Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, June 12, 2008

U.S.S. Mariner: DMZ: Rick Sutcliffe is a horrible person and ESPN’s no better

Not since ball-peen mad Peter William Coonan was allowed to visit his father’s gravesite has a Sutcliffe been treated so badly!

I was watching ESPN’s broadcast of the Braves game tonight, and there was a really, really weird moment where they were discussing Rick Sutcliffe taking time off to go get cancer treatment, and Erin Andrews was in the stands and wished him well or something — I wasn’t really paying attention, it seemed totally pointless — at which point Sutcliffe went off on a bizarre rant about her, how good she looked, her skirt, and how everyone was watching her and her skirt and when they cut to the broadcast booth, his partner had this weird look of terror and shock on his face, and they chatted about how distracting she was around the batting cage.

This should be Rick Sutcliffe’s last job announcing anything. He shouldn’t be hired to do dog races. He shouldn’t be able to ever get a quarter for hawking wares at garage sales.

I don’t care that he has cancer.

I don’t care that Erin Andrews is attractive, or that she wore a skirt.

He should be fired for making comments like that. More than that, he should be fired for this rant, about her.

...That’s it, that’s all I have. #### you, Rick Sutcliffe. #### you, other guy in the booth. You’re embarrassments to my gender.

Repoz Posted: June 12, 2008 at 10:56 AM | 429 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: announcers, television

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 5 pages  1 2 3 4 5 > 
   1. Bruce Markusen Posted: June 12, 2008 at 11:43 AM (#2816634)
Embarrassment to my my gender? That's a little bit much. Sutclife is embarrassing himself--and maybe ESPN--and that's about it.
   2. Shibal Posted: June 12, 2008 at 11:48 AM (#2816637)
Talk about bizarre rants....this one takes the cake.

Her whole career has been made because of the way she looks. Do you think she dresses the way she does because it is comfortable?
   3. The Essex Snead Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:00 PM (#2816641)
Do you think she dresses the way she does because it is comfortable?

Yeah, she's asking for it wearing those ... skirts and ... blouses?
   4. Zeba Zeba Eata Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:11 PM (#2816648)
Her whole career has been made because of the way she looks. Do you think she dresses the way she does because it is comfortable?

Wait, you actually think that it is appropriate for some to comment on a co-worker's looks and dress? On national television? Seriously?
   5. McCoy Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:13 PM (#2816649)
Yeah how dare Sutcliffe say something obvious like that. Or are we all supposed to pretend that Erin has a job because of her baseball mind?
   6. Mattbert Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:17 PM (#2816650)
Or are we all supposed to pretend that Erin has a job because of her baseball mind?

As amply demonstrated by Sutcliffe, it's not exactly a prerequisite.
   7. Craig Calcaterra Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:18 PM (#2816652)
Her whole career has been made because of the way she looks.


Bull and crap. Has she maybe gotten an opportunity or two that she may not have had she been less attactive? Maybe, but you don't know that and I don't either (and there are no small number of male on-screen personalities who have advanced based on their looks as well).

That said, Andrews is really good at her job. She knows sports, does not concentrate on fluff, and based on the number of games she covers, she works really, really hard.

She doesn't deserve this kind of crap. She gets enough of it from the fans and athletes. She does not need it from her own coworkers.
   8. Danny Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:25 PM (#2816655)
Sutcliffe should hang out with Chris Matthews.
   9. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:33 PM (#2816658)
There really is no defending Sutcliffe on this one. What he did was radically stupid. There are some good looking women where I work but I don't yell about how much I enjoying ogling them across the office. I don't know if he dererves to be fired, but he should be made to eat some serious shi!t about it. A public apology and a stint covering the World Dog Jumping Championships sounds like the minimum punishment. (Naw, those dogs are cool. What's the worst sport ESPN covers? Don't say the WNBA because that will start me on a whole bunch of Fembot and death by snoo-snoo! jokes and then we'll be back where we started except I'll be in the Rick Sutcliffe role. No way, fellas, no ####### way!)
   10. Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:37 PM (#2816661)
There are some good looking women where I work but I don't yell about how much I enjoying ogling them across the office.

You're missing out, Shooty!
   11. Shibal Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:37 PM (#2816662)
Bull and crap. Has she maybe gotten an opportunity or two that she may not have had she been less attactive? Maybe, but you don't know that and I don't either (and there are no small number of male on-screen personalities who have advanced based on their looks as well).

That said, Andrews is really good at her job. She knows sports, does not concentrate on fluff, and based on the number of games she covers, she works really, really hard.


An opportunity or two? Nice one. What are the odds Erin Andrews is where she is today if she looked like a typical female?

Sure she knows sports, works hard, doesn't concentrate on fluff, and is good at her job. So does Michelle Voepel. Once is covering all the high profile events for ESPN, and another is covering college women's basketball and the WNBA. Why is that?

It is what it is. Sutcliffe should have kept his mouth shut. But this paternalistic "poor Erin" stuff is nauseating. She's hot, ESPN knows it, so ESPN shows her off.
   12. Steve Parris, Je t'aime Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:40 PM (#2816663)
I blame this on bloggers and talk radio.

