Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ron Darling's book

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ron Darling's book

    I know there are plenty of people that love Ron Darling and think he is something special, but I dont think he can been more of scum bag if he tried by writing this book.

    The whole Lenny Dykstra thing is just off the charts horrendous by Darling to bring it up. Darling was so appalled that he admitted he high fived Dykstra after his first inning homer off of Boyd. Boyd said he never heard anything. Strawberry called Darling a liar, Gooden and Mitchell said they didnt hear a thing either. Now that doesnt mean that Dykstra did or didnt say it, but again it was so appalling that he waited 33 years to tell everyone to sell a book.

    Forget Dykstra for a minute.......he went after Met royalty:

    He tells about how Bob Murphy was passed on drunk on the trainers table during the 1986 playoffs in Houston. Why? The man is dead - he is revered as a Met announcer -- why do it? Imagine how awesome it is for Murphy's family to read/hear this.

    Gary Carter -- another guy that we lost. A great player and team leader. Darling calls him an ego maniac and tells about how Carters daughters were punching All Star Game ballots for the their father. Why tarnish the guy?

    Darling is doing well for himself with the announcing and being on the MLBN. So why?

    I wonder if there is anything about Keith Hernandez in the book. Keith as we know had his own demons. I wonder if Ron tells about any of it being that he has to sit right next to him. Those demons are in large part why Keith ended up on the Mets.

    Darling always speaks fondly of Ralph Kiner. I wonder if there is anything in the book about Kiner being a stone cold drunk?


    My hope that this blows up on Darling leaving SNY, TBS, and MLBN no choice but to fire him. Darling is nothing but disgusting.

    Last edited by Paulypal; 04-03-2019, 07:24 AM.

  • #2
    I actually purchased this book yesterday. I'm at the 3rd chapter now. I also read the last chapter first, where he speaks about the current status of the game. Good read so far. I like the stories about Dennis Eckersley & Mike Bordick's suits, David Cone on the airplane, and Harold Baines' against Nolan Ryan. I have a lot more to read, so no spoilers! I haven't reached the Bob Murphy story yet.

    He doesn't call Carter an egomaniac in a critical or embarrassing way. That excerpt felt more like light comedy to me. Why would Darling tell it? Because some fans want to know more about the personalities and quirks of the heroes they grew up watching, even if the details are not favorable.

    About the Lenny Dykstra matter -

    1). Darling specifically expresses remorse about being complicit, since he high-fived Dykstra after the HR. The excerpt effectively captures the thinking at the time, where players did morally questionable actions to get ahead. Darling isn't endorsing the thinking today; just illustrating that that was how things were at the time.

    2). Gooden, Strawberry, & Mitchell didn't call Darling a liar. They just said they didn't have a memory of it. Not the same as saying it didn't happen.

    3). Boyd said he didn't hear anything because he was focused on the game. Again, it's not the same as saying it didn't happen. Boyd admits that it may have happened, infact. Besides, I think Boyd would never concede that he got rattled by taunts and gave up a HR in the post-season as a result.

    Comment


    • #3
      He actually told the same story in the book he wrote called Failure and Triumph that he published two years ago. In that book, he stopped short of calling Dykstra a racist, though. I'm not sure why he is even releasing a second book since the last book he wrote is about the same thing and came out only 2 years ago.

      As for the story itself, we all know Dykstra is basically a thug and scumbag who cheated his way through life. I think he was an easy target for Darling and that this book is just a cash grab. Boyd himself said he did not hear Dykstra say anything and said they were even teammates in Japan, so no one except for Darling and Dykstra know if this really happened or if it is imagined. Either way, the event in question happened 33 years ago, so I hope it becomes old news again quickly.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by redban View Post
        I actually purchased this book yesterday. I'm at the 3rd chapter now. I also read the last chapter first, where he speaks about the current status of the game. Good read so far. I like the stories about Dennis Eckersley & Mike Bordick's suits, David Cone on the airplane, and Harold Baines' against Nolan Ryan. I have a lot more to read, so no spoilers! I haven't reached the Bob Murphy story yet.

