If dogs run free, then why not Buehrle.
I see his residency decision quite differently than they did. Whereas they see him as some sort of hero, I see him as a well-intentioned but ultimately bad parent. I love animals, but I love humans a lot more. To me, the real family – mother, son, and daughter – should take precedence over Slater.
Being an absentee father in order to cater to a dog isn’t touching. It’s touched. What sort of father would not want to spend his days with his 5-year old son and 3-year old daughter? Their youth is short-lived and precious. These are the days and years in which they are so cute (more so than any dog ever could be) and their brains and hearts soak up so much information and love. They need their dad to help provide that intellectual and emotional nourishment. Having him 800 miles away – in another country, no less – will do them no good. Sure, his ballplayer’s income will give them all the material goods that they’ll ever need or want, but, for 6 or 7 months out of the year they’ll be without the possession which they need the most – their father.
Suppose Buehrle plays out the rest of his career in Toronto. He’s only 33 and is still a darn good pitcher (he sports a 3.82 lifetime ERA), so it wouldn’t be out of the question for him to play another 7 years in the Bigs, especially for a rejuvenated Blue Jays organization (to which he’s obligated to at least three seasons). Will he continue to maintain the great divide between himself and his kin over that period? I hope not. By then, his kids will be 12 and 10. That’s a good portion of their childhood to throw away.
...He needs to love what matters most – his own flesh and blood, and not some dog. By doing so, he won’t end his solid MLB career with any regrets — he’ll feel like an accomplished father and not just an accomplished ballplayer.
Repoz
Posted: February 26, 2013 at 06:06 AM |
106 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags:
blue jays,
woof
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.
As free as the wind blows!
As free as the grass grows!
Beuhrle, he follows his heart....!
But, won't somebody think of the children!?!
I mean, at least wait until they're 7 and no longer cute.
Why? We the community have an interest in Buehrle's children being productive and well-adjusted citizens and, therefore, the way he raises them is of community concern.
According to bobconfer.net, that's the official magazine of the John Birch Society.
Is this one of those "monitor the enemy" things?
And failing to see their father for a couple hours a day every day for a few weeks in the summer is going to irreparably harm them? Or harm then in an even insignificant way? My wife is an airline pilot, and thus is away from our children for days at a time, every week, for 48 weeks of the year every year of their lives. Many thousands, perhaps millions of children "suffer" similar or worse parental separation than the Buehrle children will experience.
note: I'm not really responding to SBB and his ridiculous post, but pointing out the other side to anyone who might be slightly moved by his absurd point. Society has about 10 billion more pressing concerns than if a millionaires kids can't live with daddy a few weeks out of the year.
If you have 15 children and 1 dog, do you let the Blue Jays put a contract to your head? The eternal question.
Buehrle is famous for working quickly.
However, if the Buehrle clan would have otherwise moved to Toronto but stayed only because of the dog ban, then that's a bit different (and peculiar for a guy who was so outspoken about retiring early to spend time with his family). His call, of course, but not one I could support if my opinion mattered.
Not if they consider their dog part of the family.
And that's an attitude that's just never made any sense to me. I like dogs, and we've got one, but I don't mistake him for any of my kids.
And if you had to choose between living away from your kids for an extra 7 weeks while you work 8-10 hours a day, or get rid of the dog, what would you choose? Choosing the former does not mean one is mistaking the dog for one of the kids.
2. For players, family home is primarily winter question, unless they plan to move their whole family every year in October/November and April. If he doesn't want to spend winter in Canada, why would he move his family there? How many players have their families with them during the season, and then relocate for the winter? Specially if they have schoolkids?
Rest assured that the Buerhles are taking your position into consideration.
Oh for Christ's sake, I really can't be any ####### clearer that my opinion doesn't mean #### to them.
I don't mistake my uncle for my kids either, but I still consider him family.
Funny that you don't even consider the possibility that the kids wanted to stay with the dog...
Is he a hamster?
I didn't consider any number of possibilities, in part because I've got no idea everything that went into the decision. And if I were ripping Mark Buehrle for this decision, which I'm not, that would be worth noting.
Wait, Conifer is a Birch? What's going on here?
Little known fact: If play Pavement bootlegs backwards, digitize the output, it actually makes for a nifty web sniffing algorithm...
Funny that you don't even consider the possibility that the kids wanted to stay with the dog...
