Why Shouldn’t Torri Hunter Be Punished If He Broke A Rule?

I don’t feel Torri should be suspended for 3 years. However, if baseball wants to act tough on rules, then it also should not just be ignored. A 20 to 30 game suspension would seem light considering he could be suspended for 3 years. Pete Rose never bet on a game he was playing in. Yet he is banned from becoming a Hall of Famer as a player. It is known that at least a couple of the Black Sox never got a dime or did anything to throw a game, yet they were banned for life. Their is no evidence that Mark McGuire ever cheated during his playing career. Yet everyone knows he was kept out of the Hall of Fame last summer due to the perception. I am from Minneapolis and still feel that if you want integrity in any sport (which seems very difficult to get now days) then you have to make all the players (regardless of star quality and/or talent) follow ALL of the rules equally. It does not matter if the rule is obscure. It is the player, his agent and his attorneys job to know the rules.


  1. viperdk2 wrote
    at 15:00 - 28th Luty 2010 Permalink

    It’s one of those „what the f*ck” rules. It makes no sense. Baseball has more important things to worry about like steroid use and gambling on baseball then to worry about a player offering something as a gesture of thank you. Hunter didn’t know about the rule, neither did Twins GM Terry Ryan. I’m willing to bet the suits at MLB didn’t know about it up until now.
    Hunter should be at least given a fine and that’s it.

  2. SportsFa wrote
    at 15:54 - 28th Luty 2010 Permalink

    The rule, 21-b, regards misconduct and is titled „Gift For Defeating Competing Club.”
    Isnt that what the players get paid to do??? So does this mean that owners should be suspended too since they are signing the checks??? Now if it was „gift for losing to another team”(Black Sox) that would make complete sense!!

  3. mylaihis wrote
    at 19:45 - 28th Luty 2010 Permalink

    because, while he technically violated a rule, he wasn’t intentionally doing anything wrong. he wasn’t violating the rule in the way that it was intended for. he shouldn’t be suspended at all, because he wasnt bribing the Royals, but just bragging that he had won. if he had given it to them before the game, and asked for them to intentionally lose, that would have been the case the rule was intended for and worthy of a decent, if not lengthy, suspension.

  4. prospere wrote
    at 20:29 - 28th Luty 2010 Permalink

    what did he do?

  5. C_F_45 wrote
    at 3:28 - 1st Marzec 2010 Permalink

    From my understanding the intent of the rule is to keep a player from bribing another team/player.
    I’m not sure how Tori Hunter could have been bribing anyone when he made the offer to send the Royals players the champagne AFTER they had swept the Tigers in the 3 game series to end last season. If he had made the offer BEFORE the series started then I could see where you might have a point.
    I’m glad to see MLB took the gesture as it was intended >Good clean fun< MLB does take into account intent >see „George Brett pine tar HR incident” >He technically broke the rules by having pine tar touching the trade mark on his bat< The commissioner ruled there was no „intent” to cheat and no advantage was gained, therefor the HR counted.

  6. Anonim wrote
    at 7:49 - 1st Marzec 2010 Permalink

    If Barry Bonds is still allowed to set foot on a baseball field – big league, minor league, or little league – Hunter should be allowed to play ball.

  7. sean1201 wrote
    at 10:34 - 1st Marzec 2010 Permalink

    MLB can and will use the event to stress to others of what the consequences could be. If they let Hunter off the hook then they have to give every other player an opportunity to do the same thing.
    I would say a 10 game suspension would be adequate for a first offense.

  8. Kerouac9 wrote
    at 16:50 - 1st Marzec 2010 Permalink

    MLB is smart enough to know that few bottles of champagne did NOT provide enough incentive for the lowly KC Royals to beat the Detroit Tigers – 3 straight games at that!
    Now if he had bought cars for the players, we would be seeing Torii on the beach ALOT the next 3 summers…

  9. AntDU wrote
    at 22:39 - 1st Marzec 2010 Permalink

    He sent 4 bottles of Dom P. to the Royals. The champagne costs a total of TOPS $600 – shoot at NYC clubs the most would be $3,000. This to majr leaguer’s is nothing.
    Tori meant nothing by the gesture other than to sya job-well-done to an underdog playing hard when they had nothing else going for them.
    He did not help decide the outcome of the games. He broke a rule but not to the extent that the „black sox” or even Pete Rose did. To me, this is not a story.

