Links

Saturday, August 08, 2009

Shameless Shank

I thought hit Shaughnessy hit a low water mark last fall when he declared the Red Sox playoff series over after the Red Sox won the first game. But then he hit a lower point this spring when he self-plagiarized a column about spring training from a book that he had co-written with another person. But this past week, he has sunk to a whole new level.

Shaughnessy accused David Ortiz of lying but he did not have all the facts and could not be bothered to collect them (see my diatribe in the previous post below). Today's contribution is just as bad. He issues no mea culpas—instead he offers a mammoth rationalization as to why he wrongly/prematurely accused someone of lying. It is downright disgusting. At the least, I credit him for admitting he was too lazy to collect the facts

Click here to read Shaughnessy’s rationalization:

- First, he makes the astounding claim that the reason that Ortiz seems to be getting a pass here is that people like him personally. Meanwhile, Clemens and Bonds are being vilified because people don’t like them personally. Seriously? If you didn’t have your head so far up your arse, you would realize there are worlds of differences between the cases of Bonds, Clemens, and Ortiz. There is no Game of Shadows for Ortiz is there? To this point, no one has come out publicly to say they injected Ortiz with steroids, have they? Give people credit, Dan—they are able to seek the evidence and make their own conclusions. Personality certainly is a factor but it is not the decisive factor that you claim. The cases are different but you are too dense to understand that.

- Shaughnessy does admit to being too lazy although he is probably too stupid to realize he has made this stunning admission. He says

“Seriously, if Donald Fehr, Gene Orza, or Weiner had gone public with their questions about the legitimacy of the (2003) positive results back in February, there would have been less rush to jump on Ortiz when his name came out July 30.”


Did you even bother to ask any of them yourself Dan? Did you even try to get any of the facts right? Isn't that your responsibility before you claim someone is a liar?

Then he quotes Weiner:


"We thought we were pretty darn vocal,’’ Weiner said. “We wrote a long and publicly-released letter to congressmen Waxman and Davis. Maybe we made a mistake of thinking people would read a letter sent to congressmen.’’


and says:
Right. Most of us routinely inspect all correspondence between the Players Association and Congress. Sorry we missed this one.

Sorry you missed this one? Take your sarcasm and shove it. You shouldn’t have missed this one. It is your responsibility as a journalist to do due diligence before you make the accusation that someone has lied. And you didn’t do it. How dare you?

Oh and here is my favorite
“We’re trained to be cynical of accused cheaters who claim innocence.”

Wow, what journalism school did you go to? I thought you were trained to do research to prove your assertions? I thought you were trained to take each individual case and examine it on its own merits? What you seem to be saying is that you have lumped everyone together in one big pot and it is okay to accuse them all of lying because everyone seems to be lying?

Then you have the nerve to end your little piece of trash by suggesting that there were holes in the Ortiz and Wiener’s accounts? Maybe so….but nothing in comparison to the gaping holes in your credibility and ethics. Astonishing

In my nearly three years of working on this site, I have never been this utterly disgusted. Truly, a new low for Shaughnessy. A new low for the Globe. And a new low for journalism.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

The reason nobody cares is because anyone with half a brain accepted that they're all roiders and full of shit awhile ago.

ObjectiveBruce said...

So Ortiz is the first person publicly identified as a cheater who is innocent?

Oh and Shaughnessy is right about something else, too: "We only know what we believe"

And around these parts, we believe Big Papi is just awesome!!

Chris said...

""We only know what we believe" Ahhh..so THAT's why newspapers are just one, big editorial page masquerading as 'news.' Thank you for going to the 'paid-for' model, Boston Globe, so you can be that proverbial 'tree that falls in the forest.' I hope that change comes soon. You know, the 'hope' and 'change' that Oh-bomba said we could believe in.

Anonymous said...

He kept abbreviating Player's Association as PA too. This was lazy all around. Is there anything that can be done to get rid of him?

Anonymous said...

LMAO... "around these parts" the ObjectiveDouche thinks Shank is just awesome!....come on ObjectiveDouche, all the talk about "fanboys"....you are just a big Shank Rumpswab. Your failure to recognize Shank's shortcomings leaves you with no credibility....let's hear it now OD....rah-rah-rah-sis-boom-bah....GO SHANK!

