La Russa arrested for DUI in Feb; charged day before hire

[South Side Hit Men]

2 hours ago, RagahRagah said:Guys like Rensdorf don't go to jail for anything and technically he didn't commit a crime; but the ONLY way to make a difference here is to hurt his pocketbook. 

Robert Kraft co-sign.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/robert-kraft-prostitution-charges-dropped-florida-prosecutors-n1240964

Jim Irsay co-sign.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/football/nfl/jim-irsay-suspended-6-games-after-dwi-plea-1.2753283

 

[Chicago White Sox]

31 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Bullshit. 

By this logic, none of us should have any moral compass in life because down the road it could hurt someone who depends on that income.  It is easier to label things as "cancel culture" than to actually take a stand and some action.  What you are literally telling me is that you are literally OK with the result of Tony LaRussa killing someone while on the White Sox watch, because a sales guy might lose his job if we don't pressure the organization to change this decision.  So your definition of innocent just ignores part of the equation but not the other.  Why are we not talking about the innocent victims of DUI here?  Do they not matter?  Why?

I don’t know when you became Balta, but the transformation truly is fascinating.

La Russa working for the White Sox does not have any impact whatsoever on his chances of killing a person.  You guys keep trying to argue this and it’s absolutely ridiculous.  You are not saving lives by demanding his removal and the team isn’t aiding in the potential murder of an innocent person by employing him.  Tony La Russa will continue to drink & drive regardless if he’s a member of the White Sox or not.

And who is ignoring “innocent victims of DUI” here exactly?  I want La Russa gone as much as anyone for his actions and I have emailed the White Sox stating just that.  Jerry keeping him employed minimizes the dangers of what he did and is offensive to those who have lost loved ones to drunk drivers.  But I’m also aware that trying to force their hand by hurting their bottom line may not be effective in driving a change and may have ancillary impacts.  Again, you aren’t saving any lives by threatening their sponsors, so it comes down to satisfying your moral compass over the potential ramifications to others.  I’m not even saying what you’re doing is wrong, just that I hope you’re thinking about the broader implications and the likelihood of success.  You may not like the word “cancel culture” but it’s a real thing and it can oftentimes have very ugly consequences.

[Balta1701]

7 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

So are you saying that you think Tony being fired is going to be the wake up call he needs to change?  Otherwise - I don't know that Tony being a mgr on the White Sox or retired necessarily changes what Tony is going to do behind the wheel.  I suppose you could say it is on the White Sox watch - but reality is - Tony is personally responsible for the choices he makes. 

I don't really think the Pats were personally responsible for Aaron Hernandez or the Panthers were for Rae Carruth and what they did.  Doesn't mean I have to like the TLR hire but I think some of these statements are very extreme and completely put blame on the organization when personal responsibility lies with the person.  

I dont want to do this in two threads but what the heck, it's the site owner I'm replying to, so why not.

Hernandez is an awful example for you to bring up because he's a case where, based on press reports, Urban Meyer warned the Patriots not to draft him, he displayed erratic and sometimes hostile behavior in practice, Hernandez "approached coach Bill Belichick in a "state of deepening paranoia' in 2013 but 'his coach saw little reason to get more than minimally involved", and teammates were reporting some of the people he was out with and some of the places he was going. It's literally a case of the team having plenty of information and looking the other way, and in the end winding up with a murder. Could they have stopped it, maybe, maybe not, but they didn't try. They didn't pull the trigger but they absolutely enabled the behavior that led to it. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/patriots/2018/10/16/aaron-hernandez-behavior-patriots-boston-globe/1656467002/

[Dick Allen]

It would be nice if Tony's actions had consequences. Sincere,legit consequences, brother. Don't embarrass him. As a privileged multimillionaire, I suspect he will get off pretty easy.

Edited November 12, 2020 by Dick Allen

[CanOfCorn]

3 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I don’t know when you became Balta, but the transformation truly is fascinating.

La Russa working for the White Sox does not have any impact whatsoever on his chances of killing a person.  You guys keep trying to argue this and it’s absolutely ridiculous.  You are not saving lives by demanding his removal and the team isn’t aiding in the potential murder of an innocent person by employing him.  Tony La Russa will continue to drink & drive regardless if he’s a member of the White Sox or not.