I didn't consider any number of possibilities, in part because I've got no idea everything that went into the decision. And if I were ripping Mark Buehrle for this decision, which I'm not, that would be worth noting.
You said
the family would have otherwise relocated to Toronto but refrained from doing so just because of a dog, then I find that decision to be one I couldn't get behind.
So, the possibility that the kids didn't want to give up the dog is something you can't get behind.
If it were the only reason, no, I wouldn't.
Let me put it this way: If Mark Buehrle was a buddy of mine (and, thus, valued my opinion) and told me he'd been traded to Toronto, he'd like the family to join him and the family wants to join him, but they've got this pitbull ban standing in the way, what do I think he should do. I'd tell him to simply find another home for the damn dog. Letting any animal be a barrier to that doesn't make any sense to me. YMMV.
Also, I think the bans against pit bulls are really unfair. The two sweetest dogs I have ever known are both pit bulls.
You choose the kids. And the kids should choose you. If that's not the way it goes, chances are you are a sh!t father anyway, and maybe it's best you are in a different country.
Which is exactly what the kids will think when they get old enough to reflect upon this time in their lives and the decision their father made. Of course they'll have the advantage of knowing their father the man, without the obstacle of being bogged down in fanboy.
I hope you don't have any children, because judging from this post, chances are you would be a sh!t father.
I dunno. On the one hand, I like pit bulls. I volunteer at an urban animal shelter, so I've met and worked with many, many pit bulls, and some of them are incredibly sweet dogs. Friendly, eager to please, affectionate, etc. On the other hand, they are freakishly strong for their size, and have a tremendously powerful bite compared to other dog breeds. The statistics are not kind to pit bulls; they're wildly over-represented in both dog attacks and dog attacks resulting in human fatalities. I suppose it's possible that they're no more aggressive than other dogs, but simply cause more damage when they do lose it and attack people. As people who are supposed to care about facts and data, it's hard to ignore the numbers that show pit bulls really are much more dangerous than other dogs by a massive margin. Not saying I support such bans, but there are some legitimate arguments there.
And Mark Buehrle's leaving his with a five and three year old, 12 hours away. Let's all applaud his mastery as a father!!!!!!
That's pretty much equivalent to loading one bullet into a gun with 15 chambers and then shooting his kids in the head.
Hell hath no fury like a fanboy scorned.
I hope you don't have any children, because judging from this post, chances are you would be a sh!t father.
I do! One awesome daughter. The idea of being away from her so as not to disturb the family relationship with Fido is so ridiculous I don't know what to say. Nothing is more important than actually being there for your kids.
I think you have to look at the context of who owns them. A lot of jackasses who have no business having a dog have a pit bull out of some sense of misguided machismo. (My favorite story about this is when I was sitting in the waiting room at the ASPCA hospital and these two young kids came in with a pit bull but they didn't have the money to pay the bill. Well, that's not what's funny--what was funny is that one of the geniuses was wearing a Michael Vick jersey. Hey let's go hit up the SPCA for free care for our dog, but wait a minute, let's make sure I look like a complete douche before we go.) I think instead of a ban you should have to license your pit bull, prove it has been spayed or neutered, and have a brief interview with animal control so that they know you're not a jackass.
When I see some super-macho dude walking around with a dog hasn't been been fixed and obviously hasn't been well-trained and that has a spiked metal collar, the dog is inevitably a pit bull. I think that a lot of the statistics about pit bulls being dangerous come because people who want dangerous dogs or who want to look like a thug get pit bulls.
EDIT: Coke to Shooty.
As has been pointed out, by the requirements of his job, Buehrle is not going to be around much anyway. He is missing very little time that he would actually be spending with his kids and in exchange, they get to keep the family pet. The fact that you believe this makes Buehrle a bad father says more about you than it does about him.
Jeez, that's almost as bad as being in Canada.
Not that much is still way, way better than not at all. Especially when they are young like that, those are the best years.
He could be in Canada for years, that time adds up.
That's undoubtedly some of it, but whether the pit bull is more likely to bite than the average breed, the simple fact is they're just better at it when they do.
I do think the licensure, spay/neuter and education solution noted in Shooty's post is a fine alternative to outright bans. I reject the idea that pitbulls (or similar makes and models) are no different than any other kind of dog.
Let's do some math, only this time do it right. If the family's in TO, that's 81 days plus homestand offdays the family's together that they aren't together otherwise (save the occasional road trip, though I'm not sure how that would work). Buehrle's odd hours are actually better for family time than most of us get, since he doesn't have days where he misses both mornings and nights with the kids -- a regular feature of the big city office work world.
