06-2007, 12:48 PM
Why does Rivera get a free pass on this?

I wondered this too a few years ago... did some searches on the 'net...

Appears when #42 was retired by MLB, they allowed any players who currently were '42' to keep the number. Rivera is the last player who was '42' at the retirement...

googled 'MLB 42': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_retired_numbers

the gooch
04-06-2007, 02:16 PM
Speaking of honors, Robinson Cano wears number 24 which is 42 in reverse. He has that number because that's his way of honoring Jackie Robinson.... so is Robinson Cano trying to "reverse" the breaking of the color barrier?:redneck

I still don't understand the retiring of the number, and preventing anybody from wearing number 42 (except on super special promotion days). In all sports, when a team honors a player, they don't hang a NUMBER, they hang a JERSEY. If baseball has to do something like this, I believe all teams should have "Dodgers #42" in their stadium but not prevent "White Sox #42" or "Devil Rays #42" from playing. Even a player on the Minnesota 34's should be able to wear #42.

TDog
04-06-2007, 03:40 PM
... so is Robinson Cano trying to "reverse" the breaking of the color barrier?:redneck

I still don't understand the retiring of the number, and preventing anybody from wearing number 42 (except on super special promotion days). In all sports, when a team honors a player, they don't hang a NUMBER, they hang a JERSEY. If baseball has to do something like this, I believe all teams should have "Dodgers #42" in their stadium but not prevent "White Sox #42" or "Devil Rays #42" from playing. Even a player on the Minnesota 34's should be able to wear #42.

What other sports do is irrelevant.

Retiring Jackie Robinson's number throughout major league baseball memorializes a social struggle where baseball took center stage. Prohibiting players from wearing 42 is a small consequence. Aside from affecting those who have some sort of emotional attachment to the number (people born on April 2, U.K. natives born on Feb. 4, extreme fans of Douglas Adams, people who wore 42 as kids or whose favorite non-Jackie Robinson player -- i.e. Ron Kittle -- wore 42 etc.), this doesn't hurt anyone.

Cynics might say baseball is trying to gain favor among people of color or trying to capitalize on its important as a social institution for marketing purposes. I believe retiring a number which isn't a broadly attractive number aside from its connection to Jackie Robinson, was a classy thing for baseball to do.

soxinem1
04-06-2007, 03:48 PM
I agree, but you can't say there would be no black players today if not for Robinson. Eventually the barrier would have been broken, and that doesn't take anything away from what he did.

I agree with your statements, I do not think this whole number retiring thing was necessary. He was given a HOF plaque and has an entire little league baseball program named after him. To take nothing away from his on-field accomplishments and his work for equality after baseball, the universally retired number was not necessary.

And because of the talent level in Cuba, Central America, and Mexico, someone would have broke the barrier soon after him.

And Thome25 needs to check his history books, there were non-white players in MLB before Jackie Robinson, I believe as early as 1918.

the ugly racism that black players would continue to experience for decades. Dick Allen wore a batting helmet on defense in the 1970s because of the way fans treated him at AAA Little Rock in 1963. At old Comiskey in 1970, I witnessed racial slurs being hurled at Emmett Ashford, the first black umpire in the majors. When I was playing pickup hockey as a kid on ice rinks in Northwestern Indiana around 1970, I overheard two friends talking about why they liked hockey, and they agreed it was "the last white sport left."

I remember Harold Baines, Al Cowens, and others in the 70's and 80's getting assailed in Comiskey Park. I also remember Warren Newson in Milwaukee in 1991 getting the same treatment. It was a cool game because Jack McDowell gave up a HR to Paul Molitor to start the game and nothing else, and Deacon had a nice game that day, so revenge was sweet).

the gooch
04-06-2007, 04:28 PM
What other sports do is irrelevant.

Retiring Jackie Robinson's number throughout major league baseball memorializes a social struggle where baseball took center stage. Prohibiting players from wearing 42 is a small consequence. Aside from affecting those who have some sort of emotional attachment to the number (people born on April 2, U.K. natives born on Feb. 4, extreme fans of Douglas Adams, people who wore 42 as kids or whose favorite non-Jackie Robinson player -- i.e. Ron Kittle -- wore 42 etc.), this doesn't hurt anyone.

