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

[Hamhock]

6 minutes ago, The Hawk said:

but a defense lawyer could say that it was not in character for him to drink and drive

It being his second DUI negates that defense; though it's past the threshhold of use in determining sentence, it's still relevant to display a pattern of negligence.

[fathom]

Based off of what Abreu said today, Tony is going nowhere. I’ve moved on from hoping he quits to now just following offseason transactions.

[35thstreetswarm]

“As Tony La Russa’s attorney said in his statement, Tony deserves all the assumptions and protections granted to everyone in a court of law, especially while this is a pending matter. Once his case reaches resolution in the courts, we will have more to say. The White Sox understand the seriousness of these charges.”  -White Sox statement

I am puzzled by this statement.  Why are the Sox putting so much weight on the final disposition of his case?  I'm wondering if they have some reason to believe he will get off.  Thinking through the scenarios, it seems that if they were planning to hire him regardless of the outcome they would try to make that clear now to head this off, rather than making a statement like this that drags it out and heightens the drama of the ultimate legal disposition.  Having made this statement, if he's convicted and kept on it would beg the question why they waited to announce their intention in the first place.  On the other hand, if they're seriously thinking of firing him if he's convicted, and believe there's a decent chance of that happening (which the *public* information suggests), they'd never have hired him in the first place, or might just cut ties with him now.   To me this statement telegraphs confidence in a positive legal outcome.

Then again, maybe there is no master plan and they're just punting on this to get through the news cycle in front of them.  Would be really short-sighted, but it's possible.

[RagahRagah]

1 hour ago, Texsox said:

How about this?

When writing or calling sponsors thank them for their support of the team. Explain you are certain they share your outrage over the hiring of TLR and would appreciate a statement from the company denouncing drunk driving especially by people in high visibility leadership positions within the community. 

but fall short of asking them to stop advertising with the team. 

 

That wouldn't make one ounce of difference. 

[Balta1701]

11 minutes ago, 35thstreetswarm said:

“As Tony La Russa’s attorney said in his statement, Tony deserves all the assumptions and protections granted to everyone in a court of law, especially while this is a pending matter. Once his case reaches resolution in the courts, we will have more to say. The White Sox understand the seriousness of these charges.”  -White Sox statement

I am puzzled by this statement.  Why are the Sox putting so much weight on the final disposition of his case?  I'm wondering if they have some reason to believe he will get off.  Thinking through the scenarios, it seems that if they were planning to hire him regardless of the outcome they would try to make that clear now to head this off, rather than making a statement like this that drags it out and heightens the drama of the ultimate legal disposition.  Having made this statement, if he's convicted and kept on it would beg the question why they waited to announce their intention in the first place.  On the other hand, if they're seriously thinking of firing him if he's convicted, and believe there's a decent chance of that happening (which the *public* information suggests), they'd never have hired him in the first place, or might just cut ties with him now.   To me this statement telegraphs confidence in a positive legal outcome.

Then again, maybe there is no master plan and they're just punting on this to get through the news cycle in front of them.  Would be really short-sighted, but it's possible.

Yes, they're buying time. Eventually he'll plead no contest or something like that in a plea bargain to avoid jail time unless the cop was really angry about things, and they're just hoping it'll go away. Then he'll do it again after some game early next season, and probably won't be caught. And again. And again. 

[Texsox]

1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

Yes, they're buying time. Eventually he'll plead no contest or something like that in a plea bargain to avoid jail time unless the cop was really angry about things, and they're just hoping it'll go away. Then he'll do it again after some game early next season, and probably won't be caught. And again. And again. 

If he follows his cycle he'll be too old to drive by the time he's due for a third. 

[35thstreetswarm]

4 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Yes, they're buying time. Eventually he'll plead no contest or something like that in a plea bargain to avoid jail time unless the cop was really angry about things, and they're just hoping it'll go away. Then he'll do it again after some game early next season, and probably won't be caught. And again. And again. 

That would be a dumb approach.  They'd be better off socializing the idea now.  

[RagahRagah]

1 hour ago, wrathofhahn said:

It means he has been yet to be convicted of the charge that is all.

Also I am not telling anyone, they are telling me. They can continue their crusade of bad faith if they want but when people start to bring in his politics it sort of tells me where the outrage is actually coming from. I also read through his hiring before his 2nd DUI was known barely a mention was made of it. I think it was one person. When Ozzie was being considered noone mentioned it despite him being an admitted alcoholic.

In any case I am sort of done with this. I actually don't like TLR despite us sharing similar politics and I wouldn't have hired him either but he's here and people need to just deal with it.

I think you're jumping to conclusions a bit.