  10. Twinsfre wrote
    at 4:16 - 2nd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    This rule is crap. If i was in the majors I would send flowers to another team to see what happens. Its the same exact thing.

  11. Jesse wrote
    at 7:39 - 2nd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    I think we should ask why Mark McGuire, Jason Giambi, and Barry Bonds haven’t been banned. Torii wasn’t really doing anything that bad. And i dont think Pete Rose should be banned either.

  12. Anonim wrote
    at 8:23 - 2nd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    QUOTE: „Pete Rose never bet on a game he was playing in.”
    Actually, according to his story now, Pete bet on the reds EVERY night….
    but that’s a different topic…

  13. Matt K wrote
    at 12:47 - 2nd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    Well first of all Pete Rose and Mark McGwire aren’t banned from the hall of fame. They just don’t get the required number of votes to be elected into the hall of fame. Oh yeah and McGuire pleaded the fifth which pretty much says „I am guilty”. Look at his stats he sucked without roids. I know it and every journalist knows it therefore he will probably never get in. As for Pete Rose he said „I never gambled on the Reds”. Yeah I believe a guy that has a gambling problem. Come on wise up and use your head.

  14. layd_bak wrote
    at 17:48 - 2nd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    It’s all about intent… Hunter’s intent was not to „payoff” a team for winning… in other words, he wasn’t intentionally challenging the integrity of the game (which is what the rule is really all about)… He was just rewarding them for doing so… And to be honest, who really knew about the rule? I know ignorance is no defense/excuse as the old adage goes… but, in this case, I think it’s necessary to look at the intent…..
    Besides, the Royals sent it back… Probably cause nobody over there in their clubhouse (with the exception of Buddy Bell) was old enough to drink it.
    And as another point… When the Astros pitched that 6 pitcher no-hitter in Yankee Stadium a while back, George Steinbrenner had bottles of champagne waiting on them in the visitors clubhouse… Nobody made a big fuss about this…isn’t it the same thing? He’s not a player, but Rule 21-b states:
    ?Any player or PERSON CONNECTED with a Club who shall offer or give any gift or reward to a player or person connected with another Club for services rendered ? in defeating or attempting to defeat a competing Club ? shall be declared ineligible for not less than three years.?
    It’s all about intent… Hunter was paying off the Royals, and „The Boss” certainly wasn’t paying the Astros for no-hitting his Yanks… it was more of a reward for job well done.
    PS- can we please work on the spelling of Big Mac’s last name?… McGwire…. sorry pet peeve of mine… it’s amazing how many get that wrong.

  15. Eho wrote
    at 23:44 - 2nd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    Because it’sa dumb rule and an innocent mistake. The champagne was returned before they even got it. Suspending him would be the most dumb-**** move ever! You must be a Tigers fan… by the way, it’s McGwire, not McGuire.

  16. Greg wrote
    at 1:15 - 3rd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    Because the rule is intended for completely different violations. It prevents players/teams from bribing other teams to lose, etc. For example, giving a gift to a team who is playing a team you need to win in order to face a favorable opponent in the playoffs. Torii Hunter was just exhibiting class and grace, and a slight sense of humor. Why should he be punished?

  17. overfed longhaired leaping gnome wrote
    at 3:45 - 3rd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    The Royals apparently sent the champaigne back to Hunter. He was doing it as an act of kindness and humor, so the MLB was lenient with him. MLB has been strict on rules in the past but they are finally starting to think and not just go by the rules. But I would be glad if they kicked Bonds out of the game just for the hell of it.

  18. Penguin wrote
    at 4:15 - 3rd Marzec 2010 Permalink

    wow dude you no your crap……. torri hunter idk man i think he should be for only games not years….

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *