Is this racism or culture clash in baseball?

[laloesch]

 

His criticism was of latin players.  Quite plainly.  Putting that up for debate makes me question what you're even reading or if you're just defaulting to all the mumbo-jumbo in your last sentence.

Actually it wasn't a straight criticism of latin american players plain and simple.  You can't turn this into something it isn't.  Sorry I don't support your spin.  

[laloesch]

 

Other reasons that would be a non-story would be that it didn't, and doesn't seem to ever, actually happen.

 

Really? Are we gonna go there?

[Celebrity Weddings!]

 

Really? Are we gonna go there?

 

A place where Latin players criticize American players for their emotional comportment on the field? Look, if it's a place, I'll stand corrected and offer them a second verse as the song I'm going to keep singing on Kinsler: stop telling people how to act when they're playing baseball. It's extraordinarily boring.

[Blake]

 

I suspect that Kirby would have been disappointed that people saw it that way.

I hope I didn't imply that I thought Kirby was being a showman. I thought he was enthusiastic. Like Mr. Dozier when he walked off the Tigers a couple of years ago. 

[John Bonnes]

 

I hear what you are saying, but i think this is a big hoopla about nothing to be perfectly honest.  If anything the media is driving a ridiculous narrative (like they often do) because the guy is a white guy and is automatically guilty as a racist.  If it was a Latino player saying this about the USA team or a black USA player this would be a no-story, so in reality its not just the message but also the messenger that counts.

 

Ok, but the point is, that is rarely the story. First, because it doesn't happen nearly as much. And second, because people don't line up to support it.

 

I think you're saying that this is a story because people line up to defend the latin players. But I'd say that happens because for years statements like this were lauded - provided they were said by a white person. The opposite - a black or latin player criticizing a white player for his "antics" - would be ignored by most of the US. 

 

Why does that happen? Why does a mostly white population support statements one way but forgive (or conveniently overlook) the other way?

 

I would suggest it might be because, while there isn't a conscious or overt racism involved, there is something in our nature that moves us in that direction. (Which, by the way, doesn't make us "bad" people.) And perhaps the first step in fighting it is to try and consciously recognize it. 

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Actually it wasn't a straight criticism of latin american players plain and simple.  You can't turn this into something it isn't.  Sorry I don't support your spin.  

 

He called the countries out by name.  He very clearly was distinguishing American play as "right way" and the two countries he named as "wrong way".  Otherwise, why is he suggesting kids should watch one and not the other?

[markos]

 

He is quoted as saying he hopes that kids are watching how the US plays, and plays like them, no? Isn't that implying his way is better? 

 

I do like his updated quotes. They show an open mindedness that his off the cuff remark did not. That's often the case. But let's not pretend (well, I won't) that there isn't a belief that showing emotion in the game is wrong, and that physical violence is an ok response to that...

You keep saying that this is all about not showing emotion, which I don't think is true. It is about different frameworks for defining when and how to show emotion. Different cultures create rules and taboos about various actions and situations. That is what cultures do. When there is an incompatibility between what two different cultures expect, who gets to police that? Is it okay to say, "hey, I'm sorry you took offense to my actions, but it fine in our culture so you'll just have to deal."

 

Let's take the following situation:
All-star slugger is up against a struggling Rule-5 pick trying to mop-up a 11-4 blowout in late-April. A pitch gets away and almost hits the batter. Two pitches later the batter hits a monster homer. Batter stares at the homer, flips his bat, and show-boats his home run trot. What are the moral dimensions here?
1) From one culture's perspective, the better player is flaunting his superiority over a weaker player in a completely meaningless situation. That's mean-spirited, and in this case completely unnecessary. It is okay for the pitcher to take issue with the player behavior, and for the pitcher's teammates and coaches to rally around him against the batter.
2) From another culture's perspective, there was heightened conflict between the pitcher and batter after the errant pitch (which might have been intential! who knows!) The post-home run behavior was vindicated because the batter was the victor in this conflict. In the man-to-man conflict between the batter and pitcher, the batter was the winner; therefore, the batter get to demonstrate his superiority.

 

Both cultures can be valid, but there is going to be disagreement in cases like this. Who is right in this case? And in general, can a player make any actions or say anything to his opponent that he want, no matter how mean or degrading so long as his "culture" says its okay? If the opponent and the his teammates complain about this, should they just shutup and let it go?

[old nurse]

If anything the initial comment with the follow up comments shows that you have to be very careful on what you say lest someone spin it in a way that you did not intend your comment to be.

[Craig Arko]

 

If anything the initial comment with the follow up comments shows that you have to be very careful on what you say lest someone spin it in a way that you did not intend your comment to be.

In general, that's true. Thinking first before typing something or opening the mouth; good plan.

[Mike Sixel]

 

You keep saying that this is all about not showing emotion, which I don't think is true. It is about different frameworks for defining when and how to show emotion. Different cultures create rules and taboos about various actions and situations. That is what cultures do. When there is an incompatibility between what two different cultures expect, who gets to police that? Is it okay to say, "hey, I'm sorry you took offense to my actions, but it fine in our culture so you'll just have to deal."

 

Let's take the following situation:
All-star slugger is up against a struggling Rule-5 pick trying to mop-up a 11-4 blowout in late-April. A pitch gets away and almost hits the batter. Two pitches later the batter hits a monster homer. Batter stares at the homer, flips his bat, and show-boats his home run trot. What are the moral dimensions here?
1) From one culture's perspective, the better player is flaunting his superiority over a weaker player in a completely meaningless situation. That's mean-spirited, and in this case completely unnecessary. It is okay for the pitcher to take issue with the player behavior, and for the pitcher's teammates and coaches to rally around him against the batter.
2) From another culture's perspective, there was heightened conflict between the pitcher and batter after the errant pitch (which might have been intential! who knows!) The post-home run behavior was vindicated because the batter was the victor in this conflict. In the man-to-man conflict between the batter and pitcher, the batter was the winner; therefore, the batter get to demonstrate his superiority.

 

Both cultures can be valid, but there is going to be disagreement in cases like this. Who is right in this case? And in general, can a player make any actions or say anything to his opponent that he want, no matter how mean or degrading so long as his "culture" says its okay? If the opponent and the his teammates complain about this, should they just shutup and let it go?

 

Great post.

 

The best way, imo, is to recognize that cultures are different, not better, around things like this....things that don't actually matter (like equal rights or freedoms do). We are literally discussing if people should be mad about a bat flip.......the only way, imo, to be mad about that is to decide to be mad about it. We are learning a lot about happiness and other emotions, like it is mostly how we CHOOSE to react that cause the emotion, not the stimulant itself. One chooses (either on one's own, or thru cultural training) how to react to a stimulant, like a bat flip. It isn't a moral question, I doubt it is even an ethical question (if you assume all cultural norms are ethical, then it is). 

[laloesch]

 

A place where Latin players criticize American players for their emotional comportment on the field? Look, if it's a place, I'll stand corrected and offer them a second verse as the song I'm going to keep singing on Kinsler: stop telling people how to act when they're playing baseball. It's extraordinarily boring.

 

OMG...we really do live in different worlds and must be reading different articles.  My earlier point is absolutely true.  The messenger does matter more than the message in this case.  Guilty until proven innocent.  Sheesh.  

[laloesch]

 

He called the countries out by name.  He very clearly was distinguishing American play as "right way" and the two countries he named as "wrong way".  Otherwise, why is he suggesting kids should watch one and not the other?

 

What on earth are you talking about?  He said that he hopes kids watching the WBC understand that the USA plays the game differently than Dominican and Puerto Rico?  WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT?  Nothing about race, nothing about wrong way or right way, just pointing out differences. Wow.  

[John Bonnes]

 

You keep saying that this is all about not showing emotion, which I don't think is true. It is about different frameworks for defining when and how to show emotion. Different cultures create rules and taboos about various actions and situations. That is what cultures do. When there is an incompatibility between what two different cultures expect, who gets to police that? Is it okay to say, "hey, I'm sorry you took offense to my actions, but it fine in our culture so you'll just have to deal."

 

Let's take the following situation:
All-star slugger is up against a struggling Rule-5 pick trying to mop-up a 11-4 blowout in late-April. A pitch gets away and almost hits the batter. Two pitches later the batter hits a monster homer. Batter stares at the homer, flips his bat, and show-boats his home run trot. What are the moral dimensions here?
1) From one culture's perspective, the better player is flaunting his superiority over a weaker player in a completely meaningless situation. That's mean-spirited, and in this case completely unnecessary. It is okay for the pitcher to take issue with the player behavior, and for the pitcher's teammates and coaches to rally around him against the batter.
2) From another culture's perspective, there was heightened conflict between the pitcher and batter after the errant pitch (which might have been intential! who knows!) The post-home run behavior was vindicated because the batter was the victor in this conflict. In the man-to-man conflict between the batter and pitcher, the batter was the winner; therefore, the batter get to demonstrate his superiority.

 

Both cultures can be valid, but there is going to be disagreement in cases like this. Who is right in this case? And in general, can a player make any actions or say anything to his opponent that he want, no matter how mean or degrading so long as his "culture" says its okay? If the opponent and the his teammates complain about this, should they just shutup and let it go?

 

I agree, this is a good post.

 

To move away from the race topic a bit, the point here is where does one draw the line between bad sportsmanship and and appropriate response or even fun. 

 

The one thing I can say is I do think there is a line. It isn't just "do whatever you want." Like moderating a topic, it doesn't have clear lines, but I'd say one of the key factors to consider is whether or not the action was directed to a member or members of the other team. 

 

I know last night, I thought the closest thing I saw to bad sportsmanship was Stroman's gesturing and glancing towards PR's dugout following one of his innings.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I agree, this is a good post.

 

To move away from the race topic a bit, the point here is where does one draw the line between bad sportsmanship and and appropriate response or even fun. 

 

The one thing I can say is I do think there is a line. It isn't just "do whatever you want." Like moderating a topic, it doesn't have clear lines, but I'd say one of the key factors to consider is whether or not the action was directed to a member or members of the other team. 

 

I know last night, I thought the closest thing I saw to bad sportsmanship was Stroman's gesturing and glancing towards PR's dugout following one of his innings.

 

Ya, that line is not black and white (ugh, sorry). Perhaps that's why the old school is so old school. Not allowing any emotion eliminates the need to judge. I don't think that's what it is, frankly.....

[mazeville]

I don't know whether what Kinsler said was racist. 

 

But I thought the comments were stupid, even if they weren't.

 

They're part of that old-school, don't-do-anything-fun-on-the-baseball-field mentality that makes the game so boring. Get that stick out of your butt, Ian. Take a look at attendance and television ratings and surveys on baseball and realize that maybe those other cultures you're turning up your nose against have it right. Baseball is far more popular in those countries.

 

Baseball is supposed to be a fun game. Celebrate! And quit acting like a loser.

[TheLeviathan]

 

What on earth are you talking about?  He said that he hopes kids watching the WBC understand that the USA plays the game differently than Dominican and Puerto Rico?  WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT?  Nothing about race, nothing about wrong way or right way, just pointing out differences. Wow.  

 

If I say I hope my kid watches Steve play and not Joe and Bob, by your logic I'm not saying anything critical of Joe and Bob.  Just pointing out differences.  Please tell me that isn't what you're saying.  It's preposterous on the face of it.  

 

He didn't say "I hope they notice the difference", he very clearly implied he hopes that kids play one way and not the other way.

 

Race comes into play when we consider why he is putting one way as superior to the other.  Maybe it's not racism, but there is widespread shame placed on how latin players play in baseball.  We should take a good, hard look at why.

[strumdatjaguar]

Maybe everyone who criticizes Kinsler is anti-Semitic.   Or better yet, maybe we can all just chill out a bit about this.   There has been commentary about Byung(no-space)Ho Park becoming more acclimated to American Culture, Nishi not having to worry about being taken out during a double play in Japan (why he got his leg broken in MLB)and whether Gary Gaetti became less aggressive after becoming "born again" religious.  I have to believe learning to play in the warm climate of Latin America may lead to a different style of play than learning in a colder climate like Japan.   Styles differ from the AL to the NL and from team to team. Teams sometime take on the personality of managers or team leaders.   Culture does matter  Frankly, I'm looking forward to the Brats and Beer nights in honor of Max Kepler.

[gil4]

 

You keep saying that this is all about not showing emotion, which I don't think is true. It is about different frameworks for defining when and how to show emotion. Different cultures create rules and taboos about various actions and situations. That is what cultures do. When there is an incompatibility between what two different cultures expect, who gets to police that? Is it okay to say, "hey, I'm sorry you took offense to my actions, but it fine in our culture so you'll just have to deal."

 

Let's take the following situation:
All-star slugger is up against a struggling Rule-5 pick trying to mop-up a 11-4 blowout in late-April. A pitch gets away and almost hits the batter. Two pitches later the batter hits a monster homer. Batter stares at the homer, flips his bat, and show-boats his home run trot. What are the moral dimensions here?
1) From one culture's perspective, the better player is flaunting his superiority over a weaker player in a completely meaningless situation. That's mean-spirited, and in this case completely unnecessary. It is okay for the pitcher to take issue with the player behavior, and for the pitcher's teammates and coaches to rally around him against the batter.
2) From another culture's perspective, there was heightened conflict between the pitcher and batter after the errant pitch (which might have been intential! who knows!) The post-home run behavior was vindicated because the batter was the victor in this conflict. In the man-to-man conflict between the batter and pitcher, the batter was the winner; therefore, the batter get to demonstrate his superiority.

 

Both cultures can be valid, but there is going to be disagreement in cases like this. Who is right in this case? And in general, can a player make any actions or say anything to his opponent that he want, no matter how mean or degrading so long as his "culture" says its okay? If the opponent and the his teammates complain about this, should they just shutup and let it go?

We have no trouble hearing about the ugly Americans traveling abroad and behaving like they are in America. We even have a saying, "When in Rome..." Why is it now racist for Americans to ask for international players in our leagues to not behave in a manner that many of us consider rude. I know, international tournament might be different, but I think American teams that have toured Japan in the past have at least been somewhat aware of the different cultural attitudes of the host country and have attempted to conform, rather than just labeling their expectations as racist. 

[gunnarthor]

Reading Kinsler's quote in full made me cringe.  And when you throw in what we know about society and that the teams doing things the wrong way (in the speaker's mind) are made up pretty much entirely of minorities, I'd say it was a racist comment.

 

[gunnarthor]

Not sure if this was posted yet but from Klaw's chat:

 

Exexposfan: Yesterday you said you knew codeified racism from working in baseball for many years from the Kinsler tweet. Assuming that comes from witnessing several events can you elaborate on an example? Not that I doubt you but I am curious and want to know such an event that goes on behind closed doors. If you can’t name names that’s fine.

Keith Law: I won’t give specifics that might affect people working or playing in the game, but I can point to two examples at a general level. One was the use of the phrase “winning player” or “not a winning player,” applied along almost exact racial lines. I think I only heard a white player called “not a winning player” once, because he was on the DL, as opposed to at least ten players of color called that. The other is one you’ve all heard before: “Athletic.” Black players are presumed to be athletic, and, in my opinion, are unfairly dinged when they aren’t. White players who are athletic are given excessive credit for it, because the presumption is that they’re less so – and that they’re smarter or more instinctive. Sorry I can’t be more specific.

