Sep 7, 2012, 9:43 AM EST
Last year there was a controversy in which the Mets wanted to wear first responder caps — FDNY and NYPD caps and the like, as we saw after 9/11 — but Major League Baseball told them they couldn’t.
In my view that was a stupid decision. I still haven’t heard a good rationale for it. It’s not like this opens the floodgates for other teams to wear unofficial caps. To suggest it would is to ignore the pretty obvious fact that 9/11 was far more significant — and especially significant to New York — than any other sort of tragedy that may inspire a team to wear irregular gear. I know people feel uncomfortable with such distinctions, but you can draw a line between 9/11 and, say, a massacre that kills 20 people or something.
Anyway, that decision by MLB last year angered the Mets, who considered going rogue and wearing the FDNY/NYPD hats anyway, risking fines. They ultimately relented, however. This year there will be no such controversy, as the league and the team have reached an agreement:
To mark Tuesday’s 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the Mets will continue their long-standing tradition of wearing first responder caps, though only during batting practice and the national anthem. The Mets will don their regular uniform caps for their game against the Washington Nationals.
Still nice, I suppose. But I think the Mets should be allowed to wear them during games when far more people can see them.
- Ian Kinsler hopes Rangers go 0-162, calls GM a “sleazeball” (132)
- Albert Pujols was insulted when someone asked him if he can put up Mike Trout numbers (102)
- The politics of “The Cardinal Way” (67)
- Robinson Cano wants the Mariners to bring in Kendrys Morales and Ervin Santana (64)
- Reporter calls Ian Kinsler as self-absorbed as A-Rod (60)