- Blogroll Me!
-
Cognoscenti, Agents Provocateurs and Casual Acquaintances
- Ace of Spades
- Ambivablog
- Anchoress
- Ankle Biting Pundits
- Becker & Posner
- Betsy's Page
- Big Lizard
- Tim Blair
- Bullwinkle
- Crooked Timber
- Dean's World
- Drudge
- The Fourth Rail
- Hit & Run
- Instapundit
- Jot Sheet
- Lileks
- LittleGreenFootballs
- Michelle Malkin
- Megan McArdle
- Minority Report
- Myopic Zeal
- Outside the Beltway
- Patterico
- Powerline
- Rachel Lucas
- Real Clear Politics
- Shape of Days
- Straight White Guy
- TMH Bacon Bits
- Truth Laid Bear
- Velociworld
- Venomous Kate
- Vodkapundit
- WILLisms
- Wizbang
- Yippee-Ki-Yay!!
- Althouse
- Above the Law
- Anonymous Lawyer
- Beldar
- Legal Pad
- Lowering the Bar
- Orin Kerr
- Overlawyered
- Point of Law
- Prof. Ribstein
- Rule of Law
- Volokh
- Jim Morin's Cartoons
- Cape Cod Chowder
- DaleyBlog
- Hub Blog
- Hub Politics
- Left Wing Escapee
- mASSbackwards
- Mass Federalist
- The Modern American
- Pundit Review
- Squaring the Boston Globe
- Sudden Stop
- Toys in the Attic
- Universal Hub
- Weekend Pundit
- Weekly Dig
- Mark Coffey
- Polipundit
- Scurvy Wench (Arrrrgh)
- Strata-sphere
- Tiger Hawk
- Viking Pundit
- Modern Drunkard Magazine
- Phat Phree
- Point Five
- Totally Absurd Archives
- Utter Wonder
- Oronte Churm
Truly Different/Et Alia
- Museum of Left Wing Lunacy
- Post Secret
- Jargon Database
- Detail Cops
- My Landscaping Adventure
- Pick It Up
- Motor Scooters & Brooms
- Be Careful What You Wish For
- Scaling the Pinnacle of Lunacy
- Pervis the Great Fisherman
- Partisan Politics & Filibusters
- On Morality & Hard Cases
- Spending Republican STyle
- And So It Begins
- Politics of Roe Reversal
- One Collosal Fraud
- Crybabies In Texas
- Reflections on Alito Hearings
- Real Lobbying Reforms
- Gerrymander Rules
- Bare Knuckles In The Limelight
- Limelight Fades to Black
- Bar Business Boston-style
- Big Mess, Dig
- Another Kennedy Tragedy
- Joan Plays Ball
- World Class My Ass
- Hot Air
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- December 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- May 2008
My BestWork
Humor
National Politics
Boston Politics
Archives
Law Blogs
Pulitzer Prize-winning Cartoonists
New England Bloggahs
Coalition of the Chillin
(Partial List)
Humor
THIS IS MY VIRTUAL LIVING ROOM. COME ON IN AND SAY HELLO. THE BAR IS OVER IN THE CORNER -- HELP YOURSELF, BUT MIND YOUR MANNERS.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Red Sox Make A Statement
The Red Sox did what most expected they would do, and yanked Chris House's season tickets for the entire year. In doing so, they have surely made a statement. But I think they need to make their statement clearer.
As the Sox organization points out, the season ticket agreement contains the following language:
"interfering with the play of the game in any way . . . will be grounds for . . . cancellation of subscription privileges.''
Was House punished because he interfered with play, or because he came into contact with Sheffield? Is any first-row fan who reaches over the fence to snag a ball now going to be ejected, or do you have to have the bad luck of doing it in close proximity to an opposing player?
What about the people in row one of the Green Monster seats? If one of them reaches over the wall and catches a ball that was clearly in play, does he get ejected? How about on the left field foul line?
I appreciate the Red Sox making a statement here. The effect of House's action created a potentially dangerous situation, even if his action itself was just stupid. But I think he was somewhat of a victim of his own stupidity. If Sheffield had been ten feet away, there would have been no event at all. If Sheffield had been ten feet away and House had come into contact with the ball, he would have had more than his season tickets to worry about losing.
The Sox need to make it a bright line rule. If you interfere with play, you will be ejected and your season tickets will be revoked. Period.
As the Sox organization points out, the season ticket agreement contains the following language:
"interfering with the play of the game in any way . . . will be grounds for . . . cancellation of subscription privileges.''
Was House punished because he interfered with play, or because he came into contact with Sheffield? Is any first-row fan who reaches over the fence to snag a ball now going to be ejected, or do you have to have the bad luck of doing it in close proximity to an opposing player?
What about the people in row one of the Green Monster seats? If one of them reaches over the wall and catches a ball that was clearly in play, does he get ejected? How about on the left field foul line?
I appreciate the Red Sox making a statement here. The effect of House's action created a potentially dangerous situation, even if his action itself was just stupid. But I think he was somewhat of a victim of his own stupidity. If Sheffield had been ten feet away, there would have been no event at all. If Sheffield had been ten feet away and House had come into contact with the ball, he would have had more than his season tickets to worry about losing.
The Sox need to make it a bright line rule. If you interfere with play, you will be ejected and your season tickets will be revoked. Period.