CodeG Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Should Roberto Clemente's number 21 be universally retired by the MLB? Why or why not? Information, in case you don't know Currently there are only 2 numbers in sports universally retired (Wayne Gretzky #99 in the NHL, and Jackie Robinson's #42 in the MLB) Gretzky's because he is the undoubtably best hockey player all time Jackie Robinson's because he was the first black player in the MLB (or at least since the AL was created) Clemente while he wasn't the first hispanic player in the MLB, he was the first great one. He had over 1,400 runs, .317 average, and is one of the few 3,000 hits club (with 3,000 exactly). But despite his great play, he is remembered more for his off-field performance, he was known for helping out the needy and spending lots of time with fans and the less fortunate. It was this that lead to his death in 1972, during Christmas a earthquake hit Nicaragua and Clemente organized a plan to send supplies, he would hire a pilot and a plane and fly the supplies there, as well as himself. The plane crashed on New Years Eve 1972, Clemente's body was never found. The argument against is that he has 'already been commemorated enough', MLB celebrates Roberto Clemente Day every year, as well as handing out the Roberto Clemente Award to the best humanitarian in baseball. And that if they did wouldn't then other players numbers get retired? Babe Ruth was the best player (batter and pitcher), Gehrig, Mays, Aaron, Cobb, Jeter, or even Ichiro being the first great (and really only potential HOF) to player in the MLB The argument for is that, while he wasn't the first hispanic player, he was the first great one and his contributions outside the sport will be unmatched, and that the league retired Robinson's number due to breaker the mold of the 'color barrier'. They say "Robinson opened a door for non-whites to play in the MLB, and Clemente created the bridge between whites and non-whites" So if the league is going to retire Robinson's shouldn't they retire Clemente's as well? My opinion, the league should, but I can see why they wouldn't. But, I also feel that they should even if #21 is only retired by the NL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sec19Row53 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 No. It's where I sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 No. I don't think Gretzky's number should have been retired either. Jackie Robinson was singular. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 No.However the choice should be left up to each individual team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynasty Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 I'm actually against retiring numbers in general (though Robinson is an exception). Clemente already has an award and day named after him; that's more than enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(probably)notabandwagonfan Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 1 hour ago, CodeG said: Babe Ruth was the best player (batter and pitcher), Gehrig, Mays, Aaron, Cobb, Jeter, or even Ichiro being the first great (and really only potential HOF) to player in the MLB 1 Jeter was hardly even the best player on his team throughout his career. Also, no. I agree with Gothamite: Robinson was singular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crashcarson15 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 1 hour ago, (probably)notabandwagonfan said: Jeter was hardly even the best player on his team throughout his career. Also, no. I agree with Gothamite: Robinson was singular. Hell, Jeter wasn't even the best shortstop on his team for a lot of his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 2 hours ago, Dolphins Dynasty said: I'm actually against retiring numbers in general (though Robinson is an exception). Clemente already has an award and day named after him; that's more than enough. Don't forget his bridge! But yeah, Clemente was a great player who is properly recognized. I'm fine with Gretzky's #99 being retired because of his sheer dominance of the game and the prominence he brought to the NHL (which they naturally squandered). And yet some people still think he wasn't as good as BAWBBY FACKIN AWWWW ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJWalker45 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 I would say no as well. If he had not died so tragically I don't think we'd hold him up with as much respect. He did do a lot to raise the profile of athletes as humanitarians outside of baseball though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smzimbabwe Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 If they hadn't retired it and made it unavailable, would anyone else dare to wear 99 in the NHL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 I read a biography on Clemente and he was an important and interesting guy. That said, mark me down for Robinson-only. That was the most important impact of sports on society. As an aside, I would say if it were to happen it would be all of MLB. There’s just not enough difference between the leagues anymore. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 11 minutes ago, smzimbabwe said: If they hadn't retired it and made it unavailable, would anyone else dare to wear 99 in the NHL? Some Puerto Rican Muslim from Mississauga would do it and make everyone really mad. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalieboy82 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 3 hours ago, Gothamite said: No. I don't think Gretzky's number should have been retired either. Jackie Robinson was singular. i agree with you on Gretzky. i never like retiring numbers league wide for one person. Jackie Robinson, i am OK with since he did a lot more for society then Gretzky did. so long and thanks for all the fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalieboy82 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 will the NBA retire Jason Collins number down the line (first gay player) so long and thanks for all the fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynasty Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 13 minutes ago, goalieboy82 said: will the NBA retire Jason Collins number down the line (first gay player) That's difficult to say, considering that we may have had other gay athletes in the NBA in the past who didn't have the courage to open up. Because of that, I say no, but in terms of actually opening up? Eh... I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalieboy82 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 1 minute ago, Dolphins Dynasty said: That's difficult to say, considering that we may have had other gay athletes in the NBA in the past who didn't have the courage to open up. Because of that, I say no, but in terms of opening up? Eh... I don't know. would say that there have been other gay athletes in the 4 major North American sports in the past so would those leagues retire there number. so long and thanks for all the fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 27 minutes ago, goalieboy82 said: will the NBA retire Jason Collins number down the line (first gay player) I tend to doubt that. The addition of Jackie Robinson to a major league roster was a huge deal. Jason Collins's distinction as the first openly-gay active player was a milestone, but it was a different era. I don't want to minimize his experiences, but there was a lot more division around Robinson. Fans, media, players, coaches legitimately believed (and said as much) that he should not be allowed in MLB. I really don't think there were a lot of people suggesting Collins should be barred from the league; just people that did not want to hear about because of their own insecurity or whatever. Segregation was not quite the factor with Collins as it was with Robinson. Again, it was a big deal and a key milestone. Actually, I always envisioned the first openly-gay male team-sport athlete to be a bigger star; someone with a secure roster spot. The fact that it was a journeyman on a ten-day contract was not how I envisioned it. That fact probably also makes number retirement even less likely. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 40 minutes ago, Dolphins Dynasty said: That's difficult to say, considering that we may have had other gay athletes in the NBA in the past who didn't have the courage to open up. Because of that, I say no, but in terms of actually opening up? Eh... I don't know. I dunno. Who’s to say that there weren’t black athletes in MLB before Robinson that just didn’t open up? It’s kinda the same thing. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalieboy82 Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 5 hours ago, Gothamite said: No. I don't think Gretzky's number should have been retired either. Jackie Robinson was singular. also with Gretzky, what if someone comes a long and breaks his records, will the NHL retire that persons number. so long and thanks for all the fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 12 minutes ago, goalieboy82 said: also with Gretzky, what if someone comes a long and breaks his records, will the NHL retire that persons number. I honestly don’t think his number was retired for any one record that will fall, but for being the superstar that brought the NHL into the mainstream. The first international superstar, as it were. Can’t take that away from him. But still doesn’t mean his number should have been retired league-wide. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.