[Dozier's Glorious Hair]

 

anyone that doesn't think this is indicative of "we are right, and you are wrong", well, they aren't really reading what he said. It's pretty clearly stated.....

 

And, frankly, I wasn't raised that way either, and plenty of people in the US don't want a bunch of unemotional robots around them....

 

Unemotional robots? By saying that, aren't you basically doing what you're accusing Kinsler of doing - just in the opposite direction? There's no need to belittle those who may live/work/play in a different way. To each his own, right?    

[Craig Arko]

Could be time to take the rhetoric down a notch, peeps.

[Eris]

Kinsler is expressing his displeasure with how other cultures play the game differently.   Narrow-minded, maybe.  Racist?  I don't think so.  Stupid to discuss his displeasure on the world stage?  Definitely yes.  There many examples of the traditions and unwritten rules of baseball that even within this country people don't agree with.  If everyone played the game the same way, there would be no new strategies or changes developed.

 

I enjoyed very much watching the Japanese team in the WBC.  I think this is precisely because they play a different style of baseball.  

[Mike Sixel]

 

Unemotional robots? By saying that, aren't you basically doing what you're accusing Kinsler of doing - just in the opposite direction? There's no need to belittle those who may live/work/play in a different way. To each his own, right?    

 

Perhaps. but then, I've never condoned throwing a ball at him at 90MPH in retaliation. 

 

I also think I said "plenty of people in the US don't want", not "he's wrong". I think the point I'm trying to make is that I'd tolerate his boring way of showing emotion, and not say it is wrong and that children should be like me vs him. I'm kind of good with a mix of cultures. I can't imagine anything more boring than a never changing culture. 

 

but, sure, if you want to read what I said that way, you can. And, you might not be 100% wrong. Since, you know, science says repressing your emotions is bad for you. And that celebrating joy is good for you.

[Bark's Lounge]

I think what Kinsler said was foolish with a sprinkling of bigot dust. It is sad because I imagine he has been on the receiving end of hate because of his Jewish heritage.

 

In all sincerity, I believe baseball to be Puerto Rico's, DR's, and a handful of other country's National Sport.

 

The U.S.A.'s is Football. Without the talent these other countries have brought to this game, the evolution of baseball would be in a very sad state. It's time for U.S. Ball players and Fans (mostly white), to take the stick out of their rear ends and embrace the awesome things these other countries have contributed to the best Sporting Game ever invented, instead of spewing shallow, butt hurt, borderline racist comments at the players of these countries.

 

Baseball was invented in the U.S., but the U.S. does not own baseball's soul, it's these other countries who own it. They make the game fun.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Kinsler is expressing his displeasure with how other cultures play the game differently.   Narrow-minded, maybe.  Racist?  I don't think so.  Stupid to discuss his displeasure on the world stage?  Definitely yes.  There many examples of the traditions and unwritten rules of baseball that even within this country people don't agree with.  If everyone played the game the same way, there would be no new strategies or changes developed.

 

I enjoyed very much watching the Japanese team in the WBC.  I think this is precisely because they play a different style of baseball.  

 

I've long worried the unwritten rules have just become an increasingly common excuse for policing the way other cultures and players play the game.  And that most often it is Latin players that face the brunt of it.

 

If Ian Kinsler believes strongly his version of gentlemanly play is best....ok.  He can state that without specifically deriding other countries and the way they play.  He can play his way and champion that.  

 

Where it becomes a problem is when you start telling kids not to play another way, or that other countries have it wrong, or (worst of all) when you start heaving baseballs, throwing punches, or trying take out slides to make your point.  

[Mike Sixel]

I agree, he's probably not a bad guy. I agree, he probably spoke somewhat loosely w/o caution. I agree, there is probably some bias there, whether it is race or culture or whatever. I agree, he alas, has probably experienced issues given his religion/race/ethnicity. 

