Any player cards you dont collect because of morals

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by nwobhm

You won’t buy Michael Jackson but Led Zeppelin is ok? You are joking right?

They are slightly different and one was kinda sorta accepted back then by some.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

I don't see anything wrong with having any player's memorabilia in one's collection. As has already been noted, history is made up of the good and the bad. Like the majority of us here, I'm terribly fascinated by a good story, and some of the most captivating tales involve heinous exploits. It's just a part of life. By owning anything related to a player of ill repute, it doesn't make anyone a terrible individual.

Now, if you happened to love and adore a Rae Carruth or an Aaron Hernandez and had a shrine of their memorabilia solely because of their off-the-field putridity, then I'd have a problem with you.

Putting it into a prewar baseball perspective, I'd have to think that a lot of people on the forum wouldn't mind some Marty Bergen memorabilia. None of them would want to own it to glorify his atrocities. Others will jump on the 2022 tolerance bandwagon with, "He was mentally ill. It's different.". Regardless, a shadow will permanently hang over him due to what transpired, and his memorabilia will always fall into this controversial category.

Lots of people here own Connie Mack memorabilia, yet his intolerance of integrated baseball and his infamous quote regarding Jackie doesn't seem to be brought up too often.

[JimmyC]

Originally Posted by Vintagedeputy

I collect cards of athletes. I don’t care what tobacco ad is on the back of a T206. It’s the player and what they did on the field between the lines that matters to me in my collection.

Pete Rose is a schmo. We all know that OJ killed those people. Mickey Mantle was a drunk who once said that his greatest baseball thrill was getting a blow job under the bleachers. Billy Martin was a raging alcoholic. Curt Schilling may not get into the HOF for his political views, etc.

I don’t care.

Pete Rose was one of the greatest players of all time. OJ was a HOF running back. Mantle was a Yankee legend. Billy Martin was one of the greatest managers I ever saw. Schilling was a 3x WS winner with 216 wins under his belt.

I have to work with people every day with the crappiest, oh let’s just call them “personal attributes”. These are people I certainly won’t be inviting over to my house for a cookout….but I have to only concern myself with their work. I can’t judge them for their political stance, sexual preference or if they cheat on their wives.

I treat sports card collecting the same.

Nice post and position on the topic....I like it....

[Vintagedeputy]

Originally Posted by jingram058

I don't know what you do or did for a living, but you would most certainly have been a great Navy officer. As the song lyric goes, "You've got to keep 'em separated.'

Thank you. Been involved in public safety in one form or another for 30+ years. I’ve always been the same way.

When I was in law enforcement, I didn’t care if you were black, white, pink or purple, Republican or Democrat, gay or straight. A criminal was a criminal and a victim was a victim; everyone got treated the same, by the book.

When I was a firefighter, I didn’t stop fighting the fire if you voted for someone I didn’t like in the last election.

When I was an EMT, I didn’t stop doing CPR because your sexual preference was different than mine.

I just did my job, and I kept my personal opinions personal.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Not sure what this means (sounds like a threat?).

I edited my original post (memorialized and quoted above) bc it’s politics talk and I should not talk politics on a baseball card site.

Bruce had quite a collection, but was a pretty abrasive guy at least on the interwebs.

He did make for one of the best posts ever when he threatened to sue someone over an archived post ....and that someone was him.

[Snowman]

There are a lot of players I have no interest in collecting. I thought the whole point of collecting was to buy things you like. Why would I want to buy cards of players I dislike? Cap Anson, Ty Cobb, Curt Schilling, Ben Chapman, Draymond Green, John Rocker, the list goes on.

I do find it odd though that several people here have mentioned that they don't collect LeBron James for "moral reasons"? Really? LeBron James? I'd be curious about which character qualities it is you despise about him. Is it that he's never been caught in a cheating scandal and has been faithful to his high school sweetheart for decades? Is it because he's a wonderful loving father who is heavily engaged in their daily lives? Perhaps it's his humility and unselfishness on the court that gets under your skin? Perhaps it's the schools he built for helping underprivileged youth to get caught up in academics? Perhaps it's the level of commitment to his craft that boils your blood? After all, longevity and endurance sure is a turnoff. I mean, who wants to see a 50-year-old leading the league in scoring despite having a pass-first mentality on the court? Or maybe it's the fact that he conducts himself with honor and integrity? Perhaps you dislike well-rounded players?

