Baseball

Willie Mays

In the mid-'60s, whites weren't ready for the best baseball player to be black, and blacks weren't ready for him to be black like Mays.

Willie Howard Mays Jr. was best known for his high, boyish voice; his huge wide-palmed hands, branching out at the wrists like mini baseball gloves; the oversize cap that flew off his head as he rounded the bases or roamed the outfield; and his trademark basket catch — maybe, most of all, The Catch, the one that robbed the Cleveland Indians’ Vic Wertz of extra bases in the first game of the 1954 World Series.

The Catch will make the 20th century highlight shows as Mays’ legacy. Maybe it’s the black-and-white film that makes it so breathtaking today — the field looks so vast, the fence so menacing, the outfielder so small and speedy, like a character in a grainy old silent movie viewed on fast-forward. But it was equally stunning in person. Writer Arnold Hano immortalized it in his book “A Day in the Bleachers.” Hano watched as Mays chased the ball, “turned full around, head down, running as hard as he could … I thought then: it will beat him to the wall.”

But it didn’t. With his back to home plate, Mays caught the ball over his left shoulder, and “then whirled and threw, like some olden statue of a Greek javelin hurler, his head twisted away to the left as his right arm swept out and around … And as he turned, or as he threw — I could not tell which, the two motions were welded into one — off came the cap, and then Mays himself continued to spin around after the gigantic effort of returning the ball whence it came, and he went down flat on his belly, and out of sight.” The Catch helped the Giants win the World Series in four games, their first series win since 1933, and their last to date.

Typically, the opinionated and sometimes ornery Mays himself insists that wasn’t his best catch: “The catch off Bobby Morgan in Brooklyn was the best catch I ever made,” Mays told Salon People, referring to a diving, backhanded grab of the Brooklyn Dodger’s line drive in September 1951 at Ebbetts Field. The impact stunned him briefly. “Jackie Robinson and [Giants manager] Leo Durocher were the first people I saw when I opened my eyes,” Mays recalls. That difference of opinion about The Catch is telling: Even a star as huge as Mays couldn’t control what fans revered about him, and at a certain point he had to give up.

Now, at 68, Mays says he doesn’t much care how he’s remembered. But others do. When baseball luminaries were polled after New York Yankees legend Joe DiMaggio died to see who had inherited the title of “greatest living player,” St. Louis Cardinals Hall of Fame pitcher Bob Gibson asked incredulously: “You’re assuming DiMaggio was the greatest living ballplayer?” Gibson believed Mays was the best even while DiMaggio was alive, and he has a lot of company. And while Mays insists he’s never cared about the title, his failure to secure it until DiMaggio’s death seemed a little strange to me, a holdover from a time when baseball wasn’t ready for its Ruths and Gehrigs and DiMaggios to give way to the Robinsons and the Mayses and the Aarons.

My gut feeling, eccentric and ill-substantiated as it may be, is that Mays never got the full acclaim he deserved, because he was the best in baseball when much of white America wasn’t ready for its best player to be black, and some of black America wasn’t ready for him to be black like Mays. I grew up in New York in the 1960s listening to white kids argue that the
Yankees’ Mickey Mantle was better than Mays, one circumstance in which
whites are decidedly disadvantaged. And I’ve wondered if that accounts for Mays’ ambivalent relationship with fame. He is known for his kindness to friends, but he can be cantankerous and contemptuous to strangers and fans, and even longtime friends and admirers describe him occasionally as “bitter.”

Some people scoff at the notion that Mays never got sufficient credit. “People are going to ask what you’ve been smoking if you try to say Willie Mays didn’t get enough acclaim,” San Francisco Giants president (and lifelong Mays fan) Peter Magowan told me when I ran that idea by him. “He was the highest-paid player in baseball in his day. Fans loved him.”

But Giants manager Dusty Baker agreed with me. Talking about Mays’ difficult relationship with the media, and with the baseball establishment for a time in the early ’80s, Baker offers: “What people don’t understand is what he went through. You’ll just never know. He played in a time when the world wasn’t as open-minded as it is now. And to this day, he’s never gotten what a Ruth or a Cobb or Lou Gehrig have. You ever see a Willie Mays movie? Me, either. So he’s had reason to be bitter. Whole bunch of us had reason.”

As baseball gathers in Boston Tuesday for its annual family reunion, the All-Star Game, it’s worth looking back at the 20-time All-Star, Willie Mays, who is now, officially, the “greatest living baseball player” — much better late than never.

As a 20-year-old rookie, Mays fought his promotion from the Triple-A Minneapolis Millers to the New York Giants in 1951. He told Giants manager Leo Durocher he couldn’t hit big-league pitching yet. Durocher reminded him he was batting .477 with Minneapolis, and asked simply, “Do you think you can hit .2-fuckin’-70 for me?” After Mays went 1-for-25 in his first six games with the Giants, the rookie collapsed in tears by his locker (tears figure prominently in stories about Mays; the high-strung perfectionist was prone to fainting spells and mysterious bouts of nervous exhaustion, for which he was twice hospitalized during his career). Durocher put his arm around the young center fielder and gave him a pep talk. Then he moved him down to eighth in the batting order, and Mays took off. He wound up National League Rookie of the Year, batting .2-fuckin’-74, with 20 home runs and 68 RBIs, and the Giants went to the World Series.

The city and the media fell for the speedy center fielder with the big bat and the squeaky voice. Photographers found him in Harlem, where he lived, playing stickball with neighborhood kids, before and after games. The stories about the stickball-playing rookie were affectionate, but depicted him as a childish, almost cartoonish figure, an image Mays never entirely lost. Some of the images were even more pernicious. In his rookie year the Sporting News ran a cartoon about the new star, captioned in dialect: “Ah gives base runners the heave ho!” and “Ah aims to go up in the world.”

