spiffalicious Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jul 18, 2006 -> 04:15 PM) So is it vacation time, sabbatical, suspension, or what? How much vacation time would a columnist have if his editor says he won't be back "for weeks and weeks and weeks"? I think Mariotti is lying again, or at the very least not telling the whole truth. What else is new. He said he has 8 weeks off and will be back in mid August. He wouldn't give an exact date. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeman89 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 sweet, 8 weeks. that means this thread can close down and we can stop talking about this fairy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lefty Of Love Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 They were just talkin about AROD and his 3 errors yesterday on ATH when woody paige said "Jay made 3 errors in the first segment" Jay replied "I never make errors." The guy is a f***in joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxpride77 Posted July 18, 2006 Share Posted July 18, 2006 I pray that he never comes back. He exists simply to stir the pot, and he says whatever he wants to with no regard to the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jul 18, 2006 -> 04:15 PM) So is it vacation time, sabbatical, suspension, or what? How much vacation time would a columnist have if his editor says he won't be back "for weeks and weeks and weeks"? I think Mariotti is lying again, or at the very least not telling the whole truth. What else is new. Its all of the above. Hes kind of suspended, hes kind of on vacation. The SunTimes is in a very tough spot with Mariotti. They cant "suspend" him, because it then admits Censorship, which would be the death-blow for a Newspaper. Mariotti is furious at his paper ........... so there is a detente of sorts between the two. Mariotti is taking some time to "cool off", and the paper is looking the other way regarding his vacation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Like being kind of pregnant I guess. If Mariotti doesn't currently have free choice to come back and start writing columns, it's a suspension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 08:46 AM) Like being kind of pregnant I guess. If Mariotti doesn't currently have free choice to come back and start writing columns, it's a suspension. at the same time though, hes taking as much time as he wants. And the SunTimes isnt really sweating him about it either. Hes staying away, and the Times is glad hes away ....... for now. Like I said, his paper is FURIOUS about the charge he made against them, and that can hurt the papers credibility (ive called out some of their writers already) Immensely. The Trib is watching this situation veryclosely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighurt574 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 How does suspending him admit censorship? If Mariotti's allegation was completely false, would a suspension not be warranted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RibbieRubarb Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 08:59 AM) at the same time though, hes taking as much time as he wants. And the SunTimes isnt really sweating him about it either. Hes staying away, and the Times is glad hes away ....... for now. Like I said, his paper is FURIOUS about the charge he made against them, and that can hurt the papers credibility (ive called out some of their writers already) Immensely. The Trib is watching this situation veryclosely Are these just your opinions or do you actually have sources that are telling you these facts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Hangar, I don't think the Trib is wasting anytime monitoring this "situation". People are not going to stop buying the Sun-Times because there was a situation with Mariotti that turned bad. Everyone knows he has no credibility and anything he says carries little or no weight. bighurt574 hit the nail on the head. By suspended him, they are not admitting that there was censorship, they are disciplining him for getting out of line and going beyond his scope of duties. I wouldn't be surprised if we've seen the last of him with the Times. He is probably looking for a new job right now, maybe a permanent figure on Around the Horn! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gojimthome Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(RME JICO @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 11:22 AM) He is probably looking for a new job right now, maybe a permanent figure on Around the Horn! That would be the perfect place for him. If the Sun-Times fired him and he went full-time ESPN, it would be like Sea-World freeing Willy or whatever. "Back to your own kind you go, little fella! No, don't look back! Just go! Go, damn you! *crying*" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(RME JICO @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 04:22 PM) I wouldn't be surprised if we've seen the last of him with the Times. He is probably looking for a new job right now, maybe a permanent figure on Around the Horn! He's probably in line for a full time ESPN job a la Woody Paige. I wouldn't mind this. He really isn't all too bad most of the time on AtH. Of course, he is there mainly for his comedic value as he has a long standing rivalry with Woody Paige. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 This is funny, from Scott Reifert's blog this morning: "Our favorite columnist took to the airwaves on WSCR earlier this week to explain that he is, indeed, on vacation. During the interview, he again criticized me (imagine that) when responding to a question from North about his contact with the team. North quoted from a recent article in the Chicago Reader that mentioned "emails" that had been sent to me. To clarify, the columnist has never sent me an email. His preferred method of communication is voicemail, and I have received some strong ones over the years (imagine that). Many probably wouldn't get past the MLBAM censor to be posted here, but there have been a couple recently that we have debated making public, solely to show everyone just who and what we deal with when it is not vacation season. We might have that debate once again ... During his interview, the columnist also criticized the Chicago Tribune's media writer for not calling him or his editor before writing articles about the issue. I can't speak for the general public, but I sense some irony here. Is he asking the Tribune writer to talk personally to his sources (in a sense to "show up")? Is that ironic or is it just me?