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Snowman

There are a lot of players I have no interest in collecting. I thought the whole point of collecting was to buy things you like. Why would I want to buy cards of players I dislike? Cap Anson, Ty Cobb, Curt Schilling, Ben Chapman, Draymond Green, John Rocker, the list goes on.

I do find it odd though that several people here have mentioned that they don't collect LeBron James for "moral reasons"? Really? LeBron James? I'd be curious about which character qualities it is you despise about him. Is it that he's never been caught in a cheating scandal and has been faithful to his high school sweetheart for decades? Is it because he's a wonderful loving father who is heavily engaged in their daily lives? Perhaps it's his humility and unselfishness on the court that gets under your skin? Perhaps it's the schools he built for helping underprivileged youth to get caught up in academics? Perhaps it's the level of commitment to his craft that boils your blood? After all, longevity and endurance sure is a turnoff. I mean, who wants to see a 50-year-old leading the league in scoring despite having a pass-first mentality on the court? Or maybe it's the fact that he conducts himself with honor and integrity? Perhaps you dislike well-rounded players?

That about sums up my list for why King James is intolerable.

[edjs]

Originally Posted by nwobhm

You won’t buy Michael Jackson but Led Zeppelin is ok? You are joking right?

Yikes, I just looked up what you are referencing. Well, that changes my views about Led Zeppelin.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by steve B

I do have minor firsthand experience with two drugs classed as PEDs, Ritalin and .... amphetamines! (adderall)
To the point that when my ADD doc asked about how the new dose went, I told her it made me feel like a Ballplayer. Then had to explain about 70's baseball and "greenies" -The capsule for that dose was in fact green.

A small dose of either isn't like a cup of coffee. And it's qualitatively different from 8 cups of coffee which was my normal work morning before treatment. (day 1 with a tiny bit of ritalin plus the usual 8 cups..... Yikes. They could have warned me. I did get a TON of work done that day. )
Both for me had a sort of diminishing effect over time.

I don't have access to a 90mph cage anymore, and haven't since the 80's but I can say that the "fast" cages still give me a lot of trouble. Those I think are around 70?
I don't know if "seeing" hours of 90mph pitches daily would help me see the ball better, but I have doubts. The problem wasn't the timing, but literally not having any idea where the ball was.

ADD and focus is a weird thing. Accelerants make focus easier and much sharper in general. And adrenaline is exactly that. things that are even mildly exciting, like getting to see a 90mph pitch. Actually help focus. (at least for me, for someone with more distractibility it may have less effect) One of the books I read said that a lot of first responders, EMTs etc have it, and ended up in professions where that adrenaline driven focus meant they could be very good.

Insightful - thanks for sharing. The power of the human brain is still a mystery despite the power of the human brain.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by steve B

I do have minor firsthand experience with two drugs classed as PEDs, Ritalin and .... amphetamines! (adderall)
To the point that when my ADD doc asked about how the new dose went, I told her it made me feel like a Ballplayer. Then had to explain about 70's baseball and "greenies" -The capsule for that dose was in fact green.

A small dose of either isn't like a cup of coffee. And it's qualitatively different from 8 cups of coffee which was my normal work morning before treatment. (day 1 with a tiny bit of ritalin plus the usual 8 cups..... Yikes. They could have warned me. I did get a TON of work done that day. )
Both for me had a sort of diminishing effect over time.

I don't have access to a 90mph cage anymore, and haven't since the 80's but I can say that the "fast" cages still give me a lot of trouble. Those I think are around 70?
I don't know if "seeing" hours of 90mph pitches daily would help me see the ball better, but I have doubts. The problem wasn't the timing, but literally not having any idea where the ball was.

ADD and focus is a weird thing. Accelerants make focus easier and much sharper in general. And adrenaline is exactly that. things that are even mildly exciting, like getting to see a 90mph pitch. Actually help focus. (at least for me, for someone with more distractibility it may have less effect) One of the books I read said that a lot of first responders, EMTs etc have it, and ended up in professions where that adrenaline driven focus meant they could be very good.