/Costas
   13. Craig Calcaterra Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:47 PM (#2816665)
But this paternalistic "poor Erin" stuff is nauseating. She's hot, ESPN knows it, so ESPN shows her off.


Sure they do. And they are probably deserving of some criticism of their own for cynical calculation and pandering. That doesn't excuse Sutcliffe, though (and I realize we agree on that), nor does it justify everything ever said or written by Erin Andrews to be prefaced by a reference to her beauty.
   14. McCoy Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:53 PM (#2816668)
It is funny if this happened on "The Best Damn Sports Show" this would be nothing, if it happened on morning radio it would be nothing, but gasp on ESPN that bastion of journalistic integrity it is unacceptable.
   15. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:54 PM (#2816669)
I am waiting for the ESPN guy who comments on the fact that Berman needs an extension to buckle himself in on a plane.
   16. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: June 12, 2008 at 12:58 PM (#2816672)
It is funny if this happened on "The Best Damn Sports Show" this would be nothing, if it happened on morning radio it would be nothing, but gasp on ESPN that bastion of journalistic integrity it is unacceptable.

There's a difference between a show that markets itself to jag-offs and half-brains and the broadcast of an MLB game that is supposed to cater to a general audience.
   17. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:04 PM (#2816673)
Actually, the distinction is that it is a co-worker. By my understanding this is actionable material if Ms. Andrews chose to pursue it via ESPN's Human Resources dept. At least it is actionable in other companies of which I am familiar.

I am not interested nor inclined to be politically correct. Just pointing out that in the current climate this stuff is frowned upon.
   18. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:08 PM (#2816676)
Who was the other guy in the booth? DMZ makes it sound like he played along, but also makes it sound like he sporting the Mike-Myers-with-Kayne-West face, so I don't know what to think.

Sutcliffe is, of course, a moron. He once spent the better part of 2 innings arguing with Gary Thorne that Ozzie Guillen should be the MVP (this was in '05) despite Thorne's repeated insistance that managers were not eligible and, in fact, had their own award.
   19. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:10 PM (#2816677)
Men never advance professionally thanks in part to their looks.
   20. Repoz Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:15 PM (#2816681)
Men never advance professionally thanks in part to their looks

Save Kruk.
   21. The Marksist Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:22 PM (#2816688)
I am not interested nor inclined to be politically correct. Just pointing out that in the current climate this stuff is frowned upon.


I'm not trying to jump on you Harveys, but this isn't about being PC. It's about being respectful of a coworker. Even if physical beauty were Erin Andrews's only qualification, commenting on it in the workplace, in public, is disrespectful. Calling for Sutcliff to be ritually beaten or whatever is pretty over the top, but he should be made to understand why what he said was not OK.
   22. Chris Dial Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:24 PM (#2816689)
DMZ makes it sound like he played along,
I think DMZ was suggesting he should have told Rick to STFU.
   23. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:24 PM (#2816691)
By my understanding this is actionable material if Ms. Andrews chose to pursue it via ESPN's Human Resources dept.

Heh. That's funny -- that ESPN has a Human Resources department that polices these things. Good one.
   24. JoeHova Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:25 PM (#2816692)
I find ESPN's casual sexism pretty interesting considering that much of their male talent could be charitably described as "unattractive" in the looks department. I find it odd that such people find it so easy to judge others on their looks. Probably pent-up jealousy from high school or something.
   25. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:28 PM (#2816696)
I find ESPN's casual sexism pretty interesting considering that much of their male talent could be charitably described as "unattractive" in the looks department. I find it odd that such people find it so easy to judge others on their looks. Probably pent-up jealousy from high school or something.

I hope you aren't referring to John Clayton because, while I have to this point in my life been strictly hetrosexual, when it comes to John Clayton...GRRRRR!
   26. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:32 PM (#2816698)
Dejesus:

I am sure Harold Reynolds would disagree.
   27. Fly should without a doubt be number !!!!! Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:35 PM (#2816701)
Someone should go over there to Bristol and fix this thing.
   28. Wilver Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:38 PM (#2816704)
This was an extremely creepy segment of the game. Sut was also making comments about her skirt and how windy it was and how many looks she must have been getting around the batting cage-- I think USS Mariner left that detail out, but I thought it was the worst of what he said.

It's worth noting that this is a pattern with Sut. I've seen at least two other games in which he's made comments that were, to me, clearly inappropriate. Not borderline, but way over the top. I'm surprised ESPN continues to put them on the same broadcast team after the Harold Reynolds firing.

I would like to see all points of view on this, but I have a very hard time understanding how you could justify this behavior by saying that Andrews was hired because of her looks. How is that relevant to a broadcaster harassing her on air?
   29. McCoy Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:38 PM (#2816708)
Reminds me of the Updike story about the 3 girls in bikinis in a grocery store.
   30. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:45 PM (#2816715)
Reminds me of the Updike story about the 3 girls in bikinis in a grocery store.

