Jump to content

Cardinals ban booze in the clubhouse


Recommended Posts

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/nl/cardinals/2007-05-07-alcohol-ban-hancock_N.htm

 

The St. Louis Cardinals banned alcohol in their clubhouse after the police report that pitcher Josh Hancock was legally drunk at the time of his fatal car accident.

Hancock's blood-alcohol level was 0.157%, nearly twice the legal limit, when his rented Ford Explorer slammed into the back of a tow truck April 29. Police also discovered 8.5 grams of marijuana in his car.

 

"The one thing they have to understand is they're not invincible," Cardinals general manager Walt Jocketty said at a news conference. "They have to conduct themselves and make better decisions. … Unfortunately, Josh didn't make very good decisions that night."

 

The Cardinals, who don't recall Hancock having a drink in the clubhouse after his last game, decided they will prohibit beer in their home clubhouse and stop providing alcohol on their charter flights returning to St. Louis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 of 30

2000(Maybe thats generous, probably very generous) out of 30,000

 

 

You can't compare number like that when there is that much separation in size.

 

Why did the Cardinals ban alcohol in the clubhouse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So players don't get drunk and get in a wreck and die on the way home and because everyone wanted them too.

 

Exactly.

 

Lets now use your numbers.

 

2 players leave and are on the highway drunk.

 

2000(lets use 1000) fans leave the game and are now on the highway.

 

See the faulty logic? This by itself tells me the "ban" is for PR only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then Ban it everywhere if you want to use logic like that. Bars, house parties, Resturants you name it. And I really don't think the number is that great for people driving drunk at the game. Most people go with others and often times have a ride and some of the people don't drink more than 3 beers a game due to the cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Public relations attempt to save face...

Heard a report this morning that maybe some of the BGP lawyers can attest to, that a employer can be held responsible if the employee gets drunk on alcohol the employer provided and then left the grounds and were involved in a drunk driving incident that injured/killed someone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heard a report this morning that maybe some of the BGP lawyers can attest to, that a employer can be held responsible if the employee gets drunk on alcohol the employer provided and then left the grounds and were involved in a drunk driving incident that injured/killed someone.

 

It makes sense to me, but I'm not a lawyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then Ban it everywhere if you want to use logic like that. Bars, house parties, Resturants you name it. .

 

You have just made my point. The banning of alcohol in the clubhouse is PR only. If STL is truly concerned about the safety of the drivers of STL, they would not sell alcohol at the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have just made my point. The banning of alcohol in the clubhouse is PR only. If STL is truly concerned about the safety of the drivers of STL, they would not sell alcohol at the games.

 

 

THis could be said for all professional teams not just St. Louis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THis could be said for all professional teams not just St. Louis

 

Obviously. However, STL is the current one in the news.

 

Do you agree tht this is a hollow gesture since they allow fans to drink as much as they want for 3 hours?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.