FORT MYERS, Fla. -- The Boston Red Sox are threatening to boycott their season-opening games in Japan unless their coaches and other staff are paid for making the trip. Mike Lowell has told The Boston Globe the team voted unanimously not to take the field for their final spring training game or to board the plane later Wednesday for Japan. Manager Terry Francona and his players are upset after learning the staff is not going to get a $40,000 stipend that the players are receiving. Francona had told his coaches they would be paid. The World Series champions are to begin their season against Oakland with two games in Japan. Pretty funny but I'm actually glad they did it. Why shouldn't the coaches get paid for this?
Well, we wanted to show the world Major League Baseball, what better representation is there than this? Promise them a game, sell tickets and then sit it out because you're pissed off about the money.
They weren't pissed about THEIR money, they were pissed that the coaches and training staff etc weren't being treated fairly. In fact, if this hadn't been resolved and they boycotted the trip, I'm sure they would have LOST money.
But do you not see the irony in wanting to showcase the game overseas and then have a team not play a scheduled game because of whatever greivance?
No, I don't think that's ironic in any way. It would be unfortunate for MLB, but it's certainly not ironic.
How is that NOT ironic? MLB goes international again, hoping to spread interest in the game. Common sense dictates that they're trying to put their best foot forward. To have that showcase put on hold - right before it was supposed to occur - because of a labor/pay dispute that involves reneging on a previous agreement... well... I think that could safely be described as an incongruence between what was expected and what actually occurred.
So, now the question begging to be asked is this. Are the A's coaches being paid? Does this story still have more legs to it? The silence from the left coast has been deafening. Or are they not playing any exhibition games and does this only cover those?
Irony (n)- 1. the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning: the irony of her reply, ?How nice!? when I said I had to work all weekend.
I'm aware of what irony means. In fact, I'm aware of ALL of the meanings of the word. Since you want to play the dictionary game: Dictionary: irony (ī'rə-nē, ī'ər-) pronunciation n., pl. -nies. 1. 1. The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning. 2. An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning. 3. A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect. See synonyms at wit1. 2. 1. Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: ?Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated? (Richard Kain). 2. An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity. See Usage Note at ironic. http://www.answers.com/topic/irony
Even if you use that second definition it still doesn't fit the situation. If MLB went back on it's word to pay the coaches, it wouldn't e expected that the trip would still take place.
Bullshit. My gut reaction to your post? --> Semantics is the lowest and most tedious form of debate. And I think you're being purposefully obtuse if you're using this to attempt to argue the initial point. I spoke up because you said the situation was "certainly not ironic." When planning a trip to showcase a product (ML baseball), to witness said showcase devolve into a labor dispute does not shine the best light on your product. i.e. It is a clear incongruence between what one would expect and what actually occurs. "Hey, let's make a trip to show Japan how great MLB is!" "Whoops! WE f'd up, and our players are threatening to boycott the trip! That's certainly not what we expected when we made these plans." I don't care what you think about the details of the situation, or the right or wrong of it. My point was only that your dismissal of Italian Seafood's post about the irony of the situation was incorrect. It's pretty damn ironic. Or, at the very, very, very least, it was certainly not worthy of an outright dismissal. I find it difficult to believe that you can't see the irony in this situation.