Insightful - thanks for sharing. The power of the human brain is still a mystery despite the power of the human brain.

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by Snowman

There are a lot of players I have no interest in collecting. I thought the whole point of collecting was to buy things you like. Why would I want to buy cards of players I dislike? Cap Anson, Ty Cobb, Curt Schilling, Ben Chapman, Draymond Green, John Rocker, the list goes on.

I do find it odd though that several people here have mentioned that they don't collect LeBron James for "moral reasons"? Really? LeBron James? I'd be curious about which character qualities it is you despise about him. Is it that he's never been caught in a cheating scandal and has been faithful to his high school sweetheart for decades? Is it because he's a wonderful loving father who is heavily engaged in their daily lives? Perhaps it's his humility and unselfishness on the court that gets under your skin? Perhaps it's the schools he built for helping underprivileged youth to get caught up in academics? Perhaps it's the level of commitment to his craft that boils your blood? After all, longevity and endurance sure is a turnoff. I mean, who wants to see a 50-year-old leading the league in scoring despite having a pass-first mentality on the court? Or maybe it's the fact that he conducts himself with honor and integrity? Perhaps you dislike well-rounded players?

Well said, snowman… completely agree.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by CurtisFlood

Certain region of the country? There are racist individuals in your area, and in every region of the country I have visited. Boston is the absolute worst. San Diego ranks high as well.

No area has an exclusive on racism; that was not my point. My comment was that a man of a certain age from a certain part of the country would have been exposed to that specific slur as the 'go-to' slur as he was growing up to a degree not found in other regions, and thus may have been more inclined to use it instead of some other derogatory term. In New York City, for example, large segments of the ethnic white immigrant and 1st generation populations would use their own slurs in their native tongues. My mother was one of them: she used the Yiddish version because it was what she was brought up hearing. The N word wasn't on her radar; I never heard of her using it until she was in the nth stage of dementia and spouting all sorts of craziness.

I have never been to Boston (not that I want to go there. I grew up a Knicks and Rangers fan in NYC: as a young boy I thought the actual name for the town was "Bostonsucks" because that is the only way I ever heard it said).

I did not encounter much racist stuff in the four years I spent in San Diego, but I was in La Jolla, a coastal college area. East county was another story. I did hear quite a few racist and antisemitic comments from some of the folks from those areas.

[nwobhm]

Originally Posted by bnorth

They are slightly different and one was kinda sorta accepted back then by some.

Bullshit

Originally Posted by edjs

Yikes, I just looked up what you are referencing. Well, that changes my views about Led Zeppelin.

Try looking up Aerosmith…and many others too.

The lesson is absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I’m judging none of them…. That said I wouldn’t trust them, or anyone else for that matter, with my children.

This moral superiority thing is ridiculous.

[edjs]

Originally Posted by nwobhm

Bullshit



Try looking up Aerosmith…and many others too.

The lesson is absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I’m judging none of them…. That said I wouldn’t trust them, or anyone else for that matter, with my children.

This moral superiority thing is ridiculous.

It was what they did with the fish that was…. well, no words. And the 14 year old’s mom saying it was okay that she dated Jimmy Page. I’m not naive, I grew up around some pretty popular bands and can tell some crazy stories, but man, that was some nasty stuff in the article I read.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Cliff Bowman

I don’t collect too much post 1980 but if I saw a neat Mel Hall Cubs pinback or team issued photo I wouldn’t have any trepidations about buying it.

Mel Hall's story is crazy. The Yankees published a photo of him attending a prom!

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by BobC

Obviously your insinuation is he was taking PEDs or doing something else along the lines of cheating. If PEDs, I've seriously asked this question before. Knowing how PEDs apparently effect muscles and strength, please explain then how taking them can have such a dramatic effect on someone's batting average, but as is the case with Gwynn, seemingly no such dramatic effect on his hitting home runs,

His two best homer seasons came when he was 37 & 38 years old, the former representing a 467% increase over the season prior and just his 2nd double digit season out of 11. He had 3 consecutive double digit seasons from 37-39 after 2 in his first 15 seasons.