A few years ago I was walking my dog (a smallish Australian shepherd, about 40 pounds) on a leash (as per city law and good common sense) in a city park. From about 100 yards away, an off-the-leash pit bull spies us and comes tearing over, pounces on my dog, and pins her to the ground.
I was helpless to stop it. Yelling did less than nothing. Attempting to pull the pit bull off was useless (and I'm 6 feet tall, 200 pounds, and do 50 push-ups a day). Useless. I resorted to kicking the pit bull in its side, as hard as I possibly could. Nothing. It was like kicking a brick wall.
The yahoo owner of the pit bull finally reaches us, and he manages to call the dog off, and (finally) get it leashed. I was terrified that my dog had been mauled, but the pit bull was merely demonstrating (extreme) dominance, and none of its bites had penetrated her skin. She was traumatized, but uninjured.
I was livid at the yahoo owner. He apologized, and gave me his business card and promised to pay any vet bills that I would incur. Fortunately there were none.
The combination of an irresponsible owner and a stupendously strong and ill-trained dog is quite a thing.
Pretty much. The other concern is that many modern pit bulls are bred for or from fighting stock; I've encountered numerous rescue dogs that are friendly and submissive around humans, but will fly into a frothing rage if brought near another dog. Makes sense in a way; you probably don't want to breed a fighting dog that tries to attack everything, all the time, but I'd be leery about having a pet that could so easily be reduced to a rage state, even if that state isn't necessarily triggered by me or my family.
You're assuming the family will have the kids switch schools twice per school year. That's not likely nor reasonable. Most likely, assuming they want to keep St. Louis their permanent home, which they seem to do, they would live in Toronto only during the summer months.
Night games which end 10:00-11:00, gets home around 12:00-1:00, he's not getting up at 8 with the kids. Day games work hours are similar, if not longer than office workers. No weekend or holidays off.
The five year old is barely school-age and the other kid isn't school-age. I don't know why we'd assume they want St. Louis as their "permanent home" when they lived where Buehrle worked last year.
Night games which end 10:00-11:00, gets home around 12:00-1:00, he's not getting up at 8 with the kids.
Why not? Get up, have breakfast, see them off, catch a nap in the huge chunk of day you have until work, if neceessary.
No weekend or holidays off.
But a whole offseason off, and a bunch of days off in-season. A baseball player with his family at the homebase will have more available family time than a professional office worker, male or female, with responsiblities -- and it really isn't close.
On other occasions, Buehrle has spoken about wanting to make St. Louis his permanent home. That's why there were Buehrle-to-the-Cardinals rumors for such a long time.
He doesn't have any reason to spend the offseason in Toronto - he can spend that with his kids wherever they are.
My gut is that if I were Buehrle I'd have gotten a place in Niagara Falls or Buffalo and dealt with a bit of a commute. I'd probably have told the Jays to keep a room in the hotel adjacent to the Rogers Centre set aside for me and the family if we wanted to spend a weekend in Toronto or I just didn't feel like the drive at midnight but I don't think I'd have sent the kids back to St. Louis.
The one thing that I wonder about is if the 5 year old is starting school. That's about kindergarten age and it's possible that Buehrle simply wants his kid going to school in St. Louis.
Not during the season you nitwit. That's what we're talking about.
Right. He spoke about it and then ... didn't do it. They lived in Miami last year.(*)
I mean, yeah, they'd prefer St. Louis over other cities once Buehrle decided he wasn't living with them, but that's not really the issue at hand.
(*) Well, technically, they lived in Broward County, since the jurisdiction in which Buehrle was employed also has a pit bull ban.
That's what I'm talking about too. A Toronto Blue Jay works in Toronto at least 81 times during a baseball season. Honestly, this really isn't debatable -- he's going to be living in an empty house that wouldn't be empty but for the pit bull 70 or more days a year, conservatively speaking. That isn't some tiny, de minimus number.
You sound like Seinfeld trying to rationalize an extra five days in Florida with Morty and Mom to Elaine by making it seem like it's really only two days what with meals and sleep and all. Sorry, no sale.
If I see an off the leash PB, I pick up my dog and get the hell outta Dodge--fast. I am tempted every time to rat-out the moron with the loose Death Machine on four legs
via cell phone, but have yet to do so. My dog is to PB's as a sandwich is to me, more or less.