And who is ignoring “innocent victims of DUI” here exactly?  I want La Russa gone as much as anyone for his actions and I have emailed the White Sox stating just that.  Jerry keeping him employed minimizes the dangers of what he did and is offensive to those who have lost loved ones to drunk drivers.  But I’m also aware that trying to force their hand by hurting their bottom line may not be effective in driving a change and may have ancillary impacts.  Again, you aren’t saving any lives by threatening their sponsors, so it comes down to satisfying your moral compass over the potential ramifications to others.  I’m not even saying what you’re doing is wrong, just that I hope you’re thinking about the broader implications and the likelihood of success.  You may not like the word “cancel culture” but it’s a real thing and it can oftentimes have very ugly consequences.

To be fair, an employer has three choices in matters like this, when they are public...help, ignore, or cut bait. They all have ramifications, but only one really hurts and that is what the White Sox are doing now. 

Helping might not work, but you can say you tried.

Cutting bait leaves that person behind, which could be a wake up call, or make it worse.

Ignoring the problem doesn't do anyone any good. That's the problem I have currently.

[Chisoxfn]

5 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I dont want to do this in two threads but what the heck, it's the site owner I'm replying to, so why not.

Hernandez is an awful example for you to bring up because he's a case where, based on press reports, Urban Meyer warned the Patriots not to draft him, he displayed erratic and sometimes hostile behavior in practice, Hernandez "approached coach Bill Belichick in a "state of deepening paranoia' in 2013 but 'his coach saw little reason to get more than minimally involved", and teammates were reporting some of the people he was out with and some of the places he was going. It's literally a case of the team having plenty of information and looking the other way, and in the end winding up with a murder. Could they have stopped it, maybe, maybe not, but they didn't try. They didn't pull the trigger but they absolutely enabled the behavior that led to it. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/patriots/2018/10/16/aaron-hernandez-behavior-patriots-boston-globe/1656467002/

Ok - so I actually purposely put Hernandez in there for this reason.  You are right - the Pats were warned and probably shouldn't have drafted him, because he wasn't worth the collateral risk to their organization. But him being a drug king pin and a murder had nothing to do with anything the Pats had done.  Meyer's warning I think had a lot more to do with not wanting to have that sort of individual around teammates - but you and Southsider are stating the White Sox are directly responsibility for actions that TLR takes behind the wheel or the decisions that Hernandez made - its just crazy talk.

Now if the Pats covered up for him and the like or were literally buying him firearms - okay - different story, but none of that is what we are talking about here.  

 

Note: And I'd say the same thing, White Sox probably should have made a different decision because of this (when combined with the weight of all the other things). But obviously Jerry didn't - I don't think that means JR condones drunk driving or is responsible for what TLR does (unless TLR & JR are going out to dinner and having a bunch of drinks and TLR says, I'm going to take an uber Jerry and Jerry goes...nah your good).  

[southsider2k5]

19 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

So are you saying that you think Tony being fired is going to be the wake up call he needs to change?  Otherwise - I don't know that Tony being a mgr on the White Sox or retired necessarily changes what Tony is going to do behind the wheel.  I suppose you could say it is on the White Sox watch - but reality is - Tony is personally responsible for the choices he makes. 

I don't really think the Pats were personally responsible for Aaron Hernandez or the Panthers were for Rae Carruth and what they did.  Doesn't mean I have to like the TLR hire but I think some of these statements are very extreme and completely put blame on the organization when personal responsibility lies with the person.  

When you directly enable the bad behavior?  Yes.  You can become a part of the blame.  For example, I can draw a distinction between having a guy who gets a DUI while already an employee, and hiring one who is going through the court system for one.  I can also draw another line at someone who is going through the court system for a second one. 

[Dick Allen]

How many people would feel good about their chances if they just told a potential employer they just got charged with a DUI? 

[Chicago White Sox]

Just now, CanOfCorn said:

To be fair, an employer has three choices in matters like this, when they are public...help, ignore, or cut bait. They all have ramifications, but only one really hurts and that is what the White Sox are doing now. 

Helping might not work, but you can say you tried.

Cutting bait leaves that person behind, which could be a wake up call, or make it worse.

Ignoring the problem doesn't do anyone any good. That's the problem I have currently.