Mays was drafted by the U.S. Army after one year in the majors, and the Giants did poorly without him. It was the two-year Army stint, plus his 12 years playing at San Francisco’s windy Candlestick Park, that cost him a shot at Ruth’s home-run record. Do the math: Mays finished his 22-year career with 660 homers, an average of 30 a season. Give him just 25 each for the two years he was in the service and he’s up to 710 (the Babe hit 714), and give him another 5 a year for time served at Candlestick — the renowned graveyard for long fly balls that would be homers anywhere else — and he would have hit 770, surpassing even Hank Aaron’s 755.

But that’s focusing on what he didn’t do. Mays is best remembered for what he did: He’s among baseball’s top 10 all-time leaders in home runs, RBIs, hits, runs scored and total bases. He stole more bases during his career than his recent rivals for greatest living player — Ted Williams, Aaron and DiMaggio — put together. He led the league in home runs three times, and in stolen bases four years in a row. He was Most Valuable Player in 1954 and 1965. He holds some offbeat records, too — for hitting the most home runs in extra innings (22), and being the only player in history to hit a home run in every single inning through the 16th.

Yet when people lucky enough to have seen him play talk about Mays, they don’t trade in records and statistics. They describe him as a perpetual-motion machine, a one-man show of nonstop agitation and cogitation, at the plate and in the field, a danger to his opponents from the first at bat to the last out of every game he played.

“He would routinely do things you never saw anyone else do,” says Giants president Magowan, who saw him play at New York’s Polo Grounds in his rookie year. “He’d score from first base on a single. He’d take two bases on a pop-up. He’d throw somebody out at the plate on one bounce. And the bigger the game, the better he played.”

But for every anecdote about the way Mays used his bat or glove, there’s at least one about the way he used his brain. “He played in the days before you had computerized printouts and videos and all the stuff we have now to tell you what a guy does against you,” says Dusty Baker. “And still there was nothing he couldn’t do.” Mays had an encyclopedic memory, Baker says, for the pitchers he faced, and their pitches. He was known to swing at good pitches, and even strike out if there was no one on base, early in a game, just to fool the pitcher into throwing the same pitch in a dangerous situation later — when he’d nail it.

Conservative pundit and baseball devotee George Will lists Mays among the smartest and best-disciplined players in baseball history. But he “received a lot of semi-disparaging praise as a ‘natural,’” Will wrote in “Men at Work,” because of “the residue of racism.” Mays was stealing other teams’ signs as a rookie, Will notes, and he routinely stayed on the field when the other team took infield practice, partly for the extra conditioning, and partly to watch the way his opponents positioned themselves when fielding, so he could know when to try for an extra base during the game.

His managers, from Durocher onward, sooner or later learned to leave him alone and let him call the shots in the outfield and at the plate. Some reporters, and occasionally his teammates, thought they were coddling their superstar. But when Herman Franks, who managed the Giants in the mid-1960s, was asked why he often deferred to Mays so frequently, he put it this way: “Because he knows more about those things than I do. You got any hard questions?”

But Mays had his share of disappointment in his stunning career. Unbelievably, when the Giants moved to San Francisco from New York in 1958, fans booed him, while embracing rookies like Orlando Cepeda, Willie McCovey and Jim Davenport. It was at least partly because provincial San Franciscans wanted to bury the New York past of the team they wooed West. Racism no doubt contributed to the ugly reception: Mays couldn’t buy a home in the city until the mayor intervened, and a brick was thrown through the window of his first residence.

And while Mays insists he doesn’t dwell on it, it had to sting that despite his stature — the Sporting News named him “the player of the decade” in 1969 — the Giants went to the World Series only once in the 1960s, although they had the second-best record in all of baseball through those years. In his personal life, he got divorced in the mid-’60s and wound up on the verge of bankruptcy, thanks to some bad financial advice and the fact that he played just before salaries started to skyrocket.

In 1972, Mays was traded to the New York Mets for pitcher Charlie Williams and $100,000. At first he was devastated, though with the Mets he made his fourth and final trip to the World Series, at 42, in 1973. But while he made key contributions to the Mets’ winning season — including hitting the game-winning single to clinch the division — he was widely criticized for playing past his prime. Early that year Roger Angell complained that Mays, whom he loved, “has so far resisted the clear evidence that he should retire … His batting reflexes are gone, and so is his arm … His failings are now so cruel to watch that I am relieved when he is not in the lineup. It is hard for the rest of us to fall apart quite on our own; heroes should depart.”

It’s clear that leaving baseball was one of the hardest passages of Mays’ life. “Oh, it was difficult. Very difficult. I’ll say that to this day,” he says. “You know, a lot of people said when I was 40, I should quit, but I don’t think so. You should play as long as you can and as long as you enjoy the game. In ’73, I wasn’t enjoying the game, so I quit in May, I retired, and they wouldn’t let me retire. So I finished up in the World Series. But I say to players: Play as long as you can, because you only have one chance.”

If retiring was hard, Mays’ worst professional blow was his ban from baseball in the early 1980s, when he went to work, as a meeter-and-greeter, for Bally’s Casinos. No baseball millionaire, he needed the money. But Commissioner Bowie Kuhn ruled that Mays and Yankees great Mickey Mantle, who worked for Claridge’s, could no longer hold even honorary jobs with major league teams because of their association with gambling. Baseball writers savaged Kuhn, noting that his anti-gambling edict didn’t affect owners like the Yankees’ George Steinbrenner or the Pittsburgh Pirates’ John Galbreath, both of whom owned racetracks.