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 01:46 PM) During his interview, the columnist also criticized the Chicago Tribune's media writer for not calling him or his editor before writing articles about the issue. BAHAHAHAHAHA, are you f'n joking me???? Wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 01:46 PM) This is funny, from Scott Reifert's blog this morning: "Our favorite columnist took to the airwaves on WSCR earlier this week to explain that he is, indeed, on vacation. During the interview, he again criticized me (imagine that) when responding to a question from North about his contact with the team. North quoted from a recent article in the Chicago Reader that mentioned "emails" that had been sent to me. To clarify, the columnist has never sent me an email. His preferred method of communication is voicemail, and I have received some strong ones over the years (imagine that). Many probably wouldn't get past the MLBAM censor to be posted here, but there have been a couple recently that we have debated making public, solely to show everyone just who and what we deal with when it is not vacation season. We might have that debate once again ... During his interview, the columnist also criticized the Chicago Tribune's media writer for not calling him or his editor before writing articles about the issue. I can't speak for the general public, but I sense some irony here. Is he asking the Tribune writer to talk personally to his sources (in a sense to "show up")? Is that ironic or is it just me?" This is one vote for releasing the tapes. Blow the lid off of the fraud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox72 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I would love to hear these tapes. I think it would be great to fully expose this tool for what he really is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(bighurt574 @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 10:22 AM) How does suspending him admit censorship? If Mariotti's allegation was completely false, would a suspension not be warranted? He came out and said he had a problem with his paper, because theyve "censored" his SOX columns back in October. His paper of course is very angry that he made this charge. Have you heard anyone from the SunTimes saying otherwise? Of course not, they want that to go away very quietly, but at the same time, arent happy that he made that known. The only thing I like about all of this, is that he made the same charge to the Trib censoring their own writers, and it was very timely, as Sullivan had a behind-the-scenes beatdown administered to him by people from the other team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gojimthome Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Scott Reifert is great. Those voicemails need to be leaked to jaythejoke.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I suspect Mariotti has a different definition of "censorship" than his editors do, and therein lies the problem. Columnists are subject to the editorial red pen much the same as staff writers. None of the other Sun Times columnists seem to be complaining about censorship. That, to me, speaks volumes, especially since the Sun Times employs several long term, veteran columnists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 02:46 PM) I suspect Mariotti has a different definition of "censorship" than his editors do, and therein lies the problem. Columnists are subject to the editorial red pen much the same as staff writers. None of the other Sun Times columnists seem to be complaining about censorship. That, to me, speaks volumes, especially since the Sun Times employs several long term, veteran columnists. And if you throw in their seeming market as the "tabloid" newspaper of Chicago complete with the blaring/misleading headlines, and prominantly placed gossip columnists, it makes it all that much more amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 And if you throw in their seeming market as the "tabloid" newspaper of Chicago complete with the blaring/misleading headlines, and prominantly placed gossip columnists, it makes it all that much more amazing. Exactly, as in, what on earth could he have written that can't even get approved by Sun Times editors? Must have been something really imflammatory. Again, it's all speculation but I find it interesting that it's Mariotti who seems to have a pattern of trouble with editors/program directors/bosses. Sooner or later the finger points squarely at him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hangar18 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 QUOTE(JimH @ Jul 19, 2006 -> 03:19 PM) Exactly, as in, what on earth could he have written that can't even get approved by Sun Times editors? Must have been something really imflammatory. Again, it's all speculation but I find it interesting that it's Mariotti who seems to have a pattern of trouble with editors/program directors/bosses. Sooner or later the finger points squarely at him. Thats a good question, what could he have possibly written, that the paper deemed it necessary to Censor its own writer? Could it have been that trashy? that uncalled for? It never stopped the SunTimes before. Maybe he has something, maybe someone from the SOX did put the screws on the SunTimes and they indeed censored his articles and he decided to blow the whistle on them. Maybe it wasnt even something that ridiculous or unfounded. The SunTimes has never done this before (to my knowledge anyway) but again, making a charge like this Ruins the Credibility (whatever the SunTimes has left) of the newspaper. Thats why nobody is really talking, other than Jay. On that note, we havnt heard a peep out of Sullivan for that matter either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoRowand33 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 what awesome irony in Jay asking to be called before he is written badly about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 but again, making a charge like this Ruins the Credibility (whatever the SunTimes has left) of the newspaper. On that note, we havnt heard a peep out of Sullivan for that matter either What charge? The credibility of the newspaper is, IMO, increased now that Mariotti is on, ahem, "vacation". Maybe they are just sick and tired of dealing with Mariotti's difficult "I want it my way and my way only" personality. I suspect that's exactly the case. Sullivan's issue was Cubs brass felt he was printing personal criticism of the players vs. professional criticism. Fine line I suppose, but they hashed it out in private, which is the way it should be done. Sullivan has basically said as such on the Sun. morning baseball radio programs. Viewpoints were exchanged, it appears over, and that's that. Thats a good question, what could he have possibly written, that the paper deemed it necessary to Censor its own writer? Could it have been that trashy? that uncalled for? It never stopped the SunTimes before. It happens every day ... at the Sun Times and every paper in America. Editors say "no, that's not going to be printed." Sometimes it's whole stories, sometimes it's one line of a story, sometimes it's one word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 You would have to guess in the postseason he was trying to be critical in a column of the Sox. When a team is in the World Series, big city newspapers tend to jump on the bandwagon big time and they probably didn't want any negative crap coming out of the Mariotti camp. You have to give the Sox credit for shutting up all the pundits last postseason. If they would have choked it away to Cleveland in September it would have been monumental, still being written about with potshots. If they would have lost any of the series in which they grabbed the commanding early lead, i.e. going up 2-0 on Houston, etc. the talk of hexes and choking also would be there. Good job SOX. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.