Cynics might say baseball is trying to gain favor among people of color or trying to capitalize on its important as a social institution for marketing purposes. I believe retiring a number which isn't a broadly attractive number aside from its connection to Jackie Robinson, was a classy thing for baseball to do.
IN SPORTS, JERSEYS ARE RETIRED. NOT NUMBERS.
Hang Robinson's jersey in every stadium. Make kids ask their father why that jersey is different from all the sox jerseys. There is your history lesson.

If/when Mariano Rivera gets to the HOF, and if the yankees decide to retire his jersey, there will be a Dodgers #42 and a Yankees #42 hanging up. Why can't it happen like that again?

Did anybody care that both starting pitchers wore #52 on Monday? No. Because they were different uniforms.

[Off topic: Are the minor leagues banned from recognizing Jackie Robinson as well? He never played in them, but they are part of mlb.]

The Dude
04-06-2007, 04:47 PM
Hopefully this thread doesn't get roadhoused but, why the hell couldn't anyone regardless of race choose to honor Robinson?

Arguably, Robinson opened the door for every race to play baseball not just his own. Baseball wouldn't be the multi-cultured sport it is today without him.

I personally think they should have Crede wear it because they can easily flip-flop his two numbers to get 42. That is if he wants to be the one doing it.

tick53
04-06-2007, 04:51 PM
Jermaine, who else?

TDog
04-06-2007, 05:04 PM
IN SPORTS, JERSEYS ARE RETIRED. NOT NUMBERS.
Hang Robinson's jersey in every stadium. Make kids ask their father why that jersey is different from all the sox jerseys. There is your history lesson.

If/when Mariano Rivera gets to the HOF, and if the yankees decide to retire his jersey, there will be a Dodgers #42 and a Yankees #42 hanging up. Why can't it happen like that again?

Did anybody care that both starting pitchers wore #52 on Monday? No. Because they were different uniforms.

[Off topic: Are the minor leagues banned from recognizing Jackie Robinson as well? He never played in them, but they are part of mlb.]


When Ron Kittle was managing the Schaumburg Flyers, he wore 42 on the field, so I believe that minor leagues allow players to wear 42.

I don't pay attention to any sport but baseball because no other sport is worth my time. I don't know what they do with their jerseys and don't consider it an issue. But in baseball, numbers are retired. Baseball was retiring numbers before the NBA was founded. If you come up with the Yankees, you don't demand to wear No. 3. Baseball is a game of heritage and that heritage includes retiring numbers as the best way to memorialize players' special contributions to the team, the city and the game.

I seriously doubt that anyone here suffers personal injury from major league baseball retiring 42 because of Jackie Robinson's contributions to the game and American society.

TDog
04-06-2007, 05:14 PM
...
If/when Mariano Rivera gets to the HOF, and if the yankees decide to retire his jersey, there will be a Dodgers #42 and a Yankees #42 hanging up. Why can't it happen like that again? ...

By the way, the Yankees didn't decide to retire Bill Dickey's No. 8 until they retired Yogi Berra's No. 8. I've never met a Yankees fan who has a problem with two players being honored with retirement of the same number. And no one seems to mind that Nolan Ryan has two numbers retired in three cities.

the gooch
04-06-2007, 06:06 PM
When Ron Kittle was managing the Schaumburg Flyers, he wore 42 on the field, so I believe that minor leagues allow players to wear 42.Schaumburg is an independant team, so I'm not sure it applies. Still hoping to get a confirmation.

I don't pay attention to any sport but baseball because no other sport is worth my time. I don't know what they do with their jerseys and don't consider it an issue. But in baseball, numbers are retired. Baseball was retiring numbers before the NBA was founded. If you come up with the Yankees, you don't demand to wear No. 3. Baseball is a game of heritage and that heritage includes retiring numbers as the best way to memorialize players' special contributions to the team, the city and the game.Teams retire numbers on their own jerseys - not others. Leagues don't retire numbers. Otherwise, Baines wouldn't have worn #3 out of respect for the Yankee's Babe Ruth, and we would have 3-digit numbers because we would have run out by now.

By the way, the Yankees didn't decide to retire Bill Dickey's No. 8 until they retired Yogi Berra's No. 8. I've never met a Yankees fan who has a problem with two players being honored with retirement of the same number. And no one seems to mind that Nolan Ryan has two numbers retired in three cities.Nolan Ryan played with two numbers and he played in those three cities. What Jackie Robinson did contributed a lot to baseball and beyond, and greatly affected every baseball franchise. I don't mind hanging his jersey at every MLB ballpark. But he never played for the White Sox, so he never wore a White Sox jersey. He wore a Dodgers jersey.

