Ask me about being a sports writer!

[MurphNKY]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just find it amazing so many don't understand the necessity of that sort of reporting.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it amazing that you seemingly don't understand that the story you worked on was hardly news and you have already admitted it to be, more or less, a fluff piece. I also find it amazing that you feel that people think you should "be a cheerleader" and not ask important questions. No one is saying that at all.

Asking the dude what his thoughts are on having such a dubious record is not an "important" question. Honestly, what sort of answer were you hoping to get out of him? Outside of him blowing up, you're going to get one of an infinite amount of athletes' cliche answers.

You seem like every other sportswriter who overvalues his knowledge of and importance to the game. The fact that you didn't understand the question about sportswriters being dumb or dumbing down their material tells me a lot.

I'm glad Barry Larkin snapped at you. Oh, boo hoo, an athlete ripped you a new one for asking a stupid question. Grow a pair of balls. It's good to see athletes who don't always play the media's game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Almost not even worth responding to...but, sheer stupidity and blatant vulture-ness requires a retort.

Sigh..one more time. It was a sidebar...perhaps you need me to explain what that is? And it was newsworthy (do you need me to explain that to you as well...the true definition, not uninformed ignorant opinion of the definition like you have?) because it not only broke a long standing MLB record, but coincided with the most cruicial point of the game.

The fact you can't see that is newsworthy is laughable is is your ridiculously defensive, weird post. Bottom line is this...I'm not going to argue true journalism, what is or isn't news with someone who is COMPLETELY ignorant of the fact and who is just looking to pick at me to get his jollies.

You sound like an idiot..truly. Take a moment and read and try to absorbe instead of forming an opinion off the bat and not caring what someone like me (who has life experience in the field) knows to be the case. It was newsworthy and you're a clueless moron if you don't think it was based on the what I've gone over constantly.

[Pudge714]

One more since you are from Cincy what do you think of Adam Dunn?

[MurphNKY]

[ QUOTE ]
One more since you are from Cincy what do you think of Adam Dunn?

[/ QUOTE ]

That topic has been quite the hot issue in Cincinnati Reds talk this year. I, more than most in this town, support Dunn and think the idea of him on the club is a great thing.

I mean, he has his down sides obviously, he's an awful defensive outfielder, for some reason can't and won't paly first base and gets very lazy (obviously) when they are losing or get to a point where they're clearly out of it.

That being said..wow..what a weapon! He has amazing power, he gets on base, he changes opposing teams' approach more than any other player. He's just exciting to have and, while he has his downside, he's got scary potential if he improves/matures over the next couple of years.

Unfortunately, though, the reality as I see it is simply that he's not a luxury the Reds can afford given their budget constraints. Being a small market team, they're almost forced to let him go this offseason. His option is $13 mil and - frankly - they have so many holes on the pitching staff and defensively...they need to build in that way. Plus, he really is a prototypical AL DH...so, his game is really better suited for the junior league.

It's a shame the organization is what it is...a small market victim of the current system. And, unlike Oakland, totally unable to think outside the box.

I can see Dunn fitting in very nicely with the Yankees next year...which would make me sick...but, it probably will happen.

[MikeyPatriot]

Murph,

Kyleb is right about you.

[prohornblower]

I'm not surprised Casey was the nicest. They call him "The Mayor" because ...everyone thinks...he's crooked?? lol. I don't know, but it's supposed to mean everyone likes him.

I heard that in a player poll of the nicest ballplayers, he was first on 46% of the players poll. That is ridiculous.

I saw his wife and kids outside Minute Maid at the '04 All-Star game. I'm assuming it was them because she was hot and tan and wearing a "Casey" jersey and pulling a couple small kids around, also with "Casey" jerseys, and no husband to be found. That is all.

[MurphNKY]

[ QUOTE ]
Murph,

Kyleb is right about you.

[/ QUOTE ]

He told me you like mooseballs...

Seriously...nothing personal I hope you understand. I'll agree to disagree and thank you for the thought provoking dialogue.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not surprised Casey was the nicest. They call him "The Mayor" because ...everyone thinks...he's crooked?? lol. I don't know, but it's supposed to mean everyone likes him.

I heard that in a player poll of the nicest ballplayers, he was first on 46% of the players poll. That is ridiculous.

I saw his wife and kids outside Minute Maid at the '04 All-Star game. I'm assuming it was them because she was hot and tan and wearing a "Casey" jersey and pulling a couple small kids around, also with "Casey" jerseys, and no husband to be found. That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]


Likely a wife but not definite.
Could be a sister or cousin or something too.

Could even just be some super-fan or something.
Obviously if you would go to a Reds game and see a few hundred people wearing Casey jerseys they aren't all likely to be his wife and kids.

[prohornblower]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not surprised Casey was the nicest. They call him "The Mayor" because ...everyone thinks...he's crooked?? lol. I don't know, but it's supposed to mean everyone likes him.

I heard that in a player poll of the nicest ballplayers, he was first on 46% of the players poll. That is ridiculous.

I saw his wife and kids outside Minute Maid at the '04 All-Star game. I'm assuming it was them because she was hot and tan and wearing a "Casey" jersey and pulling a couple small kids around, also with "Casey" jerseys, and no husband to be found. That is all.

[/ QUOTE ]


Likely a wife but not definite.
Could be a sister or cousin or something too.

Could even just be some super-fan or something.
Obviously if you would go to a Reds game and see a few hundred people wearing Casey jerseys they aren't all likely to be his wife and kids.

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't hear me say she was tan. lol. I don't think Sean Casey has a tan sister. This lady was dark, man. And pretty petite. Definitely worthy of being a player's wife. And she kept telling the kids, "Let's go see Daddy hit, come on.." Then one of the kids was like, "Hey mom, why do they call Daddy 'The Mayor'?"

lol. OK, maybe not, but I'd bet money it was his wife.

[Uncle Wimp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am sorry, but just because you are in the media doesn't give you the right to embarrass a guy further. If I was Larkin that dumbass question at that time would have made me furious as well.

I guess you don't see it because it was your job to do it and you feel like it is your right. I guess dumb questions just piss me off more than most people.

[/ QUOTE ]

You simply just don't understand the business and, honestly, there's no way you could since you haven't worked in it.

Bottom line is this...the media is not present to be cheerleaders for the teams they cover. It's not about writing fluffy, happy, gee whiz stories...it's about delivering timely, newsworthy items that surround the event you're assigned to cover - good or bad.

Whether or not YOU see it as a pertient news item, it was and that's not up for debate. It was a MLB record that had been held for many years. Plus, to give you perspective, I was using it as a 2-3 inch sidebar, not a main story.

It's foolish to think something like that shouldn't be reported and a question(s) shouldn't be asked. ESPECIALLY when it had a direct./immediate impact on the game.

Also, COME ON...I don't know where you get this anti-media stance..but, why would we want or seek out to anger or embarrass someone? Larkin was the best player on that team...to be foolish enough to have some sort of vendetta would be career suicide.

Also, you may want to perhaps give a little bit of allowance that maybe you don't possibly understand what it is reporters do or what their intent is when asking questions. Athletes, for the most part, are difficult to get good quotes from...so, what may appear as a dumbass/mean question to you...odds are there's a reason why it's being asked. Perhaps the reporter knows that asking a certain question a certain way is actually goign to get good information from the interviewee.

Open your mind a bit...realize it's the media's job to NOT cheerlead, but to report news as it happenes, when it happens, as soon as possible...and not make decisions based on upsetting someone.

Larkin should have handled it with class...instead he acted like a child. Again, watch news conferences and you'll see examples every week of athletes - pissed or not at questions about negative things - answering in a classy manner bc they get it. Larkin didn't and never will.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a print journalist myself and I'm embarrassed by some of the stupid questions I hear. Seriously, a 3-inch sidebar on that kind of MLB record is 2.95 inches more than the subject deserves, and Barry Larkin probably knew it. He probably felt you were asking just to stick it to him, a reporting tactic that is becoming more common in places like NYC. Increasingly, reporters blindside athletes with questions just to get a rise out of their subject. And we wonder in our profession why athletes are on edge.

I once covered a St. John's men's basketball game, and the NY media asked not one question about the game itself, but asked repeated questions about an injury to a star who didn't even play. As a reader, I want to know what happened. I can do without the gossip and trivia. I don't see the difference between the overblown MLB record that no fan would likely have known or cared about, and Patrick Rafter groupies. It all adds up to who cares?

And Murph, your arrogant and condescending response to the above comment, by a typical reader of the sports page, is the kind of thing that is also driving people away from newspapers.

[MurphNKY]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am sorry, but just because you are in the media doesn't give you the right to embarrass a guy further. If I was Larkin that dumbass question at that time would have made me furious as well.

I guess you don't see it because it was your job to do it and you feel like it is your right. I guess dumb questions just piss me off more than most people.

[/ QUOTE ]

You simply just don't understand the business and, honestly, there's no way you could since you haven't worked in it.

Bottom line is this...the media is not present to be cheerleaders for the teams they cover. It's not about writing fluffy, happy, gee whiz stories...it's about delivering timely, newsworthy items that surround the event you're assigned to cover - good or bad.

Whether or not YOU see it as a pertient news item, it was and that's not up for debate. It was a MLB record that had been held for many years. Plus, to give you perspective, I was using it as a 2-3 inch sidebar, not a main story.

It's foolish to think something like that shouldn't be reported and a question(s) shouldn't be asked. ESPECIALLY when it had a direct./immediate impact on the game.

Also, COME ON...I don't know where you get this anti-media stance..but, why would we want or seek out to anger or embarrass someone? Larkin was the best player on that team...to be foolish enough to have some sort of vendetta would be career suicide.

Also, you may want to perhaps give a little bit of allowance that maybe you don't possibly understand what it is reporters do or what their intent is when asking questions. Athletes, for the most part, are difficult to get good quotes from...so, what may appear as a dumbass/mean question to you...odds are there's a reason why it's being asked. Perhaps the reporter knows that asking a certain question a certain way is actually goign to get good information from the interviewee.

Open your mind a bit...realize it's the media's job to NOT cheerlead, but to report news as it happenes, when it happens, as soon as possible...and not make decisions based on upsetting someone.

Larkin should have handled it with class...instead he acted like a child. Again, watch news conferences and you'll see examples every week of athletes - pissed or not at questions about negative things - answering in a classy manner bc they get it. Larkin didn't and never will.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm a print journalist myself and I'm embarrassed by some of the stupid questions I hear. Seriously, a 3-inch sidebar on that kind of MLB record is 2.95 inches more than the subject deserves, and Barry Larkin probably knew it. He probably felt you were asking just to stick it to him, a reporting tactic that is becoming more common in places like NYC. Increasingly, reporters blindside athletes with questions just to get a rise out of their subject. And we wonder in our profession why athletes are on edge.

I once covered a St. John's men's basketball game, and the NY media asked not one question about the game itself, but asked repeated questions about an injury to a star who didn't even play. As a reader, I want to know what happened. I can do without the gossip and trivia. I don't see the difference between the overblown MLB record that no fan would likely have known or cared about, and Patrick Rafter groupies. It all adds up to who cares?

And Murph, your arrogant and condescending response to the above comment, by a typical reader of the sports page, is the kind of thing that is also driving people away from newspapers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I give up...I'm not going to defend something that anyone in the print industry would totally agree with me on. I highly doubt you have any association with any legitimate sports publication...or else you'd know better.

As far as being arrogant and condescending...c'mon, I've been getting railed for two days about something this stupid. It's ridiculous...I've explained clearly the logic behind it and the few vultures of you that continue to post about it simply don't get it.

You keep misconstruing "stupid questions" with "newsworthy or not newsworthy"...frankly, I'm over it. If you can't see the way that has gotten confused by the vultues, including you, then move on and pick at someone else.

And...dude...seriously, just because you don't think something is newsworthy doesn't mean that it isn't...get over yourself (speaking of arrogant).