WSU151 Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 In fairness to Guillen the word he is quoted as using is 'respectable' not admirable. (Fair enough that may not make a lot of difference to some people, but its a different word, with a different sense. And many people may not respect Castro for remaining in power, and alive.) My difficulty is still that he has was suspended for those comments. I appreciate that the Marlins have acted within their rights, but even still in my view this is the statement the Miami Marlins should have put outThe Miami Marlins make it clear that the comments of their manager, Ozzie Guillen, with respect to his respect for the former Cuban dictator, Fidel Castro in no way represent the views of the Miami Marlins organisation. We recognise the offense that those comments will have caused many in the state of Florida and further afield, and are dealing with the incident internally. We resepct Mr Guillen's right to air his views publically, and note that if he had made similar comments in Cuba about an enemy of the state he would not be dealt with as justly. If you hire Guillen you know you are going to have to deal with this kind of thing every once in a while. Are you going to suspend him every time he embarrasses your organisation? Might as well not have employed him in the first place if you are.Again, not a freedom of speech issue.He can say what he wants about baseball-specific matters, but when he goes into political matters that offend and alienate your very own fanbase, then yes he should be reprimanded.Respectfully, I think you have the wrong way around. When he isn't talking about baseball, he should be able to say what he wants. The Marlins have every right to distance themselves from non baseball comments he makes, but when he talks baseball he is a Marlins employee, so they have every right to take whatever course of action they choose then.He's a Marlins employee if he talks baseball or not. Not sure why you think everything changes once he leaves the stadium, especially when he's talking to the press.Because he is a private citizen and as such is entitled to an opinion, and to air that opinion should he choose to.That's not really true. A private citizen gives up his license to a private opinion once he agrees to go on the record with the media. A military general can say whatever he wants to his wife about the President in the living room, but he can't say anything bad about the commander-in-chief when he's being recorded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.