No, a lot of us don't like what you call his "politics," in which a lot of it isn't actually political. For some reasons every issue gets labeled as "political" now so that people can defend reprehensible views and be protected. I don't support vitriol but I do support shooting down people's "views" when facts and morals are opposed to them.

Anywho, IMO it isn't *because* of his views, it just amplifies them and gives us yet another reason to intensify and validate the fact that the guy should have never been hired and now the organization is in a catch 22 where no matter what way Reinsdorf goes about it, he looks like an idiot and an asshole.

Edited November 13, 2020 by RagahRagah

[ThirdGen]

17 minutes ago, 35thstreetswarm said:

“As Tony La Russa’s attorney said in his statement, Tony deserves all the assumptions and protections granted to everyone in a court of law, especially while this is a pending matter. Once his case reaches resolution in the courts, we will have more to say. The White Sox understand the seriousness of these charges.”  -White Sox statement

I am puzzled by this statement.  Why are the Sox putting so much weight on the final disposition of his case?  I'm wondering if they have some reason to believe he will get off.  Thinking through the scenarios, it seems that if they were planning to hire him regardless of the outcome they would try to make that clear now to head this off, rather than making a statement like this that drags it out and heightens the drama of the ultimate legal disposition.  Having made this statement, if he's convicted and kept on it would beg the question why they waited to announce their intention in the first place.  On the other hand, if they're seriously thinking of firing him if he's convicted, and believe there's a decent chance of that happening (which the *public* information suggests), they'd never have hired him in the first place, or might just cut ties with him now.   To me this statement telegraphs confidence in a positive legal outcome.

Then again, maybe there is no master plan and they're just punting on this to get through the news cycle in front of them.  Would be really short-sighted, but it's possible.

There may be some additional information they want to add to their statement saying they are keeping him despite the conviction, such as he sought treatment and gave up drinking after the arrest, or he has agreed to surrender his license that would be potentially incriminating if released prior to the case being tried but is important to the team's logic in not firing him.

[Balta1701]

3 minutes ago, Texsox said:

If he follows his cycle he'll be too old to drive by the time he's due for a third. 

Just remember, third time being caught is not third time doing it. He's a legit, HOF type guy. It's ok for him. 

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, ThirdGen said:

There may be some additional information they want to add to their statement saying they are keeping him despite the conviction, such as he sought treatment and gave up drinking after the arrest, or he has agreed to surrender his license that would be potentially incriminating if released prior to the case being tried but is important to the team's logic in not firing him.

There is absolutely no reason why they couldn't say that now if he had actually done so. 

[ThirdGen]

4 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

There is absolutely no reason why they couldn't say that now if he had actually done so. 

It would basically be a public admission of guilt.  Not going to say that if he thinks he may beat the conviction.   Seems unlikely to me, but always possible.

[southsider2k5]

49 minutes ago, The Hawk said:

I think that the fact the guy was also on meds after his hip replacement surgery may influence the judge and jury to have some leniency in the case. Like I said earlier, his alcohol read-out wasn't very high(yeah it was over the limit) but a defense lawyer could say that it was not in character for him to drink and drive but the combination of pain pills and some wine at dinner made him woozy. This combined by a penitent TLR could result in public service and other leniency.

Go back and read the post on the science here.  By the time he was pulled over, the estimate is that his BAC was somewhere around .145.  It was 3.5 hours until they got a court order and he got his blood test and the official 0.095 was tested.

[Balta1701]

7 minutes ago, ThirdGen said:

It would basically be a public admission of guilt.  Not going to say that if he thinks he may beat the conviction.   Seems unlikely to me, but always possible.

It wouldn't be a public admission of guilt any more than attending the treatment program was. If he actually attended one because he wanted leniency from the judicial system and made that public, I'd think better about him! That would be a good sign! A judge isn't going to look any worse on him for making that public than if he did it and kept it private. 

[southsider2k5]

 

[southsider2k5]

 

[Chicago White Sox]

4 hours ago, shakes said:

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.

 

Jerry Reinsdorf is 84 years old and is not going to change at this point in his life.  Again, know the fight you are fighting and realize who is likely to win or lose as a result.  If you still think it’s a fight worth fighting, then by all means do what you think it right.  I’m just highlighting that more likely than not, La Russa will still be manager no matter what you do and if anyone loses it will be people in the organization who had nothing to do with the hiring.  So accepting the status quo might not feel right to you, but it may end up with a better outcome for all parties involved.

[Jerksticks]

I’m really glad Tony didn’t hurt anybody. Hopefully the legal system does what it’s designed to do so Tony no longer puts lives at risk.  
 

He’s here in our dugout to not get out-managed by the opposing dugout.  I look forward to him doing a great job of that.  I liked Ricky but he definitely lost games and got out-managed quite a bit.
 

I think Tony beats the A’s. 

[wrathofhahn]

3 hours ago, Texsox said:

I'm not certain how immoral was introduced. What we are discussing is an organized by Soxtalk campaign to get sponsors to drop advertising unless the team fires TLR. 

I'm against it because it directly harms team workers and will not be effective. A MLB team is a monopoly that can't go out of business. JR will continue to collect his pay as President and the franchise will continue to grow in value. The only guaranteed response to drops in is a decrease in spending on players.

 

Not to mention TLR was upfront about the situation so it's not really TLR they should want fired it's the decision makers and shot callers in the organization who decided to hire him regardless.

Also going after advertisers is lame (there is another word I'd to use but it isn't board appropriate) I often wondered who these people were who would put that much time and effort into getting a person cancelled/trying to destroy their life because of a political disagreement anyways it reflects badly on them

If people feel that strongly they should just root for the cubs

 

Edited November 13, 2020 by wrathofhahn

[ron883]

10 minutes ago, wrathofhahn said:

Not to mention TLR was upfront about the situation so it's not really TLR they should want fired it's the decision makers and shot callers in the organization who decided to hire him regardless.

Also going after advertisers is lame (there is another word I'd to use but it isn't board appropriate) I often wondered who these people were who would put that much time and effort into getting a person cancelled/trying to destroy their life because of a political disagreement anyways it reflects badly on them

If people feel that strongly they should just root for the cubs

 

I already suggested that and said I would do it. I asked who is with, specifically to Balta. I got crickets back from everybody, though. 

[Balta1701]

11 minutes ago, Yearnin' for Yermin said:

I already suggested that and said I would do it. I asked who is with, specifically to Balta. I got crickets back from everybody, though. 

Please evaluate the type of people who own the Cubs and get back to me.

[southsider2k5]

25 minutes ago, wrathofhahn said:

Not to mention TLR was upfront about the situation so it's not really TLR they should want fired it's the decision makers and shot callers in the organization who decided to hire him regardless.

Also going after advertisers is lame (there is another word I'd to use but it isn't board appropriate) I often wondered who these people were who would put that much time and effort into getting a person cancelled/trying to destroy their life because of a political disagreement anyways it reflects badly on them

If people feel that strongly they should just root for the cubs

 

Wait?  The Cubs?  Did you even take a second on this ignorance?  The same people who are Trump supporters?  lol, sounds like this is much more up your alley.  The kind of people that will do anything to protect their fortune, including sacrificing actual lives.  The kind of people who put racist tropes into emails.  If you think this reflects badly on me, that kind of makes me feel better because your opinion is one I don't want to be in league with.

[Chicago White Sox]

4 hours ago, SouthWallace said:

The collateral damage argument seemed to suggest that the fans do nothing.  That’s what I am pushing back against.  Big picture, I actually agree with your points and the actions you suggest, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t also be voicing our displeasure to the organization itself. 

 

I’ve never said do nothing.  By all means voice your displeasure (I have done this myself) and attack the franchise with your own wallet.  No one should have to support the product if they feel this is a grave enough offense.  My only issue is when it comes to going after sponsorships, where your actions can impact other innocent parties in the organization.  If the ultimate goal is to impact the bottom line, the reality is it will be people who wanted nothing to do with La Russa who will be impacted first before Reinsdorf ever feels any ounce of pain.

[Chicago White Sox]

4 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

I can't believe this is still happening.  Take it a step further.  Would you buy cotton from slavers?  Think of the poor slaves who might get beaten if the cotton doesn't get sold?  Would you buy your wife a blood diamond?  Think of all of the awful Africans who would lose their livelihoods?  Do you search out products made by child labor?  Think of all of hte kids supporting elderly parents in China with their dollar a day jobs in sweatshops?  How about your drugs?  Do you support the drug kingpins who keep your local dealers alive by keeping their supply up to date so they can feed their kids?

Extreme?  Illegal?  Immoral? Sure but all are supporting families who really need the money. By punishing those illegal activities, you are hurting families who really need the money.

 

Wow, are you comparing slavery to employing a douchebag who got a DUI?

[shakes]

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Jerry Reinsdorf is 84 years old and is not going to change at this point in his life.  Again, know the fight you are fighting and realize who is likely to win or lose as a result.  If you still think it’s a fight worth fighting, then by all means do what you think it right.  I’m just highlighting that more likely than not, La Russa will still be manager no matter what you do and if anyone loses it will be people in the organization who had nothing to do with the hiring.  So accepting the status quo might not feel right to you, but it may end up with a better outcome for all parties involved.

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.