MLB Sportswriter Scoops Self to Remain Relevant

By Diane M. Grassi

At a time when rumor and innuendo in sports journalism has arguably never been more pervasive, one would hope that the current active senior statesmen of their craft would still have an interest in maintaining their once high standards.

As prominent newspapers in cities large and small are folding, to wit, Denver’s Rocky Mountain News and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, sports coverage is being depleted. In addition, many regional newspapers are sharing content and sending fewer personnel to cover Major League Baseball (MLB) games this season. In Los Angeles for instance, only 2 newspapers, the Los Angeles Times and the Daily News of Los Angeles are covering the Dodgers; down from 12 a decade ago.

The New York Times is cutting back on MLB road trips for the NY Yankees and the NY Mets, in the publishing capitol of the world. The Washington Post and the Baltimore Sun are sharing stories for coverage of the Baltimore Orioles and the Washington Nationals.

Over all, the number of baseball writers in the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) is down 65 writers from 2008 and its total is now 725, including non-active members. That does not include those sportswriters who are not members of the BBWAA.

The argument will wane as to whether this is all relative specifically to the economy, exacerbated by the expanse of the internet. Perhaps newspaper proprietors, generally corporate holding companies that preside over numerous assets and businesses, are using the economy as an excuse to downsize.

Whichever it is, however, when a journalist perhaps sees the writing on the proverbial wall, does he or she then deliberately bend the rules to remain relevant? Such apparently appears to be the case as evidenced in a July 27, 2009 NY Daily News column written by highly regarded sportswriter, Bill Madden. The piece was titled, MLB Commissioner Bud Selig Mulling Pardon For Hit King Pete Rose. The NY Daily News still enjoys the 5th largest newspaper circulation in the U.S. and remains an exclusive property of publisher, Robert Zuckerman.

In Madden’s column, published the day after the 2009 Baseball Hall of Fame induction ceremony, he “broke” the story that MLB Commissioner, Bud Selig, “is said to be seriously considering lifting Pete Rose’s lifetime suspension from baseball.”

The source of his information? Madden goes on to say, “The tipoff that Selig may now be inclined to pardon baseball’s all-time hit king was Hank Aaron’s seemingly impromptu interview session with a small group of reporters….on Saturday.”

Aaron also spoke publicly regarding his stance on steroid users. But what Madden honed in on was when Aaron spoke about Pete Rose. Aaron said, “I would like to see Pete in. He belongs there.” That quote was apparently enough for Madden to frame a complete story and to put the whole broadcast media and press corps in a tizzy.

Here is his own logic: “It is no secret that Selig considers Aaron one of his closest friends and values his opinions over perhaps all others…..It was also learned that in a meeting of the Hall of Fame’s Board of Directors, two of Rose’s former teammates on the Board, Vice Chairman, Joe Morgan and Frank Robinson, also expressed their hope that Selig would see fit to reinstate Rose.”

Madden goes on to say, “Another Hall of Famer familiar with the situation” also joined the chorus for Pete’s admission back into baseball, which potentially could allow his admission into the Hall. And Madden added, “According to another source, the behind-the-scenes lobbying process began 5 years ago, but stalled because Selig was still not satisfied that Rose was ‘reconfiguring’ his life.”

This prompts the question: Was that Madden’s version of a journalist’s “Who, what, when. where, why and how? Not to those journalists who take such questions seriously.

Madden apparently had doubts himself when on the following day, July 28, 2009, he wrote a NY Daily News column titled, MLB Commissioner Bud Selig Will Not Ease Up on Pete Rose. Since Madden’s first article’s title was fancied to purport fact, it came as a surprise that the very next day he would write a column almost as if someone other than himself had written the supposed news the day before.

However, prior to his near “retraction” article on July 28th, Madden’s name bounced across America from television and radio networks to new media outlets online to other newspaper dailies, and Madden was promoted as the guy who got the “scoop.” Pretty clever, eh?

As momentum built, before sunset on July 27, 2009, it was a “fact” that Selig was entertaining reinstatement for Rose. And everyone knew that Bill Madden got the exclusive.