So, yes, there was a dramatic increase.

[michael3322]

This isn't pre-war, but I'll never collect Johnny Cueto, who has made over $167 million (Baseball-Reference).

He unnecessarily kicked a player in the face during a brawl, ending that guy's career and leading him to experience lifelong health problems.

Here' the story with the video:
https://www.12up.com/posts/johnny-cu...0-01e5aq0jmn1j

(a bit more detailed: http://www.i70baseball.com/2011/05/1...n-la-rue-down/)

And here's the follow up story:
https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/l...kicks-to-head/

[G1911]

I collect him but I’m not sure why Juan Marichal gets a pass for, at best, assault and battery on film or, if he wasn’t a famous ball player, attempted homicide considering the other things being brought up.

[michael3322]

Originally Posted by G1911

I collect him but I’m not sure why Juan Marichal gets a pass for, at best, assault and battery on film or, if he wasn’t a famous ball player, attempted homicide considering the other things being brought up.

One of the ugliest incidents in baseball history.



At least there was some sort of apology and forgiveness:

"When Roseboro died at age 69 in 2002, Marichal was an honorary pallbearer and a speaker at the funeral."

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...l-50-years-ago

https://www.si.com/mlb/dodgers/news/...and-redemption

So far, Johnny Cueto didn't even apologize for ending a guy's career and giving him lifelong headaches.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by G1911

I collect him but I’m not sure why Juan Marichal gets a pass for, at best, assault and battery on film or, if he wasn’t a famous ball player, attempted homicide considering the other things being brought up.

I've seen a couple of rationalizations for it. Both make me wince.

Marichal is such a gentleman who just lost his cool. Some people seem to think that when someone is often polite and smiles, this makes homicidal behavior more acceptable. The best part about this is that in one recent interview (while exhibiting those exact gentlemanly characteristics), Marichal basically still says today that his actions were not in the wrong.

And, Roseboro forgave him for it. As if Roseboro's personal decision there has anything to do with how awful the incident still was.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Tabe

His two best homer seasons came when he was 37 & 38 years old, the former representing a 467% increase over the season prior and just his 2nd double digit season out of 11. He had 3 consecutive double digit seasons from 37-39 after 2 in his first 15 seasons.

So, yes, there was a dramatic increase.

Valid points Chris. I guess it is hard for me to think in terms of someone being so helped by PEDs in hitting home runs when those monumental numbers for them amount to only 16 or 17 home runs for an entire year. LOL

Of course, there is still the argument that Gwynn had such a fantastic eye and ability to hit for a high average that couldn't there also be a possibility that he just decided to try going for more home runs? At that point in time the home run was becoming THE thing in baseball, with the PED era really taking off around that time as well. Rather than comparing Gwynn to the likes of Bonds, McGwire and Sosa, maybe it would be more appropriate to compare him to Cobb, who actually due to average and hitting ability has a much more likely connection and comparability as a hitter? Cobb actually did a somewhat similar thing as Gwynn for a couple years later in his career as well. Most noticeably in 1925 when Cobb hit 12 homers for the year, up from just 4 the prior year (300% increase). That season, when he was 38 I believe, included the two-game stretch where Cobb suddenly put up 5 homers over two back-to-back games. A feat and MLB record he still owns part of, and which even Ruth didn't equal if I remember correctly. And there is also the story/legend of Cobb supposedly telling a reporter to watch him show people how he could hit home runs if he wanted to. Cobb also did a similar jump in 1921 at the age of 34 when he equaled his same single season home run high of 12 as well. That time he improved on a prior year total of only 2 home runs, for a 600% percent increase, blowing even Gwynn's 467% single season jump out of the water.

There are a number of things that have been said about Cobb and that he was accused of during his career, but I don't think taking PEDs was ever one of them. To my knowledge, I don't think Gwynn was ever proven to have taken PEDs, nor failed a drug test. And just look at his batting average over the four prior seasons before his 'power surge" of hitting 17 homers. The man could flat out hit, and like Cobb, led his league and the entire majors in average over multiple seasons. Now if you want to debate about whether Gwynn's high averages were possibly the result of taking PEDs as well, that is possibly a different argument/discussion, maybe.