How so? That's my favorite Updike story but I don't see the parallel here.
   31. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:46 PM (#2816716)
I would like to see all points of view on this, but I have a very hard time understanding how you could justify this behavior by saying that Andrews was hired because of her looks. How is that relevant to a broadcaster harassing her on air?
Exactly.

Regardless of whether Andrews is deserving of her job - from the ESPN games I watched, she seemed quite competent - there is absolutely no excuse for public, national harassment of a co-worker.
   32. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:52 PM (#2816719)
Comment 28 basically gets it right.

I find ESPN's casual sexism pretty interesting considering that much of their male talent could be charitably described as "unattractive" in the looks department.

Actually most of the anchors fall well within the cleaned-up frat guy look that is the default handsome man in our culture. Then of course you've got the actual journalists who actually know their sport deeply, like John Clayton and Tim Kurkjian. And the ex-athletes, who are mostly pretty good looking too, unless they're elderly or John Kruk or Ron Jaworski.

There are a few non-hot-chick women who have advanced far in sports broadcasting, like Linda Cohn and Shelley Smith. But since the shows are watched by 90% men, well, they have to be a lot more competent than anyone else.
   33. Hack Wilson Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:53 PM (#2816720)
Its not Sutcliffe's fault he was obviously drunk. I actually got that impression from the pre-game show which is all we got in Chicago.

Anyway I got rear-ended by a cab driver a couple nights ago. No he didn't say I'm sorry I am drunk, which he was. He said, "Its not my fault I was on the phone."

No, I'm not allowed to hit people anymore.
   34. JoeHova Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:57 PM (#2816722)
I guess I was mostly talking about the guys on PTI constantly encouraging athletes to dump their wives for someone hotter and so forth. And by talent, I didn't mean the anchors, I meant the former athletes and the journalists. From what I've seen, the anchors are by far the least likely to say something demeaning to women (at least publicly).
   35. flournoy Posted: June 12, 2008 at 01:58 PM (#2816724)
Sounds like it made for good TV. I didn't see it, but I probably would have found the episode hilarious and would have agreed with Sutcliffe, though I certainly would have more tact than to discuss it on the air.

Whatever the case, I'd rather watch Erin Andrews than the Braves lately...
   36. Gaelan Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:06 PM (#2816726)
Sutcliffe engages in awkward flirting with Andrews every game. Every time it makes me want to crawl out of my skin. So, one, this is not a one time thing. It is every game. Two, I can't believe none of you have noticed it before. Last week he was making jokes about her hair in the rain. It is unseemly.
   37. PerroX Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:09 PM (#2816729)
Zumsteg got a little hysterical.

I guess that sensitive male thing still plays with the chicks in Seattle.
   38. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:10 PM (#2816732)
I'd call Sutcliffe an embarrassment to my gender if I didn't already have better reasons to be embarrassed for us.

I'm still not over the embarrassment of Tom Green.
   39. andrewberg Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:15 PM (#2816735)
Anyway I got rear-ended by a cab driver a couple nights ago. No he didn't say I'm sorry I am drunk, which he was. He said, "Its not my fault I was on the phone."


That's pretty egregious. I got side swiped while unloading groceries from my car, ripping off the rear driver's side door a couple of months ago and was somehow declared liable. Probably because I wasn't drunk.
   40. A.T.F.W. Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:20 PM (#2816742)
He should be fired for making comments like that. More than that, he should be fired for this rant, about her.

...That’s it, that’s all I have. #### you, Rick Sutcliffe. #### you, other guy in the booth. You’re embarrassments to my gender.


Why don't you just change the channel if you're that upset? You heard something on TV that offended you, so don't watch it anymore.
   41. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:25 PM (#2816748)
By my understanding this is actionable material if Ms. Andrews chose to pursue it via ESPN's Human Resources dept.

I'll take it a step further - at this point it doesn't matter what she thinks or whether she feels compelled to make a case out of it. If I said that about a female coworker - not on TV - any reporting of it by anyone in the room, regardless of whether they're the "hurt" party, would be grounds for my discipline and perhaps dismissal.
   42. Justin T., Director of Somethin Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:37 PM (#2816765)
I saw some of the game, but didn't hear Sutcliffe's rant. But I doubt it tops Brent Musberger's antics during every single college hoops game he called with Steve Lavin in which Andrews was the courtside reporter. A whole season of uncomfortability there, so I doubt Andrews was fazed last night.
   43. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:42 PM (#2816770)
An opportunity or two? Nice one. What are the odds Erin Andrews is where she is today if she looked like a typical female?

I never even heard of Erin Andrews until now, but the idea that there aren't a zillion men out there on TV who weren't hired in great part for their looks is almost as absurd as the idea that looks played no part in Erin Andrews' hiring.

It's not just TV, either. In the past few years, there have been several articles to the effect that the "looks factor" is even affecting the career prospects of novelists, due to the ever-increasing prominence of the dust jacket photo of the author in promoting the book. And this phenomenon has been noted for both women and men. It's a fact of life that reflects a combination of human nature, trivilization of values, and a culture based far more of image than substance. And it ain't going away anytime soon.

I don't think Sutcliffe should be fired, but someone might want to give him a little talk about elementary respect for a colleague.
   44. jmurph Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:49 PM (#2816778)
There are a few non-hot-chick women who have advanced far in sports broadcasting, like Linda Cohn and Shelley Smith. But since the shows are watched by 90% men, well, they have to be a lot more competent than anyone else.


I know this is the conventional wisdom, but I think it's wrong. I can't think of a single other female sideline reporter that is even remotely attractive. Particularly on ESPN. Bonnie Bernstein on CBS has a certain something, but she's also clearly competent, as is Andrews. I think most people just have a beef with the whole idea of a sideline reporter, so we dismiss them by saying they got hired for their looks. I just don't think reality supports this notion.
   45. Eric J. Seidman Posted: June 12, 2008 at 02:51 PM (#2816779)
For anyone curious, here is a link to the vid of Sutcliffe saying it; watch O'Brien's reaction, as if he knows it's wrong but doesn't want to call Sut out on it:

http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx?id=5908f2b8-dcb6-4250-b176-5f16039b348e
   46. TerpNats Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:06 PM (#2816790)
Erin Andrews did work on the National Spelling Bee for ESPN a few weeks back. If Sutcliffe is still with the network next year, perhaps he should succeed her on that assignment.

But looks do count in the TV business. Anyone remember Karie Ross at ESPN in the late '80s (and whatever happened to her, anyway?).
   47. Charter Member of the Jesus Melendez Fanclub Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:07 PM (#2816792)
I can't think of a single other female sideline reporter that is even remotely attractive.

Pam Oliver
   48. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:12 PM (#2816799)
Personally, I'm more curious about what Andrews thinks of this than anything else.
   49. jmurph Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:14 PM (#2816801)
Pam Oliver


Fair enough. Great tidbit on her- she worked a Giants game a couple of years ago and was interviewing Tiki Barber. The interview ended and she kicked it back to the booth, but her mic was still on and she said to Tiki: "I have to bring my thesaurus when I'm talking to you, Boo." Totally hilarious, and very professional to refer to a player as "Boo."
   50. The Good Face Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:14 PM (#2816802)
I'll take it a step further - at this point it doesn't matter what she thinks or whether she feels compelled to make a case out of it. If I said that about a female coworker - not on TV - any reporting of it by anyone in the room, regardless of whether they're the "hurt" party, would be grounds for my discipline and perhaps dismissal.


This.

Seriously, why is this stuff so hard for people? It's not like Sutcliff's fresh out of the locker room either, he's had over a decade to familiarize himself with basic workplace do's and don'ts.
   51. Craig Calcaterra Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:20 PM (#2816812)
Personally, I'm more curious about what Andrews thinks of this than anything else.


My guess is that we'll never know. Regardless of how she actually feels, she seems to be very on-point when it comes to playing this stuff off and not playing the "poor me; a woman in a man's world" card. Almost every interview with her revolves around what people are saying about her on the blogs, and whether it's an act or not, she does a very good job of acting like she doesn't care too terribly much.
   52. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:30 PM (#2816822)
You have to admire kevin for keeping up his self-esteem, even after Billy Jean King kicked his ass at the Astrodome
   53. kthejoker Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:34 PM (#2816824)
Seriously, don't you people have mothers? Sisters? Wives? Female friends?

This entire thread is an embarrassment to my gender.
   54. plink Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:35 PM (#2816825)
You know who complain about this stuff the most? Homely women who never get compliments like that.

You are wrong.
   55. Charles S. will not yield to this monkey court Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:38 PM (#2816827)
You know who complain about this stuff the most? Homely women who never get compliments like that.


Well, them and guys with daughters who would like to see tham eventually enter a work environment where guys aren't commenting on their legs.

And since when are homely women not allowed to have an opinion? We homely guys certainly spout ours often enough.
   56. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:44 PM (#2816831)
So now we are commenting upon the comments as opposed to the actual situation?

The only comment here by itself worth noting is the end of post 39 which was incredibly vulgar, and I am astonished is still on display.

Having written that I understand that the poster of said comment will quite possibly direct a similarily crude remark involving my wife or other female relative. I would find that........disappointing.

But such are the risks of a public chat room.................
   57. bunyon Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:45 PM (#2816832)
This entire thread is an embarrassment to my gender.

So's your mom.

* My first one and I don't mean it seriously. It just seemed to be calling out for it. It's been a long day already and it's not even lunch.
   58. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:46 PM (#2816835)
Not only that, if anyone is a disgrace to his gender, it's Zumsteg. Criminy, a blind man would notice how good-looking Erin is.

ANot noticing makes me the question: does Derek still have a pulse or does he have identity issues?
Wow.

A man defending a woman's right not to be harassed = gay!!!

Your comments on this thread are reprehensible, and a perfect example of the way in which misogyny functions in America - reducing a woman to her attractiveness and denying her basic rights to fair treatment. And tossing in gay-baiting to boot. Truly awful behavior here.
   59. bunyon Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:47 PM (#2816837)
Regardless of how she actually feels, she seems to be very on-point when it comes to playing this stuff off and not playing the "poor me; a woman in a man's world" card.

I agree. My guess is it pisses her off. But she knows that the answer is to just keep doing her job and doing it well, regardless. The women who succeed in life know which battles to fight. Same goes for the men, of course. If a guy gets rattled by harrassment (usually not of a sexual nature, of course) he isn't going to go far. I think ESPN should discipline Sutcliffe because you can't have announcers saying things that will offend a good chunk of your audience. But women deal with this sort of thing all the time and I'd guess she'll get through it professionally.
   60. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:48 PM (#2816838)
Having written that I understand that the poster of said comment will quite possibly direct a similarily crude remark involving my wife or other female relative. I would find that........disappointing.
Espcially now that kevin's divorce is coming through and he's back on the market!
   61. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:48 PM (#2816840)
I can't think of a single other female sideline reporter that is even remotely attractive.

I remember Joe Namath disagreeing.

Also, Dei Lynam. Although she actually got into the business because of nepotism rather than her looks.
   62. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:49 PM (#2816842)
I think ESPN should discipline Sutcliffe because you can't have announcers saying things that will offend a good chunk of your audience.
I think ESPN should discipline Sutcliffe because harassment is wrong. The PR aspect is surely a part of it, but we can make a pretty clear moral judgment here.
   63. bunyon Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:50 PM (#2816843)
Re 66: yes, of course. I meant to say I think ESPN WILL discipline Sutcliffe. The should goes with your reason better than mine.
   64. rr Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:55 PM (#2816851)
I work with a lot of pretty hot women, and while I think Zumsteg's rant is clearly over the top, Sutcliffe blew it. It is like everything else related to sex/romance/gender/horniness/ogling etc: time and place. One of my close colleagues, a very good teacher, is extremely hot, and one time she was telling me about a guy who had hurt her in a relationship and was feeling down. I told her she was smart, beautiful, etc and would have plenty of options in the romance area if she so chose. But when we WORK together, I never say a word about her looks, or any other woman's, other than the occasional "I like your new hairstyle" or whatever. Dealing with attractive women a lot, I know they of course like being pretty and it has more plusses than minuses, but like anything else, it has an upside and a downside. This incident is part of the downside, I would guess, from Andrews' perspective.

So, the idea that Sutcliffe is "a horrible person" because of this is silly IMO--but it DOES show he is kind of a dumbass with poor judgment.
   65. rr Posted: June 12, 2008 at 03:58 PM (#2816856)
So's your mom.

* My first one and I don't mean it seriously. It just seemed to be calling out for it. It's been a long day already and it's not even lunch.


Good use of it.
   66. Eric J. Seidman Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:02 PM (#2816862)
If they discipline him it'll likely be in private, though; I can't see something public coming out about ESPN suspending a guy with cancer. Right or wrong, I doubt it'll happen.
   67. Daryn Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:03 PM (#2816863)
What was the name of the woman who interviewed Joba earlier this year and was allegedly put off by something he said (though she denies it)?
   68. Kiko Sakata Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:04 PM (#2816864)
he is kind of a dumbass with poor judgment.


Didn't everybody already know this about Rick Sutcliffe? Is he the one who had the rambling mostly incoherent "interview" with George Clooney a few years ago, or am I getting the ex-jock "dumbass with poor judgment" ESPN announcers mixed up?

edit: To answer my own question, Google confirms that I remembered correctly. Sadly, YouTube no longer has video of the incident, because of MLB copyright issues.
   69. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:05 PM (#2816865)
That's pretty egregious.

So's your mom.

I work with a lot of pretty hot women

Sales rep, eh?

Why don't you just change the channel if you're that upset? You heard something on TV that offended you, so don't watch it anymore.

An alternate strategy would be to express one's hopes that the thing he generally enjoys watching should become even more enjoyable by ceasing to contain certain forms of idiocy.
   70. Andere Richtingen Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:09 PM (#2816877)
It's sad that it's come to be to the extent it has, but kevin is clearly just crying out for attention and nothing more. As the father of a two year-old, I've learned that it's best to leave such pleas ignored.
   71. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:14 PM (#2816884)
People (including me) really should watch the clip before commenting about it. There's absolutely nothing at all offensive about Sutcliffe's remarks, unless you're looking to be offended. Erin Andrews sure didn't seem to be, not in the slightest. Whoever U.S.S. Mariner DMZ is, his column is seriously demented, and if he were of any consequence at all, he'd owe Sutcliffe an apology.

EDIT: I see the word "harassment" being throw about in regards to Sutcliffe's comments. How on Earth does anyone read "harassment" in anything like this? Was he hitting on her or something? Get real.
   72. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:18 PM (#2816887)
The only comment here by itself worth noting is the end of post 39 which was incredibly vulgar, and I am astonished is still on display.

Yeah, but if we started at that, we'd have to remove at least 60% of his posts and it would require near constant monitoring of the site.

Not that it would be a bad idea, mind you. Stay classy!
   73. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:19 PM (#2816888)
Whoever U.S.S. Mariner DMZ is, his column is seriously demented, and if he were of any consequence at all, he'd owe Sutcliffe an apology.

Andy, you hang out here too much, pardner! DMZ is Derek Zumsteg and USS Mariner is an excellent baseball blog about a terrible baseball team.
   74. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:20 PM (#2816889)
Also, you guys need to stop fooling around with this idiocy and read Michael Lewis' piece about Cuban baseball. It's the best piece of sportswriting you will read this year.
   75. Kiko Sakata Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:21 PM (#2816891)
I kind of have to agree with Andy here. I probably wouldn't go so far as to say there's "absolutely nothing at all offensive" but having read through the thread, then watching the clip, I was struck by how innocuous the whole thing seemed compared to the way folks here were talking about it. I didn't really get the "Mike Myers standing next to Kanye West" sense from the other guy (who brought up the dress in the first place) and Erin Andrews seemed fine with the conversation. Now, kevin's comments in this thread, on the other hand, those are way over the line.

But Rick Sutcliffe is still "kind of a dumbass with poor judgment". I'm just not sure this is the best example of it.
   76. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:24 PM (#2816897)
So we still have to pretend that the female eye candy that work television sports are there because they "know the game"? Do we ever get to the point where we can actually acknowledge what's going on here?

I remember Andrews when she used to do highlights during Braves games on TBS. She was absolutely horrible. Could barely get through the script in the alloted time. Still, for what they hired her for, she was an overachiever.
   77. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:27 PM (#2816900)
Andy, you hang out here too much, pardner! DMZ is Derek Zumsteg and USS Mariner is an excellent baseball blog about a terrible baseball team.

Then I'll just chalk it up to a (very) bad day on Zumsteg's part. I agree that he's usually pretty good when he posts here.
   78. Herr Mike Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:30 PM (#2816905)
LOL at sensitive man types. Geez, get over yourselves. Give this girl some credit. I'm sure she can handle it. If not, she should wear a Hank Clinton Pantsuit.
   79. Traderdave Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:31 PM (#2816907)
Also, you guys need to stop fooling around with this idiocy and read Michael Lewis' piece about Cuban baseball. It's the best piece of sportswriting you will read this year.


where??
   80. Rodder Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:31 PM (#2816908)
I think Andy is on the mark here. O'Brien mentioned the color of her dress, to which Sutcliffe threw in "it's now my favorite color." Then, after reference by O'Brien to his cancer treatment threw out "I am more worried about Erin in that dress," and went on to suggest that she was wearing a short skirt in the Windy City, and guys in batting practice were having a hard time keeping their eyes off of her. It almost seemed to me that he was trying to steer ther conversation away from his cancer, and he might have been uncomfortable talking about it. I wouldn't have made the comment myself, but it certainly seems tame compared to what is on most programming.
   81. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:33 PM (#2816912)
Also, you guys need to stop fooling around with this idiocy and read Michael Lewis' piece about Cuban baseball. It's the best piece of sportswriting you will read this year.


where??


Newsblog has a link.

Here's another link
   82. Shibal Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:37 PM (#2816915)
Wow, just watched the tape.

Has DMZ ever worked with females before? This was friendly banter, nothing remotely close to harassment.
   83. ian Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:46 PM (#2816926)
It's always embarrassing when people think "it's true!" is a end-all defense to "it's inappropriate." How stupid.
   84. Charles S. will not yield to this monkey court Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:46 PM (#2816927)
So we still have to pretend that the female eye candy that work television sports are there because they "know the game"?


You don't have to pretend anything. Just remember that she is a human being and someone's daughter. Discussing her sexyness or hotness publicly in a work situation is inappropriate. Have we really gotten to a point in society where simple politeness and respect in the workplace is too much to ask?
   85. rr Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:47 PM (#2816929)
People (including me) really should watch the clip before commenting about it. There's absolutely nothing at all offensive about Sutcliffe's remarks, unless you're looking to be offended.


I did, and like anything else, as I said, it's a question of degree. Sutcliffe would have been better off not saying it, and it is simple, but useful, to imagine if it was your wife or GF or sister in Andrews' situation. I think "nothing at all offensive" is giving the guy too much slack, just as "horrible person" is giving him too much grief.

If I said something like this to one of my sexy colleagues on a windy day on campus, I would be seen as kind of a dumbass, and I think that is where Sutcliffe fits in. Also, FWIW, Sutcliffe is married. I wonder how Mrs. Sut sees this.

I am sure Andrews is used to it, probably didn't care that much, and since I watch most games muted, I have never heard her.

WRT Zumsteg, IIRC he made a lot of USSM posts pushing for Kim Ng as Mariners' GM before the Bavasi hire, and will or has start doing it again soon when Bavasi gets canned. Also, either Zumsteg himself or someone connected to him is or was working on a novella or novel about the first female player in the majors, which I believe was linked at USSM for a time. So, I think he is a obviously a guy who is concerned with women's issues--a fine thing, mostly--but is over-the-top rhetorically here.
   86. Gaelan Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:48 PM (#2816932)
People (including me) really should watch the clip before commenting about it. There's absolutely nothing at all offensive about Sutcliffe's remarks, unless you're looking to be offended.