The only problem? No one had told Bud Selig about his supposed intention. And for a guy covering NY sports for 30 years, Madden erased any doubt that he was not now well known. Unfortunately, no so for his best work, but for arguably committing a neat publicity stunt of sorts.

Given the climate of broadcast and newspaper outlets offing their talent near retirement age, it makes sense in some circles that Madden would want to gain instant and unabated relevance. And few ever read or heard about Madden’s follow-up column the next day on July 28th which he began with, “Despite growing sentiment from a number of influential Hall of Famer’s – most notably Hank Aaron – that 20 years has been a sufficient sentence for Pete Rose for betting on baseball, Bud Selig insists nothing has changed from his stand point.”

But most curious is Madden’s conclusion in the first paragraph as he denotes, “And I’m coming to the belief that he’s going to remain so as long as Selig is commissioner.” He goes on to state, “The image Selig has been carefully crafting for himself over the past 2 years is that of no-tolerance….So how would it look now if he pardoned someone who broke baseball’s cardinal rule?”

You have to love this guy. A day later he draws a conclusion as if the original article never existed, but based upon his own reporting and history with Bud Selig on the Pete Rose saga. So the only conclusion we can conclude is that Bill Madden knew better, but needs to be part of the national spotlight, whether his reportage is accurate or not or even belies what he really knows.

The underlying point of citing Bill Madden here is that it sets a bad precedent not only for sport journalists but the state of journalism generally. For if a guy, supposedly well regarded and one of the most powerful sports writers in New York City, has to stoop to such rubbish to bring unearned attention to himself, then what kind of example does it set? It goes against the Journalist’s Creed, which is incumbent for the survival of the Fourth Estate.

And you will be interested to know that Bill Madden is one of 3 finalists for the J.G. Taylor Spink Award to be voted upon this November and to be awarded at the 2010 Hall of Fame induction ceremonies. The award is the highest one bestowed by the BBWAA to its membership. However, winners are not “inducted” into the Hall of Fame but rather “enshrined” by way of a permanent exhibit within the Hall’s library. And Spink Award recipients also enjoy lifetime membership on the Hall of Fame’s Veterans Committee that elects those players who are past their 15 years of eligibility on the ballot, as well as non-player candidates.

So why Madden’s self-scribed hype? To keep his job? To get another job? To win the Spink Award? Or to do it because he can get away with it given his good reputation? Whatever the reason, he certainly was not thinking of his journalist brethren and those who strive to report the facts and for whom it still matters. It would be refreshing to hold on to that last bastion of good journalism, given the times in which we live.

Copyright ©2009 Diane M. Grassi
Contact: dgrassi@cox.net

MLB SUFFERS NO LACK OF HYPOCRISY

By Diane M. Grassi

Major League Baseball (MLB) fans over the past several years have not only been witness to those performances taking place on MLB baseball diamonds across America, but have also been privy to after-the- fact cover-ups, collusion, denials and authoritarian control of their National Pastime. And all this in spite of supposed lessons learned from its failures going back to the early 20th century with the 1919 Black Sox throwing the World Series.

But where MLB differs in the late 20th and early 21st centuries from its historic past, is by virtue of its yearly multi-billion dollar revenues it now enjoys, enabling it more unilateral power over the game of baseball in spite of the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) and the World Umpires Association (WUA) with which it must collectively bargain.

MLB is given great latitude granted by the United States government, which allows MLB to continue to be the only professional sports league in the U.S. not subject to anti-trust laws, except with respect to collective bargaining with its unions. And it seemingly appears it need not explain its decisions or lack thereof to its fans, employees, or even the U.S. Congress, unless of course subpoenaed, about the “best interests of baseball.”

News arose in July 2007 that now former National Basketball Association (NBA) veteran referee, Tim Donaghy, was pending indictment by the federal government, allegedly for providing information to illegal bookmakers associated with the Gambino Crime Family in New Jersey, who wagered bets on NBA games. He allegedly funneled confidential information to them on games and personnel while he was actively refereeing for the NBA during the 2005 and 2006 seasons included the post-season. Donaghy plead guilty on federal charges in court on August 15, 2007.

