Master Index of Archived Threads


Torii Hunter To Miss Three Years?

MFS62 Apr 24 2007 11:14 AM

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2847416 Of course, they'll probably assign John Mitchell to investigate, so a decision to suspend Torii could come years after he retires. Later

Nymr83 Apr 24 2007 11:24 AM

pretty lame that you can get three years for that and near nothing for first offense drug stuff.

iramets Apr 24 2007 11:29 AM

Well, it is "integrity of the game" stuff, and related to the ability of fans to judge whether games are being fixed or not....which is kinda central, don't you think? I mean, yeah, it's dumb to suppose that the Royals would be laying down if they felt disappointed that Torii hadn't sent over his weekly case of champagne, but say it was a half-million in cash that he sent the Royals to divvy up--I think you'd see that as a clear conflict of interest, no?

Yancy Street Gang Apr 24 2007 11:32 AM

No, not really. The Royals should be trying to win anyway. The Twins wanted the Royals to win, and the Royals wanted the Royals to win. Where's the conflict?

metirish Apr 24 2007 11:38 AM

It's an honest mistake,if Hunter gets suspended for that I'd be amazed.

Methead Apr 24 2007 12:04 PM

"Any player or person connected with a Club who shall offer or give any gift or reward to a player or person connected with another Club" He could probably wriggle out of a suspension based on this technicality, right? If he didn't offer a gift to a specific person but instead sent it to the whole team (nudge nudge wink wink), then the rule as written would seem to say he's in the clear. edit : I meant to add... he'll probably get fined for it, though.

Rockin' Doc Apr 24 2007 03:04 PM

I think Torii Hunter made and honest mistake. If baseball punishes him (beyond a fine and a public reprimand) then they, in my opinion, need to reassess their policies and priorities. It's not as if Hunter offered to send the champagne to the Tigers if the lost all three games of the series.

Nymr83 Apr 24 2007 04:18 PM

yeah i think theres a huge difference between incentives to win and incentives to lose (though even a "gag gift" kinda thing sent a team that just lost wouldn't bother me... just think "hey Braves, thanks for getting swept by the Nationals, enjoy these Free Brooms."

Frayed Knot Apr 24 2007 04:30 PM

I think it's pretty clear that the severity of the max penalty is designed to quash ideas like gifts for promises of future play: play this way next Thursday and I'll give you X as opposed to Hunter's after-the-fact show of appreciation. And while I see where they need to condemn what he did anyway simply for the the avoidance of even the appearance of impropriety, I'd be surprised if much comes from this beyond a few warnings and maybe something along the lines of a fine directed to charity.