BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Rany on the Royals: Banned!

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, July 02, 2009

Rany on the Royals: Banned!

Good to know that Dayton Moore took some time out from scouting Braves rejects to make a move.

I was, in fact, planning to show my face at the ballpark in two weeks. We had been working behind the scenes for the past several weeks to put together a Baseball Prospectus night at Kauffman Stadium – an event that we have held with much success at a number of major league parks around the country. We even had the date tentatively set for July 17th, we were lining up guests from Kansas City and around the country, and I was just a few days away from announcing the details to all of you fine readers. Unfortunately, that event is now on indefinite hiatus. I guess the Royals have no interest in selling 100+ tickets to their Hall of Fame Suites at $80 a pop.

Having already cleared the weekend on my schedule, I’m still planning to come to town that weekend, so maybe I’ll get the chance to face the heat. Or maybe not: I was just informed last night that I’ve been blacklisted by the team. That’s right: I’ve been banned by the Royals! The way this team is playing, I’m not sure if the Royals are trying to punish me or reward me.

Brandon in MO (Yunitility Infielder) Posted: July 02, 2009 at 04:37 PM | 52 comment(s) | Login to Bookmark
Related News: General

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages

1. The Essex Snead Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:24 PM (#3240548)

Bany on the ... Boils?

2. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:28 PM (#3240556)

That's just...wow. I can understand Dayton Moore in his private moments thinking \"#### that know-it-all #######!" But to actual ban him. I declare that most uncool.

3. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:29 PM (#3240557)

Not the first time the Royals have banned media for having the gall to ask questions.

I would like to take this opportunity to say I think David Glass, in addition to being handsome and a wonderful humanitarian, is a terrific owner. Under the leadership of him and his brilliant son Dan, the Royals are clearly on the right path to a championship. Dayton Moore has made unquestionably brilliant moves that have vastly improved this team and with the calm, wise decisions of Trey Hillman, it is only a matter of time before this team is successful.

4. bunyon Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:35 PM (#3240567)

I know he's just a dermatologist, but could Rany serve as trainer?

Seriously, they ban Rany? The guy others always make fun of for thinking the Royals are going to win? Wow.

5. Bad Doctor Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:35 PM (#3240568)

It will be curious to see if the MSM picks up this story. We saw in the Morris story how quick they were to conflate themselves and bloggers when the question was the application of journalistic ethics and standards. I'm sure they wouldn't stand for the banning of a reporter who wrote negatively about the team in a responsible way, so we'll see what happens here.

6. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:36 PM (#3240570)

Seriously, they ban Rany? The guy others always make fun of for thinking the Royals are going to win? Wow.

You know Neyer has sweaty palms right now...

7. Brandon in MO (Yunitility Infielder) Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:37 PM (#3240572)

Like Rob Neyer ever gets within 400 miles of the KC

8. bunyon Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:38 PM (#3240575)

It isn't a worry, I'm sure, but if they ban Rany they should have a posse out looking for Rob.

9. Designated Sitter (GGC) Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:41 PM (#3240584)

Banning? That's nothing. It's been close to two years since The Royals put Garth Sears on ice.

10. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:42 PM (#3240585)

Seriously, I'm very much looking forward to both Rob's and Poz's response.

11. Brandon in MO (Yunitility Infielder) Posted: July 02, 2009 at 05:57 PM (#3240604)

Posnanski had a column bashing the usage of Meche yesterday (121 pitches AFTER complaining of a "dead arm") and criticizing the Aviles, Crisp, and Soria injuries.. BEFORE Rany announced the banishment.

JoePo has picked his side.

12. bfan Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:07 PM (#3240631)

i wish my team had a guy like Rany covering them; this guy is a fabulous writer and very insightful. Maybe now that he is banned by the undeserving Royals, other teams' fan-base can now bid on his fandom.

13. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:12 PM (#3240642)

14. bfan Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:21 PM (#3240659)

The A's bid 2 Funkadelic albums and a talking Bill King bottle opener.

Paid to whom? Does it go to the player (american style) or to the club (soccer style)?

15. Fred Lynn Nolan Ryan Sweeney Agonistes Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:21 PM (#3240660)

The A's bid 2 Funkadelic albums and a talking Bill King bottle opener.

And a John Jaha bobble-head.

16. Jeff K. Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:28 PM (#3240673)

Talking bad about the Royals? That's a banning.
Talking bad about the Royals online? Whoo-boy, that's a banning.

17. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:35 PM (#3240687)

Talking bad about the Royals? That's a banning.
Talking bad about the Royals online? Whoo-boy, that's a banning.

