Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-07-05

of his own. He can tell them ali he
| pleases that he hasn't thought OF ever
| doing the managing thing; that he doesn't
want 1t; that he's bosom friend and
| chum Of the existing manager and
| wouldn't think OF doing anything to try
to gouge him out of his Job. But the
movement will go on all the same despite
the secretly chosen ones efforts to break
it up"
This same umpire has q theory that
frequent changes in the managership Of
clubs are first-rate things.
players get tired Of the same man.
ager." was the way he expressed it. MOT
only that. but they involuntarily fall into
a rut " hen one manager is at the head
Of the layout for too long time. They
learn all Of the managers little box Of
tricks. They know what he Is going to
direct them to do in certain instances and
cases. They apprehend in advance al
most the words he Is going to employ in
ordering them to do these certain things.
And so they begin to play the old army
game, as we call 1.-THE mechanical stuff
that never will any more. the way base
ball has developed, get a club anywhere
near the top position.
when a layout of ball players get this
kind of a line on their manager-when. I
mean, they know everything that he
knows and could follow his copy even II
he were not on the grounds-why. Il is
simply inevitable that they will sooner
or later get down to the army or barn
yard game. Even when the brighter
men of the club have ideas Of their own
with respect to the way certain things
should be done at critical junctures of the
game. they know that they can't have
their ideas carried out. and. if\the man
ager over them is man impatient of
suggestions. they soon get into the habit
of taking orders and not sticking in their
oar at all. That's where too much disci-
pline is bad thing for ball players. If
I were running ball club 1t seems to me
that I'd have it understood that every
man on the outfit should have the privi-
lege of rapping In any time he chose with
suggestions as to what ne thought ought
to be done. even IL the suggestions proved
the gang that I'd like them to stake me
to little consensus Of their ideas every
time kinky kind Of a play came up.
and / certainly would treat them ciyilly
when they came along with their little
ideas.
LAS 1t stands now. the discipline Of the
game is such that most OF the players
are entirely buffaloed when 1t comes to
Offering suggestions. The average man.
ager seems to take 1t as kind of an in
tended reflection on himself when a play
er who is keen for the success of the
nine swings along with his own idea as
to what ought to be done In a given case.
and few players who nudge through with
advice in this way ever are treated with
sufficient courtesy to induce them to
"cne back again with that kind of stuff.
When the ball player feels that he is a
sort of factor himself, in cooperation
with the actual manager. in putting plays
over and pulling the club out Of playing
interest in the game.
ITO get back to the idea of shifting
managers, I've noticed that when these
changes take place the club nearly always
picks up in its work to a noticeable ex-
tent. 1t doesn't make any difference If
the new manager is not. taking him all
in all, so good as his predecessor in the
managing line. He's Just new one,
that's all. and he's there with some new
stuff, and the men like to have these
they are able to unite all OF the stuff
that they've picked up from the previous
manager with the new ideas that are
brought along by the new man, and this
that nearly always works exceedingly to
the advantage Of the team with the new
manager.
IT'S dead-sure thing. too. that ball
players will do a whole lot better for one
manager than they will for another one.
1t doesn't necessarily follow, either. that
they're dissatisfied with their manager
when they don't do the very best they
know how. 1t often happens that when a
change Of managers Is made the notion
Is sort Of bruited around that the change
was made owing to the dissatisfaction OF
the players with the displaced manager.
This as I say. is not necessarily the case.
and. as a matter Of fact. it is not often
the case. 1t is simply a matter OF hui
manness on the part of the players, SO
to speak. Men following any pursuit In
life maybe you've noticed. will sort of
take a brace and forge ahead when a
new foreman or overseer or superintend-
ent or office boss or what not is placed
ove1 them. They are keen to show the
new man that they are there with 1t,
that they are next to their jobs. that they
want to do the best they know how and
that they are meaning to hold up the
hands of the new man.
There's quite a good deal of piffle talk
ed and written about ball players lay
ing down on their managers. Ball pay
ers who are of any account don't lay
down on anybody. If they laid down on
the managers they would be laying down
on themselves, of course, and ball play
ers are too keen for their contracts and
their end-of -the-season averages to do
any of that stuff purposely. They would
be biting off their noses to spite their
faces if. in order to get hunk with a
manager they didn't particularly fancy.
they diminished their speed and began to
loll around 1t isn't laying down. It's
simply that the players get into a rut
under one man and need now one"