        He doesn't call Carter an egomaniac in a critical or embarrassing way. That excerpt felt more like light comedy to me. Why would Darling tell it? Because some fans want to know more about the personalities and quirks of the heroes they grew up watching, even if the details are not favorable.

        About the Lenny Dykstra matter -

        1). Darling specifically expresses remorse about being complicit, since he high-fived Dykstra after the HR. The excerpt effectively captures the thinking at the time, where players did morally questionable actions to get ahead. Darling isn't endorsing the thinking today; just illustrating that that was how things were at the time.

        2). Gooden, Strawberry, & Mitchell didn't call Darling a liar. They just said they didn't have a memory of it. Not the same as saying it didn't happen.

        3). Boyd said he didn't hear anything because he was focused on the game. Again, it's not the same as saying it didn't happen. Boyd admits that it may have happened, infact. Besides, I think Boyd would never concede that he got rattled by taunts and gave up a HR in the post-season as a result.

        I was going to buy the book just because I thought it would be filled with funny stories. I am sure that most of the book is written just that way, but Darling saw it necessary to step on some heads to sell the book. I dont want to read any cheap shots.

        A quote from Strawberry:

        “You don’t do that. … You don’t make up things about a person that other players didn’t hear or other players didn’t know about,” Strawberry said on “The Michael Kay Show” on ESPN Radio. “Of course, I would’ve never … I would’ve jumped on [Dykstra] about it if he ever said something like that.

        “I never heard Lenny say anything racist. Never, ever. He’s not. I know this guy. I’ve seen this guy. I came through the minor leagues with him, I’ve had him in my home. This is not true, and it’s not fair.”


        He said "make things up" ,and "not true". That means Strawberry said it didnt happen. Therefore he called Darling a liar.


        I dont know if Dykstra said it or not nor do I care if he said it or not. Its irrelevant - What is relevant is that Darling found it ok to report on it 33 years later. Kicking a guy when he is down, and in some cases dead. If the upper crust of humanity was so appalled by it why didnt he address Dykstra in the dugout. Nope - the scumbag took notes and reported on it well after the fact. Meanwhile 5 minutes later he found it ok to high five Lenny after homering. OH YEAH he was remorseful about being complicit - Cmon lets get real.

        The Bob Murphy story could be funny between the players that were having a meeting around Murphy's passed out drunk body, but only between the players that witnessed it. You make that public and now his family reads it, and it tarnishes his image. Scumbag move. I wonder how much remorse he has about that.


        Classy guy.

        Last edited by Paulypal; 04-03-2019, 08:27 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Dykstra is officially suing Darling. A part of me thought they might have been colluding to generate controversy and publicity; not the case:

          https://nypost.com/2019/04/09/lenny-...st-taunts/amp/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by redban View Post
            Dykstra is officially suing Darling. A part of me thought they might have been colluding to generate controversy and publicity; not the case:

            https://nypost.com/2019/04/09/lenny-...st-taunts/amp/
            All I can say if Darling made even some of it up - he pays the price.

            As I said -- even if Lenny did what was reported by Darling --- Darling should have kept his mouth shut 33 years after the fact, and then he plays the role of how he was basically appalled by it. Yet high fived Lenny after his homer.

            Its actually pretty disgusting behavior.

            Strawberry flat out called Darling a liar. So who knows. Darling may have bit off a lot more than he can chew.

            I just cant imagine Lenny dropping the N word - yelling the N word from the dugout with Straw/Gooden/Mitchell sitting right there. If you remember anything about Mitchell the other players were afraid of him.