Andy you are so far off here. This happens every single week and it is awkward and uncomfortable every single week. Watching an old man flirt with a young woman is sickening and that's what it was. How do I know this? Because it happens every single week.
   87. Guapo Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:50 PM (#2816933)
This was friendly banter, nothing remotely close to harassment.

I think we're experiencing some sort of cultural disconnect here.

So at your place of work, it would be OK to say the following to a female coworker- "Wow, that was some skirt you were wearing today! None of the guys were listening to the accountant go over the financial statements- they were too busy checking you out!"

Or would it be OK to say it ABOUT her, but not TO her?

I'm geninunely interested because around these parts, you'd be shitcanned in about 5 minutes.
   88. Fred Garvin is dead to Mug Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:54 PM (#2816940)
I have to admit that I was looking for something a bit stronger than what I saw.

Nevertheless, part of the issue, IMO, is the way Sutcliffe said what he did. Taken on its face, it wasn't that much more outrageous than what Dave O'Brien said. The way Sutcliffe spoke though, he sounded like a drunken lech.
   89. rr Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:54 PM (#2816941)
This was friendly banter,


Again, time and place. If Andrews likes it when older married male colleagues comment on her looks in a semi-flirtatious way, and has encouraged/not discouraged that, and Sutcliffe and others do so around the ESPN facilities, fair enough. But even if that is the case, doing it on the air is pretty stupid.

Has DMZ ever worked with females before?


I don't know, but like I said, I have and do, and often, women are uncomfortable with this kind of stuff, if it comes from the wrong guy and/or at the wrong time, but don't say much about it publicly because they think guys will say "It was friendly banter" or some such. I have seen that many times, and that is why I am careful around the office.
   90. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:56 PM (#2816946)
Discussing her sexyness or hotness publicly in a work situation is inappropriate.

To me it seems pretty silly to hire someone based primarily on their hotness and then make that an unmentionable topic. That's the primary reason they are on the payroll, but please don't mention it, just pretend you are cutting to her ten times a game because of her unique insight.
   91. Shibal Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:58 PM (#2816947)
So at your place of work, it would be OK to say the following to a female coworker- "Wow, that was some skirt you were wearing today! None of the guys were listening to the accountant go over the financial statements- they were too busy checking you out!"

Or would it be OK to say it ABOUT her, but not TO her?


A new co-worker that you hardly know? Out of bounds. Someone who has shown to be rather sensitive about being complimented like that? Out of bounds. Someone who engages in the banter/flirtation and gives it right back? Sure...it is called goofing off and having fun.

That's what Sutcliffe AND Andrews were doing...she was talking about her yellow dress being "for a boy"; she didn't seem offended at all. We don't know what goes on behind the scene there, but I'm pretty sure if Andrews doesn't like comments like that she will put a stop to them real quick. As someone said, it happens all the time.
   92. Steve Treder Posted: June 12, 2008 at 04:59 PM (#2816948)
To me it seems pretty silly to hire someone based primarily on their hotness

It is pretty silly. That doesn't in any way justify being an ass about it.

Making that kind of comment on air is utterly inexcusable.
   93. Steve Treder Posted: June 12, 2008 at 05:00 PM (#2816950)
That's what Sutcliffe AND Andrews were doing

No. They weren't having a one-on-one conversation. They were on the air.
   94. PerroX Posted: June 12, 2008 at 05:04 PM (#2816956)
Erin Andrews can obviously handle herself.

Her looks are obviously a part of her package, obviously part of her job description. She wasn't in the stands at Wrigley wearing slacks and a blazer with her hair pinned back, she was out there lookin' hot as part of the job.

More sexist than acknowledging a woman's good looks is the idea that poor little girls are helpless to live out in the world of men without some other man there to protect them, or rules of behavior and language.

As for kevin's comments, and mine, they're both poking fun at the silliness of political correctness, of people here who way too often are looking to find offense in what people say.

Besides, Kevin lives on this board to give offense.
   95. The Essex Snead Posted: June 12, 2008 at 05:06 PM (#2816960)
As for kevin's comments, and mine, they're both poking fun at the silliness of political correctness, of people here who way too often are looking to find offense in what people say.

Wait -- I thought "Joey B." was kevin's sock puppet account?
   96. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: June 12, 2008 at 05:09 PM (#2816961)
People (including me) really should watch the clip before commenting about it. There's absolutely nothing at all offensive about Sutcliffe's remarks, unless you're looking to be offended.

I did, and like anything else, as I said, it's a question of degree. Sutcliffe would have been better off not saying it, and it is simple, but useful, to imagine if it was your wife or GF or sister in Andrews' situation. I think "nothing at all offensive" is giving the guy too much slack, just as "horrible person" is giving him too much grief.


I don't have a sister, but my wife is in the upper 1% of 48 year old women, and she would have reacted exactly as Erin Andrews did. She's always been of the opinion that when men stop hitting on her, it's all over. If Ms. Andrews had exhibited any degree of discomfort, I would react differently, but she showed absolutely no evidence of any discomfort whatsoever in that clip.