What is this from? I can't quite remember and it's bugging me!

18. Moses Taylor demands to be housewarmed Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:40 PM (#3240697)

What is this from? I can't quite remember and it's bugging me!

That's a paddling.

19. birdlives is one crazy ninja Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:42 PM (#3240702)

The O's offer a care package from the Dharma Initiative and Rick Demsey's nephew.

20. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:46 PM (#3240706)

What is this from? I can't quite remember and it's bugging me!

That's a paddling.

Simpson's? God, I should know this.

21. J. Lowenstein Apathy Club Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:46 PM (#3240708)

In defense of the Royals, Rany's 6/24 article does contain this paragraph:

Jeremy Affeldt’s blister problems came and went for the better part of two seasons – coming at a time when Affeldt looked like he could become a frontline starter if he could stay healthy – to the point where I started emailing Bob Dutton in frustration with medical advice that I hoped he would forward onto the team. (I know I said I wouldn’t bring my medical background into this, but this particular problem was right up a dermatologist’s alley.) It got to the point where I committed a terrible breach of journalistic ethics by approaching Affeldt in the Royals clubhouse in Chicago in late 2003 and introducing myself as a doctor who was writing about blister injuries in pitchers. My plan was to gently suggest the proper approach to his problem – something called a partial nail avulsion – but fortunately, by this point the Royals had finally figured out the solution on their own and Affeldt told me he was scheduled to have the surgery after the season. (To the best of my knowledge, he hasn’t had a blister since.)

In that paragraph, Rany admits that he "committed a terrible breach of journalistic ethics" (by which he means, presumably, that he lied to Affeldt about the story he was going to write). That also may be a breach of the terms of his press ticket - I'll have to look at some I have to see whether the press pass conditions would cover something like this (misrepresentation). Possibly. At any rate, it may not be as clear cut as "Rany wrote bad things about the trainer and everyone got mad".

22. Quiet Flows the Don Taussig Avenger (Edmundo)

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:47 PM (#3240709)

Philadelphia offers the suit that the drunk Santa was wearing when he was booed FORTY years ago plus bill1's fart-infused chair.

23. Jeff K. Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:48 PM (#3240711)

What is this from? I can't quite remember and it's bugging me!

Speaking of bugs, bees are bugs, and that's what we used to call nickels. "Give me five bees for a quarter", we'd say.

24. pkb33 Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:49 PM (#3240718)

This is really amazing...even a poorly run organization like the Royals would be expected to do better than this.

I really hope this gets some legs in the MSM...the Royals deserve a lot of abuse for this. Maybe we should sign the team up for a subscription to Pravda and make sure it shows up at HQ Monday AM.

25. Quiet Flows the Don Taussig Avenger (Edmundo)

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:49 PM (#3240721)

21, is the statute of limitations for a breach of journalistic ethics > 6 years? That was 2003 -- you'd think that the Royals would have acted by now. :)

26. Jeff K. Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:50 PM (#3240722)

That also may be a breach of the terms of his press ticket - I'll have to look at some I have to see whether the press pass conditions would cover something like this (misrepresentation).

It doesn't violate what I have from MLB.com to give clubhouse/press box access. Misrepresentation isn't covered, and obviously so, when you think about it. Can you imagine the squawking when it was applied even legitimately by the letter, much less the first clubhouse guy/press secretary that went overboard in the application, which would take half a nanosecond?

27. Shooty: Applying to be Fearless Leader

Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:50 PM (#3240723)

Speaking of bugs, bees are bugs, and that's what we used to call nickels. "Give me five bees for a quarter", we'd say.

I had a feeling it was the Simpsons.

28. J. Lowenstein Apathy Club Posted: July 02, 2009 at 06:53 PM (#3240731)

Edmundo, sure, but they didn't know about it until 6/24.

JeffK : you are probably right. There is a hard "no autographs" rule on press passes and several others, but probably not that.

29. TM in Ann Arbor Posted: July 02, 2009 at 07:32 PM (#3240797)

Press pass terms are, in order: You agree that you're acting on a specific assignment; 'prior written consent,' etc,; don't bootleg the game; MLB owns the logos; your problem if you lose an eye to one of those maple bats; don't take pictures if you aren't a photographer; don't give it to your buddy and have him say he's you so he can watch a free game; listen to people who work for the club/the park/MLB; if you get sued for something you write at the park it's not MLB's fault; if you end up on TV while in the press box you don't get to complain about it; you agree to all this.

30. Craig Calcaterra Posted: July 02, 2009 at 07:38 PM (#3240805)

Tim: you forgot one: If this is your first time in the press box, YOU HAVE TO FIGHT.