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't see what the point was in bringing it up now either, other than because that's bringing up ancient misdeeds is how things are these days. But based on the constant "Mr. P" and "Mister Perfect" references from Dykstra and Straw I think they were never buddies, I guess if one does a "tell us what it was really like all the juicy stuff" it runs this risk if not dome delicately or you get the "boring, bland" critique.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by PVNICK View Post
                I don't see what the point was in bringing it up now either, other than because that's bringing up ancient misdeeds is how things are these days. But based on the constant "Mr. P" and "Mister Perfect" references from Dykstra and Straw I think they were never buddies, I guess if one does a "tell us what it was really like all the juicy stuff" it runs this risk if not dome delicately or you get the "boring, bland" critique.
                What's the point of taking a history course in college about the the Roaring 20s; or reading a biography of Dwight Eisenhower, Babe Ruth, Wilt Chamberlain; or reading an account of the 1927 World Series. All recount "ancient" deeds, but they all have some value.

                For some fans, learning about the players's personalities and the way things were can enrich our understanding of the sport we love. If Dykstra did say those racist things to get ahead and got high-fived afterwards, then it speaks to the immoral mindset that pervaded the game; the way the players didn't care about what they needed to do to win a game.

                I don't see the story as Darling's bringing up an ancient misdeed just to bring it up.

                I think the question is whether the story is true or not true. If it's untruth, then he should have never said it. If it's truth, then he has every right to publicize it in his book.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by redban View Post

                  What's the point of taking a history course in college about the the Roaring 20s; or reading a biography of Dwight Eisenhower, Babe Ruth, Wilt Chamberlain; or reading an account of the 1927 World Series. All recount "ancient" deeds, but they all have some value.

                  For some fans, learning about the players's personalities and the way things were can enrich our understanding of the sport we love. If Dykstra did say those racist things to get ahead and got high-fived afterwards, then it speaks to the immoral mindset that pervaded the game; the way the players didn't care about what they needed to do to win a game.

                  I don't see the story as Darling's bringing up an ancient misdeed just to bring it up.

                  I think the question is whether the story is true or not true. If it's untruth, then he should have never said it. If it's truth, then he has every right to publicize it in his book.
                  What if the history courses are slanted the way the writer wants you to accept HIS history?

                  Nobody needs Darling to tell them what a douche Dykstra was. We have all read about the crime/drugs...etc. Darling is a scumbag for piling on an easy target. What have fans learned about Dykstra by reading Darlings book?

                  They learned that Lenny may or may not have yelled racists remarks at Boyd. So what did they actually learn? We learned nothing for certain about what happened in the dugout. What we learned for certain is that Darling is a scumbag to his core -- other than that - they learned nothing. Whether Dykstra said those things or not -- Darling is a scumbag to his core.

                  My hope is that they find that Darling either lied about Dykstra or embellished the story to make it a better read. I hope that either is proven and Darling loses his job(s).

                  So tired of people saying things publicly and because its said.........its true.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Darling's book was a huge, massive, colossal error in judgement.

                    He cheapen himself by throwing an '86 teammate under the bus. He trashed any integrity people viewed him as possessing by prostrating himself to the fascist SJW PC gang of thought-police thugs. All for the sake of a few ephemeral dollars.

                    Did he really need the money? Did he really need higher name recognition? He was already a legend in a town that never forgets its Mets heroes. He was already a widely respected member of, without question, MLBs finest broadcasting team. He already had national gigs on weekly games and was in regular rotation on the MLB network.

                    This book wiped away all the warm and fuzzy feelings I and so many others had for him. It made me put Howie Rose on with the TV sound turned down because I just didn't want to hear his voice. Now he's enduring the type of dramatic illness that causes deep reflection on life's choices that one has to wonder - was it worth it Ron? Or maybe he's too shallow a man to have engaged in such self reflection over the past weeks. I think that's a real possibility.

                    At any rate, shame on you Ron Darling.

                    The stark contrast with another Met related book, released just 2 weeks earlier, could not be more striking.

                    Art Shamsky's After the Miracle: The Lasting Brotherhood of the 69 Mets is everything beautiful about the special bonds of a iconic Championship year - the 50 years of enduring friendships among the formerly young, now old men who gave us one of only two Met Championships.

