1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Whitlock on the gay umpire

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by PopeDirkBenedict, Aug 13, 2010.

  1. PopeDirkBenedict

    PopeDirkBenedict Active Member

    I am not the world's biggest Jason Whitlock fan, but he nailed it with this one. The ending is superb.

  2. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    I enjoyed the meat of the story, getting to know who Van Raaphorst is and how he came to be where he is.

    But the ending didn't really move me.
  3. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    Good column. Glad he brought himself into it.

    I guess I'm stunned that being a gay umpire would even be an issue. I hope the guy gets another break.
  4. kingcreole

    kingcreole Active Member

    That was better than anything Whitlock has written for the Star in years. I know that's not saying much, but I thoroughly enjoyed that column. Good stuff. Props to Whitlock.
  5. JimmyOlson

    JimmyOlson Member

    My only quibble was the lack of sourcing of the quotes. It made me pause. To be fair, this was the first I had heard of the story, so I didn't realize the quotes from the rant were out there.

    But, like I said, it was only a pause. That was a great, great column.
  6. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    Agreed. Good story, but the ending didn't work for me at all.
  7. PaperDoll

    PaperDoll Well-Known Member

    FYI: Jeff Pearlman did a piece for SI on the same incident -- which was posted a couple of hours before Whitlock's, according to the website timestamps. He sources quotes to Outsports.com and the Edmonton Journal.
  8. sprtswrtr10

    sprtswrtr10 Member

    I'm interested in what people think. While I prefer the sourcing of Pearlman, I like more the tone from Whitlock, even while, politically, for full disclosure, I am solidly on the left, pro gay-marriage, in-military, it's the last bastion of legal bigotry, etc. etc. The way Whitlock wrapped it up reminded me (not to equalize the two statements, but …) of Obama's speech on race during the campaign. Bowers offered himself up at his very, very worst. He deserves what he got. But it's probably not all he is, either. Maybe we couldn't all become Bowers in a regrettable moment, as Whitlock says, but we all have character flaws that can be exposed when presented with the right (wrong) circumstances.
  9. PCLoadLetter

    PCLoadLetter Well-Known Member

    I think both pieces work very well, save for Whitlock's ending. Interesting that one took it almost entirely from the ump's viewpoint and the other from the manager's.

    The sourcing wasn't an issue for me, particularly since Bowers didn't dispute it.
  10. Sam Mills 51

    Sam Mills 51 Active Member

    Both were right on target. Good to see that some can bury the axes long enough to acknowledge quality.
  11. JCT89

    JCT89 Member

    Bowers comment about having a gay cousin is just so lame. It honestly reminds me of the racist guy that claims he's not really racist for saying inappropriate things because he has "black friends."
  12. thatshot

    thatshot New Member

    I thought this thread was going to be about something else...

    Jokes aside, great column. The Star got their moneysworth on this one.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page