[SF Twins Fan]

 

I think what Kinsler said was foolish with a sprinkling of bigot dust. It is sad because I imagine he has been on the receiving end of hate because of his Jewish heritage.

 

In all sincerity, I believe baseball to be Puerto Rico's, DR's, and a handful of other country's National Sport.

 

The U.S.A.'s is Football. Without the talent these other countries have brought to this game, the evolution of baseball would be in a very sad state. It's time for U.S. Ball players and Fans (mostly white), to take the stick out of their rear ends and embrace the awesome things these other countries have contributed to the best Sporting Game ever invented, instead of spewing shallow, butt hurt, borderline racist comments at the players of these countries.

 

Baseball was invented in the U.S., but the U.S. does not own baseball's soul, it's these other countries who own it. They make the game fun.

 

Just so you're aware the saying "butt hurt" can be considered a homophobic slur by some people. I'm not saying you're homophobic but just letting you know that some people consider it as much.

 

Really the only reason I'm pointing this out is to make a point that what people say doesn't always mean they're being racist or homophobic. What Kinsler said might have come out wrong when he said it. I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt as I haven't seen a pattern from him to suggest that he is in fact racist.

[mikelink45]

Thanks for bringing this topic to the page.  I would like to shift it slightly to the Twins.  My biggest gripe with the "new" Twins approach is the lack of diversity in the FO and the Coaching ranks.  I believe people make racist remarks without thinking that what they say is racist because it echoes the comments of their contemporaries, but when we use terms that misrepresent another culture and consequently demean them because they do something that the speakers culture does not do - that is racism.  Different cultures celebrate in different ways which is why I travel and have spent time in numerous other countries, not in hotels, but in the countryside with the native people.

 

We need coaches who not only understand temperament, but have the ability to convey things to others who misunderstand.  World competition has helped us to sort out some of the racism, but in other ways has also highlighted it.  I recommend the movie Pele and also the movie Race about Jesse Owens and also 42.    There are more movies and more books, but we have to confront the judgmental statements and the racial overtones that are part of them.  

Many racial statements come from people in the majority race and they fail to see the implications.  Take the American Indian.  The book Undefeated by Steve Sheinkin about Jim Thorpe and the racism that the Carlisle Indians faced.  How may American Indians in Baseball were called "Chief"?  Or the book Hank Greenberg: The Hero of Heroes: John Rosengren and the antisemitism that abounded.

It is uncomfortable, but real and it is a topic we need to confront.  To a certain extent the WBC was a microcosm of this.  It was terrible downplayed in the press, but not in other  countries.  It allowed players to play the way they like with people that understood them and then we get ridiculous statements from people like Kinsler.  

It is also one other thing, it is the continuation of the baseball unwritten rules - perhaps the stupidest set of rules every conceived, about what is right in the oppositions mind, whether it is legal or not.

Thanks for the chance to express my thoughts.   

[Han Joelo]

Ironically, the epitome of that stoic, play the right way mentality would be characterized by never, ever, under any circumstances, claiming that you yourself are that way.  If you were, you'd just put your head down and keep grinding.

 

On another note, perhaps in another fifty years, expressing joy on the field will be so commonplace that crisply jogging the bases, jaw set, eyes flinty, and head down, will be seen as the ultimate form of showmanship.

 

Finally, "they" is a dangerous word to use when discussing things in this realm.  It implies a stereotyping of ALL people of a particular creed, culture, religion, or...race...as being something.  As many have pointed out above, Kinsler's words seem to imply he is speaking for all Americans.  As an individual, I might agree with that style, and I might even teach my kids to save the celebration for after they've won the Big One, but I strongly disagree with attaching simplistic labels to entire HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of people with one monochromatic brush.

 

Does anybody know if Leyland's quote was serious?  I'm hoping it was sardonic and wry.

 

postscript:  As a Twins fan, I was rooting for Puerto Rico, and would have loved to watch Berrios, Vargas, and Rosario having a reason to celebrate.  And Romero.