[MLB] Kenny Rogers suspended for 20 games

[blowMeNeo]

Do what? He pushed the camera.

586155092[/snapback]

Doesn't matter. It was a $5000 camera that he destroyed, which is criminal damaging, and the push, in the courts eyes, would be considered assault.

[Ayepecks]

If you or I did that to someone on the street, we would get atleast 10 days in jail.  This penalty is too soft.

586155087[/snapback]

HAHAHAHAHAHA! If you or I pushed a cameraman charges wouldn't be filed (and nor would the cameraman have pressed on to continue to film you), the media wouldn't be creating a mockery of the situation, and there would be no jail time! Sorry, but 10 days in jail? Please!

Secondly, the camera was not destroyed! IT WASN'T EVEN BROKEN! Stop pretending to know the story.

[BroChaos Veteran]

there was no assault, and no criminal activity, otherwise he woulda been arrested.

[[f]]

I just knew playing terrible country music would get someone in trouble eventually.

[....]

Man, are you kidding me? No offense BOOG, but you sure do go overboard on people you don't like. Barry Sanders is a prime example.

586155054[/snapback]

Huh? I never said I didn't like the guy. I actually do.

But when you assault someone for no reason, unprovoked, then yeah, you deserve every day you get and then some. Was it this camera man who was reporting the contract squabble? was it this camera man who kicked his dog? Of course not.

What MLB should have done is hand out an incredibly long suspension (the rest of the year) to show they are not going to put up with crap like this any longer. The Dodger bullpen incident, the Sheffield incident, and now this is turning the league into the NBA. Crap like this didn't happen 20 years ago.

It's plain assault. I know it sounds strange, but by law, if anyone touches you without your permission, you actually can file assault charges. Battery is when you get injured.

[Fred Derf Veteran]

Do what? He pushed the camera.

586155092[/snapback]

The cameraman had a neck injury.

Kenny's actions reflects poorly on baseball. The league needs to recognize that starting pitchers need to be disciplined differently. 20 games to a fielder is completely different than 20 games to a starter.

I personally think that Kenny got off very lightly to be suspended for, what amounts to, four games.

[Ayepecks]

The cameraman was BSing it just like anyone else would do, because he was released less than an hour after he was taken to the hospital. All you saw about the camerman on a stretcher was just for effect from the media.

BOOG: Nope, the cameraman didn't report it, and I never once claimed he did. But, Kenny did ask the camerman to leave before he started filming, and he also asked the cameramen long before the actual pre-game practice not to film him.

Am I saying what he did was right? No, I'm not, but you guys are extremely overreacting to a situation that it seems (to me) you don't know what happened at all.

[BroChaos Veteran]

The cameraman had a neck injury.

Kenny's actions reflects poorly on baseball.  The league needs to recognize that starting pitchers need to be disciplined differently.  20 games to a fielder is completely different than 20 games to a starter.

I personally think that Kenny got off very lightly to be suspended for, what amounts to, four games.

586157176[/snapback]

i would bet the cameraman had nothing...just making up injuries trying to make a quick buck.

and did he actually touch the cameraman, or just his camera?

if laying your hand on someone is illegal, so should shoving a camera in someones face. i know thats not exactly what happened in this case...but people don't seem to care that overall, the media has become way to invasive, and something needs to be done about it.

[Ayepecks]

He touched the camerman, but only brushing him in an attempt to get rid of the camera. He didn't punch or kick the cameraman, or anything like that. The closest I think you can say to him doing anything is maybe that he shoved him, but even that's a stretch.

[Fred Derf Veteran]

He touched the camerman, but only brushing him in an attempt to get rid of the camera. He didn't punch or kick the cameraman, or anything like that. The closest I think you can say to him doing anything is maybe that he shoved him, but even that's a stretch.

586157750[/snapback]

Please. He shoved the camera that was resting on the guys shoulders thus pushing the cameraman back as well.

That's like saying "I didn't punch you in the stomach! I punched you in the shirt. It's not my fault your stomach was behind it."

If you shove and object being carried by a person it is akin to shoving the person.

[christracy]

^ lol yup. sorry but the rogers didn't give a crap about the guy or the camera and just wanted the camera off he didn't care what happened to the guy. i do believe if an act results in an injury for another person there is some degree of responsiblity on the attacker.

scorp: this effect for the media could be on behalf of the rangers as much as you think the guy played it up. maybe the rangers wanted to make sure their image isn't tarnish and wanted to make a kind gesture?

[....]