                    I was too young for 69 but I knew so many of the players because they were still there in 72, the year I became a die hard loyalist. I recommend this book to every Met fan, especially those like me who weren't there for 69.

                    Art Shamsky's book is everything Darling's piece of trash isn't; it's an inspiring, touching, worthwhile read. Its the book NY baseball fans should have been talking about all spring.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by SaltyParker View Post
                      Darling's book was a huge, massive, colossal error in judgement.

                      He cheapen himself by throwing an '86 teammate under the bus. He trashed any integrity people viewed him as possessing by prostrating himself to the fascist SJW PC gang of thought-police thugs. All for the sake of a few ephemeral dollars.

                      Did he really need the money? Did he really need higher name recognition? He was already a legend in a town that never forgets its Mets heroes. He was already a widely respected member of, without question, MLBs finest broadcasting team. He already had national gigs on weekly games and was in regular rotation on the MLB network.

                      This book wiped away all the warm and fuzzy feelings I and so many others had for him. It made me put Howie Rose on with the TV sound turned down because I just didn't want to hear his voice. Now he's enduring the type of dramatic illness that causes deep reflection on life's choices that one has to wonder - was it worth it Ron? Or maybe he's too shallow a man to have engaged in such self reflection over the past weeks. I think that's a real possibility.

                      At any rate, shame on you Ron Darling.

                      The stark contrast with another Met related book, released just 2 weeks earlier, could not be more striking.

                      Art Shamsky's After the Miracle: The Lasting Brotherhood of the 69 Mets is everything beautiful about the special bonds of a iconic Championship year - the 50 years of enduring friendships among the formerly young, now old men who gave us one of only two Met Championships.

                      I was too young for 69 but I knew so many of the players because they were still there in 72, the year I became a die hard loyalist. I recommend this book to every Met fan, especially those like me who weren't there for 69.

                      Art Shamsky's book is everything Darling's piece of trash isn't; it's an inspiring, touching, worthwhile read. Its the book NY baseball fans should have been talking about all spring.
                      Well I basically agree with you on Darling. I wont beat around the bush and call him what he is which is a scumbag. I grew up in Brooklyn and when you get down to the basics of it -- that is the correct word.....scumbag.

                      I wish him well in his health battle because we have to separate the two for sure, but I have respect for him whatsoever.

                      Finest broadcast in the busness? Eh. I like Keith...........Gary Cohen is vile and Darling now joins that club.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Paulypal View Post

                        Finest broadcast in the busness? Eh. I like Keith...........Gary Cohen is vile and Darling now joins that club.
                        Do you not like Gary Cohen for his broadcasting talent? Or like Darling because you dislike him as a man?

                        I know nothing about Cohen outside the booth other than his anecdotes of being a lifelong Met fan, which is very endearing. In the booth I think he's aces. The 3 together were magic, but I can no longer listen to Darling. they should replace him with Bobby O.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SaltyParker View Post

                          Do you not like Gary Cohen for his broadcasting talent? Or like Darling because you dislike him as a man?

                          I know nothing about Cohen outside the booth other than his anecdotes of being a lifelong Met fan, which is very endearing. In the booth I think he's aces. The 3 together were magic, but I can no longer listen to Darling. they should replace him with Bobby O.
                          I do think Cohen's broadcasting is ok but its "too Met for me", and I have been a Met fan for a while. Very over the top in certain areas, and with certain players...........Lagares for one. Also a shill for the boss.

                          Whatever I thought about Darling went out the window with either throwing Dykstra under the bus or lying about Dykstra - both are equally offensive to me.

                          Bobby O was fired for not being the shill that Cohen is so he isnt an option - although I would like to listen to some honest broadcasting I dont expect it to come any time soon. I would love for Bobby O to be back in the mix.
                          Last edited by Paulypal; Yesterday, 10:35 AM.

                          Comment

                          Ad Widget

                          Collapse
                          Working...
                          X