I honestly don't know. And since his passing, we'll never hear it from him either. At least before his passing, he spoke out and took blame for not doing or saying more against the PED movement, along with laying blame to all of MLB for not doing/saying more against it as well. That never sounded to me like someone who partook in the taking of PEDs themself.

[BobC]

Double post!

[Koufax32fan]

Well, that was a weird few minutes; I learned way too much about some very bad people - I have done a lot of reading about baseball history, and can't believe I didn't ever hear about or remember Marty Bergen. I do have his brother Bill's T206 card.

Ok, what's the deal with Led Zeppelin?

And - disclosure here, I am a Chicagoan of a certain age so MJ was, is and always will be the greatest basketball player in history - I am surprised by LeBron being mentioned and not Kobe.

Back in the early 2000's, I was a lawyer for a company that had a business lawsuit in Denver, Colorado. We had the same lawyer who represented Kobe. I respect my (former) outside counsel for taking his case and she did a great job for us (and for him), but I lost all respect for Kobe after that. I don't collect basketball cards, but I would not spend a shekel (or even a nickel) on a Kobe card.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Koufax32fan

Well, that was a weird few minutes; I learned way too much about some very bad people - I have done a lot of reading about baseball history, and can't believe I didn't ever hear about or remember Marty Bergen. I do have his brother Bill's T206 card.

Ok, what's the deal with Led Zeppelin?

And - disclosure here, I am a Chicagoan of a certain age so MJ was, is and always will be the greatest basketball player in history - I am surprised by LeBron being mentioned and not Kobe.

Back in the early 2000's, I was a lawyer for a company that had a business lawsuit in Denver, Colorado. We had the same lawyer who represented Kobe. I respect my (former) outside counsel for taking his case and she did a great job for us (and for him), but I lost all respect for Kobe after that. I don't collect basketball cards, but I would not spend a shekel (or even a nickel) on a Kobe card.

I had a girlfriend who knew the prosecutor on the other side of the Kobe case and I would agree with you knowing the details of that case. Disgusting.

Amazing how so many people and organizations that purport to support women gave him a pass on that rape. Definitely a case of selective narrative cuz Kobe.

[sreader3]

For me it comes down to one's sense of what constitutes an endorsement. Is one endorsing or ratifying an athlete’s character by collecting his cards? Or is collecting done for other reasons, such as an historical accounting, a desire to finish a set, or other factors unrelated to a player’s character? I take the latter view. I don’t think that people endorse or ratify a player’s actions just because they collect his cards. So I will continue to acquire Hal Chase, Pete Rose and—if a set collection should ever require—O.J. Simpson and any other psychopath.

[jmill4000]

Were you serious about Jackie Robinson? He's literally the top person I would WANT to collect. I don't think I'm alone here. Not concerned about rumors he may have been a little impolite to a few people or whatever.

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

I know I will never collect OJ Simpson

i note there are a bunch of guys in the the 50s sets that did not have nice things to say about jackie robinson and willie mays as well..

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

I had a girlfriend who knew the prosecutor on the other side of the Kobe case and I would agree with you knowing the details of that case. Disgusting.

Amazing how so many people and organizations that purport to support women gave him a pass on that rape. Definitely a case of selective narrative cuz Kobe.

Yeah, I don't see how anybody could read the full, complete details of that case and come away thinking Kobe was innocent.

[Prof]

Originally Posted by Casey2296

I had a girlfriend who knew the prosecutor on the other side of the Kobe case and I would agree with you knowing the details of that case. Disgusting.

Amazing how so many people and organizations that purport to support women gave him a pass on that rape. Definitely a case of selective narrative cuz Kobe.

I've only read the somewhat detailed descriptions of that case that are available publicly, and it was pretty messed up. He absolutely got a pass, and people have really glossed over it at this point.

I never liked him before that case. That cemented my dislike for him. And I never liked his contrived mamba stuff afterward either.

I wouldn't collect his stuff for myself. But, if I ever found something very cheap that I could flip, I'd buy it and flip it.



I really don't see what anyone would have against LeBron though. I'm not even a fan of his, but he's been squeaky clean his entire life. No scandals at all.

