BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: JT the Brick: Voting privileges should be taken away if Manny makes NL lineup

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

Saturday, May 30, 2009

JT the Brick: Voting privileges should be taken away if Manny makes NL lineup

And a Boy in Static Lifetime Achievement Award is on its way, JT! Well done, you Brick!

If Dodgers outfielder Manny Ramirez is voted into the starting lineup for the All-Star game by the fans of Major League Baseball and allowed to be on the roster there should be a congressional investigation.

I’m serious.

...This is another shining example of how sports fans in general are becoming softer and softer with each passing generation. Commissioner Bud Selig should use the suspension of Ramirez to make a strong statement to the players union and the fans. If a player violates the substance abuse policy and is suspended, he can’t participate in that year’s All-Star game.

This topic truly bothers me because it brings out the ignorance of fans that do not care about the proud tradition of baseball. I consider myself somewhat of a baseball purist but have accepted several recent rule changes that have enhanced the sport such as the advent of the wild card and instant replay. I despise performance enhancing drugs and how they have ruined the history of the game by ballooning the statistics of players who knowingly cheated.

I have great memories as a kid of watching the All-Star game with my father and believing that the outcome actually mattered. I was also the co-host of the Pete Rose radio show back in the late 90’s and relish the stories that the all-time hit king would tell about what that game meant to him and his teammates as they took pleasure in dominating the American League.

Repoz Posted: May 30, 2009 at 12:43 PM | 76 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: dodgers

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.

1. alkeiper Posted: May 30, 2009 at 01:19 PM (#3199871)

A congressional investigation to tell the public how stupid they are? THAT will go over well. I think Manny Ramirez in All-Star voting will provide an excellent gauge as to how the public really feels on the steroid issue.

I would have no issue though with tying a steroid suspension in with denying an All-Star appearance.

2. Quinton McCracken's BFF Posted: May 30, 2009 at 01:29 PM (#3199875)

Maybe Bud can invoke the "in the best interests of The Game" clause.

3. AndrewJ Posted: May 30, 2009 at 01:29 PM (#3199876)

I was also the co-host of the Pete Rose radio show back in the late 90’s and relish the stories that the all-time hit king would tell about what that game meant to him and his teammates as they took pleasure in dominating the American League.

Because nobody embodies baseball ethics more than Pete Rose. Can I get an Amen????

4. villainx Posted: May 30, 2009 at 01:34 PM (#3199879)

Palmeiro Gold Glove.

5. UCCF Posted: May 30, 2009 at 02:25 PM (#3199894)

Voting privileges taken away? No.

Children taken away? Absolutely.

6. The Adam Dunn Effort #44 Posted: May 30, 2009 at 02:53 PM (#3199903)

I consider myself to be something of a purist

, arrgggh, I mean blowhard. Put this post on the IR.

7. Devin has a deep burning passion for fuzzy socks Posted: May 30, 2009 at 02:56 PM (#3199905)

Some of the people are voting for Manny because they want to say "We don't care about steroids." Some people are voting for him because they want to embarass MLB for having someone suspended for steroid use on the All-Star ballot. Some people are voting for him because they're Dodger fans. And there are probably some people voting for him because he's one of the few names they recognize.

So if Manny does make the All-Star team, it doesn't actually mean anything. There's too many agendas here.

8. Cowboy Popup Posted: May 30, 2009 at 03:11 PM (#3199914)

The privilege of voting? Go #### yourself. Take away the vote and see how many people still care.

I consider myself somewhat of a baseball purist...I was also the co-host of the Pete Rose radio show back in the late 90’s and relish the stories that the all-time hit king would tell about what that game meant to him and his teammates as they took pleasure in dominating the American League.

So steroid use is worse in the self proclaimed purist's eye than the cardinal sin in baseball? This guy is a waste of time.

9. RB in NYC (Now with New iPhone!) Posted: May 30, 2009 at 03:31 PM (#3199925)

Jesus, what a ######## this guy is.

10. Blackadder Posted: May 30, 2009 at 03:38 PM (#3199931)

And some people are voting for Manny because they think he is one of the three best outfielders in the National League.

11. villainx Posted: May 30, 2009 at 03:54 PM (#3199940)

And some people vote for Manny cause they want to see him in the All Star game.

12. Best Regards, Larry M. Posted: May 30, 2009 at 04:00 PM (#3199943)

And some people vote for Manny because they punched the wrong hole in the card.