31. Smiling Joe Hesketh Posted: July 02, 2009 at 07:39 PM (#3240807)

There's not a "No Cheering" provision?

32. Dewey, Steven Wright Wannabe and Soupuss Posted: July 02, 2009 at 07:39 PM (#3240808)

#30 - RDF.

Just for this, I will have to root against the Royals tonight, and throughout the weekend.

33. Slivers of Maranville (SdeB) Posted: July 02, 2009 at 07:41 PM (#3240811)

Edmundo, sure, but they didn't know about it until 6/24.

I don't think statutes of limitations don't start running until the authorities 'find out about it.'

34. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: July 02, 2009 at 07:49 PM (#3240825)

I don't have the time to read this screed, but I have no problem with an MLB team banning a blogger who does nothing but ##### about the team.

35. The Buddy Biancalana Hit Counter Posted: July 02, 2009 at 07:52 PM (#3240829)

I don't have the time to read this screed, but I have no problem with an MLB team banning a blogger who does nothing but ##### about the team.

Not familiar with Rany's work, huh?

36. bunyon Posted: July 02, 2009 at 07:57 PM (#3240833)

35: Indeed. They have banned the one friendly blogger in the universe.

Is that sort of misrepresentation really a violation of journalistic ethics? I'd have thought investigative journalists would misrepresent themselves a lot (not that Rany, necessarily, is an investigative reporter). I just can't see a guy walking into RJR and saying, "Hi, I want to bring down the tobacco industry, would you please give me all your records?"

37. Craig Calcaterra Posted: July 02, 2009 at 08:00 PM (#3240846)

I have no problem with an MLB team banning a blogger who does nothing but ##### about the team.

Rany has historically given the Royals way more benefit of the doubt than they were ever entitled. It's never been blind faith -- Rany is not some mindless fanboy -- but he has long avoided the cynicism and hopelessness that tends to take over your more critically-minded followers of historically poor performing teams. His criticisms have almost always been reasoned and, at least in my experience, have rarely if ever been cheap shots.

He's the sort of blogger/fan a team would be wise to cultivate, not alienate.

38. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 02, 2009 at 08:09 PM (#3240860)

Rany updates by clarifying what "banned" means:

Just to be clear here, since I think everyone’s taking my words a little too literally: I don’t think I’ve been “banned” in the sense that they’re going to have security guards outside the stadium making sure that I don’t buy a ticket. It does mean that the Royals have cut off any access I may have from the team for my radio show, and – this is critical – have intimated that any other radio show which has me on as a guest faces the same penalty.

I see this as the equivalent of having my media credentials taken away, except of course that I don’t have media credentials, and the Royals have made it clear they don’t give media credentials to bloggers.

39. Barnaby Jones Posted: July 02, 2009 at 08:32 PM (#3240896)

Rany says he and the team have resolved there differences amicably.

And I was so looking forward to all the blogwrath.

40. E., Hinske Posted: July 02, 2009 at 08:46 PM (#3240916)

Rany is not some mindless fanboy -- but he has long avoided the cynicism and hopelessness that tends to take over your more critically-minded followers of historically poor performing teams. His criticisms have almost always been reasoned and, at least in my experience, have rarely if ever been cheap shots.

The Edmonton Oilers had a spectacularly ugly mess this year after a critically minded follower of the team who was there on a press pass wrote a live blog in which he took a number of shots at the team and the players and made a series of jokes that, while funny, were in poor taste. He then wrote about that experience while quitting his blog and the whole thing snowballed to the point that people at the CBC were commenting on it. So really, this isn't that bad for KC yet.

41. Steve Treder Posted: July 02, 2009 at 09:07 PM (#3240927)

Rany says he and the team have resolved there differences amicably.

Well, I'm glad to hear that. But still, how weird is this? Their differences were able to be resolved promptly and amicably -- in which case, couldn't they have been resolved privately, with just a phone call to Rany, saying hey, we need to have an understanding going forward, or something? Why immediately resort to the nuclear option?

Seems like a very clumsy way to handle the situation, particularly given that, as Craig puts it, "He's the sort of blogger/fan a team would be wise to cultivate, not alienate."

42. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: July 02, 2009 at 09:31 PM (#3240944)

I think I was confusing Rany with Neyer's constant negativity about basically everything in baseball. mea culpa.

43. _ Posted: July 02, 2009 at 09:47 PM (#3240959)

So it turns out Rany was actually being melodramatic about the whole thing, adding a clarification to his post because we were taking him too literally when he said he was banned; not to mention there was nothing for him to be banned from - he has no press credentials. I like Rany, but he came dangerously close to Mariotti territory in making the story about him. It's like a dermatologist trying to present himself as some sort of lifesaver.

