Do you believe a manager should use his rules in certain circumstances?Phils/Mets?

Question

Manuel sat JRoll yesterday,which was a pivotal game for the Phils,because he showed up late to the game.Do you feel that was a wise move?He did it once already this season(Not running out a play)and it paid off but it didn't yesterday and now the Mets are 1 up in the division.Was Charlie's rules that important to maybe change the seasons' luck around for the Phils and maybe start a rift in the Phils locker room?

Answer 1

Rollins put Charlie in that position and he is the one to blame for this; not Charlie.  CM has to maintain some order in his house and if he allows JRoll to come in whenever he feels, others will feel it's OK and do the same.  With Charlie doing what he needed to do, I think it would actually bring the team together (especially if Rollins were to apologize to his teammates as he should).  It's no different than if you or I were to show up late to work.  (well, maybe a little since I don't make 7 figs a year to play a game)

Answer 2

There comes a point in time for a manager when he has to start changing with the times. Charlies old school, no doubt about it. And I am sure star players get disciplined all over the league. But why say you are benching him. The team can know. But tell the media he's got a sore hammy, or he needs a day off, or he doesn't matchup well against Perez, whatever you have to say not to publically show him up (again). Keeping the team business in house is always a good idea.

In a game as big as yesterdays I would have played him. I don't know how late he was, but traffic around Shea is ridiculous, and Rollins is arguably the best player on the Phillies. Making an example is fine, but pick your battles is how I look at it.

Answer 3

If you were being paid that much to do YOUR job, would you ever show up late?

In almost any other field of work, if you were being paid that kind of money, and you showed up late, you'd be fired on the spot.  Right then and there.  Actually, you'd be fired in many fields that pay much less than that.  You're paying a guy seven or eight figures to show up late to work?  These guys have to be reminded that it's a privilege to be doing what they're doing, and there are THOUSANDS of people out there who would be perfectly willing to take their job at any moment, and you'd bet they would be hustling and showing up on time.

Charlie Manuel made the right call here, and I wish more managers were like that.  We don't need to "baby" these guys.  If it means public humiliation for a day, so be it.  Get him angry, maybe it'll help him focus.  Why keep it in the clubhouse?

It's a gigantic privilege to be playing Major League Baseball, and in exchange for that, you have to deal with the very public lifestyle that comes with it, especially when your mistakes, which are the fault of nobody else but you, are made public.

If you're a manager, you've got your leadoff hitter leaving you wondering where he is, and you don't know what happened.  You're left unnecessarily worrying what the problem is, and you're put in a terrible position.

Why make an exception because it's a big game?  Now you've got guys thinking, "well it's a big game, so it's fine if I get there a little later."  It should be absolutely the opposite!  On a day like that, you'd better be EXTRA careful that you're there when you're supposed to be!  It's easy enough to get around in this city, especially after rush hour on a weekday (yes, even though it's New York!  But I speak from experience).  If you're getting around when it's crowded, plan ahead for it!  It's not as if he's never been here before; he should know better!

If it wasn't Jimmy Rollins, but instead someone like Eric Bruntlett, do you think we'd be having this discussion?  There would have been no discussion; he'd sit because he was late, end of story.  If you're going to make an exception because he's Jimmy Rollins, that's a terrible example, and that's what will breed a rift in the clubhouse.  What Charlie Manuel did yesterday reinforced the idea that this is a team, and everyone is accountable to the same degree.

On any team outside of Major League Baseball, he'd be sitting, no question about it.  Why you should get a free pass because you're a major-league player is beyond me.  Good call by the skipper.

Answer 4

This could go either way because it tells the other players be here on time because now we have to win. Now the other players know that they have to put in all the effort, Manuel disciplined these players. No, it was not a wise move because now you are one game back instead of one game ahead. Maybe they still would not have won that game we will never know. The guy was stuck in traffic, in New York think about it. I don't see how the other players made it on time. Rollins now knows Manuel will not tolerate this.

Answer 5

Good for him. If you're not going to enforce the rules, why have them? At some point, all the talk about "team" has to mean something. When star players at allowed to do whatever they want, the concept of "team" is a joke. And the players know it. Good for Manual, I'm now a fan of his.

Answer 6

well im a phillies fan but jimmy shouldve showed up on time. and  bruntlett had a great game. he went 3 for 4 with two doubles. rollins probably wouldnt have had as good a game as that. the only thing they lost was his electricity

Answer 7

Rules are Rules but at the same time, its something like this, lets say the phills lose the division by just one game, that put Manuel in the unemployment line. when your playing the team that is tied with you in the division, you think you'd want the best lineup available on the field.

Answer 8

Considering I'm a Phillies fan I think yes Manuel's reasoning behind everything is sensible to a point and I think it was the right call to bench a guy like Rollins and in doing so let's everyone know that they're position on the field isn't safe thus making everyone work just a tad harder and keeping their position safe. I don't think it such a big deal to begin with I don't see it as a pivotal game in the division as of yet, there's still a long way to go. Just like high school or an employer, even though it's policy, you start letting people come in late with no consequences everyone will start to do it.

Answer 9

I have no problem with the benching, I have a problem with not keeping it in the Clubhouse.  Don't let clubhouse stuff out in the press.  Uncle Charlie wants to show how in control he is...or he thinks he is!  That being said, his replacement had a great game yesterday!  I also think that this weekend is a bigger series, if they put the Braves away like they should then it put the Braves in a selling mode at the deadline which could effect the rest of the season with the other teams beating up on a depleted Braves team.  The other players seemed to support it in the press but that does not mean that behind the scenes they are not supporting Rollins on this and waiting for Charile to go the way of the Bowa.  One thing about when Bowa was there...all the players were united, they all hated him!

Answer 10

Everyone should remember the general cant of commentary in this thread -- rules are rules, no exceptions, gotta enforce 'em or what's the point? -- the next time some flavor of the "Rose should be reinstated" noise pops up.

Answer 11

Yes I DO but ONLY certain ONES

Answer 12

I agree that the player is to blame, not the manger. If the manager starts making exceptions for cases where its a star player and a critical game, it creates problems in the clubhouse that will cost you more than 1 game this season. Players will get the message that the rules and treatment are unequal and based on talent. Everyone understands and accepts the fact that playing time is unequal based on talent, but it will p**s off a lot of players if the team rules are applied unequally because of a player's talent level.

There are 2 options though that the manger should have considerd.

1) Why does the punishment have to be sitting out a game. There are other ways to punish a player for minor offenses. If he had been showing up late repeatedly, then maybe a suspension was the right thing, but for a first time problem other punishment would be just as effective as sitting out. He could perhaps fine the player a nominal amount of money or force them to stay after practice for extra conditioning drills. However, if the team rules were already posted stating that the punishment would be suspension, then he made a mistake when he wrote the rules, not when he benched the player.

2. He could have let the team decide the punishment. This happened on my high school team once and it worked fine. A player was in trouble, and the coach let the team vote whether he should sit or not. We voted to let him play because we wanted his bat in the lineup. We set his punishment as some extra conditioning drills plus he had to carry all the equipment to and from the field for one practice. Even though the player essentially got off easy; we as a team didn't feel like there was a double standard because it was the team, not the coach who had let our teammate off the hook.