13. Scott Kazmir's breaking balls Posted: May 30, 2009 at 04:03 PM (#3199945)

And some people are voting for Manny because they think he is one of the three best outfielders in the National League.

Define "best", please. IMO, he's not. He sucks on defense, has no range, no arm and is considered a cancer in the clubhouse. Sure, he can hit for average and power, but has no speed and no brain when it comes to making baserunning decisions. His replacement, Juan Pierre, also has a girly arm, but has considerably more range, better defense, more speed and makes better judgements on the basepaths. BTW, he's also hitting close to .400 and he's not, as far as I know, a malcontent in the clubhouse, but has the power of a chipmunk.

Am I saying Pierre is "better" than Manny? Maybe. It just depends on what you mean by "better".

14. Best Regards, Larry M. Posted: May 30, 2009 at 04:04 PM (#3199946)

Am I saying Pierre is "better" than Manny? Maybe. It just depends on what you mean by "better".

If you mean "considerably worse", then yes, Juan Pierre is better than Manny Ramirez.

15. Brian Norton Posted: May 30, 2009 at 04:14 PM (#3199950)

And some people vote for Manny because they thing the whole PED discussion is overblown.

When did fan's desires become irrelevant?

16. dingo powered war machine (CoB) Posted: May 30, 2009 at 04:43 PM (#3199965)

So you ride yourselves over the fields and
you make all your animal deals and
your wise men don't know how it feels to be thick as a brick.

In the Pantheon of stupid sports radio jocks, JT "Thick as a" Brick breathes rarified air. Seriously, *this* article is NOTHING. He's a complete LA team homer, hated DePodesta and his "laptops", loved LoDuca in all his grittyguttyglory, knobgobbles on EVERYTHING Lakers (especially Phil) and speaks in a patios of mangled new age platitudes, Eastern "philosophy" and "haiku", which never actually follow the haiku form.

17. baudib Posted: May 30, 2009 at 05:06 PM (#3199977)

speaks in a patios

This sounds painful.

18. Spivey Posted: May 30, 2009 at 05:06 PM (#3199978)

There's nothing more I hate than telling the consumer they're idiots and their desires should not only be ignored but punished.

19. Eddie Gaedel Posted: May 30, 2009 at 05:16 PM (#3199988)

players who knowingly cheated.

Considering everything else that's wrong with TFA, I know this is a nit, but...

Can a player unknowingly cheat? I mean, isn't intent inherent in the crime of cheating? A player may unknowingly receive an unfair advantage (inadvertently using a teammate's corked bat, for instance), but can that be considered cheating?

Sorry, it just seems that "knowingly cheated" is a bit redundant.

20. Dave Spiwak Posted: May 30, 2009 at 06:10 PM (#3200057)

In the Pantheon of stupid sports radio jocks, JT "Thick as a" Brick breathes rarified air. Seriously, *this* article is NOTHING. He's a complete LA team homer, hated DePodesta and his "laptops", loved LoDuca in all his grittyguttyglory, knobgobbles on EVERYTHING Lakers (especially Phil) and speaks in a patios of mangled new age platitudes, Eastern "philosophy" and "haiku", which never actually follow the haiku form.

... and if I'm not mistaken, got his first "big break" into the business as a regular caller to the Jim Rome show.

21. The Artist Posted: May 30, 2009 at 06:19 PM (#3200066)

Dear god, this man is a blowhard, even by our standards here.

22. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: May 30, 2009 at 06:31 PM (#3200088)

Take away voting privileges anyway. See what happens. Everyone hates the current voting system anyway. Shake things up so we can see what kind of a system we really want to have.

23. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 06:47 PM (#3200111)

Let the managers pick the rosters, subsitute as little or as often as they wish (subject only to the three inning limit for pitchers) and then pay the entire winning team (and the winning manager) a million dollars each, and the losing players nothing. And keep the "this time it counts" World Series advantage. Put some real incentive back into the game.

The fan voting is BS to begin with unless you can somehow limit it to one vote a person, which is impossible. The way it is now, those votes for Manny can mean just about anything you want it to mean, i.e. anything or nothing. When you can get a handful of people to persuade enough other people to vote the maximum 25 times as a joke, it's pretty hard to argue that this represents anything remotely resembling any considered judgment.

And BTW I'm all for Manny's being in, so this has nothing to do with his case in particular. I'd just much rather see an All-Star game treated like a real competition instead of an almost meaningless exhibition game surrounded by teary Olympics style moments and glorified batting practice.

24. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: May 30, 2009 at 07:04 PM (#3200140)

Let the managers pick the rosters, subsitute as little or as often as they wish (subject only to the three inning limit for pitchers) and then pay the entire winning team (and the winning manager) a million dollars each, and the losing players nothing. And keep the "this time it counts" World Series advantage. Put some real incentive back into the game.

I think the only reason they don't put a cash payout on an All-Star game win is that MLB doesn't really want to emphasize how much money these guys are making. But a cash reward for winning would definitely add a big incentive. Manny would surely show up for that.

25. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 07:07 PM (#3200142)

And tell me that the buildup for such a game wouldn't also do wonders for the ratings.

26. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: May 30, 2009 at 07:09 PM (#3200145)

They could advertise it as "The All-Star $1 Million Challenge".

27. Tricky Dick Posted: May 30, 2009 at 07:52 PM (#3200171)

I'm not a huge fan of the current system of fan voting (I don't like ballot stuffing, even though there is little to do about it). But if you are going to have voting, one can't say, "you can vote as long as your choice meets my standards." People have different opinions on what an All Star team is, and who should be on it. That's part of what makes fan voting interesting. Personally, I'm not likely to vote for Manny right now, but if someone else wants to...go right ahead.

28. Harry Balsagne's transparent jealousy

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:01 PM (#3200177)

29. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:22 PM (#3200202)

I'm not a huge fan of the current system of fan voting (I don't like ballot stuffing, even though there is little to do about it).

I see on MLB's site that anyone can vote up to 25 times each.

Is this enforceable?

Probably not**, but if it is, why couldn't they reduce it to one vote each? What could possibly be the reasoning behind letting one person cast 25 votes, if not to ENCOURAGE ballot stuffing?

Not that I care anyway. My only interest in the All-Star game is that the AL wins and keeps the home field advantage for the World Series, for whatever that's worth.

**and if it isn't, this doesn't arouse much confidence in the various proposals for internet voting in political elections....

30. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:28 PM (#3200209)

Just in case voting for Manny wasn't already fun enough. What's the point of collective outrage if people refuse to share?

But I'm sure that Bud Selig will play this situation perfectly, as always.

31. Allan H. "Bud" Selig Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:35 PM (#3200213)

A problem involving the All-Star Game? That's right in my wheelhouse!

32. Jeff K. Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:37 PM (#3200214)

Wait, wait.

Someone took the guy who was embarrassingly stupid as the overnight guy on Sporting News Radio 15 years ago (and hence was stuck in that role for God knows how long, at least 3-4 years) and gave him a freaking column?

33. Danny Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:40 PM (#3200219)

What could possibly be the reasoning behind letting one person cast 25 votes, if not to ENCOURAGE ballot stuffing?

Encouraging page views and advertising dollars.

34. Jeff K. Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:40 PM (#3200220)

**and if it isn't, this doesn't arouse much confidence in the various proposals for internet voting in political elections....

Well, it's enforceable if one throws out cost. If you don't, the question becomes what's cost-effectively enforceable, and the standards for allowable cost on the MLB All-Star Game side are quite different than those for elections.

That said, internet voting, for this reason and many others, is a terrible, awful, no-good idea.

35. 94by50 Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:43 PM (#3200222)

... and if I'm not mistaken, got his first "big break" into the business as a regular caller to the Jim Rome show.

You are correct, sir. JT won Rome's first "Smackoff" sometime in the mid-90s, which basically makes him a talent show winner. How he parlayed that into a radio gig (no, multiple radio gigs), I don't know, but we should all have such fortune.

JT on the radio is no less painful than reading the article above. Probably more painful, because at least while reading the article, I don't have to hear his voice.

36. cardsfanboy

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:44 PM (#3200223)

I hope this isn't one of those guys who has a BBWAA card, because I would say if they vote Jim Rice into the Hof they should have their voting privileges taken away.

37. Baldrick Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:54 PM (#3200230)

I posted this in the other thread which died, so I'll repeat it here:

All-star voting is one of those situations where the fans are almost definitionally right. The point of voting is to elect a team that the fans want to see. There is no right answer. Whoever gets the most votes is ipso facto the most qualified.

If Manny gets the most votes, then...put him in the all-star game. What's the problem? It's a fake game anyways.

38. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:55 PM (#3200231)

I hope this isn't one of those guys who has a BBWAA card, because I would say if they vote Jim Rice into the Hof they should have their voting privileges taken away.

Fortunately he's not on the BBWAA Badge list, at least not yet.

39. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 08:59 PM (#3200234)

All-star voting is one of those situations where the fans are almost definitionally right. The point of voting is to elect a team that the fans want to see. There is no right answer. Whoever gets the most votes is ipso facto the most qualified.

So if your 25 votes trumps 24 people who only cast one vote, that's democracy in action? Maybe in The Great McGinty.

But I agree with you about the "fake game" part, and more power to Manny if enough people want to stuff enough ballot boxes to get him into the starting lineup.

40. Baldrick Posted: May 30, 2009 at 09:04 PM (#3200236)

So if your 25 votes trumps 24 people who only cast one vote, that's democracy in action? Maybe in The Great McGinty.

Vote early, vote often.

But no, that's not democracy of course. But it's a popularity contest and isn't supposed to be anything else. So if people are motivated to overvote, well...meh.

Maybe it's just because I'm getting older, but I find it really hard to be worked up about who the fans vote for in the All-Star game.

Honestly, the only reason it really matters to me is that people will decide down the road to use ASG attendance as a proxy for "respect" in HOF voting.

41. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 30, 2009 at 09:09 PM (#3200239)

But if you are going to have voting, one can't say, "you can vote as long as your choice meets my standards."

No, but you can say, "People who are suspended are ineligible."

42. Best Regards, Larry M. Posted: May 30, 2009 at 09:11 PM (#3200240)

No, but you can say, "People who are suspended are ineligible."

But he won't be suspended when the All Star Game rolls around.

43. Jim Wisinski

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 09:28 PM (#3200257)

I would have no issue though with tying a steroid suspension in with denying an All-Star appearance.

Me neither; if MLB is going to make steroid use such a major violation, to the point of a permanent ban for a third offense, then it makes sense to deny certain things like ASG appearances. But since MLB didn't think about stuff like that in the first place they're probably praying that the fans cover for them by not voting Ramirez into the game.

44. Jeff K. Posted: May 30, 2009 at 09:31 PM (#3200258)

JT on the radio is no less painful than reading the article above. Probably more painful, because at least while reading the article, I don't have to hear his voice.

One eight hundred, two two seven, six.....nine oh seven

That ####### 907 is seared into my brain.

45. Srul Itza Posted: May 30, 2009 at 09:49 PM (#3200280)

So if your 25 votes trumps 24 people who only cast one vote, that's democracy in action?

If somebody cares so much that he votes 25 times, while the other guys only vote once, then for purposes of the All Star Game, that is indeed democracy in action.

46. Walt Davis Posted: May 30, 2009 at 09:52 PM (#3200282)

The CBA explicitly says that suspended players can't be declared ineligible for the AS game -- even if they're suspended at the time it seems. So, already been decided and negotiated and there's nothing to debate really.

speaks in a patios

Not to be confused with Jesus' famous Sermon on the Patio.

This is another shining example of how sports fans in general are becoming softer and softer

When I was younger, fans were much more uptight than fans of today!! Get off my lawn!!

Really, isn't that the most ridiculous version of "things were better when I was a kid" that's ever been seen? Fans were "harder"?? WTF?

47. Best Regards, Larry M. Posted: May 30, 2009 at 09:53 PM (#3200283)

Of course, I could go ahead and vote 2000 times today if I want. There's a box of All Star ballot by me.

48. SouthSideRyan Posted: May 30, 2009 at 10:09 PM (#3200295)

It's not even that you're limited to 25 votes. You're limited to 25 votes per day. Of course all you need is to put in a different email address every 25 votes and vote unlimited # of times.

49. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: May 30, 2009 at 10:21 PM (#3200305)

Really, isn't that the most ridiculous version of "things were better when I was a kid" that's ever been seen? Fans were "harder"?? WTF?

It's the truth. Back in 1922, the Texas Rangers asked a fan to turn their "YANKEES SUCK" T-shirt inside-out. Six days of bloody rioting ensued, engulfing the city until the chaos was cruelly put down by Pullman strikebreakers.

50. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 10:34 PM (#3200322)

Of course, I could go ahead and vote 2000 times today if I want. There's a box of All Star ballot by me.

It's not even that you're limited to 25 votes. You're limited to 25 votes per day. Of course all you need is to put in a different email address every 25 votes and vote unlimited # of times.

This is all good information.

------------------------------

I see on MLB's site that anyone can vote up to 25 times each.

Is this enforceable?

Well, it's enforceable if one throws out cost. If you don't, the question becomes what's cost-effectively enforceable, and the standards for allowable cost on the MLB All-Star Game side are quite different than those for elections.

Funny, but when BTF has a poll on its homepage, once you've voted once, the next time you go on the page all you see are the results. You can't vote a second time unless you use some other computer or otherwise go through a fair amount of trouble. Does this mean that Jim and Dan have a secret stash of loot that they're pouring into ballot security?

Of course as everyone points out, the marketing imperatives of MLB are apparently aimed precisely at the sort of fans who get off on multiple voting. Maybe MLB figures they'll feel obliged to buy an extra round of beers for every extra time they vote, who knows? And if it gets Manny in the game, I guess it's worth it.

51. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 10:36 PM (#3200325)

It's the truth. Back in 1922, the Texas Rangers asked a fan to turn their "YANKEES SUCK" T-shirt inside-out. Six days of bloody rioting ensued, engulfing the city until the chaos was cruelly put down by Pullman strikebreakers.

You mean "GRINGOS SUCK," don't you?

52. Chip Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:10 PM (#3200347)

It's the truth. Back in 1922, the Texas Rangers asked a fan to turn their "YANKEES SUCK" T-shirt inside-out. Six days of bloody rioting ensued, engulfing the city until the chaos was cruelly put down by Pullman strikebreakers.

As seen in the John Sayles movie "Eight Men Out of Matewan."

53. Jim Wisinski

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:20 PM (#3200349)

The CBA explicitly says that suspended players can't be declared ineligible for the AS game -- even if they're suspended at the time it seems. So, already been decided and negotiated and there's nothing to debate really.

The steroid policy has been collectively bargained, has it not? So the point stands that MLB chose not to do anything to prevent this, as I assume it would have been reported if they pressed for it and were shot down by the union.

54. Harold Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:21 PM (#3200350)

Funny, but when BTF has a poll on its homepage, once you've voted once, the next time you go on the page all you see are the results. You can't vote a second time unless you use some other computer or otherwise go through a fair amount of trouble.

No, it's very little trouble. If the limit was one vote, people would find ways to get around it. By setting the limit to 25, MLB is setting it high enough that people can get it out of their system without breaking any rules. It would be a joke if they tried to set the limit to something small.

People at ballparks can vote as many times as they want. I don't want see what the problem is here.

55. Dewey, Steven Wright Wannabe and Soupuss Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:21 PM (#3200351)

"JT the Brick"? WTF is that?

56. Harold Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:22 PM (#3200353)

Not to mention, a lot of people enjoy voting. Why wouldn't MLB encourage it?

57. Ray (RDP)

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:26 PM (#3200357)

How could a player who has been suspended for 50 games be voted into a game that decides home-field advantage in the World Series?

When the fans send yet another message that they don't actually give a rat's ass about this issue?

He is still hiding from the media and has not explained to Dodgers season ticket holders, who pay his enormous salary, what actually happened.

The author is confused about who pays Ramirez's salary? Odd.

58. Kiko Sakata

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:32 PM (#3200360)

The author is confused about who pays Ramirez's salary?

Does anybody pay "his enormous salary" while he's on suspension? I thought it was unpaid (I recall having a few threads talking about how this might save the Dodgers some money so they could maybe afford to go buy a starting pitcher or something).

59. Ray (RDP)

Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:32 PM (#3200361)

So if your 25 votes trumps 24 people who only cast one vote, that's democracy in action?

Yes, by definition. The rules allow for one person to vote 25 times.

This isn't that difficult, Andy.

60. Danny Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:35 PM (#3200363)

People at ballparks can vote as many times as they want. I don't want see what the problem is here.

Isn't it obvious? The fans voting Manny in pisses off the PED=tehdevil crowd, so there must be something wrong with the system.

61. Bitter Calculus Instructor Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:46 PM (#3200372)

Would it be unethical to vote 25 times from each of multiple e-mail accounts?

62. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:46 PM (#3200373)

It is still pathetically easy to game this system. Just write a script that submits registration requests containing automatically-generated email addresses. That's how we nearly ended up with an all Montreal Canadien starting five in this year's NHL All-Star game.

Bottom line is that the league doesn't really care who gets voted in, as long as people are going to their site often.

63. 8ball Posted: May 30, 2009 at 11:58 PM (#3200380)

There should absolutely be a Congressional investigation. Just like the Congressional investigation that occurred after Shawne Merriman went to the Pro Bowl the year he was suspended for PEDs.

