shakes

This is exactly what Jerry is banking on. His strategy to not really address it and kick the responsibility down the road, while people get distracted and forget about it because it's hard, is going to work. Well, it works in the short term. It's just another reason to add to the pile of why the Sox are a non-entity nationally and an afterthought in Chicago. It's why the attendance is what it is, and why the Sox budget sits where it sits. There's always a reason that nothing can be done. Didn't think it would be the working man this time, but it's always something. There is a special kind of Stockholm syndrome with Sox fans that I don't see in other fanbases.

I just can't get on board with this line of thinking. Jerry has denigrated his fane base for 40 years. That's why the Sox have perpetually low attendance. The numbers of employees is lower than it should be, and incentive based jobs like ticket sales are lower producing than they could be, because of his actions. Not putting pressure on him because it may hurt a weaker than it should be sales office is akin to giving up. The pressure people are talking about may end up in what, season ticket losses in the hundreds? How many job losses do you anticipate that will result in? If Jerry gave a shit about his fans and average attendance went from 20k to 30k, what would that do for areas like the ticket sales office? How many more advertisers would want to join if they were a more successful team with a packed park? If you care so much about those people, you should care more about what Jerry is doing and pressure him to change. Accepting the status quo is doing more harm than good for the people you think you are protecting.

But you don't have a say in the matter. And you are saying we shouldn't take other action like cancelling season tickets or going after sponsors because it causes collateral damage to innocent employees, ignoring that the Sox leadership is what is hurting them. If we don't do those things, then there is no chance LaRussa gets fired or punished. There is a direct correlation.

But it is doing just that, protecting those who have done something wrong . But fine, I'll switch gears - it's OK we have differing opinions on this. Imagine if the Sox had better leadership, that was held accountable, and didn't perpetually have some of the worst attendance in baseball. Imagine how well those ticket agents could do, and how many more they would have to hire if they made better decisions and cared about their fans. Short term pain, for long term gain. Or, we could just let Jerry keep not caring about anyone else, alienate their fans and let those ticket agents miss out on huge opportunity cost.

You said punish the guilty. Legally, he was never guilty of anything. Why is that different?

Go back to my earlier example. Ray Rice wasn't convicted of a crime. What should have been done with him?

So employers should have no say in consequences, only the courts? You can't possibly believe this. I hate to go here, but Ray Rice was never actually convicted of a crime, so he shouldn't have faced any consequences from the league or his team? The courts took it up and dropped his charges, so just go back to work as if nothing happened?

Give Tony a spot at the end of the bench with a clear view to the sky. Hand him an Old Style and let him yell at the clouds.

Employment and the legal system are two completely different things. Employment is an earned privilege. There doesn't need to be a conviction to take action on an employee. I am held to a standard at my job that is well above the standard of the legal system, and so should LaRussa. Particularly at a privately held company. Public embarrassment to a company is frequently grounds for termination and often times that happens well before the legal outcome. Private companies are not held to an obligation to wait out the legal process, this is an active choice by the White Sox. I've seen people fired for much much less, including social media posts. There are absolutely no legal consequences, but there sure are employment consequences, The Sox are telling the public his behavior is acceptable to their organization. I would not make the same choice. Partly, because of your earlier comment that this is likely to impact many other White Sox employees and potential future employees. I do not see a single upside to them digging in their heels.

The MLB manager role is equivalent to a C-suite level job at a fortune 500 company. Arguably, it's higher profile. How many COO's can you name off the top of your head? The point is, they need to be held to a higher standard and they are in fact a public face of the organization. Their actions are representative of the product you are putting out, and by supporting Larussa, the White Sox are supporting his actions. There are consequences to this support, and it will absolutely impact lower level employees who have no say in this hiring decision. That's a consequence of bad leadership. It is unfortunate for those employees, but this is an everyday situation in the workplace. It is not our responsibility as customers(fans) to look out for those lower level employees, that is the responsibility of the White Sox leadership. They are failing those employees, not us. Our choice as customers(fans) is to continue to give money to that leadership, or not. Let the leadership decide what impact to their organization is acceptable to them. Don't let them off the hook, if you are dissatisfied.

Things may be different in Arizona, but defense attorneys in Illinois will file every delay, extension, filing they can waiting for the prosecution or police to make a mistake or no show. Well over a year is common. People that get off on a DUI usually happen because of a procedural technicality. Unless things are very different in Arizona or there is a want to get this settled quick, I would not expect this to be settled within days or a even a month.

Brooks is a good dude. I was involved in a local fundraiser years ago and I reached out to him to see if he would be able to donate anything for auction, and he put me in touch with an employee in the org that gave tickets and gift cards without batting an eye. Every time after I asked, he did the same.

But he was reported to be swerving and in the video he clearly seems drunk. The evidence is there that he shouldn't be driving, and he has done this before. There is nothing 'dangerous' about this line of thinking - it's in fact the very opposite. The law doesn't flex legal limits for age and nothing you are saying would ever be a defense in a court of law. He actually seems more intoxicated than what he blew. I can't believe people are trying to find a way to defend this. I have driven drunk and not been caught and driven drunk and been caught. I faced many consequences and had to make serious changes in my life. I am a much better person for it now. When people get special treatment and consequences are lesser than for others- who are less privileged - it is a disservice to all who are involved, particularly Tony. If he gets to just move on with the Sox as if nothing happened, and he does it again, and puts more people in danger, how does that look for the Sox and MLB as a whole?

I don't think it's overboard. This hire has the ability to do more damage than losing an advertiser, which is unlikely - and even if they do lose an advertiser - I think they deserve it and it will hold them accountable. It may even make them re-think their decisions and better understand that there are consequences for their actions. We can also go back to advertisers, if the Sox do the right thing, to thank them for their attention and say they now support them advertising the White Sox.

Did they drive home over the limit? Because if they did, then yes fire them. Haven't seen a single person here say coaches can't drink.

Thanks for putting this out there. I am a recovering alcoholic with a DUI. You nailed everything here. First thing I thought of when I heard this is Tony likely has a problem, and if he doesn't face up to some things he will do this again. I don't like seeing people in that stage as it's a painful place to be, but enabling this behavior is the last thing he needs.

I get what you are saying and for the most part you are probably right. I can only speak for myself and let you know I won't spend a dime with Larussa here and probably not until Jerry is gone. I will follow and watch, as the Sox are a big thing in my family, but the older I get the more I learn to speak with my wallet. It's the only language they speak. I have more and more friends doing the same with the Cubs because of the Ricketts. And I have been on and off parts of groups of full and partial season tickets, and frequently bought tickets for my family. It won't move the needle, but it's all I can do. It sucks the players have to be brought down by this, but Jerry is nothing short of a tyrant in the sports community - and I just don't feel good about giving him any more money.

I went through several different channels, and haven't heard a word back. I'm expecting it to stay that way. They don't care about us as fans. What more evidence do we need?

I have done just that and would recommend everyone else takes a minute to do the same. Thanks for sharing the contact info and idea. Pass on your feelings to the team and let them know that you will not spend money on this team. Money is all that matters. I have emailed the season ticket office to tell them not to ever contact me again if LaRussa manages a game. Doubt it will mean anything to them, but it's all we can do. Honestly, not sure I can support this team anymore. We are not required to be fans of this team. Illinois likes to remind people that Driving is a privilege, not a right(take note Tony). It's time we tell the organization the same about our fandom.

What's your take on this? https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28503160/jack-mcdowell-says-tony-la-russa-had-sign-stealing-system-white-sox-80s

I've tried asking that to a couple of people and they don't seem to want to reply. And let's not forget that Jack McDowell said LaRussa put in a sign stealing system in Comiskey in the 80's. Along with the many other things mentioned in this thread that aren't related to cheating, but make me think LaRussa can be a generally crappy person. Let's forget all of that, but Hinch shouldn't get a second chance. You can't reconcile those things, if you call out Hinch and not LaRussa you are just carrying JR's water.

Are you saying that because of Hinch's past cheating? What do you think of LaRussa's?

This reeks of just that. I don't know how anyone can see this as anything but a Jerry decision. I wouldn't be surprised if Hahn does leave. At a certain point when you realize you are in an organizational structure like this, you collect a paycheck or move on. There just isn't value in pushing back.

You guys nailed it. This hurts, because for once I thought the Sox were headed in a direction to be a destination and that would've opened them up for a long window. TA has a chance to be the face of baseball for a younger generation and draw in fans that otherwise may not follow. I felt the Sox were so close to being embraced nationally instead of making headlines for ridiculous Hawk or Ozzie tantrums. It really felt like they were ushering in something new here, and this feels like as big a step backwards as I could've imagined. LaRussa will likely be successful enough in the short term, but there will be long term ramifications. And I don't believe he was sincere in any way, and the players silence is everything.

I don't think reducing shifts is about adding singles. I think the game has swung more towards three true outcomes, in part, because of the shift. It's harder to advance runners station-to-station, and has made home runs and walks the most efficient way to score runs. Base stealing is a lost art, understand there are more reasons than the shift(injuries), but also in part because of the value placed on outs that could lead to multi-run homeruns and losing the big inning. I absolutely understand the analysis behind these trends, but I think that creates less drama throughout the course of the game. I think the athletes are better today, but can have less ways to flash their skills - and certainly practice less of these skills. There isn't room today for the Omar Vizquel's and Ozzie Smith's, or maybe even the Buehrle's. I'm not sure that is a good thing. Maybe, it's just my attention span, but I find less riveting stretches today in the game and find myself watching more passively. I watch less and less non White Sox baseball because the strikeouts and homers aren't as fun to me at this scale. I love the nuance in baseball and just don't see as much today, even though I fully appreciate the reasons the game has moved to where it is today. Couldn't agree more though about letting them celebrate and be individuals. I truly love the personalities that are coming out on the Sox and around the league.