Clevinger's apology was better written.The Indians have 10 days to deal with this before they will need one of these guys to start a game, although it looked like they may have been auditioning Logan Allen last night, having him throw 60 pitches. They could just slide Plutko and Allen into those spots for as long as they want. We'll see what they do, but it would obviously be a drop-off in talent.
Clevinger said all the right things, or did he? He said he was wrong in not "immediately coming clean". Does that mean he had a change of heart and came clean when they got back to Cleveland? Or does that mean he got caught and then "came clean" after being confronted with the evidence? Which is not the same thing, not by a long shot.
The fact that they are "at different stages of acceptance" may also play into it. It sounds like one of them really doesn't see what is the big deal.
This is an unusual situation because the players got together and made a code of conduct for themselves before the season started. And now they had team meetings, one with the coaches and one with players only, to discuss the situation. Normally it's management who decides on fines, suspensions, etc when there is a rules violation. In this case it seems the players are involved, although to what extent I don't know. Who decides how this plays out? The front office? The players? The front office with player input?
clevinger's statement was well written.. delivery was tardy..The Indians have 10 days to deal with this before they will need one of these guys to start a game, although it looked like they may have been auditioning Logan Allen last night, having him throw 60 pitches. They could just slide Plutko and Allen into those spots for as long as they want. We'll see what they do, but it would obviously be a drop-off in talent.
Clevinger said all the right things, or did he? He said he was wrong in not "immediately coming clean". Does that mean he had a change of heart and came clean when they got back to Cleveland? Or does that mean he got caught and then "came clean" after being confronted with the evidence? Which is not the same thing, not by a long shot.
The fact that they are "at different stages of acceptance" may also play into it. It sounds like one of them really doesn't see what is the big deal.
This is an unusual situation because the players got together and made a code of conduct for themselves before the season started. And now they had team meetings, one with the coaches and one with players only, to discuss the situation. Normally it's management who decides on fines, suspensions, etc when there is a rules violation. In this case it seems the players are involved, although to what extent I don't know. Who decides how this plays out? The front office? The players? The front office with player input?
clevinger's statement was well written.. delivery was tardy..
The question becomes..what is the right thing to say at that point??.. Sorry for not coming clean immediately is admitting the earlier acts were wrong/poor.. Plesac DID come clean immediately but, it doesn't change the unanswered question:
That is, take the converse of believing in the sequestration of their freedoms: Do either/both Clevinger & Plesac really believe they should be imprisoned into a constant/restrained bubble in order to do what only they can do?.. Would you give up your freedom for other reasons.. At the end of the game.. don't these guys leave the bubble and go home?.. stop at a drive thru?.. Go to the grocery store to get some stuff?. isn't this the same thing?.. in public.. exposed.. or are there limits on the limits?. where does it end?..
Argument can be raised in both directions.. with the full understanding that indignation and guilt aren't very strong stances to take..
Thoughts?..