The ruling devastated Mays, and his news clips from the early 1980s are a series of negative stories — Mays’ not showing up for old-timers games, the All-Star Game and at other public appearances. When Peter Ueberroth became commissioner in 1985, he brought Mays back into the fold, and Mays began working again with the San Francisco Giants. In recent years, as a baseball ambassador with the Giants, he’s had a higher profile again and gotten better media.

The baseball ban is still a bitter memory to Mays. When I brought it up during our mostly pleasant interview, he became hostile and the conversation never recovered.

But if Mays hates talking about his ban from baseball, there’s a subject he’s arguably even less happy talking about, and that’s race. But it’s unavoidable. He was born in Birmingham, Ala., which Martin Luther King Jr. proclaimed the most viciously segregated city in the South. Police Commissioner Bull Connor, who later became notorious for deploying fire hoses and police dogs against civil rights marchers, did the radio broadcasts of the Birmingham Barons, a local semipro baseball team. But very early in his biography, “Say Hey,” Mays felt compelled to put his Birmingham childhood in perspective:

I always enjoyed playing ball, and it didn’t matter to me whether I played with white kids or black. I never understood why an issue was made of who I played with, and I never felt comfortable, when I grew up, telling other people how to act. Over the years, a lot of organizations have asked me to be their spokesman, or have wanted me to make speeches about my experiences as a black athlete, or to talk to Congressmen about racial issues in sports. But see, I never recall trouble. I believe I had a happy childhood. Besides playing school sports, we’d play football against the white kids. And we thought nothing of it, neither the blacks nor the whites. It was the grownups who got upset … I never got into a fight that was caused by racism.

But just a page later, Mays notes that “life was rough for blacks in those days.” While his family never lived in abject poverty, it got by thanks to time-honored survival strategies of the Southern poor: extended-family homes, boarders, backyard farming and everybody bringing in a little income every way they could, from moonshine to baseball. Mays’ parents separated when he was a baby, and he lived with his father and two young cousins he called “Auntie.” His father, Kitty Kat, supported the family by working at a local steel mill, when it was open, as well as playing baseball in the semipro Industrial League. From the age of 14 onward, Willie was playing alongside him, augmenting the family’s budget while he was becoming a local baseball legend.

So Mays could write honestly that “life was rough for blacks in those days” and “I believe I had a happy childhood.” He was only 16 when he started playing with the Birmingham Black Barons of the Negro Leagues, and he thrived in the separate, unequal but glamorous black baseball world. The Black Barons outdrew the white Barons in attendance locally, and when he traveled he was a black-community celebrity. Ironically, it wasn’t until he left the Negro Leagues and signed with the New York Giants that he experienced racism’s sting directly: He couldn’t join the Giants Class A team in Sioux City, Iowa, because its management wouldn’t field a racially mixed team, so he was sent directly to the Class B team in Trenton, N.J.

When he got to the major leagues, Mays and other black players couldn’t stay in the same hotels as their white teammates in several cities, including Phoenix, where the team spent spring training. But in 1954, Jackie Robinson finally got the Brooklyn Dodgers to force St. Louis’ segregated Chase Hotel to let its black players stay there. And by the early 1960s, Mays found himself confronted less directly with white racism than with black demands that he use his celebrity and influence to ease the way for other blacks in baseball, and in society.

Perhaps the most painful controversy was the firestorm over Giants manager Alvin Dark, a veteran of the New York team who had played alongside Mays in the early ’50s, and managed the San Francisco team in the early ’60s. A conservative Christian Southerner, Dark was a paradox: He fielded the most colorful team in baseball, managing black and Latino stars like Mays, McCovey, Cepeda, Felipe Alou and his brother Matty. On days when Juan Marichal pitched, there might be only one or two white Giants on the field.

But Dark couldn’t overcome his backward attitudes toward race. He feuded constantly with the feisty Cepeda and tried to crack down on Latin music and the use of Spanish in the clubhouse. The conflict boiled over into public view twice: First, when Jackie Robinson interviewed Dark for his 1964 book “Baseball Has Done It,” the talkative Southerner went on patronizingly about the “colored boys” he managed, and opined that the civil rights movement was “being rushed too fast,” and “we from the South actually take care of the colored people, I think, better than they’re taken care of in the North.”

It got worse. After a disappointing Giants slump, the bitter manager unburdened himself to Newsday writer Stan Issacs. “We have trouble because we have so many Spanish-speaking and Negro players on the team,” Dark told Issacs. “They are just not able to perform up to the white ballplayer when it comes to mental alertness. You can’t make most Negro and Spanish players have the pride in their team that you can get from white players. And they aren’t as sharp mentally.” Dark singled out Cepeda and McCovey as slackers, but didn’t mention Mays.

The clubhouse erupted. Mays called a team meeting in his hotel room in Pittsburgh and, according to biographer Charles Einstein in “Willie’s Time,” he faced down Cepeda, who swore, “I’m not going to play another game for that son of a bitch.”

“Oh, yes, you are,” Mays retorted, “and let me tell you why.” He told his teammates Dark would eventually be fired for his remarks, and advised, “Don’t let the rednecks make a hero out of him.” And with typical Mays pragmatism, he argued that Dark’s racism had never interfered with his fielding the best team, because “he likes money.” Cepeda and others disagreed, but a players’ revolt never materialized, and Dark was fired, as Mays predicted, on the last day of the disappointing 1964 season. According to Einstein, Mays never talked to Dark again all season. (But on the eve of Cepeda’s belated induction into the Hall of Fame this month, Dark finally apologized to the Puerto Rican slugger.)

Yet Mays’ role in dampening the revolt against Dark would count against him among some black players. Both Jackie Robinson and St. Louis Cardinals star Curt Flood, who changed baseball history when he refused a trade to Philadelphia, would criticize his silence on civil rights issues. In his militant, moving memoir, “The Way It Is,” Flood wrote, “All but a few major leaguers share my view of baseball reality. Among those who do not, the most prominent is the great Willie Mays, who reports from privileged isolation of his huge success that he has nothing to complain about.”

Robinson went on in a similar vein in “Baseball Has Done It”: “Big league Negroes are aware. They are eager to help in the struggle … Rarely did anyone decline. Among those who did [was] Willie Mays … Willie is the highest paid star in baseball … I hope Willie hasn’t forgotten his shotgun house in Birmingham’s slums … Willie has faced the same problems that confront every Negro … What has he learned from life? We’d like to know. Willie didn’t exactly refuse to speak. He said he didn’t know what to say. I hope that he will think about the Negro inside Willie Mays’ uniform, and tell us one day.”

But to this day, Mays has rarely spoken about race publicly, not even to answer his critics. Perhaps his most revealing statement came in a 1974 speech he made on the occasion of his induction to the Black Athletes Hall of Fame. “This award means a great deal to me, because the time that I broke into baseball, I was like a young Jackie Robinson … I had a lot of hardship that no one knows about. I don’t like to speak about it because I was very ashamed of it. I’ve been told, Willie, you don’t care about your people. But that’s a lie. The suffering that I received in the last, I would say, 23 years, I couldn’t talk about because it was inside of me … I had to hold it.”

Mays’ defenders have pointed out the steps he has taken on behalf of African-American players, as well as his support of black youth with scholarships and other financial donations. The week we met, he was heading to New York to attend the graduation of a young student he’d encouraged as a child. But when I asked him if, given the quiet things he’s done for African-Americans, he was bothered by criticism that he didn’t speak out, he snapped: “Why? Why should I speak out? Yes, I did things; I still do. That’s not speaking out. I don’t speak out. I don’t do things for the notoriety. I’m the type of guy, I do what I like to do and if people don’t like it …”

He trailed off, and I thought about how, among the infinite number of ways racism scars black people, is the way it makes a political example — symbol, spokesman, victim, race-traitor — of individuals who’d rather just be people, and “do what I like to do.”

These days, though, Willie Mays gets to do what he likes to do. He greets his public when he feels like it, and he mostly ignores the media. He’s making an appearance at this year’s All-Star Game in Boston (a far cry from when he boycotted the last game held in San Francisco, in 1984, because he wasn’t offered a public role). He claims his 1951 catch against the Brooklyn Dodgers as his best, and doesn’t worry about the rest of the world’s insistence on The Catch. When he won the title of “greatest living baseball player” in the poll after DiMaggio’s death, he declined to be interviewed about it. Later, he told me:

“That doesn’t mean nothin’ to me. I got credit, but I don’t care about credit …

“I played my 22 years, and I’m proud of it.”

Joan Walsh

Joan Walsh is Salon's editor at large.

Guillen’s pro-Castro candor

The Miami Marlins' manager is lucky to get a suspension. Not so long ago, he might have received a car bomb.

A contrite Miami Marlins manager Ozzie Guillen gestures at a news conference on Tuesday. (Credit: AP/Lynne Sladky)

There’s not much reason to doubt that baseball manager Ozzie Guillen admires Fidel Castro. He said so five years ago in an interview with Men’s Journal. When asked to name the toughest man he knew, Guillen replied, “Fidel Castro. He’s a bull—- dictator and everybody’s against him, and he still survives, has power. Still has a country behind him. Everywhere he goes, they roll out the red carpet. I don’t admire his philosophy; I admire him.’’

No one cared about that macho thought because Guillen was skipper of the Chicago White Sox at the time. As the newly hired manager of the Miami Marlins, Guillen repeated the notion to Time last week–”I respect Fidel Castro,” he said. “You know why? A lot of people have wanted to kill Fidel Castro for the last 60 years, but that [expletive] is still there”–and he found himself on the brink of unemployment.

As Miami’s Cuban-American talk radio hosts whipped up a storm of protest, the Marlins denounced Guillen and suspended him for five games. On Tuesday the chastened manager repudiated his statements, said Castro was a bad man, and apologized “on my knees.” With Guillen’s job hanging in the balance, most sportswriters attributed the controversy to his big mouth: He is known for insulting gays and admitting he likes to get drunk often.

But Guillen’s real problem is Cuban Miami, where enforcing the anti-Castro party line is a more popular pastime than baseball, not the least because the Marlins owners arranged to stick the city’s taxpayers with the bill for their new $640 million ballpark in Little Havana while depriving local residents of legal parking spaces. The combination of Guillen’s candor, Miami politics, and the Marlins’ arrogance is what has brought the Cooperstown-bound skipper to the brink of being fired.

The city has never shown much tolerance for people who say nice things about Castro. In 2000, Jim Mullin, editor of the city’s alternative weekly New Times, compiled a chronology of violent intolerance that has few parallels in modern America. In 1975 a Cuban American man was murdered after advocating closer relations with Castro’s Cuba. In 1978, an anti-Castro talk radio host had his legs blown off by a car bomb because he dared criticize his fellow exiles for resorting to violence. In 1983, the Little Havana branch of a Miami bank was bombed because one of its executives had negotiated with the Castro government for the release of 3,600 political prisoners. In 1998, a bomb threat emptied a concert hall during a performance by Compay Segundo, a 91-year-old musician made famous by the movie “The Buena Vista Social Club.” All told, Mullin found more than 40 instances of bomb threats and explosions directed at people who had somehow offended the anti-Castro orthodoxy.

A 1994 Human Rights Watch report on the sorry state of free speech in Miami concluded,  the city is “dominated by fiercely anti-Communist forces who are strongly opposed to contrary viewpoints.” The HRW reports linked these forces to “acts of repression ranging from shunning to violence.” The reports found “significant responsibility” by the government at all levels, including “direct harassment by the government and government support of groups linked to anti-free speech behavior.”

That tradition continued this week when two local politicians injected themselves into the controversy by calling for Guillen’s firing. The call was echoed by a vigilante group known as Vigilia Mambisa, which describes itself as “a hard-line, right wing, Anti-Castro, Anti-Communist group of dedicated Cuban-American demonstrators … known for their rapid response to calls for protest aired on Miami Spanish-language stations.”  The group is calling for a boycott of the Marlins until Guillen is fired.

The problem is Miamians are already boycotting the Marlins. The team ranked 28th out of 30 major league teams in attendance last year. Dario Moreno, a professor of political science at Florida International University, said, “I don’t think this is a free speech issue. There’s a lot more tolerance than there was 30 years ago.” Moreno noted that south Florida’s three Cuban-American congressional representatives and the state’s Cuban-American senator have not called for Guillen to be fired.

“This has more to do with the Marlins and a community that invested large sums of money in their stadium over the objections of lots of people,” Moreno said. “The promise was that they would bring the community together and give us something to be proud of. It’s not working out very well.”

Moreno says he thinks Guillen may be able to keep his job if the Marlins muzzle Guillen (good luck with that) and reach out to the community. “The baseball fans are willing to let this one go by if he just promises to not talk politics,” Moreno said.

“As a Christian, I accept his apology,” said Alberto Muller, a former newspaper columnist who spent 15 years in a Cuban prison. “But in Miami, not everybody is a Christian.” Muller thinks Guillen will be fired.

A Miami Herald online reader survey found 57 percent of 2,500-plus respondents saying Guillen’s five-game suspension was sufficient punishment. If Guillen only loses his job for expressing admiration for Fidel’s toughness, it will be a sign of civic progress. Not long ago, he might have lost his legs or his life.

Continue Reading Close
Jefferson Morley

Jefferson Morley is a staff writer for Salon in Washington and author of the forthcoming book, Snow-Storm in August: Washington City, Francis Scott Key, and the Forgotten Race Riot of 1835 (Nan Talese/Doubleday).

The year of the baseball book

From a treatise on Yankee hating to a "people's history," a number of great books covered the national pastime

This article appears courtesy of The Barnes & Noble Review.

A simple and unsettling calculation reveals to me that this year marks the 40th anniversary of my coming to New England and setting up shop as a Red Sox fan. How innocent I was in that distant day: how little I understood the faces etched with pain, the haunted eyes, the lips that writhed in uttering “Yankees.” It did not take long to become afflicted by the same symptoms and, in my time here, certain Yankee-related events have been so traumatic that they are best designated by numerals alone: 1978 and 2003. The ALCS of 2004 (when the Red Sox came from a 0-3 game deficit to vanquish the evil ones) changed the region’s mental landscape — as, of course, did the subsequent World Championship(s). Since then, Yankee hating has become more of a pleasant pastime than a crippling mental and spiritual disorder.

Barnes & Noble Review
It is in this happier frame of mind that I turn to “Damn Yankees: Twenty-Four Major League Writers on the World’s Most Loved (and Hated) Team,” edited by Rob Fleder. Among the two dozen pieces is the funniest consideration of Yankee hating I have ever read. “Take Me Out to the Oedipal Complex” is illustrator and writer Bruce McCall’s confession that, because his father was a Yankee fan, he himself embraced hating the team, leaving little anti-Yankee pamphlets of his own making around the house for his father to stumble upon. It was his own “unique form of patricide” and constituted his identity: “We Yankee-haters, by God, knew who we were. We were losers. We also knew that the devoted Yankee fan, wallowing in his smug prosperity, betrayed a contemptible character flaw. He was not only a front-runner but also a weakling and a sissy and a stranger to the humiliation and failure that toughens the spirit, readying you for more humiliation and failure.”

All-out Yankee attacks are actually few in this book, Frank Deford’s may be summed up succinctly: Y$a$n$k$e$e$s, and Nathaniel Rich’s more forlornly: Mets fan. Charles Pierce, though a Red Sox supporter from birth, writes sympathetically of the proud ethnic divisions in his native Worcester, which — thanks to Joe DiMaggio — put an island of Italian-American Yankee fans in the middle of Massachusetts. Among the other contributors, who range from Jane Leavy to Colum McCann, are Peter Dexter with a mean-spirited, humblebragging consideration of Chuck Knoblauch, and Dick Telander with an appreciative one of Jim Abbott. Economist James Surowiecki provides an excellent assessment of George Steinbrenner’s contribution (marketing genius). Derek Jeter has two big fans in Roy Blout Jr. and Tom Verducci, while Bill James asks the question that may — or may not — have given you sleepless nights: “Did you ever find yourself wondering which season was the greatest ever by a Yankee catcher?” I will reveal the season (1950) and the player (Yogi Berra) because that is only the beginning. James, a driven man, pushes on, with amusing commentary, to rank the 100 best seasons for Yankee catchers.

The catcher who appears most often in high places on that list is also the costar of Harvey Araton’s “Driving Mr. Yogi: Yogi Berra, Ron Guidry, and Baseball’s Greatest Gift.” Guidry, who had played for the Yankees during Berra’s time as a coach and last tenure as manager, has, for over a decade, picked up the ancient backstop every spring at the Tampa airport to drive him to the Yankee training camp. Around that annual journey are spun a number of tales including the story of Berra’s mighty fourteen-year umbrage at a highhanded George Steinbrenner, which was finally resolved in a July 1999 celebration of Berra’s return to Yankee Stadium. The event was elevated by the perfect game pitched that afternoon by David Cone — triumphantly bringing back the memory of Berra’s own role in Don Larsen’s perfect game in the 1956 World Series. We find here too the introduction of frogs’ legs by the Louisianan Guidry into Berra’s diet and a sense of the deep friendship between two great baseball men.

The title of Tim Wendell’s “Summer of ’68: the Season That Changed Baseball, and America, Forever” is one that could be used, mutatis mutandis, as we say around the farm, for any number of seasons. Nonetheless, outside the park, 1968 was a doozy, marked by assassinations, riots, an increasingly unpopular war, and a violent Democratic Convention in Chicago. The effects of this were felt inside the park as racial tensions increased and a number of players had to interrupt their time on the field for military training. As for the game itself: it was a season of phenomenal pitching, with the magnificently fearsome Bob Gibson emerging with a preternatural 1.12 ERA (and 1.67 in the World Series). Alas, the season’s hurling greatness changed the game forever: the next year saw the mound lowered by six inches and the designated hitter appear in the American League. The book includes excellent photographs and is strongest when it concentrates on baseball.

The “gentlemen’s agreement” that banned black players from organized profession baseball was struck behind closed doors toward the end of the nineteenth century. In “Conspiracy of Silence: Sportswriters and the Long Campaign to Desegregate Baseball,” Chris Lamb shows that the ban was maintained in great part by its existence never being acknowledged. The book is a chronicle of bad faith, on the part of owners and organizational big bugs, and of a press that remained generally silent on the subject. It is also an absorbing account of how that silence was finally broken. Key to this were a few white sports reporters, a few black ones from the black press, and the (Communist) Daily Worker, a paper that, until the Nazi-Soviet Pact of 1939 was far more influential than most of us can quite take in today. The entrance of the United States into the war against a racist regime made baseball’s own racial hypocrisy increasingly untenable, which fact was increasingly reflected in the formerly circumspect mainstream press. In the largest sense, Lamb shows how pivotal the desegregation of baseball was to that of the nation as a whole.

Mitchell Nathanson claims that “A People’s History of Baseball” “is baseball history from an alternative point of view,” and to that end it visits some of organized professional baseball’s most notorious institutions and episodes, among them segregation; the Reserve Clause; the banning of players from the game without due process; the blind eye turned by club owners to “performance-enhancement drugs” and subsequent scapegoating of a few players; and the battle over who owns baseball statistics. Nathanson’s goal is to reclaim baseball and its story from those who have spun a falsely uplifting version, first among the guilty being Henry Chadwick (a.k.a. the Father of Baseball), who promoted ideologically skewed statistics (in Nathanson’s opinion) and offered baseball as an edifying example of individual sacrifice and teamwork (bad). To offer Chadwick as villain is a real stunner to my way of thinking, but in this case even more so as his success in making statistics integral to baseball made possible what Nathanson considers — most eccentrically — to be the means of restoring the game to both players and fans. That is fantasy baseball: the game that takes the actual game out of baseball.

Continue Reading Close

The Marlins’ bizarre new look

The team's revamped logo involves a whimsical rainbow swoosh. The effect is anything but intimidating

So far the biggest story to come out of baseball’s early off-season isn’t some splashy free agent signing or the abrupt retirement of St. Louis Cardinals manager Tony LaRussa, but that of the logo and uniform redesign of the Florida Marlins. The new look was officially announced on Friday, and if you haven’t seen them already, you might not believe your eyes. In fact, when some of the images of the new logo were leaked there was such shock and disbelief by the baseball world, most people assumed it was a farce, calling the look everything from “Hawaiian Shaved Ice” to “Push-up Pop” to “Rainbow Bright.”

Florida Marlins

The rebrand was planned as part of the team’s big move to their new stadium, New Marlins Ballpark (which also sports a logo with a rainbow motif), a baseball-only park with a retractable roof to keep the tropical rains away. With a name like New Marlins Ballpark, the powers-that-be decided the team needed a new identity as well. So not only are the uniform colors radically different, but the team will now be called the Miami Marlins.

Gone is the teal, silver and black color scheme the team has worn since its inception in 1993 (and in which it won two World Series), and in its place, as you can see, is a curious combination of oranges, yellows, blues and assorted other bright hues. Gone too is the detailed illustration of the eponymous fish, bursting around and through the logo with furious determination. Instead there is now a whimsical suggestion of a marlin swooshing from some unclear source out of the Aztec-influenced M letterform. Whatever its origin, one thing is sure: The overall effect is anything but intimidating.

In addition to the new logo and color scheme, new uniforms will also be revealed. Again, this look isn’t certain to be the one unveiled on Thursday (and in light of all the backlash, it’s entirely possible the Marlins’ design team has gone back to the drawing board) but this is what has been floating around the ether and seems to make sense based on the logo. White home jerseys with black caps. Away grays with a radically out of place blue cap (that strangely echo the original Tampa Bay Devil Rays uniforms). And some assortment of combinations for Fridays and other games.

Apparently the team’s (and stadium’s) colorful new look is meant to reflect the multicultural heritage of the many diverse ethnic groups living in the area. But you have to wonder if the Marlins’ head honchos learned nothing from the atrocious Houston Astros uniforms of the mid-1970s (known as the “rainbow era”) that made even Nolan Ryan and J.R. Richard, at left (two of the era’s most dominating pitchers), look a tad sheepish.

Not to say orange is a bad choice for a sports team (the Giants, Orioles and Tigers pull it off pretty well), but it does require some tasteful design skill and a healthy grasp of workable color palettes.

Perhaps it’s not the worst logo ever (for some ideas on that front click here); there are always the Chicago White Sox shorts and collared unis from the ’80s to claim that distinction. But if this is indeed the look of the new Miami Marlins, my guess is it won’t be around long.

Copyright F+W Media Inc. 2011.

Salon is proud to feature content from Imprint, the fastest-growing design community on the web. Brought to you by Print magazine, America’s oldest and most trusted design voice, Imprint features some of the biggest names in the industry covering visual culture from every angle. Imprint advances and expands the design conversation, providing fresh daily content to the community (and now to salon.com!), sparking conversation, competition, criticism, and passion among its members.

Continue Reading Close

Exonerating Bill Buckner

25 years after the Red Sox infielder's infamous World Series error, we look at what really happened that October

(Credit: AP)

Bill Buckner’s error in the 1986 World Series – 25 years ago today, a day of infamy for Red Sox fans — is one of the two most famous plays in World Series history. (Willie Mays’ catch in the 1954 fall classic is the other.)

Like Mays’ over-the-shoulder catch, Buckner’s booboo is entrenched in American folklore. Jimmy Fallon’s Red Sox fanatic in “Fever Pitch,” distraught over breaking up with his girlfriend, watches Buckner’s play over and over on his VCR. During congressional hearings in 2008, U.S. Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Ky., called former Treasury Secretary John Snow, then-SEC chief Christopher Cox and former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan “three Bill Buckners.” On “Curb Your Enthusiasm” this season, Larry David loses a softball game when a ball rolls between his legs; his coach screams, “You Buckner-ed me!”

Everyone knows that Buckner lost the 1986 World Series for the Red Sox. But what everyone knows is wrong.

At the time, the Red Sox were burdened with 68 years of frustration; their last championship was in 1918. Leading three games to two against the New York Mets, Boston was ahead by a score of 5-3 in the bottom of the 10th inning. Red Sox pitcher Calvin Schiraldi got two quick outs. In the Sox locker room the champagne was iced, and the scoreboard flashed “Congratulations Red Sox.”

Gary Carter, Kevin Mitchell and Ray Knight all singled, and the score was 5-4 with Mitchell on third. Reliever Bob Stanley came into the game to pitch to Mookie Wilson and threw a wild pitch that brought Mitchell home and tied the score. But it’s the next play that still has Red Sox fans screaming in the middle of the night.

Stanley threw a sinker-ball, designed to produce ground balls to infielders. What was supposed to happen did happen—Mookie Wilson tapped a slow grounder at Buckner at first base. But the ball rolled between Buckner’s legs, and the Mets won in the most incredible finish to a World Series game ever. (See it with commentary by the inimitable Vin Scully.)

Buckner’s career changed in an instant. Up to that moment, he was one of the game’s great unsung hitters. He’d batted better than .300 seven times in his career, winning the 1980 American League batting title. He led the league four times in assists. During that crucial September 1986 playoff run, he carried the team, hitting .340 with eight home runs. All that was soon to be forgotten.

The scholar Stephen Jay Gould (in Natural History magazine) called him “a gallant first baseman and a veteran with a long and distinguished career.”

“For weeks,” wrote Gould, “manager John McNamara had been benching Buckner for defensive purposes during the last few innings of games with substantial Red Sox leads, but after a long and hard season, Buckner’s legs were shot … he could hardly bend down.”

Plagued with chronic ankle soreness—he was the first player to wear high-top baseball cleats to ease the pain— Buckner had been relieved in three previous series games by Dave Stapleton. Why was he still playing when Wilson hit the ground ball? Because McNamara was sentimental; he wanted his regulars on the field when the Red Sox won the series.

But Buckner’s error did not lose the championship for the Red Sox; it didn’t even lose Game 6 for them — the Red Sox had already blown their two-run lead. Two nights later, with another chance at the ring, Boston lost 8-5.

(Buckner, incidentally, had two hits in four at-bats and scored a run in Game 7.)

Red Sox fans cried “Curse of the Bambino”—the punishment Boston supposedly merited for selling Babe Ruth to the Yankees in 1919—but the focus of the curse that season was Buckner. Yet Buckner did not put the tying runs on base. He didn’t throw the wild pitch that made it 5-5. He did not make the decision to keep his defensive replacement on the bench. Had he made the play, the Red Sox could have lost the game anyway.

When so many others contributed as much or more to the Red Sox defeat, why has history made Buckner the goat? Perhaps Gould said it best when he suggested that in the collective minds of Red Sox fans, “If Buckner fields the ball properly, the Sox win their first World Series since 1918 and eradicate the Curse of the Bambino. In this scenario, Buckner’s miscue marks the unkindest bounce of all, the most improbable trivial little error sustained by a good and admired man. What hath God wrought?”

What God wrought, perhaps, was a curse on both teams. The New York Mets have not won another World Series since; their greatest stars on that 1986 team —pitcher Dwight Gooden and slugging outfielder Darryl Strawberry—saw their careers cut short by drug abuse. In 2007 and 2008, the team crumbled down the stretch and missed the playoffs. And this year, the Red Sox, who seemingly broke the Curse by winning the World Series in 2004 and 2007, suffered the all-time worst collapse in baseball history, losing 20 of their last 27 games.

But that was kid’s play for what God had in mind for Donnie Moore. Red Sox fans were quick to forget that they never would have had a crack at their own little tragedy had it not been for Donnie Moore. Boston made it to the World Series by beating the then-Anaheim Angels in the American League Championship Series. After four games, they were in better shape against the Red Sox than the Red Sox ever were against the Mets.

On Oct. 12, 1986, playing in Anaheim, the Angels were up three games to one with a 5-2 lead going into the top of the ninth. Then, a real curse revealed itself. Don Baylor hit a two-run homer to make it 5-4. Moore had been a fine relief pitcher that season, tallying 21 saves. With two outs and the tying run at second, Moore got two strikes on Dave Henderson, then tried to slip a fastball by the Red Sox outfielder. The pitch changed his life. Henderson slammed it to deep left field for a two-run homer. On TV, Al Michaels screamed, “Unbelievable! Astonishing! With one strike away Anaheim Stadium was one strike away from turning into Fantasyland! You’re looking at one for the ages here!”

Like Buckner, Moore was damned for losing the big one. What was forgotten is that the Angels came back to tie it, and Moore, still in the game, induced Jim Rice to ground into a double play. But in the 11th, the Red Sox scored another run off Moore on a sac fly by – of course – Dave Henderson. The Angels lost 7-6.

But that still left them with two chances to win their first-ever pennant and trip to the World Series. The Sox blasted the Angels pitching for 19 runs over two games and went on to meet their destiny against the Mets, without the slightest thought that they owed a great big ugly debt to sheer luck – one that would soon be repaid with interest.

Still, to Angels fans, it had all come down to the pitch that Donnie Moore threw to Dave Henderson. All the subsequent chances that they lost were the evil spawn of that one pitch.

For the next two years, Moore couldn’t walk out on the field without being booed, crushed and heckled. When he left the ballpark, fans were lineup to scream insults, even when he won. Moore began to drink heavily and his talents eroded. On July 18, 1989, Moore got into a shouting fight with his wife at their home in Anaheim Hills. He went to his closet, got an automatic pistol and, in front of his children, shot his wife and one of his daughters. The daughter drove herself and her mother to the hospital; they survived. Moore did not. Back in the house, with his son pleading for him to drop the gun, Moore shot and killed himself.

Now that is tragedy. That puts Bill Buckner’s error in perspective. It’s only a game, unless you choose to regard it as something more.

Meanwhile, the infamous Buckner ball, once owned by Charlie Sheen, is up for auction on eBay, asking price $1 million. The bid will close at the exact minute of the 25th anniversary of the play.

Now a successful businessman, Buckner has lived down the error by turning the joke on himself. On “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” he won the cheers of a New York crowd by catching a baby dropped from a burning building.

In 2008, he threw out the first pitch of the Red Sox home opener and got a standing ovation from the sell-out crowd. Somewhere, one has to feel, the Bambino himself was applauding.

Continue Reading Close

Allen Barra's next book is "Mickey and Willie -- The Parallel Lives of Baseball's Golden Age," from Crown.

What baseball tells us about racism

Most home-plate umpires are white -- and they seem to be hurting the careers of minority pitchers

Despite recent odes to “post-racial” sensibilities, persistent racial wage and unemployment gaps show that prejudice is alive and well in America. Nonetheless, that truism is often angrily denied or willfully ignored in our society, in part, because prejudice is so much more difficult to recognize on a day-to-day basis. As opposed to the Jim Crow era of white hoods and lynch mobs, 21st century American bigotry is now more often an unseen crime of the subtle and the reflexive — and the crime scene tends to be the shadowy nuances of hiring decisions, performance evaluations and plausible deniability.

Thankfully, though, we now have baseball to help shine a light on the problem so that everyone can see it for what it really is.

Today, Major League Baseball games using QuesTec’s computerized pitch-monitoring system are the most statistically quantifiable workplaces in America. Match up QuesTec’s accumulated data with demographic information about who is pitching and who is calling balls and strikes, and you get the indisputable proof of how ethnicity does indeed play a part in discretionary decisions of those in power positions.

This is exactly what Southern Methodist University’s researchers did when they examined more than 3.5 million pitches from 2004 to 2008. Their findings say as much about the enduring relationship between sports and bigotry as they do about the synaptic nature of racism in all of American society.

First and foremost, SMU found that home-plate umpires call disproportionately more strikes for pitchers in their same ethnic group. Because most home-plate umpires are white, this has been a big form of racial privilege for white pitchers, who researchers show are, on average, getting disproportionately more of the benefit of the doubt on close calls.

Second, SMU researchers found that “minority pitchers reacted to umpire bias by playing it safe with the pitches they threw in a way that actually harmed their performance and statistics.” Basically, these hurlers adjusted to the white umpires’ artificially narrower strike zone by throwing pitches down the heart of the plate, where they were easier for batters to hit.

Finally, and perhaps most important, the data suggest that racial bias is probably operating at a subconscious level, where the umpire doesn’t even recognize it.

To document this, SMU compared the percentage of strikes called in QuesTec-equipped ballparks versus non-QuesTec parks. Researchers found that umpires’ racial biases diminished when they knew they were being monitored by the computer.

Same thing for high-profile moments. During those important points in games when umpires knew fans were more carefully watching the calls, the racial bias all but vanished. Likewise, the same-race preference was less pronounced at high-attendance games, where umps knew there would be more crowd scrutiny.

Though gleaned from baseball, these findings transcend athletics by providing a larger lesson about conditioned behavior in an institutionally racist society.

Whether the workplace is a baseball diamond, a factory floor or an office, when authority figures realize they are being scrutinized, they are more cognizant of their own biases — and more likely to try to stop them before they unduly influence their behavior. But in lower-profile interludes, when the workplace isn’t scrutinized and decisions are happening on psychological autopilot, pre-programmed biases can take over.

Thus, the inherent problem of today’s pervasive “post-racial” fallacy. By perpetuating the lie that racism doesn’t exist, pretending that bigotry is not a workplace problem anymore, and resisting governmental efforts to halt such prejudice, we create the environment for our ugly subconscious to rule. In doing so, we consequently reduce the potential for much-needed self-correction.

Continue Reading Close
David Sirota

David Sirota is a best-selling author of the new book "Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at www.davidsirota.com.

Page 1 of 81 in Baseball