Tony?..Tony?...TONE! said...

God that was PATHETIC....Shank desperately trying to backpedal...Hey Shank, you lousy piece of crap, try getting the story right the FIRST TIME......was a sorry excuse for a writer

Roger Bournival said...

Oh and Shaughnessy is right about something else, too: "We only know what we believe"

When you're too lazy to make phone calls and confirm facts, that's all you're gonna 'know', isn't it? Not that that's ever stopped Shank before...

Anonymous said...

Date line: Boston - You will believe what you want to believe. And most (sports) fans are going to believe (The Shank) has always been dirty.

Dave M., you are correct:

“Give people credit, Dan—they are able to seek the evidence and make their own conclusions.”


I posted here right after the Ortiz story broke last week (7/31 posts):


“Also, it seems that the Players Union already has a line of defense as explained by Bronson Arroyo:

"Arroyo, who pitched for the Red Sox from 2003 to 2005, said he took androstenedione, which was banned in 2004, as well as amphetamines, which were banned in 2006, according to the Herald report. He said he gave up taking andro, a steroid precursor, when a rumor spread through baseball that due to lax production standards, some of it was laced with steroids.

……."

So the lines are being drawn and the Shank, the Dope that he is, can't even connect the dots.

This will play itself out during the next Players/Owners negotiation and my money is on the players.”


As an outsider I try and read between the lines and the strategy The Shank uses is so predictably flawed. He (they = owners) “believe what they want to believe” and assume they can influence the outcome.

I do give The Shank credit for representing his “boss” man well by trying to keep the fandom stupid.

However, we non-conformist (their strategy calls us basement dwellers) are a little more sophisticated.

OB + Shank, welcome to The Party, beer is down in the basement fridge on the right side.

Mark my words, all this recent steroid needling is just posturing for the Player/Owner negotiations that are to take place next year.

To close ….. “and the Shank, the Dope that he is, can't even connect the dots.”


g

Dave M said...

OB

Is that the best you can offer? Really?
Are you feeling okay? You are slipping

Anonymous said...

and round and round and round goes the Steroid Merry-go-round......WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

NFL Picks said...

Ortiz is a sad story right now. If you didn't take any steroids and your going to deny doing it, why does it take you 5 days to prepare after the story is released, when you were asked so many times before then and had "no comment". A-Rod took the right road even though the whole truth wasn't revealed. Ortiz may end up going down as hated as Barry Bonds without the numbers to back him up.

ObjectiveBruce said...

It's like shooting fish in a barrel, Dave.

People we like who are accused of using performance-enhancing drugs are given the benefit of the doubt. People we don't like are cheaters.

It's a fact.

It's also a fact that the 2003 results triggered tests going forward because more than five percent of the players were positive for banned substances. It's also a fact that the union made a joint announcement, withh management, on Nov. 13, 2003, in which it agreed that the mandatory testing, with penalties, had been triggered by the 104 positives.

But if the results included the mere "careless" purchase of vitamins, without knowing that somebody was lacing the vitamins wiht all sorts of illegal junk, as claimed by the beloved Ortiz, then the union would have had a moral, if not legal, obligation to grieve and ultimately arbitrate the use of the 2003 tests to trip the mandatory testing agreement. The union filed no such grievance, and endorsed the use of those 2003 results as dispositive when it joined management in announcing that mandatory testing would now be required.

Ortiz waited too long to answer to be credible. He promised to find out and report what he tested postive for, and then reneged, hiding behind the union. Guess what? The union can't prevent Ortiz from revealing what he tested positive for. He backpeddled. Call him on it.

The union's retreat on the meaning of the positive results in support of a single player is not credible.

Ortiz is getting a pass because he's one of Our Heroes.

Careless and confused? Hardly. Cynical and calculating is more like it.bv

Anonymous said...

Objective Bruce,

Whenever I read this blog I have to say the irony in all of your posts accusing everyone else to be hard in the pants for local stars and claiming people to be fawning sycophants, while you yourself without exception always side with Shaughnessy and heap praise on his amazing writing.

