Will They Never Learn Redux

You didn't hear the YES folks mention this story on the telecast last night. Honestly, it's getting harder and harder to maintain any allegiance to this franchise. We all know that as fans it's our lot to be taken for granted, and that we make our compromises in rooting for any commercial venture. But there also should be some kind of compact between team and its loyal devotees, and it seems like the Yankees have decided they're just not interested in maintaining it. And if they're not, why should we? Especially if the show stinks. 

23 comments… add one
  • I agree – this is awful. You know, though, there are options. Fans can file a small claims suit for what, $20? The Yankees would spend more defending the case than just giving these fans a refund. It’s a crappy solution, but it would likely work.
    Otherwise, last night was tough call. Making fans wait 2+ hours is terrible. But making them wait for another game, and a second trip to the stadium, is far worse. They made the right call because they got the game in.

    Rob May 5, 2009, 11:24 am
  • Actually, Rob, why couldn’t the Yankees just LET PEOPLE BACK IN WHO HAD TICKET STUBS? Again, utter tone-deafness. I highly doubt that there were hundreds of deadbeat fans waiting around for paying customers to discard their ticket stubs then take those and get into a game if it were played – the fact is that fans who thought the game was rained out would hold onto their stubs for the re-scheduled game. This is sheer idiocy on the part of the team not to let people back into the Park if they held a legitimate stub.

    SF May 5, 2009, 11:38 am
  • Did you miss the part where I said?:
    “I agree – this is awful.”
    But let me also say, it’s very hard these days to say what’s a “legitimate” stub – a fact that I will be surely taking advantage of. For instance, I went to the game on Saturday with a black and white printout. Once that seat is scanned, it now becomes impossible at the gate to say if that printout or another non-scanned one are the legitimate stub. In making things more convenient for fans, they’ve basically made it much harder to police things.
    That said, last night should have been an easy exception. The park wasn’t full. Still, someone had to have the cohones to go against the technology and thus their policies to do the right thing. Since fans were given faulty advice, that’s grounds for a lawsuit, esp. when $800 is at stake.

    Rob May 5, 2009, 11:48 am
  • Agree 100% that not letting them back in seems silly. If a game is rained out you NEED your stub, so you are right on SF. The only issue I have and I have been at quite a few rainouts is that you should never, ever leave until you hear the announcement OR see it on the board. They make an announcement over the PA and they post it on the board so that everyone can hear it or see it. It’s a shame though that the “Can I Help” folks passed along the wrong message. Either way I am sure the Yankees will try and make this right.

    John - YF May 5, 2009, 11:49 am
  • Wasn’t shouting at you, Rob, more just expressing my disbelief with what transpired. Sorry that came off like that. Fans going to small claims court may be a remedy, I have no idea, but the simple fact is that a smart business person could have made the decision to let people back in the park in like two seconds, it shows a complete lack of sense to do what the Yankees did – the consideration of allowing people in, even if they had PHONY ticket stubs (how many people would this even have been? Think about that: who raced home to print out phonies so they could get in if the game was actually played!?) should have been a total no-brainer. This stuff is just inconceivable to me.

    SF May 5, 2009, 11:53 am
  • What probably happened is that the “Can I help you” guys said something along the lines of “This game probably isn’t getting played tonight,” so the fans took that as advice and left. Rule #1: don’t leave the game until it is officially called.
    Having said that, it’s dumb that they didn’t let people back in. Sure there’s the fear of people getting back in illegally, but if there are lots of ushers walking around checking for tickets then this isn’t really an issue. Dick move on their part.

    Atheose May 5, 2009, 11:53 am
  • the consideration of allowing people in, even if they had PHONY ticket stubs (how many people would this even have been? Think about that: who raced home to print out phonies so they could get in if the game was actually played!?) should have been a total no-brainer. This stuff is just inconceivable to me.
    It’s not that, it’s that people could pull the “three men enter, one leaves with all three ticket stubs, and lets two more guys in” trick. Obviously the odds of this being an issue last night were slim, and the Yankees management should have changed their policy considering the way things turned out. But every stadium I’ve ever been to has that no-reentry policy. I wonder who made the call on this? How far up the chain of command did this decision go?

    Atheose May 5, 2009, 11:56 am
  • It’s not that, it’s that people could pull the “three men enter, one leaves with all three ticket stubs, and lets two more guys in” trick.
    Like you say, last night this was probably unlikely to happen. And if it did, SO WHAT? They get additional concession revenue, frankly, and a situation like last night occurs what, a couple of times a season? The people who should NOT be blamed are the gate officials enforcing the rules – this one falls on management.
    I have no beef with management trying to get the game in, and waiting, that’s fine. But they needed to let people back in the stadium and write off the problem of people entering under the “3/1” scenario you describe Ath.

    SF May 5, 2009, 12:02 pm
  • Keep in mind that I said: “Obviously the odds of this being an issue last night were slim, and the Yankees management should have changed their policy considering the way things turned out.” Agree with you 100%, was just pointing out a detail.

    Atheose May 5, 2009, 12:06 pm
  • No worries, SF.
    I wonder who made the call on this? How far up the chain of command did this decision go?
    That’s the thing – I have little doubt it never made it to Yankee management. Security is a private company. They were enforcing their contractual obligations and someone needed to release them. But someone had to ask management.

    Rob May 5, 2009, 12:06 pm
  • But someone had to ask management.
    Security Head to Randy Levine’s answering service: “uh, can you please ask Mr. Levine if can we let a bunch of fans back in, they have stubs and we have a near-riot on our hands here at the concourse”
    Randy Levine’s Assistant: “Mr. Levine is busy eating caviar off a stripper’s stomach, but he said to tell you no, that they made their beds, they can sleep in them. Also, he said that next time maybe they shouldn’t get so scared of a little water. Have fun with your tasers.”

    SF May 5, 2009, 12:11 pm
  • I think this entire situation can be boiled down to the fact that we are all (myself included) jealous that we’re not currently eating caviar off strippers.

    Atheose May 5, 2009, 12:16 pm
  • Speak for yourself! :)

    Rob May 5, 2009, 12:28 pm
  • The Daily News reported “scores” of fans actually were let in for a brief time a couple gates down from the infamous Gate 6, and some more were let in after the crowd dispersed at Gate 6 itself. So either someone made a quick policy change or no one’s running the show at the turnstiles.
    Equally distressing: Stadium security threatening to take a Daily News photog’s credential for taking pictures at the scene.

    Paul SF May 5, 2009, 1:07 pm
  • It has been an amazing p.r. nightmare for the Yankees this year.
    All the Alex Rodriguez stuff, Joba’s DUI. Now we learn that Joba’s mom gets busted for selling meth to an undercover cop. (Before you jump on me, remember the sins of the father/mother are not the sins of the son. I’m merely pointing this out to make my larger point.)
    So much of this convergence of bad publicity is not their doing.
    But then they go and do THAT last night. Where’s the common sense?

    I'mBillMcNeal May 5, 2009, 1:30 pm
  • Your use of “they” Bill is exceedingly sloppy. The only connection between the Yankees (as an organization) and all those very disparate events is the (very) free association in your mind. As for last night, as more information comes to light, it seems the Security (a hired private entity) made an initial call based on their SOP, then got overruled. The Yankees, however flawed, made the right call.
    I know we want villains. But let’s at least be more honest than the tabloids.

    Rob May 5, 2009, 1:40 pm
  • Rob, um, you’re making my point.
    As I stated, several events have occurred (ARod, Joba) that reflect poorly on the Yankees merely because those persons involved are Yankees.
    To quote me: “So much of this convergence of bad publicity is not their doing.” (By THEIR I mean the Yankees.)
    So it is you, Rob, who is having “free association” issues.
    RE last night: It would appear as though once the brass got wind of the turnstile situation they got it fixed. But again, it reflects poorly on the Yankees. It was the Yankees who hired this firm. Ultimately it is the Yankees who are responsible for their actions.
    (For what it’s worth, by the way, it is my understanding that at the end of Game 4 of the 2004 World Series, St. Louis Cardinals employees let Red Sox fans into Busch Stadium to enjoy the end of the game. No charge. I have my doubts that Fenway employees would have done the same thing had the circumstances been reversed.)
    But back to the Yankees: Here is another offering of oddities from the Daily News’ Bob Raismann: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2009/05/04/2009-05-04_yankees_put_squeeze_play_on_media_at_the_new_stadium.html

    I'mBillMcNeal May 5, 2009, 1:57 pm
  • Yeah, the Yankees only paying Joba 400K is why his Mom must resort to selling meth. Actually, I’m surprised someone at the Post or News hasn’t written that column yet.

    Rob May 5, 2009, 2:18 pm
  • I fail to see how Joba’s mom being arrested has any relevance to the Yankees or an image of the Yankees. It is utterly separate and completely saddening. Only a minute and completely sub-mental contingent of fans will free-associate Joba’s family matters with the Yankee organization, and only the most rabid Yankee hater would care to connect them.

    SF May 5, 2009, 2:48 pm
  • Joba’s mom being arrested for selling drugs is newsworthy in that Chamberlain himself has had at least one public problem with alcohol. It sheds some light on why JC might have issues of this kind. If he hadn’t been arrested for DUI, I might buy the argument that it’s not much of a story, though certainly no one here can be surprised by a news report about a relative of a celebrity.

    Hudson May 5, 2009, 3:22 pm
  • No one said it wasn’t newsworthy (for a tabloid). It just has nothing to do with the Yankee organization, especially when one is admitting to “pointing this out to make [a] larger point” about the PR difficulties of said organization.

    Rob May 5, 2009, 3:40 pm
  • SF: “only the most rabid Yankee hater would care to connect them.”
    Hudson: “Joba’s mom being arrested for selling drugs is newsworthy in that Chamberlain himself has had at least one public problem with alcohol. ”
    Guess you are a rabid Yankee hater Hudson…. :)
    Joba has been estranged from his mom for years. While not surprising its in the news this has no bearing on the team right now.

    sam-YF May 5, 2009, 3:40 pm
  • Sam-YF: It has a bearing on the character of a Yankee player who had a “problem” with alcohol last summer. (In my opinion, driving while intoxicated is right up there with meth-dealing, as it puts the lives of total strangers at risk.) Chamberlain may be estranged from his mom, but he was raised at least in part by her — no? Hence the relevance, if we consider the character of athletes at all important. I do, at least to the extent that athletes are role models to lots of kids. I looked up to guys like Yaz in the ’70s and I doubt young boys (and girls) have changed *that* much in 30 years.

    Hudson May 5, 2009, 6:30 pm

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.