Your Yankees example proves my point. How does wearing number 42 on a major league baseball jersey that doesn't say Dodgers on the front cause personal injury to the memory of Jackie Robinson?

An equally asinine but more understandable thought is to require every team (not just on anniversaries) to have a player wear number 42. [Another off-topic: It does say teams "have the option to...". So what if a team chooses not to have someone wear Robinson's number? Will that offend people?]

HawkDJ
04-06-2007, 06:30 PM
I wondered this too a few years ago... did some searches on the 'net...

Appears when #42 was retired by MLB, they allowed any players who currently were '42' to keep the number. Rivera is the last player who was '42' at the retirement...

googled 'MLB 42': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_retired_numbers


Interestingly, Jose Lima requested #42 this year for the Mets during spring training since he wore the number in 1997 when it was retired, but since he chose to switch numbers when he went to the Royals, he apparently gave up his claim to the #42.

TDog
04-06-2007, 07:45 PM
Schaumburg is an independant team, so I'm not sure it applies. Still hoping to get a confirmation.

Teams retire numbers on their own jerseys - not others. Leagues don't retire numbers. Otherwise, Baines wouldn't have worn #3 out of respect for the Yankee's Babe Ruth, and we would have 3-digit numbers because we would have run out by now.

Nolan Ryan played with two numbers and he played in those three cities. What Jackie Robinson did contributed a lot to baseball and beyond, and greatly affected every baseball franchise. I don't mind hanging his jersey at every MLB ballpark. But he never played for the White Sox, so he never wore a White Sox jersey. He wore a Dodgers jersey.

Your Yankees example proves my point. How does wearing number 42 on a major league baseball jersey that doesn't say Dodgers on the front cause personal injury to the memory of Jackie Robinson?

An equally asinine but more understandable thought is to require every team (not just on anniversaries) to have a player wear number 42. [Another off-topic: It does say teams "have the option to...". So what if a team chooses not to have someone wear Robinson's number? Will that offend people?]

You really are missing the point. Baseball has a heritage of retiring numbers. Major league baseball retired Jackie Robinson's number, not just because of his contributions to baseball, but because of his contributions to society through baseball. Taking 42 away from the list of numbers major league teams can assign their players doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't require teams to run their uniform numbers into three digits. It was an unprecedented honor for a man who made a unique contribution to baseball and America that transcended his team and baseball itself. If I have missed something, if you were signed by a major league team and were denied wearing 42, I am sorry for your loss, but I think the value of memorializing the number surpasses the loss of one number.

Frankly, I don't see why this issue should upset people.

Thome25
04-06-2007, 11:02 PM
I agree with your statements, I do not think this whole number retiring thing was necessary. He was given a HOF plaque and has an entire little league baseball program named after him. To take nothing away from his on-field accomplishments and his work for equality after baseball, the universally retired number was not necessary.

And because of the talent level in Cuba, Central America, and Mexico, someone would have broke the barrier soon after him.

And Thome25 needs to check his history books, there were non-white players in MLB before Jackie Robinson, I believe as early as 1918.



I remember Harold Baines, Al Cowens, and others in the 70's and 80's getting assailed in Comiskey Park. I also remember Warren Newson in Milwaukee in 1991 getting the same treatment. It was a cool game because Jack McDowell gave up a HR to Paul Molitor to start the game and nothing else, and Deacon had a nice game that day, so revenge was sweet).

IMO Jackie Robinson's breaking of the color barrier made it more widely accepted for ALL minorities(<<<I hate that term but, I used it for lack of a better word.) to play MLB. NOT just African Americans.

Yeah, you had your different races scattered throughout the history of MLB but, I believe Jackie Robinson playing in 1947 completely kicked open the door for everyone to start playing on a regular basis.

TDog
04-06-2007, 11:19 PM
I wouldn't be surprised to see Razor Shines wear No. 42. He would certainly be visible from the third-base coaching box.

the gooch
04-07-2007, 12:19 PM
You really are missing the point. Baseball has a heritage of retiring numbers. Major league baseball retired Jackie Robinson's number, not just because of his contributions to baseball, but because of his contributions to society through baseball. Taking 42 away from the list of numbers major league teams can assign their players doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't require teams to run their uniform numbers into three digits. It was an unprecedented honor for a man who made a unique contribution to baseball and America that transcended his team and baseball itself. If I have missed something, if you were signed by a major league team and were denied wearing 42, I am sorry for your loss, but I think the value of memorializing the number surpasses the loss of one number.

Frankly, I don't see why this issue should upset people.This isn't personal, and I am not upset. I am trying to discuss what I believe would have been a better way to do it.

There is no discussion about what Jackie Robinson did. Many people believe he deserves some type of honor given to no other player. I agree with that.

I do not believe the honor given to him makes much sense. When I think of White Sox #42, I don't think of Jackie Robinson, I (like most here) think of Kittle. But if it is a Dodgers jersey, of course it's Robinson.

They should hang a Jackie Robinson DODGERS jersey in every MLB stadium. It will make kids ask their dads why that jersey is different from all the others up there. It makes the kids learn about his memory.

Every baseball player that picks a number is asked why they chose that number by a reporter. Now players can't say they picked #42 to honor Jackie Robinson, and then get a chance to talk about their hero. Didn't Sosa wear #21 because of Roberto Clemente? Didn't Rivera chose #42 because of Robinson? Why take that away?

With all the stupid controversy over WHAT jersey is on a player's plaque in the HOF, how dumb is it to put a guy in 29 uniforms he has never worn?
Number of games played by Jackie Robinson in a Dodgers uniform: 1,382
Number of games played by Jackie Robinson in a White Sox uniform: 0
Did Jackie Robinson greatly change the way every baseball team does things? Yes. But he did it by wearing a Dodgers uniform.

areilly
04-07-2007, 01:23 PM
They should hang a Jackie Robinson DODGERS jersey in every MLB stadium. It will make kids ask their dads why that jersey is different from all the others up there. It makes the kids learn about his memory.

[cut]

With all the stupid controversy over WHAT jersey is on a player's plaque in the HOF, how dumb is it to put a guy in 29 uniforms he has never worn?
Number of games played by Jackie Robinson in a Dodgers uniform: 1,382
Number of games played by Jackie Robinson in a White Sox uniform: 0
Did Jackie Robinson greatly change the way every baseball team does things? Yes. But he did it by wearing a Dodgers uniform.


To retire a team-specific jersey implies the player's accomplishments were only legendary in the context of that team. Fisk's White Sox #72, for example, probably means very little to a Giants fan.

Robinson's accomplishments went deeper than what he did for just the Dodgers, and the retirement of his number was/is meant to reflect that. Who played years before or weeks afterward is irrelevant. When Robinson, a black man starting at first base for a team in New York City, came to the league it put the issues of racism, segregation, Jim Crow laws, et al, to the forefront of the national discourse. Baseball was merely the backdrop.

Ultimately his significance has little to do with what he did as a player, even though he put together a remarkable career. To say a professional sports league can't remove something as trivial as a number as a way of acknowledging the significance of the man is asinine. One hundred years from now, very few people will be talking about Mariano Rivera, and even fewer will be talking about Ron Kittle. I find it hard to see how Jackie's body of work won't still command respect and reverence.

Frankfan4life
04-07-2007, 02:36 PM
You really are missing the point. Baseball has a heritage of retiring numbers. Major league baseball retired Jackie Robinson's number, not just because of his contributions to baseball, but because of his contributions to society through baseball. Taking 42 away from the list of numbers major league teams can assign their players doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't require teams to run their uniform numbers into three digits. It was an unprecedented honor for a man who made a unique contribution to baseball and America that transcended his team and baseball itself. If I have missed something, if you were signed by a major league team and were denied wearing 42, I am sorry for your loss, but I think the value of memorializing the number surpasses the loss of one number.

Frankly, I don't see why this issue should upset people.TDog, I read all of the comments you made on this topic and all I can say is I hope there is a TDog on every other baseball message board that addresses this topic.

It is painful to remember how heinously racism affected this country. That is why it is vitally important not to ever forget. It is especially important for those who were not around in that era or never suffered racism. For MLB to honor the incredible courage that Jackie Robinson and other black baseball players of that time had and to reflect on the pain and suffering they endured, is exemplary and necessary. Frankly, I don't care who wears #42 on the Sox. I just want whoever wears it to know what it symbolizes.

southside rocks
04-07-2007, 07:37 PM
In answer to the question of which Sox player will wear #42 next Sunday, Scott Reifert's blog says this:

Honoring Robinson
Jermaine Dye wants to wear uniform No. 42 next Sunday (April 15th) to honor the 50th anniversary of Jackie Robinson's debut with the Brooklyn Dodgers. Other uniformed personnel have until the end of today to let us know if they also want to wear number 42 for the day.