64. Jeff K. Posted: May 31, 2009 at 12:03 AM (#3200386)

Funny, but when BTF has a poll on its homepage, once you've voted once, the next time you go on the page all you see are the results. You can't vote a second time unless you use some other computer or otherwise go through a fair amount of trouble. Does this mean that Jim and Dan have a secret stash of loot that they're pouring into ballot security?

Harold already basically answered this, but this just proves my point. The standard is even lower for a Primer poll, and so Jim and Dan put ridiculously lax 'security' on the thing, knowing full well it's easy to break but not caring because nobody really cares about the results. If you want the same security for elections you could have it right now, but be prepared for President moot.

65. Ray (RDP)

Posted: May 31, 2009 at 12:03 AM (#3200388)

There should absolutely be a Congressional investigation. Just like the Congressional investigation that occurred after Shawne Merriman went to the Pro Bowl the year he was suspended for PEDs.

Yes, we should model this Congressional investigation after that one.

66. Blackadder Posted: May 31, 2009 at 12:03 AM (#3200389)

#63: they do make you fill in a keyword each time before you can vote. I honestly don't know, but is it really that easy to write a script that can read those "distorted words against irregular background" things you see these days?

67. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: May 31, 2009 at 12:25 AM (#3200400)

#63: they do make you fill in a keyword each time before you can vote. I honestly don't know, but is it really that easy to write a script that can read those "distorted words against irregular background" things you see these days?

That part isn't easy--I didn't know it was being used for ASG voting--but I imagine it could be done.

68. Vegas Watch

Posted: May 31, 2009 at 12:57 AM (#3200428)

My favorite part of this, which I don't believe has been mentioned, is it saves your ballot every time you vote. So the second through 25th times it literally takes three clicks after you type in the "validation key".

69. Earvin 'Gold Stars' Johnson Posted: May 31, 2009 at 12:57 AM (#3200430)

is considered a cancer in the clubhouse.

By all accounts, Manny was considered a clubhouse godsend for the Dodgers last year.
Then again, he replaced on the roster Jeff Kent - who definitely is a cancer.

70. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: May 31, 2009 at 01:02 AM (#3200439)

Situation: There are over 450,000 horrible, horrible online votes for Manny Ramirez.
Mystery: Who currently has 50 days of completely free time to cast that many votes?

The pieces of the puzzle are starting to fall into place...

71. Jolly Old St. Neck Wound, Moral Idiot

Posted: May 31, 2009 at 01:06 AM (#3200443)

Situation: There are over 450,000 horrible, horrible online votes for Manny Ramirez.
Mystery: Who currently has 50 days of completely free time to cast that many votes?

And who has a few million spare dollars to outsource the job to India?

72. LTV100 Posted: May 31, 2009 at 03:58 AM (#3200645)

Ironically, this article has now inspired me to vote for Manny early and often. I usually tend to grab a ton of ballots at the ballpark and stuff them for Phillies (or other players I like) anyway. But I hadn't considered how Manny getting voting in would be a good reflection about how much I care about steroids being used (i.e. not at all) and would love to see it happens. I'll make it a point to vote a crapload for ARod too (though I'd probably be voting for him anyway).

73. akrasian Posted: May 31, 2009 at 04:27 AM (#3200682)

#73 - yes, I hadn't voted yet, and the outcry has motivated me to vote for Manny and two others who aren't close to the top in outfield voting.

Besides any other reasons (like wanting to send a signal about the hysteria) Manny has been outstanding since he was traded to the NL last July. He will have missed a bunch of time, but has dominated when he's played. And anything that gets a friend of Pete Rose's knickers in a bunch over breaking of the rules is a plus by me.

74. RMc is the loyal supporter of the MLB event Posted: May 31, 2009 at 06:20 PM (#3201081)

Put some real incentive back into the game.

They could make it like the old Aztec game of pok-ta-pok, which was kind of like basketball (players threw a rubber ball through a stone hoop). In pok-ta-pok, the winning team's clothing were given to the spectators...and the losing team was executed, with a spear through the neck.

So...it'll be either naked Manny, or dead Manny. Tonight on FOX...!!

75. Spivey Posted: May 31, 2009 at 06:48 PM (#3201126)

Ironically, this article has now inspired me to vote for Manny early and often. I usually tend to grab a ton of ballots at the ballpark and stuff them for Phillies (or other players I like) anyway

I've never understood this, especially from someone that presumably knows baseball. I certainly have no interest in seeing mediocre Rangers in the allstar game.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Saturday, May 30, 2009

JT the Brick: Voting privileges should be taken away if Manny makes NL lineup

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics