"We had an agreement," Curt Schilling, one of a handful of Red Sox players who talked with Major League Baseball on ground rules for the trip, told ESPN's Claire Smith.From what the players were saying, it sounded as if MLB was going to be in breach of its contract with the team players and staff. But the MLB breach would have been with the staff and assistants, not with the players, and so I wonder whether the players' refusing to go would have put them in breach. More likely, the trainers and assistants would be viewed as essential complements for the players, and if they had not gone on the trip (because of the breach), then likely the players could also have refused to go.
"Some of the promises have already been taken away, now this," Schilling said. "As far as the players are concerned, [withholding the coaches' bonuses] can't happen."
''When we voted to go to Japan, that was not a unanimous vote,'' Lowell told the Globe, "but we did what our team wanted us to do for Major League Baseball. They promised us the moon and the stars, and then when we committed, they started pulling back. It's not just the coaches, it's the staff, the trainers, a lot of people are affected by this.
But do you really think the refusal to go to Japan would have had "profound global ramifications"? Ordinarily, I think Jayson Stark [sidebar column here] has a lot of valuable insight, and I enjoy reading his columns, but this is a bit over the edge:
I have no doubt that these guys completely understand the profound global ramifications of this trip. Nobody needs to explain to them that this isn't just another road series on their pocket schedules. This is an event of major significance for the sport, for the franchise and for the nation they're about to visit.
It is probably obvious, but I decided to blog this after the Red Sox refused to play the Blue Jays but before the resolution, and especially after I read Stark's column, which I found amusing (though clearly prescient).