Again, this isn’t a White Sox issue, this is a Jerry Reinsdorf issue.  He’s the only person excusing this behavior and he also happens to be the one person who is friends with La Russa.  If he hasn’t helped him by now, despite a drinking problem for ages, nothing is going to change that.

[Bob Sacamano]

2 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

How many people would feel good about their chances if they just told a potential employer they just got charged with a DUI? 

Not good at all.

[Marky Mark]

Let's be honest guys.  Most of us here who wrote in to the Sox to call for TLR's termination, did so because he is a terrible fit for the Sox right now and we should have had a younger more modern choice with more current experience.  His 2nd DUI might have put us over the top, but that isn't the primary reason for the outrage.

With that in mind, the whole contacting the sponsorships thing is a little over the top.

[southsider2k5]

47 minutes ago, ThirdGen said:

Per Wikipedia:

"In May 2008, Fisk returned to the White Sox as a team ambassador, and a member of the team's speakers bureau"

Per the Whitesox.com https://www.mlb.com/whitesox/team/front-office  Not sure what job is MORE public facing than "Community Relations Representatives" (althought he was announced as "Team Ambassador" when hired.

"Community Relations Representatives Harold Baines, John Cangelosi, Carlton Fisk, Ken Harrelson, Bo Jackson, Ron Kittle, Carlos May, Bill Melton, Donn Pall, A.J. Pierzynski, Tim Raines, Mike Squires"

His DUI was in 2012.  I don't recall Sox fans clamoring for his termination.  

And in retrospect I probably shouldn't have mentioned the cocaine thing, that was a cheap shot.  That was before Raines played for the Sox.

Also Fisk was at Soxfest this January.

For the record, I would love to see the Sox end their associations with Fisk, Raines, and Daryl Boston.  I have zero problem with the team saying we want employees who serve as an example for the type of people we want to see in our organization.

[southsider2k5]

11 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

How many people would feel good about their chances if they just told a potential employer they just got charged with a DUI? 

And not just a DUI, but their second one.

[Chicago White Sox]

1 minute ago, southsider2k5 said:

if TLR doesn't change that is on him.  Tony can do whatever he can do. 

But the White Sox directly enabling his behavior includes them in the responsibility for anything bad that happens.  You can't separate that out as well it doesn't matter what we do, he is going to do what he wants anyway, but lay direct responsibility for layoffs not on Jerry, but on someone who takes exception to that action and is willing to take action.  Why isn't that also the direct responsibility of the person taking the action?  After all I didn't fire that person, JR would. Why isn't that Jerry's responsibility?  After all, I have no employees, so by that logic, I have no impact at all on firing people. Why does JR seemingly not gain responsibility for anything in these scenarios?

And where does the line happen here?  What level of horrible person are you willing to not protest if it helps the team win games? 

I’ve already voiced my complaints on the matter and hope Jerry continues to be embarrassed by the press.  But at the same time, I don’t want to see every member of the organization punished over this when none other of them had anything to do with this actual move.  I don’t think a ticket agent should lose his job over this.  I don’t think Tim Anderson should have to play with a lesser roster because of this.  You’ve decided everyone else must pay to suffice your moral standards.  I applaud your desire for action, but I question if you’ll achieve results that actually benefit anyone but yourself.

[Danny Dravot]

13 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

How many people would feel good about their chances if they just told a potential employer they just got charged with a DUI? 

Shit. I got an underage drinking citation fifteen years ago and I always wonder if it exists out there somewhere, and if I need to out myself on job applications that ask have I EVER been charged with or convicted of a non-moving offense, and I feel a real sense of anxiety when I inevitably decide that the answer is yes. If I got a DUI yesterday? I'd just throw the whole damn thing out the window.

[Danny Dravot]

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

For the record, I would love to see the Sox end their associations with Fisk, Raines, and Daryl Boston.  I have zero problem with the team saying we want employees who serve and example for the type of people we want to see in our organization.

What did Daryl Boston do?

[Quin]

3 minutes ago, Danny Dravot said:

What did Daryl Boston do?

https://slate.com/culture/2020/01/mets-rape-accusation-spring-training-1991.html

[Rowand44]

21 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

How many people would feel good about their chances if they just told a potential employer they just got charged with a DUI? 

A lot of companies won't bring you in if there's a pending case against you no matter what it is.