The worst thing he did was The Decision special, and maybe he was a little odd about Hong Kong/China stuff a few years ago.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by jmill4000

Were you serious about Jackie Robinson? He's literally the top person I would WANT to collect. I don't think I'm alone here. Not concerned about rumors he may have been a little impolite to a few people or whatever.

you misunderstood, i was talking about OTHER players (putting the OTHER players in a bad light in the 1950s that had bad things (racist etc) to say about jackie and willie.... thus there are a some OTHER players that some collectors may not want because of how those OTHER players viewed jackie and mays and others....

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Prof

I've only read the somewhat detailed descriptions of that case that are available publicly, and it was pretty messed up. He absolutely got a pass, and people have really glossed over it at this point.

I never liked him before that case. That cemented my dislike for him. And I never liked his contrived mamba stuff afterward either.

I wouldn't collect his stuff for myself. But, if I ever found something very cheap that I could flip, I'd buy it and flip it.



I really don't see what anyone would have against LeBron though. I'm not even a fan of his, but he's been squeaky clean his entire life. No scandals at all.

The worst thing he did was The Decision special, and maybe he was a little odd about Hong Kong/China stuff a few years ago.

Kobes wife sort of helped in that..when the wife stays and the person is a huge star....that can help sway public opinion....

as to Leberon, its more political stuff that most under 30 year olds dont care about ..like when he posted that officer that shot a girl who was about to stab another girl and he basically put a target on the officers back for saving another girl from being stabbed if not killed....plus a ton of pro china stuff that seem hypocritical when he talks about problems in the US...question of degree etc

[G1911]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Kobes wife sort of helped in that..when the wife stays and the person is a huge star....that can help sway public opinion....

as to Leberon, its more political stuff that most under 30 year olds dont care about ..like when he posted that officer that shot a girl who was about to stab another girl and he basically put a target on the officers back for saving another girl from being stabbed if not killed....plus a ton of pro china stuff that seem hypocritical when he talks about problems in the US...question of degree etc

I’m pretty sure Kobe was forgiven because the accuser refused to testify in the criminal case and so the case was dropped. As I recall it, much of the actual evidence was not indicative of her accusation. Back then, there was generally still a presumption of innocence or having to prove the charge, unlike today where, for example, Bauer is guilty even though he was found not guilty and all of the evidence indicated the charge was an outright lie.

I’m pretty sure you nailed it for Lebron. Attacking the US government for very questionable things (such as the case where an officer, on video, shot a woman actively trying to murder an innocent block woman and saving her life with only a decor or two to spare and he tried to stir up outrage) while simultaneously appearing to, at best and most charitably, have no problem with the CCP marked him as a left wing wackadoodle to many on the right. Curt Schilling, but in reverse. I will never understand people who insist athletes must agree with their politics, on either side. I can understand, though don’t agree with, barring athletes who did heinous things that are objectively terrible and were in the context in which they lived like rape (with evidence) or murder. Drawing the line at political dissent from their views is just virtue signaling self righteousness. I have left wingers and right wingers in my cards and don’t care.

[jmill4000]

Got it

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

you misunderstood, i was talking about OTHER players (putting the OTHER players in a bad light in the 1950s that had bad things (racist etc) to say about jackie and willie.... thus there are a some OTHER players that some collectors may not want because of how those OTHER players viewed jackie and mays and others....

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

No area has an exclusive on racism; that was not my point. My comment was that a man of a certain age from a certain part of the country would have been exposed to that specific slur as the 'go-to' slur as he was growing up to a degree not found in other regions, and thus may have been more inclined to use it instead of some other derogatory term. In New York City, for example, large segments of the ethnic white immigrant and 1st generation populations would use their own slurs in their native tongues. My mother was one of them: she used the Yiddish version because it was what she was brought up hearing. The N word wasn't on her radar; I never heard of her using it until she was in the nth stage of dementia and spouting all sorts of craziness.

I have never been to Boston (not that I want to go there. I grew up a Knicks and Rangers fan in NYC: as a young boy I thought the actual name for the town was "Bostonsucks" because that is the only way I ever heard it said).

I did not encounter much racist stuff in the four years I spent in San Diego, but I was in La Jolla, a coastal college area. East county was another story. I did hear quite a few racist and antisemitic comments from some of the folks from those areas.

Boston and NY are similar, but at the same time different. At least as far as sports fans go.

Bostons version of racism is underhanded and sneaky. The same people with BLM signs will be the same ones that won't hire minority contractors. Or that will watch certain customers more closely than others.
But it's weird, because it's often a "not one of US" scenario. Once someone reaches the point of being " one of US" they're pretty much treated as equals.

Yes, it's very weird and situational.

I grew up sort of halfway between NY and Boston team influences, and got into sports in a place that was a bit more Boston. Then HS very near Boston.
So I'm sort of the opposite, but I doubt for instance that the Yankees and Red Sox would be the same without each other.
https://www.espn.com/mlb/s/2002/0718/1407265.html

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by G1911

I’m pretty sure Kobe was forgiven because the accuser refused to testify in the criminal case and so the case was dropped. As I recall it, much of the actual evidence was not indicative of her accusation. Back then, there was generally still a presumption of innocence or having to prove the charge, unlike today where, for example, Bauer is guilty even though he was found not guilty and all of the evidence indicated the charge was an outright lie.



I’m pretty sure you nailed it for Lebron. Attacking the US government for very questionable things (such as the case where an officer, on video, shot a woman actively trying to murder an innocent block woman and saving her life with only a decor or two to spare and he tried to stir up outrage) while simultaneously appearing to, at best and most charitably, have no problem with the CCP marked him as a left wing wackadoodle to many on the right. Curt Schilling, but in reverse. I will never understand people who insist athletes must agree with their politics, on either side. I can understand, though don’t agree with, barring athletes who did heinous things that are objectively terrible and were in the context in which they lived like rape (with evidence) or murder. Drawing the line at political dissent from their views is just virtue signaling self righteousness. I have left wingers and right wingers in my cards and don’t care.

I don't know if Bauer is innocent or guilty, but there is significant evidence against him. I am not sure why you say there is not.

The woman presented herself at the police station and the police took pictures of her bruises and did a physical examination. That police file is evidence.

She made a phone call to Bauer with the police on the line where Bauer apparently admitted punching her. That call is evidence.

Obviously her sworn statement is also evidence, as is her testimony in court.

Two other women filed complaints against Bauer in the past alleging similar things, i.e. that Bauer punched and choked them during sex without their consent.

Again, I am not sure what the truth is, but there is evidence to weigh here.


Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

I don't know if Bauer is innocent or guilty, but there is significant evidence against him. I am not sure why you say there is not.

The woman presented herself at the police station and the police took pictures of her bruises and did a physical examination. That police file is evidence.

She made a phone call to Bauer with the police on the line where Bauer apparently admitted punching her. That call is evidence.

Obviously her sworn statement is also evidence, as is her testimony in court.

Two other women filed complaints against Bauer in the past alleging similar things, i.e. that Bauer punched and choked them during sex without their consent.

Again, I am not sure what the truth is, but there is evidence to weigh here.


Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

I was referring to the videos she filmed and were leaked, her messages, how her story never managed to line up with the evidence and her numerous direct contradictions that sunk the case. That she made a claim is not evidence of her claim being true. That she claimed he hit her is not evidence of anything, because everyone admitted that and the issue is of consensual rough sex vs. rape.

[timn1]

wrong spot!

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by G1911

I was referring to the videos she filmed and were leaked, her messages, how her story never managed to line up with the evidence and her numerous direct contradictions that sunk the case. That she made a claim is not evidence of her claim being true. That she claimed he hit her is not evidence of anything, because everyone admitted that and the issue is of consensual rough sex vs. rape.

OK so there is a lot of evidence that he beat her up, in fact he admits to most of it, but not much evidence, other than her testimony, that it was non-consensual. And he had evidence that called into question her testimony.



Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Gorditadogg

OK so there is a lot of evidence that he beat her up, in fact he admits to most of it, but not much evidence, other than her testimony, that it was non-consensual. And he had evidence that called into question her testimony.



Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Yes, but the evidence is a bit more than just calling her testimony into question. He said consensual, she said rape. She looks perfectly fine, happy and unharmed in the videos she filmed in his bedroom while he was asleep shortly after, she later alleged, he violently raped her. Their documented communications did not appear to be anything but a consensual sexual relationship. She continued to happily meet up with him for more sex. She asked him, in writing, to slap her and give her "all the pain" during said sex, in communications that are publicly available. Her details and narrative changed several times to try and clear up contradictions, creating new ones.

Sexual crimes are bad, beyond the obvious reasons, because it is a crime in private. Many guilty cases are still a 'he says she says' because it was in private. This isn't one of those cases. Her story was directly contradicted by the documentary evidence, and not in the small details. She asked him to do it, in writing, and came back for more. He did it. That's not rape. Bauer is guilty of partaking in a kind of sex some may not enjoy and of spitting some bad lines in those texts, but all of the actual evidence suggests the charge is a lie. Which is a tragic shame all around, Bauer will live with a presumption of guilt from much of the public for the rest of his life because the media found him guilty before seeing any evidence, and every time we have one of these cases and the media latches onto it and then it turns out to be a big load of fiction, it hurts trust in genuine victims of actual horrible crimes.

[Popcorn]

I’ll flip any card but OJ / F that dude and California lol

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Popcorn

I’ll flip any card but OJ / F that dude and California lol

Yea, Californians are the absolute worst

[Popcorn]

yeah yikes, just responding to the op / Michael Vick is on the list

[1952boyntoncollector]

with unusual victim testing the limits with athlete is like most things in life that i sum up with one ultimate analogy.

You go to a bar, and you stare at some dudes...eventually one will look at you back and say 'why are you staring' you say ' what you going to do about it'

arent you a wacky person for saying that? do you deserve in theory to be beat up as people will say on fantasy chat boards but in real life..

you get beat up, it not your fault legally and the other person should be charged with a crime. There are lots of 'what you going to do about it people out there' that 'have it coming to them in fantasy' but in the real world the other person has to be the normal person...

Bauer could of not engaged with that 'what you going to do about it person'
and so on and so on..

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by G1911

Yes, but the evidence is a bit more than just calling her testimony into question. He said consensual, she said rape. She looks perfectly fine, happy and unharmed in the videos she filmed in his bedroom while he was asleep shortly after, she later alleged, he violently raped her. Their documented communications did not appear to be anything but a consensual sexual relationship. She continued to happily meet up with him for more sex. She asked him, in writing, to slap her and give her "all the pain" during said sex, in communications that are publicly available. Her details and narrative changed several times to try and clear up contradictions, creating new ones.

Sexual crimes are bad, beyond the obvious reasons, because it is a crime in private. Many guilty cases are still a 'he says she says' because it was in private. This isn't one of those cases. Her story was directly contradicted by the documentary evidence, and not in the small details. She asked him to do it, in writing, and came back for more. He did it. That's not rape. Bauer is guilty of partaking in a kind of sex some may not enjoy and of spitting some bad lines in those texts, but all of the actual evidence suggests the charge is a lie. Which is a tragic shame all around, Bauer will live with a presumption of guilt from much of the public for the rest of his life because the media found him guilty before seeing any evidence, and every time we have one of these cases and the media latches onto it and then it turns out to be a big load of fiction, it hurts trust in genuine victims of actual horrible crimes.

Well said. When those videos were posted online, I was shocked. Completely flipped the script for me.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

with unusual victim testing the limits with athlete is like most things in life that i sum up with one ultimate analogy.

You go to a bar, and you stare at some dudes...eventually one will look at you back and say 'why are you staring' you say ' what you going to do about it'

arent you a wacky person for saying that? do you deserve in theory to be beat up as people will say on fantasy chat boards but in real life..

you get beat up, it not your fault legally and the other person should be charged with a crime. There are lots of 'what you going to do about it people out there' that 'have it coming to them in fantasy' but in the real world the other person has to be the normal person...

Bauer could of not engaged with that 'what you going to do about it person'
and so on and so on..

This sounds eerily like a bar scene from Yellowstone, in which a California Tourist Girl's face is met with a whiskey bottle (courtesy of Beth). Suffice to say it did not end well for her.