And in early August 2007, MLB tried to hoist its latest unilateral decision upon the WUA in light of the perception of illegal gambling and cheating ongoing in the NBA by one or more of its officials, especially with NBA Commissioner David Stern’s assertions that he thought the NBA had had the best security detail in all of sports. Such has made for nervous Nellie’s over at MLB headquarters on Park Avenue, NYC. And although there have been complaints from players as well as from fans with how discipline and policies have been decided by David Stern, there still is a perception of a rationale and accessibility to the NBA’s Commissioner.

It will take months for the NBA to come to a conclusion regarding the reach that Donaghy may have had in the NBA and who else may have been involved, if at all, and how new security options will be implemented. But Stern made it clear that he will not react swiftly with a knee-jerk reaction as to the legalities and ethics of preserving the NBA. And that is precisely what MLB Commissioner Bud Selig has been accused of by the WUA.

It has been reported that a letter dated August 6, 2007 from the WUA to MLB stated that the WUA was breaking off talks with MLB concerning its very recent unilateral decision to require extensive credit background checks to be performed on all MLB umpires effective immediately. However, due to the lack of disclosure of how the findings of any investigations would be handled by MLB, the WUA cut off cooperation with MLB until the expiration of its Collective Bargaining Agreement which expires in 2009. The points of contention which MLB was not willing to concede or even discuss with the WUA include:

“The nature, type and scope of information that you intend to gather on the umpires.”
“The sources, legitimate and otherwise, from which you intend to collect the information.”
“The persons who will have access to the information once it is collected.”
“The vendors and consultants who will assist you in collecting and reviewing the information.”
“The frequency with which you plan to conduct the investigations.”
“The uses to which the information will be put.”
“The process by which MLB, the WUA and the affected umpires will address any concerns that might arise from the information.”
“The protections that will be put in place to ensure that the information is not misused or publicly disclosed.”
“The safeguards that will be adopted to ensure that umpires will not be subject to disciplinary or other adverse job actions stemming from or based upon any of the information.”

And furthermore, WUA spokesman, Larnell McMorris, who also serves in such a capacity for the National Basketball Referees Association, (NBRA) said that the umpires also wanted to revisit their prior discussion with MLB regarding the use of an additional or 7th umpire for World Series games as well as the National League and American League Championship Series, given the need for an alternate in case of injury, illness or unforeseen emergencies. But Rob Manfred, MLB Executive Vice President of Labor Relations, depicted the umpires’ demands as an underhanded way to get an extra umpire for post-season play, again citing that such did not serve the ‘best interests of baseball’ and accused the WUA of not bargaining in “good faith.”

While MLB has no apparent problem with waving the ‘best interests of baseball’ banner when it sees fit for public relations purposes, it apparently is not concerned about it enough to ensure the game’s integrity in having enough umpiring officials on hand during the crucial post-season. And apparently such has been a previous concern to the WUA which remained unaddressed.

To date, when alternates are required for the 70 MLB contracted umpires, minor league umpires are called upon to pick up the slack. Although MLB umpires draw salaries ranging from a minimum of $87,000.00 to upwards of $250,000.00, minor league umpires, many whom have worked as much as many as 154 MLB games in one season, receive a pro-rata share of the minimum MLB salary. Minor league salaries are monthly, with a maximum of $3500.00 per month.

But are not games compromised when replacing MLB umpires with minor league umpires in a pinch? Especially with the use of QuesTec, the controversial computerized technology used to grade an umpire’s home plate ball and strike calls. Used since 2001, MLB has not made public the exact amount of such machines used in MLB stadiums. There are reports that as few as 13 stadiums have QuesTec and as many as 23 stadiums are equipped with it. But certainly not all 30 MLB stadiums have the systems.