Even players who are probably generally viewed as "bad guys" in new england like Merriman, A-Rod, Pettite, Manny, have been exposed as PED users and people around here generally haven't said much. Most people have acknowledged that it infiltrated the sport in general. It's awful for the players bodies and it changes the game to a degree, but there are plenty of other evils in baseball's history (racial barriers, gambling, amphetamine use) that have probably done worse. Human corruption is part of the history of sports, too. All of the names out there have pretty much have assured every team was guilty...sportswriters are the only people left in the room that care. The guys on PTI had it right the other day when the said the only people that care are people with AARP cards and the writers.

The reason that Shaughnessy sucks is because he knows this, but instead decides to spin this reactionary crap. He is an excellent writer and can be a witty guy, but instead he adds nothing.

Anonymous said...

Exacty...the ObjectiveDouche is a Shank Shaughnessy sycophant, that's all he is....I mean it can't be any more obvious. In fact it's downright scary how he'll go to any length in order to defend "his man".....REAL scary

Chris said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chris said...

There is NO place for Shaughnessy in the WEEI-Globe tie-up, which speaks volumes. Look for even more bitterness, more snark, more anger, and more derision from him. I feel very bad for his family.

mike_b1 said...

If Ortiz is "getting a pass," that's as much an indictment of other journalists as it is the fans -- a startling accusation even for someone as driven by bias and petty jealousy as The CHB.

If The CHB truly thinks Ortiz is "getting a pass," then The CHB should get his fat white ass off the bar stool at The Fours and do the research and snooping necessary to prove it. Otherwise, he should go back to tipping pint glasses and waitresses and leave important matters to the real writers.

Anonymous said...

OB,

Mike_b1 makes a valid point.

It is what we have asked for all along - a due diligence approach to resolving the "accountability" matter within MLB Steroidgate.

Hopefully, if he chooses look at himself in the mirror, the Shank starts with the media's lack of courage during the 1991 to 2008 period!

g

Dave M said...

Bruce

Take off your blindfold. You are shooting at the wrong barrel of fish.

You continue to obfuscate. But it sounds like you have some inside info. How does Ortiz get access to something that has been sealed? Please elaborate. You may be right but I have not heard any of the crack media suggest it... though I dont hold out much hope for the media to do much homework on this topic anyway.

Regardless, you deal in smoke and mirrors. Ortiz is not my HERO. Not sure how many times I can say it. I have served in the Middle East. Many of my old college classmates fly combat missions in the Middle East. Many of the troops who have worked for me are in harm's way daily. My nephew recently returned from Afghanistan where he was involved in daily firefights. They are the heroes. I know who the heroes are . Stop f-ing telling me who my heroes are. You have no flipping idea.

And the Red Sox are not the center of my life. I am not a "fanboy blogger". I have a wife and four children. I have a doctoral degree in economics. I have a wide ranging interest in many topics. I am able to put sports and the Red Sox in proper perspective. The Red Sox are not my heroes. I am not a fanboy blogger.

I have worked in the sports department at a bigger city newspaper. I do have a sincere interest in journalism and logic. I am ashamed of what Shaughnessy represents. You throw out all these misdirected arguments and yet you can't address the simple and basic points I have levied against Shaughnessy. Shaughnessy accused Ortiz of lying based on an anonymous report. Shaughnessy did not have all the details behind this report and he made no attempt to gather them. But it did not stop him from accusing someone of lying. Not only that, he has the gall to make sarcastic statements flaunting the fact that he could not be bothered to collect the facts. How do you defend this?

The posters on this board are right. You have no credibility. I think I recall two instances where you were mildly critical of Shaughnessy in the past 3 years or so. If you want to be objective, Bruce, you need to be evenhanded and you are not. My fellow bloggers and I have often given credit to Shaughnessy for good columns. Yes, I sometimes take the namecalling a little too far but I think I have been fair where warranted. But, in this case, Shaughnessy is so far in the wrong and I just cant imagine how you dont see that. I can tell you have some intellect but you seem to use it in misguided ways.

Regardless I would appreciate it if you would stop telling me who my heroes are. Like I said, you have no idea and I resent the hell out of it.