Letting your dog off his leash in the impropoer area is a good way to get your dog killed as well: dog sees a squirrel, bolts, car hits dog.
The operative word that you inadvertently left out of that first sentence is "yet".
Nah, he's got a point. Imagine what a little well-timed intervention with MamaBear Blanks might have accomplished.
Little known fact: If play Pavement bootlegs backwards, digitize the output, it actually makes for a nifty web sniffing algorithm...
Pavement? Repoz is light years beyond Pavement.
Nothing is more important than actually being there for your kids.
So you don't work? You never work late or on weekends? You don't bowl, play softball, jog? You don't take a weekend to go fishing with your friends? You home school? Have you ever taken a new job in a new city and moved the family? If so, was that really the best thing for the kids?
And, the $10,000 question, have you ever forced your kids to give up a pet?
All that to say that it's not just macho idiots who shouldn't own pit bulls.
Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
/ducks
Know your pet. Train/spay/neuter (as appropriate) your pet. When I owned a 65lb part shepherd I trained the heck out of him because he was a pretty big semi-scary looking dog (who could be fierce). Currently I own a 60lb mutt who is so totally not fierce (and came pretty well trained, lucky me).
Sheesh.
Are pit bulls dangerous because they're owned by macho ########## who don't train or socialize them adequately, or do macho ########## own pit bulls because they're dangerous dogs that enhance their owner's self-image of badassery? I lean towards the latter.
Also, in terms of dog attacks on other dogs, you should never bring a dog on a leash into an area where there are other dogs off leash. You're putting your dog at risk - unleashed dogs see leashed dogs as extreme submissives and will attempt to assert their dominance over them. You've either got to let your dog off leash themselves (in which case the dogs will 99% of the time figure it out for themselves, whatever their breed is) or just don't bring your dog there.
@83-I was talking about people who just walk around suburban NYC with their large dogs off the leash. Not a dog run. I'm talking about the sidewalk.
I agree with you completely - wasn't addressing you specifically, sorry. I was more talking about when people bring their dogs to dog parks and such but still keep their dog on a leash. Likewise, one shouldn't in a public park that isn't an off-leash area let one's dog off the leash. It's not so much that the dog is a danger to other people (it isn't, in fact it will probably want to play with every person it sees) - it's that the dog may be a danger to other dogs or vice versa, as in Steve's example.
OTOH, our 175 pound Mastiff is a terror. She is overly protective at the park. (At the doggy day care...yes, that's right, doggy day care we go to, she's fine, just another dog in the pack, plays well with others, is loved by all, dogs and humans alike). At the park, she's in "protect" mode. Hence, she doesn't go to the park much any more.
I've got two of the most well behaved labs on the planet. Both have been hunt trained so they are completely obedient off-leash. I still wouldn't dream of letting them wonder around off-leash because some people are just terrified of dogs over 50 lbs. Don't get me wrong, I'm not making a value judgement, I just think someone would call the cops or shoot my dogs (I live in a heavily armed neighborhood).
One of the few towns to be named after a local columnist, or perhaps his output.
That is true. The issue is that a lot of people don't seem to know what their dog is. The problem seems to be exacerbated when there are a lot of other dogs around (i.e. lots of off leash dogs and one leashed dog), hence the dog park issue. Sometimes you feel like you should say something to people you see bringing a leashed dog to the dog park, wondering why the other dogs keep sniffing at it and continuously jerking the dog away because other dogs are messing with it - just let the dog off the leash and it's going to get a lot less attention.
our 175 pound Mastiff
Now that is a big dog.
Hmm, I still can't figure why a columnist with the Niagara Gazette would get in such a tizzy over Buerhle not moving his millions into their county?
That is a great story!
But as anybody with a brain knows, Westies are the best dogs. And not with those ridiculous ACK haircuts, I'm talking about a nice puppy-cut.
Have we ever had a "dog thread"? I don't recall one. Nor do I recall a "car thread", which strikes me as odd, for a site dominated by American males.
Can your Westies bring you beer? Both of my labs are trained to open the refrigerator and bring me a can. Very handy.
We have 3 cats, and they love her, and vice-versa.
When men come to the house, she gets weird and protective. She's much better with women.
I am so hoping this was a joke, or a reference, or something.
One rich motherf*cker.
As someone with 5 kids, 2 dogs, 1 bird, 1 rabbit and fish, I never have cash...ever.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main