While QuesTec has remained a contentious issue with MLB umpires as well as many MLB pitchers and catchers, umpires are graded on every game they call behind the plate and then evaluated by the Umpire Supervisor for MLB. Formerly former American League umpire, Frank Pulli, served in such a capacity prior to his retirement and now former National League umpire, Rich Garcia, succeeds Pulli.

But questions about the integrity of QuesTec remain. For example, the calibration of QuesTec varies from stadium to stadium and such nuances such as shadows and the locations of stands proximate to home plate can alter the placement of the equipment or change the end result of the scoring. This is noted with respect to curve balls and sliders which QuesTec cannot accurately discern as the ball may clip the corner of the plate initially but may end up outside of the batter’s box when caught by the catcher. Such would be scored as a strike, yet the umpire would correctly call it a ball.

Secondly, umpires are suspect of only one individual having full discretion to grade the umpires with use of QuesTec as he sees fit, and may not be an impartial judge, being an employee of MLB. And questions also remain about the revenue and financial arrangement which MLB has with QuesTec Systems and the monetizing of such arrangements which MLB to date refuses to disclose to its owners, players, or umpires.

That brings us to Frank Pulli and Rich Garcia and their own histories with the ‘best interests of baseball’. In 1989, after the completion of investigator John Dowd’s report on Pete Rose’s illegal sports betting activity, other indiscretions arose. We now know, as confirmed by Pete Rose himself in 2004, that he did indeed bet on MLB as well as on the team he was playing for and managing at the time, the Cincinnati Reds.

But what we did not know in 1989, until it was revealed some 13 years later in a report by the New York Daily News in 2002, was that then National League umpire Frank Pulli, then American League umpire, Rich Garcia, and then Chicago Cubs Manager, Don Zimmer, were found to have been involved in illegal sports betting on sports other than MLB, with members none other than the Genovese Crime Family in New Jersey.

At the time, then MLB Commissioner, Fay Vincent, disciplined Pulli and Garcia for associating and doing business with gamblers and bookmakers in violation of Major League Rule 21 or “the best interests of baseball.” Both came forward early on when called upon and satisfied both Dowd and Vincent. “With these guys, there was nothing involving baseball in anything they did. Anybody who doesn’t understand that misses the crux of the whole point, said Vincent.”

But the aforementioned quote was not from 1989 but from 2002, in the NY Daily News report which stated that Pulli and Garcia were put on 2 years of probation at the time. It was ultimately kept secret not by one Commissioner but two, when Bud Selig succeeded Vincent. The secret remained in Selig’s office for over 10 years and had it not been for Don Zimmer in his 2001 autobiography mentioning that he was also reprimanded by MLB, the secret might still be just that.

Now that the ‘best interests of baseball’ has reared its head again with respect to the gambling issue in the NBA, that which has never been addressed, is why sports betting by MLB umpires Pulli and Garcia was not divulged until 2002? And why were both Pulli and Garcia then subsequently rewarded by Commissioner Selig by becoming the exclusive individuals who oversee the QuesTec System and grade umpires on their calls from behind the plate? And fans are also aware, ad nauseam, about the failed oversight of performance enhancing drugs having been used throughout Selig’s administration.

It is evident now, however, as Selig nears the end of his contract with MLB which expires in 2009, and paid him a salary of $14.5 million in 2006, that he measures the success and integrity of MLB through eyes of a CEO of a Fortune 500 Company. He regaled at the beginning of the 2007 season that MLB revenue for 2006 was a resounding $5.2 billion. Yet, Selig’s continual foot-dragging on issues of concern to the fans are never addressed unless push comes to shove, such as intervention by the U.S. Congress or the threat of MLB’s losing its anti-trust exemption by the U.S. government.

But as long as MLB has benefit of Rule 21 to hide behind and use whenever it becomes convenient, it bears no resemblance to integrity whatsoever. And Commissioner Selig’s legacy more than likely will be overshadowed by how he looked the other way and how he may have forever sullied the hallowed records of America’s pastime in the process.


Copyright ©2007 Diane M. Grassi
dgrassi@cox.net