Part of the problem I have with the DMZ's reaction is that he imagines that all women react identically to comments like Sutcliffe's. Just because Gloria Steinem gets offended by things like this doesn't mean that all women do, and if Erin Andrews seems fine with it, I can't quite understand why it should bother a blogger.

Andy you are so far off here. This happens every single week and it is awkward and uncomfortable every single week. Watching an old man flirt with a young woman is sickening and that's what it was. How do I know this? Because it happens every single week.

I usually don't watch ESPN baseball, so I can't pass judgment on all these other times you're talking about. To the extent that the women in question seem discomforted by any of his comments, then of course he'd be out of line. But that clearly wasn't the case here.
   97. The Good Face Posted: June 12, 2008 at 05:10 PM (#2816963)
Wait -- I thought "Joey B." was kevin's sock puppet account?


Kevin's true name is Legion.
   98. PerroX Posted: June 12, 2008 at 05:13 PM (#2816967)
Watching an old man flirt with a young woman is sickening...

Not a fan of [link deleted], huh?

It's almost always true that people who overreact, who are "sickened" or "angered" by the behavior of others, are projecting their own issues.

Sutcliffe's a moron, but he's harmless.

I feel sorry for you guys who are afraid of your own sexual shadows.
   99. TVerik, the gum-snappin' hairdresser Posted: June 12, 2008 at 05:15 PM (#2816970)
I'm backwards on this. Andrews said, "For a boy" first, bringing the aesthetic to the personal. In my opinion, Sutcliffe got close to over the line by "it's my new favorite color" remark, but in context, I think a few words from the bosses should suffice.

Chris Matthews, in the clip above, went much, much farther and made the whole situation uncomfortable.
   100. rr Posted: June 12, 2008 at 05:15 PM (#2816971)
More sexist than acknowledging a woman's good looks is the idea that poor little girls are helpless to live out in the world of men without some other man there to protect them, or rules of behavior and language.


Nah. No one really said she can't handle herself, or even implied it, except maybe Zumsteg. And, like I said, if she is into older married dudes checking her out and talking to her about it, her call. We are saying that Sutcliffe said some stupid #### on the air.

As for kevin's comments, and mine, they're both poking fun at the silliness of political correctness


People use the "PC is silly" line all the time. It is just a label used to duck complex realities about varying sensibilities. I am sure there are things that don't offend me that would offend you. Does that make you "silly?" IIRC you are the same guy who posted yesterday that "Race is always a factor in American life. Period." I happen to pretty much agree, but a lot of people would say "sounds pretty much like PC silliness to me".


Her looks are obviously a part of her package, obviously part of her job description. She wasn't in the stands at Wrigley wearing slacks and a blazer with her hair pinned back, she was out there lookin' hot as part of the job.


Probably. And it may be that ESPN producers encourage the kind of stuff Sutcliffe said on the clip to attract viewers. Doesn't mean some of those viewers might find it irritating or offensive or that they are necessarily wrong to do so.
Page 1 of 5 pages  1 2 3 4 5 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Piehole of David Wells
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogYost's managerial decisions make for extra-entertaining World Series | FOX Sports
(3 - 1:38pm, Oct 25)
Last: Captain Supporter

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(933 - 1:35pm, Oct 25)
Last: Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3775 - 1:31pm, Oct 25)
Last: JE (Jason)

NewsblogBoston Red Sox prospect Deven Marrero enjoying turnaround in Arizona Fall League | MiLB.com News | The Official Site of Minor League Baseball
(5 - 1:30pm, Oct 25)
Last: Dale Sams

NewsblogDave Dombrowski: Injury worse than expected, Miguel Cabrera 'is as tough as you can possibly be' | MLive.com
(11 - 1:27pm, Oct 25)
Last: Dale Sams

NewsblogGambling Bochy creature of habit when it comes to pitchers | CSN Bay Area
(3 - 1:14pm, Oct 25)
Last: esseff

NewsblogMLB - Royals' Ned Yost keeps managing to win - ESPN
(9 - 12:55pm, Oct 25)
Last: The elusive Robert Denby

NewsblogPhils' philospophy beginning to evolve | phillies.com
(8 - 12:43pm, Oct 25)
Last: Cargo Cultist

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(20 - 12:25pm, Oct 25)
Last: BDC

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1959 Ballot
(7 - 11:46am, Oct 25)
Last: lieiam

NewsblogRoyals get four AL Gold Glove finalists, but not Lorenzo Cain | The Kansas City Star
(17 - 11:46am, Oct 25)
Last: BDC

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(391 - 11:43am, Oct 25)
Last: Tom Cervo, backup catcher

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(517 - 10:40am, Oct 25)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(82 - 9:30am, Oct 25)
Last: TerpNats

NewsblogCurt Schilling not hiding his scars - ESPN Boston
(23 - 7:32am, Oct 25)
Last: Merton Muffley

Page rendered in 0.9731 seconds
52 querie(s) executed