Clipping:What Constitutes an Amateur Base Ball Club
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 |
| Add a Clipping |
| Date | Saturday, April 17, 1869 |
|---|---|
| Text | The question has been asked, “What is an Amateur Club?” The rule prohibiting ball playing for money having been repealed and another adopted, legalizing professional or paid players, it becomes of no little interest to the majority of clubs to determine their standing as to whether they are professionals or amateurs. The greater number of ball clubs in this vicinity are anxious to be classed as amateurs, as experience has proven that they are seldom, if ever, able to vanquish the thoroughly-professional Atlantics or Mutuals, of this city, although they (the would-be Amateurs) have men who indirectly receive money for their time spent on the ball field. The wording of the new rule does not strictly imply that there is a marked difference to be made in clubs, as it only applies to players; and here is the point on which it is to be decided whether a club is professional or amateur. To my mind a professional club would be one composed wholly, or of a majority, of professional players. It would hardly be proper to just to style a club professional that has one, two, or three paid players: yet they are not strictly amateurs. Neither would it be just to not style a club amateur when they have one man playing in the nine to whom it would be a pecuniary loss were he not paid for his time spent in playing match games. If the opinion of your New York correspondent was to prevail, and be accepted as the meaning of the rule in question; viz., “That matches between professional and amateur Clubs did not count or affect the list of victories and defeats of each club.” I am of the opinion that considerable trouble would be experienced in matches played between clubs claiming to be amateurs, could it be proved by either club that their opponents had paid players. It is very doubtful if there are any clubs, as a class, that do no have one or more playing members whose time is paid for whenever they are engaged in matches, while a great many clubs who have heretofore been classed as strictly amateur, have been, and intend this season to play upon enclosed grounds, to which an admittance fee is charged, and the proceeds going to the club, being divided among the players of the first nine. The rule in question was intended to make a class of certain clubs that had heretofore had the reputation of employing and paying men to devote their time to playing ball. But as it reads, it virtually does nothing but to designate a man that plays ball, as a professional player. Therefore a professional club would necessarily have to be composed of a majority, or wholly of paid players. The rule should be definite. Yet who shall define it. We have both professional and amateur officers in the National Association. Their views may differ, while some may hold strictly radical views, and insist that a club to be an amateur one, must be composed wholly of players devoting their without any compensation, either directly or indirectly. The adoption of the rule has undoubtedly increased the interest in base ball, as many clubs that have heretofore been drooping and dying out, now give signs of renewed vigor, and are filling up with active members. “Jerry” [elsewhere in the issue described as “a gentleman of high standing in the fraternity”] |
| Source | National Chronicle |
| Tags | |
| Warning | |
| Comment | Edit with form to add a comment |
| Query | Edit with form to add a query |
| Submitted by | Richard Hershberger |
| Origin | Initial Hershberger Clippings |
Comments
<comments voting="Plus" />