But, Kenny did ask the camerman to leave before he started filming, and he also asked the cameramen long before the actual pre-game practice not to film him.

Am I saying what he did was right? No, I'm not, but you guys are extremely overreacting to a situation that it seems (to me) you don't know what happened at all.

586157196[/snapback]

I'm sorry, were you there? Seems like it from your comments.

The video clearly shows Rogers walking out of the dugout and a direct line towards the cameraman, who was out on the field the whole time. That cameraman has every right in the world to be on that field, as that's his job.

And my point is exactly what fred said. it's basically a 4 game suspension. That's weak for a malicious act.

[Ayepecks]

Please.  He shoved the camera that was resting on the guys shoulders thus pushing the cameraman back as well.

That's like saying "I didn't punch you in the stomach!  I punched you in the shirt.  It's not my fault your stomach was behind it."

If you shove and object being carried by a person it is akin to shoving the person.

586157762[/snapback]

Touching a camera IS NOWHERE NEAR akin to touching a person. Your comparison is absolutely and utterly asinine in that a shirt is physically over and concealing your body -- a video camera is on your shoulder, it is covering no part of your body.

Shoving an object being carried by a person is not akin to shoving the person. If I were to punch a purse being carried by a woman would I be punching the woman? Please. I would not be touching the woman, I would not be causing harm to her, or anything similar to that.

Rogers did absolutely nothing to harm the cameraman, so don't even imply as much. The cameraman was physically harmed in no way. As I said: he did not punch him, nor did he kick him. Like I said, saying he shoved the guy is a stretch because all he did was shove the camera off of the guy's shoulder to the ground. If you shoved a backpack I was wearing you would not be shoving me -- there is an extreme difference there.

Please, if you're going to make an analogy, at least make it a good one.

I'm sorry, were you there?  Seems like it from your comments.

The video clearly shows Rogers walking out of the dugout and a direct line towards the cameraman, who was out on the field the whole time.  That cameraman has every right in the world to be on that field, as that's his job.

And my point is exactly what fred said.  it's basically a 4 game suspension.  That's weak for a malicious act.

586157947[/snapback]

I was at the game, I have season tickets.

And, you're right. The cameraman had a right to be there. Fox 4 got permission (and owns the rights to Rangers games), and he was allowed to be there. But, as I already said, Rogers asked the cameramen not to film him. He asked this before the game even started, and he told the cameraman to stop before he shoved it, and then he asked again after the cameraman picked it up and continued to film soley on Rogers yet again.

[Hyori]

Sportmen that pull this kind of crap should be banned from their respective game altogether.

[mattmatik]

Why was Kenny Rogers even concerned about being filmed in the first place? That makes no sense. If he has an inning where he gives up 8 runs is he going to step off the mound and start yelling at the cameras to stop filming the game?

What a pansy. He should have got an actual 20-game suspension...20 STARTS. I don't care if he just grabbed the camera or if he did ask to stop being filmed. You don't go attacking people. I give the cameraman credit for holding his composure, I don't think I could have.

[christracy]

Touching a camera IS NOWHERE NEAR akin to touching a person. Your comparison is absolutely and utterly asinine in that a shirt is physically over and concealing your body -- a video camera is on your shoulder, it is covering no part of your body.

Shoving an object being carried by a person is not akin to shoving the person. If I were to punch a purse being carried by a woman would I be punching the woman? Please. I would not be touching the woman, I would not be causing harm to her, or anything similar to that.

Rogers did absolutely nothing to harm the cameraman, so don't even imply as much. The cameraman was physically harmed in no way. As I said: he did not punch him, nor did he kick him. Like I said, saying he shoved the guy is a stretch because all he did was shove the camera off of the guy's shoulder to the ground. If you shoved a backpack I was wearing you would not be shoving me -- there is an extreme difference there.

Please, if you're going to make an analogy, at least make it a good one.

I was at the game, I have season tickets.

And, you're right. The cameraman had a right to be there. Fox 4 got permission (and owns the rights to Rangers games), and he was allowed to be there. But, as I already said, Rogers asked the cameramen not to film him. He asked this before the game even started, and he told the cameraman to stop before he shoved it, and then he asked again after the cameraman picked it up and continued to film soley on Rogers yet again.

586158213[/snapback]

it doesnt cover your body but it does cover your eye. so if you have binoculars and someone comes alone and shoves those and tweaks your neck he shouldnt be penalized right? the cameraman has the camera to his eye when you shove that you shove it into his head. if i shoved your backpack would you take offense to me shoving your backpack or take it as me shoving you? everyone in sports thinks he was wrong and the punishment is justified.