EDIT: To his credit, he does later in the post express regret for making it about him. I hadn't gotten that far.

44. Lassus: Posted: July 02, 2009 at 09:51 PM (#3240964)

I haven't read the full ins and out of this, but I have little doubt it was caused by some middle-management doofus pissing in a circle.

EDIT: And maybe Rany being a bit of a drama queen.

45. Designated Sitter (GGC) Posted: July 02, 2009 at 10:27 PM (#3240987)

It's like a dermatologist trying to present himself as some sort of lifesaver.

Yeah, that guy that did our skin cancer screenings at work said he went to Julliard and his smock looked like he got it at a corner deli.

46. Christopher Rose Posted: July 02, 2009 at 10:45 PM (#3240999)

Rany has his own program an hour a week on 810 WHB. He frequently appears on 810 at other time as guests.

Being told that nobody from the organization will appear on his own program is one thing. (Shortsighted ...)

Being told the Royals organization will also boycott any station that uses him as a guest is over the top. I wouldn't say Rany is being a drama queen when the Royals pretty much used the nuclear option; he had no press credentials to revoke so they went after him as hard as they could.

Glad to see the Royals have backed off from that stance. I'm hoping that officials will continue to appear on his own program since thus far the conversations have been good radio. I'm guessing that by backing off though it might just be the threat to boycott any station that uses him as a guest.

47. Howie Menckel Posted: July 03, 2009 at 12:48 AM (#3241103)

"Is that sort of misrepresentation really a violation of journalistic ethics? I'd have thought investigative journalists would misrepresent themselves a lot (not that Rany, necessarily, is an investigative reporter). I just can't see a guy walking into RJR and saying, "Hi, I want to bring down the tobacco industry, would you please give me all your records?" "

Yes, that would be a serious breach of journalistic ethics.
That's part of the complication these days - "Hey, give him a break, he's not a journalist."

I would say that anyone with a "press pass" should be expected to uphold standard journalistic ethics.
So if Rany had one, that would be a major violation.

I've walked around plenty of places and not run over and said to someone, "Hey, ask me who I am!"

But is asked - yes, you give an honest answer.
And you sure as hell don't represent yourself as someone else.

ANY exceptions?
Hmm, trying to crack a human slavery or child porn ring - that would have to be weighed in a serious way, and how to minimize it at most.
Certainly not something to be taken lightly.

48. J. Michael Neal Posted: July 03, 2009 at 05:08 AM (#3241204)

Did Rany misrepresent himself? As far as I can see, all he did was say that he was a journalist, which is true, and that he was writing a story on pitchers with blisters, which is also true. He wrote several pieces about Affeldt and his problem with blisters, if nothing else. The only thing I could think of that would have been a breach of journalistic ethics, and I thought he was being sarcastic, was by inserting himself into the story by offering a diagnosis and treatment to Affeldt. If anything, I would have thought it was a violation of *medical* ethics to offer treatment without actually examining the patient.

49. Swedish Chef Posted: July 03, 2009 at 05:21 AM (#3241205)

Yes, that would be a serious breach of journalistic ethics.

Americans have some pretty stuck up notions about ethics compared to English tabloids, then.

50. philistine Posted: July 03, 2009 at 07:06 AM (#3241222)

Americans have some pretty stuck up notions about ethics compared to English tabloids, then.

Alleycats have pretty stuck up notions about ethics compared to English tabloids.

51. Roy Hobbs of WIFFLE Ball Posted: July 03, 2009 at 08:50 AM (#3241230)

It's like a dermatologist trying to present himself as some sort of lifesaver.

Pimple Popper, M.D.!

52. bunyon Posted: July 03, 2009 at 10:47 AM (#3241241)

Thanks for the comment Howie. How far does staying out of it go, though? Say you have an exclusive with a celeb off-stage just before a press conference. As he's about to go out, you notice his fly is down - can you tell him?

As for the medical side, I've had plenty of doctor friends offer opinions on things with the explicit caveat that they haven't examined me. I mean, if Jay Marriotti had stumbled into the Royals locker room and knew how Affeldt could fix the blisters, would it be unethical for him to say so?

It seems to me Rany should've not said anything about who he is or what is creds are and just told Affeldt what he thought - or asked the questions he eventually asked anyway; Howie, is that in line with what a journalist should do? (I am asking in all sincerity )

Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Thursday, July 02, 2009

Rany on the Royals: Banned!

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics