STL FANATIC Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 Bruce Sutter's number 42 is retired for the Cardinals, personally I don't like how they are wearing a number of a former Cardinal who has his number retired, while non of the others get worn. However, I think it is a great way to remember Robinson.I like Bruce Sutter as much as the next Cardinals fan, but I hardly think he can be mentioned in the same company with Jackie Robinson.He can't, and yet his number IS still retired, so I've had the same thoughts. Obviously the weight of wearing 42 to honor Robinson is so great that it doesn't matter, but it'd make me more comfortable if there was a statement from Sutter endorsing it. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 He can't, and yet his number IS still retired, so I've had the same thoughts. Obviously the weight of wearing 42 to honor Robinson is so great that it doesn't matter, but it'd make me more comfortable if there was a statement from Sutter endorsing it.You're kidding me, right? 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deliver2david Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 He can't, and yet his number IS still retired, so I've had the same thoughts. Obviously the weight of wearing 42 to honor Robinson is so great that it doesn't matter, but it'd make me more comfortable if there was a statement from Sutter endorsing it.You're kidding me, right?No. He's STL FANATIC. Loves those St. Louis teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEAD! Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 He can't, and yet his number IS still retired, so I've had the same thoughts. Obviously the weight of wearing 42 to honor Robinson is so great that it doesn't matter, but it'd make me more comfortable if there was a statement from Sutter endorsing it.You're kidding me, right?No. He's STL FANATIC. Loves those St. Louis teams.really? Man, I thought he loved St. Lucia.... I saw, I came, I left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred T. Jane Posted April 13, 2007 Share Posted April 13, 2007 really? Man, I thought he loved St. Lucia.......and here I thought it was St. Lawrence, South Dakota the whole time! [Croatia National Team Manager Slavan] Bilic then went on to explain how Croatia's success can partially be put down to his progressive man-management techniques. "Sometimes I lie in the bed with my players. I go to the room of Vedran Corluka and Luka Modric when I see they have a problem and I lie in bed with them and we talk for 10 minutes." Maybe Capello could try getting through to his players this way too? Although how far he'd get with Joe Cole jumping up and down on the mattress and Rooney demanding to be read his favourite page from The Very Hungry Caterpillar is open to question. --The Guardian's Fiver, 08 September 2008 Attention: In order to obtain maximum enjoyment from your stay at the CCSLC, the reader is advised that the above post may contain large amounts of sarcasm, dry humour, or statements which should not be taken in any true sort of seriousness. As a result, the above poster absolves himself of any and all blame in the event that a forum user responds to the aforementioned post without taking the previous notice into account. Thank you for your cooperation, and enjoy your stay at the CCSLC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFoA Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I agree with Torii Hunter: It's turning into overkill. It was okay when I figured that it was just gonna be the entire Dodger team and one player, one coach, and the manager if they wanted to from each team. But when you've got other whole teams and some guys just wearing it just because then it's overkill. IMO, only Ken Griffey Jr. and others under the circumstance should wear it because other than that it's overkill.Then again, there really isn't enough of a way to honor the accomplishments and impact that Jackie Robinson had on sports and American history & culture as a whole, so idk. It's a catch 22. I think it's too much, but it really can't be too much. Â Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dilbert Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 an entire team wearing 42? Jackie is rolling over in his grave! Whatever happend to teams wearing patches. Changing numbers is too much Signature intentionally left blank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oz615 Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 One player for each team is would've been enough or better yet If the entire team insist on wear #42 they should game jerseys during BP and auction off the jersey w/ proceeds going to the Jackie Robinson Foundation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 He can't, and yet his number IS still retired, so I've had the same thoughts. Obviously the weight of wearing 42 to honor Robinson is so great that it doesn't matter, but it'd make me more comfortable if there was a statement from Sutter endorsing it.You're kidding me, right?Why would I be kidding?What doesn't make sense to you about this...Jackie Robinson did a great thing and deserves this honor, and ultimately he should get it regardless. But number 42 is retired in St. Louis for Bruce Sutter as well. Bringing it out of retirement without considering one of the men it is retired for is a questionable practice as far as I'm concerned. Again, what Robinson did makes it worth doing anyways, but I'd be more comfortable if Sutter said he thought it was an awesome tribute too.Why is that so wrong?Oh, because you'll try and call me out for anything anymore (you may note I was the second person in this thread to express these sentiments)? Fair enough.And frankly I don't see why that has anything to do with me being a St. Louis guy at all, other than that I'm aware of the situation because I follow the Cardinals. There's nothing homer about feeling that way.I agree with Torii Hunter: It's turning into overkill. It was okay when I figured that it was just gonna be the entire Dodger team and one player, one coach, and the manager if they wanted to from each team. But when you've got other whole teams and some guys just wearing it just because then it's overkill. IMO, only Ken Griffey Jr. and others under the circumstance should wear it because other than that it's overkill.Then again, there really isn't enough of a way to honor the accomplishments and impact that Jackie Robinson had on sports and American history & culture as a whole, so idk. It's a catch 22. I think it's too much, but it really can't be too much.I don't agree with Torii Hunter much anyways, but specifically because of what he implied. He knew if he came right out and said it he'd get a lot of crap, but he also knew exactly what he was implying.And that was that Hunter believes only black players should allowed to be honoring Robinson by wearing 42.What a joke! I'm not going to say Hunter is racist for that implication, but what he IS doing is serving to make the divide stronger.It should be about honoring the impact Robinson had on OUR SOCIETY AS A WHOLE by helping some of that divide go away, not about simply empowering one group of people in that society. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 It's too much. One player per team would have been fine. And yes I believe it should be a black player. Jackie Robinson broke the color line. This whole thing, including wearing 42, is a tribute to that. It's not racist or divisive to think black players should be the ones wearing the number. It just makes sense in the context of the tribute. If that is what Torii Hunter was getting at then I agree with him 100%. Â Â Â Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scar988 Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I think he woudl have preferred for only 1 per team. I will say the Braves let the right guy wear it. Andruw is so much like Jackie would have been if Jackie wasn't the first black guy to play MLB. just a guy out there playign great center field, hitting a good ball, and having fun while doign it. RIP #55 JUNIOR SEAUOwner of ScarDraft.comBleacher Report NFL Featured Columnist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I think he woudl have preferred for only 1 per team. How could you possibly know that?From my perspective it seemed to me that Jackie was a pretty laid back kinda guy, he'd probably be happy that people still remember him... but I think we all can agree that it's a shame he isn't around to see these honours. --- Chris Creamer Founder/Editor, SportsLogos.Net  "The Mothership" • News • Facebook • X/Twitter • Instagram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I think he woudl have preferred for only 1 per team. You'd know. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Telemundo219 Posted April 14, 2007 Share Posted April 14, 2007 I think he woudl have preferred for only 1 per team. Probably one player on each team (I would say one African-American but Robinson affected all) and 1 team preferably the Dodgers or Mets. College sports as we know them are just about dead. The lid is off on all the corruption that taints just about every major program and every decision that the schools or the NCAA make is only about money, money, and more money. We'll have three 16+ team super-conferences sooner rather than later, killing much of the regional flair and traditional rivalries that make college sports unique and showing the door to any school that doesn't bring money to the table in the process. Pretty soon the smaller schools are going to have to consider forming their own sanctioning body to keep the true spirit of college sports alive because the NCAA will only get worse in it's excess from here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 Heres my prediction nobody for the Mets wears it tomorrow, really big storm coming and there wont be a game, and its a shame I think Rachel Robinson was supposed to be there for it. She seems to have a relationship with the Mets, esp with the front entrance of Citi Field being named after Jackie Robinson. www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJMorris3 Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 You know, I'm at least thankful that the white players are not voting to walk off the field in a strike rather than celebrate this milestone. (Remember, this is exactly what ALMOST happened in 1947, with teams voting to strike if Jackie Robinson was allowed to play.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Québécois Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 Having every player wears the #42 is exagerated to me.Instead, make all the players wear a #42 on their sleeves or a special badge celebrating the 60th aniversary of that giant step for baseball.Or if you guys think having players wear th #42 for one day is a good idea, why not make the LA Dodgers do it.... After all, this is the organisation that started it all....I remember seeing th Expos wearing a special badge commemorationg the 50th anniversary since Raobinson played AAA up here...Robinson's widow always said that playing in Montreal in the 50's was a best thing that could have happened to Robinson since there wasn't any sign of racism in our city at that time... Le QUÉBÉCOIS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 15, 2007 Share Posted April 15, 2007 Like I said, the leaguewide patch would've been the best bet. If you're going to retire 42 for everybody forever, retire it and mean it. The Dodgers and Mets should've also done something special, since as A)Jackie's club itself and B)the current representative of National League baseball in New York, this is of more relevance to them above the other 28. That's cool about Montreal, by the way. Speaking of, I need to get up there. How are they about outsiders speaking French? Do we get pity points for at least trying? My French is decent. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Québécois Posted April 20, 2007 Share Posted April 20, 2007 Like I said, the leaguewide patch would've been the best bet. If you're going to retire 42 for everybody forever, retire it and mean it. The Dodgers and Mets should've also done something special, since as A)Jackie's club itself and B)the current representative of National League baseball in New York, this is of more relevance to them above the other 28. That's cool about Montreal, by the way. Speaking of, I need to get up there. How are they about outsiders speaking French? Do we get pity points for at least trying? My French is decent.Hi,You can be serve everywhere in english in Montreal. Only very few places where the employees don`t speak english or at least can`t undertsand what you`re saying in englishBut if you speak french, I can assure you that french-canadians will be happy and very respectful of your efforts. No need to worry here!Bienvenue chez nous à Montréal... Le QUÉBÉCOIS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.