Tip of the cap to JD. He's a player in the Jackie Robinson mold, IMO: plays hard, respects the game, a class act on and off the field.

ChiSox14305635
04-07-2007, 09:38 PM
This looks to be the players who will wear #42:

AL Central:
White Sox: Dye
Twins: Hunter, Rondell White, Jerry White (1st base coach)
Tigers: Sheffield
Indians: CC Sabathia, Josh Barfield
Royals: Reggie Sanders, Emil Brown

AL East:
Yankees: Rivera (grandfathered in)
Red Sox: Coco Crisp
Orioles: Corey Patterson
Blue Jays: Frank Thomas :cool:, Vernon Wells, Royce Clayton, Mickey Brantley (hitting coach)
Rays: Carl Crawford

AL West:
Angels: Gary Matthews Jr.
A's: Shannon Stewart, Milton Bradley, Tye Waller (1st base coach)
Rangers: Ron Washington (mgr)
Mariners: Arthur Rhodes

NL Central:
Cubs: Derrek Lee, Jacques Jones, Cliff Floyd, Darryle Ward
Cardinals: The entire team
Brewers: Bill Hall
Reds: Griffey
Pirates: The entire team
Astros: Carlos Lee :cool:

NL East:
Mets: Willie Randolph (mgr)
Braves: Andruw Jones
Marlins: Willis
Phillies: Jimmy Rollins
Nationals: Dmitri Young

NL West:
Dodgers: The entire team
Giants: Bonds
D-Backs: Orlando Hudson
Padres: Mike Cameron
Rockies: LaTroy Hawkins


Apparently, Garret Anderson was given the opportunity to wear it for the Halos, but he turned it down.

esbrechtel
04-07-2007, 09:55 PM
That will be crazy to watch the Dodgers game...all wearing number 42....

the gooch
04-08-2007, 01:08 AM
TDog, I read all of the comments you made on this topic and all I can say is I hope there is a TDog on every other baseball message board that addresses this topic.

It is painful to remember how heinously racism affected this country. That is why it is vitally important not to ever forget. It is especially important for those who were not around in that era or never suffered racism. For MLB to honor the incredible courage that Jackie Robinson and other black baseball players of that time had and to reflect on the pain and suffering they endured, is exemplary and necessary. Frankly, I don't care who wears #42 on the Sox. I just want whoever wears it to know what it symbolizes. I agree with everything you said here.
To retire a team-specific jersey implies the player's accomplishments were only legendary in the context of that team. Fisk's White Sox #72, for example, probably means very little to a Giants fan.I completely disagree. Placing the man's jersey (no matter what kind of jersey) in your stadium implies the player's accomplishments were legendary to your team. Actually, it doesn't just imply, it flat-out says that. And in my opinion, photoshopping a uniform on him that he never wore doesn't mean anything.

Everyone says we must respect baseball history. Maybe I feel it is important to remember history the way it happened. No baseball owners wanted black players on their team. The color barrier was finally broken because a baseball owner wanted Jackie Robinson to play for his team. That one team was the Brooklyn Dodgers. We must also remember the role the Dodgers franchise played in this historic event.

Robinson's accomplishments went deeper than what he did for just the Dodgers, and the retirement of his number was/is meant to reflect that. Who played years before or weeks afterward is irrelevant. When Robinson, a black man starting at first base for a team in New York City, came to the league it put the issues of racism, segregation, Jim Crow laws, et al, to the forefront of the national discourse. Baseball was merely the backdrop.We all agree on this. Ultimately his significance has little to do with what he did as a player, even though he put together a remarkable career. To say a professional sports league can't remove something as trivial as a number as a way of acknowledging the significance of the man is asinine. One hundred years from now, very few people will be talking about Mariano Rivera, and even fewer will be talking about Ron Kittle. I find it hard to see how Jackie's body of work won't still command respect and reverence.Everything you say here is correct. But I find it hard to see how Jackie's body of work won't still command respect and reverence even if players on teams he never played for wear the same number as him. That is the only point I am trying to make here. I believe that MLB made a justified and honorable effort to commemorate Jackie Robinson throughout baseball. I feel what they did (denying players from wearing a jersey he never wore) is not the way to do it, and I've stated multiple times in this thread what I feel accurately honors the man.