Dirk Hayhurst

Dirk Hayhurst’s story of sexual abuse and debauchery in the minors has caused some blowback

116 Comments

Earlier this week, Dirk Hayhurst wrote about his 2003 rookie league team over at Sports on Earth. Specifically, their off-the-field sexual habits which ranged from mere immaturity to what seems to have been, by any definition of the term, rape. I linked the post here approvingly, as I believe that, for whatever else it is, it’s a revealing look at an ugly part of sports culture that is overlooked by many.

But there is that “for whatever else it is” part, and many have come out in the past few days to criticize Hayhurst for telling this story. Or telling it in this way. Or telling it at this time. Or in, possibly, overstating how many of his teammates were involved in what he described. There are a lot of good points being brought up in this regard.

One good read along these lines is Alexis Brudnicki’s, who reached out to some of Hayhurst’s teammates for their side of the story. Another is Eireann Dolan’s piece, which sharply criticizes Hayhurst for having stood silent for so long. If something was said or done about it back in 2003, she argues, the very culture that Hayhurst seeks to expose now could have been addressed then and, maybe, the perpetrators of these alleged crimes could have been dealt with. Dolan’s piece is based, unfortunately, on personal experience. Another is from Stacey May Fowles who, while getting Hayhurst’s intent, notes that, in some important ways, Hayhurst’s story is part of the problem when it comes to male attitudes about sexual abuse. All of these reads are worth your time.

For Hayhurst’s part, he responded to the criticism he has received this week on Twitter, accepting some of this criticism as well-placed, but defending himself as well. I’ll put his tweets together into paragraph form for easier reading:

Back in 2003, I was afraid to lose my job, nuke teammates with things that would be denied and near impossible to prove…I wasn’t the writer I am now. I was young and stupid and naive enough to believe baseball policed itself…The rule was never speak of team behavior outside the locker room, no matter how bad. if you did and caused drama you’d get cut, or worse…You’d get branded (ask Bouton) and subject to every form of frontier justice the game had… beaten and beaned for breaking the code . . .I didn’t write that SoE piece to accuse anyone but myself. It’s not an attack or an apology. It’s a recounting… an admission of what was . . . It’s an expose’ of baseball’s code of silence on sexist behavior, which I was a part of just as much as anyone else, and I own that…So, yes, I realize I look awful. Some think I’m a coward for speaking late. Some think I’m a rat for speaking at all…I realize how bad I look, but the truth isn’t always convenient for those who tell it. If it was, more of it would be told. Thank for reading my stuff, your support, and for putting up with this long thread of tweets invading your feed.

This is one of those situations where I can see everyone’s point of view to some extent. I do wish Hayhurst had spoken up sooner but I understand why a person in his situation didn’t. I do think he painted with a very broad brush, but I also understand that his intent — even if it wasn’t necessarily successfully pursued — was actually not to call out anyone specific (and some who complain in Brudnicki’s piece about the broad brush seem more upset about Hayhurst writing about his experiences in baseball than what he wrote here specifically). It’s a hard subject that involved failures on Hayhurst’s part. I’m not sure there is any way he could have written this which wouldn’t lead to criticism of some sort. I hope (and believe) that he knows that.

From the outside-looking-in, however, I am still glad Hayhurst wrote this, even if it wasn’t anything anyone truly wanted to read. The excesses that can and all-too-often do take place inside sports are very real and need to be talked about. Ideally, they’re talked about when they occur and when something can be done about them. But short of that, I hope that they can still be talked about so they can help us deal with this stuff in the future.

Sean Doolittle: “Refugees aren’t stealing a slice of the pie from Americans.”

ANAHEIM, CA - JUNE 25:  Sean Doolittle #62 of the Oakland Athletics pitches during the ninth inning of a baseball game against the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim at Angel Stadium of Anaheim on June 25, 2016 in Anaheim, California.  (Photo by Sean M. Haffey/Getty Images)
Sean M. Haffey/Getty Images
19 Comments

In the past, we’ve commented on Athletics reliever Sean Doolittle and his girlfriend Eireann Dolan’s community service. In 2015, the pair hosted Syrian refugee families for Thanksgiving and their other charitable efforts have included LGBTQ outreach and help for veterans.

Athletes and their significant others have typically avoided stepping into political waters, but Doolittle and Dolan have shown that it’s clearly no concern to them. In the time since, the Syrian refugee issue has become even more of a hot-button issue and Doolittle recently discussed it with Mike DiGiovanna of the Los Angeles Times.

I think America is the best country in the world because we’ve been able to attract the best and brightest people from all over the world. We have the smartest doctors and scientists, the most creative and innovative thinkers. A travel ban like this puts that in serious jeopardy.

I’ve always thought that all boats rise with the tide. Refugees aren’t stealing a slice of the pie from Americans. But if we include them, we can make the pie that much bigger, thus ensuring more opportunities for everyone.

Doolittle, of course, is referring to Executive Order 13769 signed by President Trump which sought to limit incoming travel to the United States from seven countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. A temporary restraining order on the executive order was placed on February 3, a result of State of Washington v. Trump.

Doolittle spoke more about the plight refugees face:

These are people fleeing civil wars, violence and oppression that we can’t even begin to relate to. I think people think refugees just kind of decide to come over. They might not realize it takes 18-24 months while they wait in a refugee camp. They go through more than 20 background checks and meetings with immigration officers. They are being vetted.

They come here, and they want to contribute to society. They’re so grateful to be out of a war zone or whatever they were running from in their country that they get jobs, their kids go to our schools, they’re paying taxes, and in a lot of cases, they join our military.

Around this time last year, Craig wrote about Doolittle and Dolan not sticking to baseball. They’re still not, nor should they be. Hopefully, the duo’s outspokenness inspires other players and their loved ones to speak up for what’s right.

[Hat tip: Deadspin’s Hannah Keyser]

Russell Martin is not a fan of the automatic intentional walk

CLEVELAND, OH - OCTOBER 15:  Russell Martin #55 of the Toronto Blue Jays reacts after being struck out in the fourth inning against the Cleveland Indians during game two of the American League Championship Series at Progressive Field on October 15, 2016 in Cleveland, Ohio.  (Photo by Elsa/Getty Images)
Elsa/Getty Images
10 Comments

On Tuesday, it was announced that Major League Baseball instituted a new rule allowing for a dugout signal in order to issue an intentional walk rather than having the pitcher throw four pitches wide of the strike zone. It’s commissioner Rob Manfred’s attempt to help improve the game’s pace of play.

As Sportsnet’s Shi Davidi reports, Blue Jays catcher Russell Martin is certainly not a fan of the change.

My thing is, if they really want to speed up the game, then when a guy hits a home run, to speed up the game should a guy, just like in softball, when he hits it, should he just walk to the dugout? It’d be quicker. I’m just wondering, at what point do we just keep the game, the game? Or, how about this calculation: take all the intentional walks that were made in the last couple years and calculate – or maybe just ask to see if they have that information, to see if they really did their homework. Is it really that important to speed up the game (with this rule)? Because how many games did we play last year where we didn’t have one intentional walk? That’s something I’d like to know.

Martin also expressed concern that eliminating the four-pitch intentional walk will hurt teams’ ability to buy time for their relievers to warm up.

It’s called getting your bullpen ready so the guy doesn’t blow out his arm on the mound. Speed up the game, speed up the game.’ How about we just give guys – the human being – time to warm up on the mound after maybe something’s happened in the game? I’m not a manager, but I’m just trying to put myself in the position of a manager. OK, we’re up by one run or two runs and our bullpen’s been taxed and we’re trying to save their arms, and then the other team walks, ball gets away, guy gets to second base. When the coach visits the mound to talk to his player, it’s not like the player necessarily needs somebody to talk to him.

It’s because the guy (in the bullpen) needs time to warm up, man. It’s the same thing when you throw over to first base, like, eight times in a row. It’s not like we’re trying to keep the guy close. The guy maybe has two stolen bases in 18 years. It’s because the guy needs time to warm up. At what point does that become a problem with guys warming up in the bullpen? Sometimes it’s just strategy to give guys a little bit of time to warm up.

The Jays’ backstop then said he’d prefer if Manfred were honest about the intent behind this rule change and others which have been proposed. Martin said, “Save it. I’m tired of hearing that same lame excuse all the time. Just be honest. If they’re honest about it, we’ll get over it. But don’t hide behind the fans.”

We should be hearing from a handful of players about the new intentional walk rule in the coming days. I can’t imagine the rule is very popular among the players.