[Ayepecks]

Are you actually that ignorant, or are you just pretending to be?

Watch the video and you'll understand why I say that (in regards to your "it doesnt cover your body but it does cover your eye," comment).

"everyone in sports thinks he was wrong and the punishment is justified."

Can you please provide evidence for every single person in sports? Kthxbye.

"f i shoved your backpack would you take offense to me shoving your backpack or take it as me shoving you?"

I would take it as you want my backpack, as Rogers wanted the camera.

[....]

I was at the game, I have season tickets.

586158213[/snapback]

Congrats. But were you there when the incident happened? That was the question. Right now it sounds like you were in Roger's pocket or his shadow or something, because you certainly know a whole lot that wasn't disclosed previously.

But, as I already said, Rogers asked the cameramen not to film him. He asked this before the game even started, and he told the cameraman to stop before he shoved it, and then he asked again after the cameraman picked it up and continued to film soley on Rogers yet again.

586158213[/snapback]

How do you know he asked this specific cameraman to stop? Hard knowing since the video shows him coming directly from the clubhouse right to the cameraman. Why did he go after all the others, too? Did he warn them as well?

I strongly urge you to lay off the 'ignorant' comments to others. It seems the media is in the dark about the events leading to the maliciousness, and you seem to know it step by step....so I would say no one is ignorant, as it's all speculations and heresay. The only black and white is the attack on the cameraman. Injured or not, he was attacked.

[Ayepecks]

Congrats.  But were you there when the incident happened?  That was the question.  Right now it sounds like you were in Roger's pocket or his shadow or something, because you certainly know a whole lot that wasn't disclosed previously.

How do you know he asked this specific cameraman to stop?  Hard knowing since the video shows him coming directly from the clubhouse right to the cameraman.  Why did he go after all the others, too?  Did he warn them as well?

I strongly urge you to lay off the 'ignorant' comments to others.  It seems the media is in the dark about the events leading to the maliciousness, and you seem to know it step by step....so I would say no one is ignorant, as it's all speculations and heresay.  The only black and white is the attack on the cameraman.  Injured or not, he was attacked.

586158600[/snapback]

I sure know a whole lot that wasn't previously disclosed? Please, BOOG, I live less than 30 minutes from the stadium, do you think I don't see all of this in the news or on the newspaper? Pretty much everything I've stated has been disclosed, with the exception of my opinions, because obviously they're my opinions. For some reason I highly doubt that you've been picking up the local newspapers from around here to read, or were at the game, or even know anymore than what ESPN has shown. I know he asked the camermen (I said men earlier, don't try and change it) to stop because it was REPORTED. And he went after that cameraman and asked another to remove his camera... so stop trying to imply that there were more than that, because there weren't.

The media is not in the dark about the incidents. Not in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area, at least. Rogers was upset that the media was criticizing his contract negotions, his decision not to pitch after he broke his non-pitching hand, and was just upset with the media. He hasn't talked to the media since February, if I remember correctly.

Please do not tell me what I do know and what I don't know. If you lived in this area I'm sure you'd be acting the same way, too. The outside media hasn't reported more on it because it's only a star player being rude... tell me, why would the outside media really dig into the situation much more? If there was a situation that happened in your area, where you were at the game, and where the media is going to update you more frequently since it's your town, then I think I'd trust what you say. If you don't want to believe me, fine.

[christracy]

Are you actually that ignorant, or are you just pretending to be?

Watch the video and you'll understand why I say that (in regards to your "it doesnt cover your body but it does cover your eye," comment).

"everyone in sports thinks he was wrong and the punishment is justified."

Can you please provide evidence for every single person in sports? Kthxbye.

"f i shoved your backpack would you take offense to me shoving your backpack or take it as me shoving you?"

I would take it as you want my backpack, as Rogers wanted the camera.

586158562[/snapback]

OK no need for name calling. when u go that route it seems your an angry Rangers season ticket holder. As this picture shows it does cover his eye. most people i have heard talk about it, in media and real life, thinks it was wrong of him to go after the guy. and if you'd think i want ur backpack and not think of me attacking you then there is no further discussion to be had.

Edited July 3, 2005 by christracy

[....]

OK no need for name calling.? when u go that route it seems your an angry Rangers season ticket holder.? As this picture shows it does cover his eye. most people i have heard talk about it, in media and real life, thinks it was wrong of him to go after the guy.? and if you think that i for one minute believe that if i shoved your backpack you'd think i want the backpack and not react as if i was attacking you then i wont respond any further.

586158716[/snapback]

Well, that picture itself pretty much nullifies a lot of what Scorpio's been trying to say in this thread. The eyepiece, and the shove. Clear as day.

Seems like the local news isn't so accurate.

[Ayepecks]

No, it hardly nullifies what I have said at all, but good try, BOOG.

What I was referring to was the fact that the eyepiece hardly touched Mr. Gonzalez at all. How about you post the entire video and then we'll see when "there is no further discussion to be had." Because Rogers obviously shoved the camera from beneath, and the camera then came around the back, hardly touching Mr. Gonzalez's (I can't recall his first name, so bear with me) eye at all. Secondly, when he got the camera for a second time Rogers pushed it from the side, and it didn't touch his eye at all.

And, yes, I would think that you wanted my backpack if you were trying to shove it off me, as Rogers was doing with Mr. Gonzalez. He was trying to get the camera off the man, nothing more, nothing less. Did I ever say he didn't shove the camera? No, I never said such a thing -- it was utterly obvious that he did.

Oh, and you never gave me a report of all professional athletes that thought the punishment was justified or that what Rogers did was wrong. Please continue with that, thanks. How about you look at some of one of Rogers former teams (the Twins) and then get back to me, OK?

BOOG, if you've got something to say, say it. You've done nothing to back up your case, so how about you say something to disprove me, or just not state anything at all. That picture does absolutely nothing to nullify anything that I've said. Local news is far more accurate than any of this national crap you can dig up, so just try and back up your stance (what is it, by the way? Because all you've done is disagree with me, but given nothing to actually disprove anything I say) with some national coverage. Remember: don't look at anything from the Dallas-Fort Worth area, or Texas, in general.

[Ayepecks]

Oh, and I can post pictures all day if you want to play that game...

The camera being pulled down, nowhere near injuring the cameraman's eyes.

The camera being thrown over the head of the camerman, nowhere near injuring his eyes. Look at the picture -- see any blood around his eyes? And sagging? Maybe a black eye? I don't.

There is no further discussion to be had, everyone who disagrees with me has now had their argument null and void :rolleyes: (See how idiotic that sounds?)

Oh, and can someone please tell me where in this video the cameraman (read: not camera) is shoved? How about where is eye is injured, and his neck hurt? Maybe where he broke an arm or a leg?

http://www.wltx.com/video/vdoplayer.aspx?a...sid=28566&bw=hi

[Fred Derf Veteran]

Touching a camera IS NOWHERE NEAR akin to touching a person. Your comparison is absolutely and utterly asinine in that a shirt is physically over and concealing your body -- a video camera is on your shoulder, it is covering no part of your body.

Shoving an object being carried by a person is not akin to shoving the person. If I were to punch a purse being carried by a woman would I be punching the woman? Please. I would not be touching the woman, I would not be causing harm to her, or anything similar to that.

Rogers did absolutely nothing to harm the cameraman, so don't even imply as much. The cameraman was physically harmed in no way. As I said: he did not punch him, nor did he kick him. Like I said, saying he shoved the guy is a stretch because all he did was shove the camera off of the guy's shoulder to the ground. If you shoved a backpack I was wearing you would not be shoving me -- there is an extreme difference there.

Please, if you're going to make an analogy, at least make it a good one.

I was at the game, I have season tickets.

And, you're right. The cameraman had a right to be there. Fox 4 got permission (and owns the rights to Rangers games), and he was allowed to be there. But, as I already said, Rogers asked the cameramen not to film him. He asked this before the game even started, and he told the cameraman to stop before he shoved it, and then he asked again after the cameraman picked it up and continued to film soley on Rogers yet again.

586158213[/snapback]

Cameras are heavy and they usually rest on a pad on the camera operator's shoulders. They may also be strapped around the camera operator's neck. Thus shoving the camera that is either indirectly or directly attached to the person is akin to shoving the person.

If someone pulled a woman's purse hard enough to cause her to fall, it would be assault. Rogers shoved this guys camera hard enough to be considered an assault on the camera operator. As to whether he wishes to press charges and whether the police wish to take it to trial is another matter. It was, however, an assult.

Technically, it would be an assult to ever threaten such an action (at least by Canadian law).

[Fred Derf Veteran]

Oh, and I can post pictures all day if you want to play that game...

586159159[/snapback]

Those pictures are the pictures of an assult. The victim need not bleed. He need not even be physically touched.