 

[Balta1701]

13 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

For the record, I would love to see the Sox end their associations with Fisk, Raines, and Daryl Boston.  I have zero problem with the team saying we want employees who serve and example for the type of people we want to see in our organization.

Genuinely curious - I know Raines had a major issue for years, but my impression was always that he came back and beat it in order to restore his career and has been clean since. Is there more to that story I don't know?

[ThirdGen]

12 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

For the record, I would love to see the Sox end their associations with Fisk, Raines, and Daryl Boston.  I have zero problem with the team saying we want employees who serve and example for the type of people we want to see in our organization.

I could be wrong but I don't recall the Sox ever terminating anyone (or at least anyone that fans would know) for an off the field transgression in the 40 years JR has owned the team.  The only one I can think of that comes close is Piersall, as I'm sure his attacking a scorer and insulting Sox player wives on TV played a big part in him getting canned, but wasn't the official reason.  So don't expect them to change now.

[ThirdGen]

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

Genuinely curious - I know Raines had a major issue for years, but my impression was always that he came back and beat it in order to restore his career and has been clean since. Is there more to that story I don't know?

I believe Raines did successfully beat his drug issues.  That's why I kind of recanted on including him with Fisk in my list of "bad examples".

[Rowand44]

14 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

And not just a DUI, but their second one.

Not to minimize the severity of one but the 2nd one is actually the breaking point for a lot of places.  Certainly not all but I've seen that on more than one occasion doing what I do for a living.

[NWINFan]

20 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Again, this isn’t a White Sox issue, this is a Jerry Reinsdorf issue.  He’s the only person excusing this behavior and he also happens to be the one person who is friends with La Russa.  If he hasn’t helped him by now, despite a drinking problem for ages, nothing is going to change that.

Yes, this is a Jerry Reinsdorf issue. First, as several of us has pointed out, this was another one these "safe" hires because of the past association with the White Sox and Reinsdorf's personal feelings about LaRussa. But to me, the DUIs, important as they are, are not the only issue here. If LaRussa's problems are this extensive, how will they impact his on-the-job performance? I understand his Hall-of-Fame creds, but this still can be a major problem. Alcohol tends to make people abusive and doesn't do much for the judgement part, either.

Many of us like to have our drinks, but we don't like making major decisions after having a few. The whole thing looks like a disaster waiting to happen. I don't think many things were thought through. This is not good, really not good.

[southsider2k5]

14 minutes ago, Rowand44 said:

Not to minimize the severity of one but the 2nd one is actually the breaking point for a lot of places.  Certainly not all but I've seen that on more than one occasion doing what I do for a living.

I have said it before, but will say it again.  A mistake can be made, and steps can be taken to fix them.  Nothing in TLRs history seems to show that he is that kind of a guy, fully evidenced by the fact that he just picked up his second DUI, and not only didn't own up to it, but tried to intimidate a member of the vaunted thin blue line into letting him go.  This goes long past any potential gray area or learning a lesson.

[gusguyman]

5 hours ago, ChiSox59 said:

I am far from a "Reinsdorf apologist" and nothing in my post would indicate as such.

But I am not about to throw myself off a cliff because the Sox hired a guy with the 3rd most wins in MLB history because he got a DUI and he is old.  Its a bad hire - I didn't like it then and I don't like it now.  But its not going to be the beginning of the end for the Sox.  As i've told you several times, the organization will be just fine and the Sox will still be very good in 21 no matter who manages them.  

 

In 2011, the Boston Red Sox under Terry Francona finished 90-72, and even that record might undersell their talent since they ended the season with a ridiculous 6-18 slide.

in 2013, under John Farrell, the Red Sox finished 97-65 and won the World Series.

In between those two years, they somehow went 69-93(!!!!) under Bobby Valentine.

I agree that, in general, most managers make only a small impact on a team. But the exceptional managers on either end of quality spectrum can have much much larger impacts, with the bottom of that spectrum probably yielding a larger impact than the top. 

And FWIW, Bobby V had proven himself to be at least a competent manager throughout his career. It turns out, even a normally fine manager can have a catastrophic impact if he has lost touch with the game or if he is a terrible fit for the roster. I'm not arguing either of those are sure things for TLR, but its a real possibility, so I don't think you should say with certainty that the Sox will be just fine. They could be. Maybe its even likely they will be. Its far from a sure thing.