No Ban in MLB

[NotAboutEgo]

Interesting fact... I found out today, at a women's baseball conference, that the ban on women playing in MLB and its affiliated minors was lifted sometime back in the 1960's. MLB has not said anything about it, because it doesn't want to draw attention to the fact that women are allowed to play in its league.

Also, for those of you who think that Jackie Mitchell didn't legitimately strike out Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig, according to a former MLB player and coach who has done research on women's baseball and who has written books on the topic (of who I know personally and who was the guest speaker at a women's baseball conference this weekend), Mitchell DID in fact strike them out legitimately. He said that Babe Ruth was SO arrogant that he would never admit to being legitimately struck out by a woman, and therefore, he downplayed the situation by saying he was goofing around and did it on purpose.

[dw8man]

This is really good to hear and I think it really makes the Woman in the MLB thread very interesting.

I am very interested in your comment about MLB not saying anything. What do think they should have done or be doing? If there is no ban on woman in MLB, does the whole arguement about being held back becomes rather watered down? Now, if you are saying that MLB should be activaly promoting woman playing baseball, why? What is the advantage to MLB (not men but the MLB bottom line)? I would imaging that someone knew about the ban being lifted before the conference. Was it announced? If not, how did the conference people know about it? Whose responsibility is it to tell everyone? BTW... had anyone thought of asking an MLB rep if there was a ban and been told there was?

I am not trying to be a pain but these kinds of social issues are very interesting to me. I find it very fasinating to see who thinks what about how we all should participate in society together.

[NotAboutEgo]

This is really good to hear and I think it really makes the Woman in the MLB thread very interesting.

I am very interested in your comment about MLB not saying anything. What do think they should have done or be doing? If there is no ban on woman in MLB, does the whole arguement about being held back becomes rather watered down? Now, if you are saying that MLB should be activaly promoting woman playing baseball, why? What is the advantage to MLB (not men but the MLB bottom line)? I would imaging that someone knew about the ban being lifted before the conference. Was it announced? If not, how did the conference people know about it? Whose responsibility is it to tell everyone? BTW... had anyone thought of asking an MLB rep if there was a ban and been told there was?

I am not trying to be a pain but these kinds of social issues are very interesting to me. I find it very fasinating to see who thinks what about how we all should participate in society together.

The info I got at the conference was that MLB quietly lifted the ban by nit publicizing it. I would think that such an event would warrant getting the word out. I never said that MLB should actively be promoting women's baseball.

The guy who hosted the conference who gave us the info on the ban being lifted is a historian and researcher at Saint Mary's U in South Bend, Indiana, and he's been involved with women's baseball since he was in high school... therefore, he researchers all kinds of things that relate to women's baseball such as this. It's common knowledge amongst a lot of baseball enthusiasts that there was a ban placed on women in MLB; however, no one seemed to know of the ban being lifted back in the 1960's.

I'm able to find info while doing a web search about the ban MLB placed on women, but I haven't been able to find info on that ban being lifted while doing a search. If anyone can find any, please post it.

I understand what you're saying. Like I said, the info I got was that the ban was lifted sometime in the 1960's, and MLB kept it hush hush. I don't know much more about it and would be just as interested in finding documentation on it. I will see if I can get some from the historian who gave us the info.

[Ubiquitous]

What is the info on the actual ban in the MLB? I've never heard of a ban in the MLB. I know they put a ban on women in the minor leagues. That happened I believe in 1952 after a minor league team tried to get a woman on the roster. Trautman of the National Association put a stop to it and declared women would not be allowed. Frick agreed with it. But like I said I have never come across any ban at the MLB level nor have I ever come across anything saying anything was lifted. Does the historian know how it was lifted? As far as I know it was never in the official rules it was simply a declaration much like the Eddie Gaedal banning was a declaration not an actual pen on paper ruling.

[JeepingBaseball]

Very interesting. We just need to see some facts to support it. But if it goes public.... I think it will suddenly open a few doors as far as training is concern.

[Brian McKenna]

Also, for those of you who think that Jackie Mitchell didn't legitimately strike out Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig, according to a former MLB player and coach who has done research on women's baseball and who has written books on the topic (of who I know personally and who was the guest speaker at a women's baseball conference this weekend), Mitchell DID in fact strike them out legitimately. He said that Babe Ruth was SO arrogant that he would never admit to being legitimately struck out by a woman, and therefore, he downplayed the situation by saying he was goofing around and did it on purpose.

I'm with the cause and enjoy reading female baseball history but this was an impromptu publicity stunt, nothing more. It doesn't mean anything derogatory about Mitchell but that's what the press and excited audience coaxed them into doing that day.

[BigStellyPADRES4LIFE]

OK A woman struck out Babe Ruth one time.... ooooohhhh now women are just as good as men in baseball. All this means is someone got lucky, there are other people who struck out the Babe. Does this really make them great? Absolutely not!!! Its not in a game situation, really you think Babe was as serrious as he probably was everytime he faced Walter Johnson?

[DodgerBlue8188]

OK A woman struck out Babe Ruth one time.... ooooohhhh now women are just as good as men in baseball. All this means is someone got lucky, there are other people who struck out the Babe. Does this really make them great? Absolutely not!!! Its not in a game situation, really you think Babe was as serrious as he probably was everytime he faced Walter Johnson?

Thats what I was thinking. What if Babe Ruth hit 2 long foul balls that were almost home runs. Then took 3 pitches to be balls then just happend to get fooled once. Which meant a strike out.

[Brian McKenna]

To describe Ruth as arrogant in the Mitchell case is a red flag that revisionist history is forthcoming.

Babe Ruth was one of the biggest showman of the 20th century. He had perhaps the largest, most devoted audience of them all.

There are hundreds of instances where Ruth and cohorts were egged into stunts to appease the press, other ballplayers, fans, whomever. By spring training 1931 this had been common for over a decade. Up pops a 17-year-old girl who strikes out the fiercest duo in ML history.

It's not hard to understand what went on that day. Everyone there understood the moment, as well as, all that weren't there and read about it the next day. No one there walked away believing they witnessed one of the greastest feats in sports history. This is also supported by the contemporary accounts of the day in April 1931.

That some today are rewriting the history of baseball and find a wide audience buying it over the internet or for their cause is disturbing. This also shows how easily influenced people can be if they are more knowledgable and influenced in/by a cause or topic than in historical perspective and insight.

[NotAboutEgo]

I was just relaying info I heard at a conference from a former MLB pitching coach and current MLB consultant who was the guest speaker.

I'm not saying anything for or against it, but newspaper articles aren't always accurate as to the truth. They are like the news... whatever sells will be written in a lot of cases. I haven't done any research on the topic. Just presenting another person's view who has done research on the topic.

Was it a case of Ruth being a showman, or was it a case of Ruth's ego getting in the way? Who knows, since none of us were there.

[NotAboutEgo]

OK A woman struck out Babe Ruth one time.... ooooohhhh now women are just as good as men in baseball. All this means is someone got lucky, there are other people who struck out the Babe. Does this really make them great? Absolutely not!!! Its not in a game situation, really you think Babe was as serrious as he probably was everytime he faced Walter Johnson?

Did I say that any of what you are saying? You are so misguided. I was simply stating what I heard.

[Brian McKenna]

Who knows, since none of us were there.

It is possible to know most anything from the past; one just needs a competent historian who is versed in the topic and the attitudes and rhetoric of the day. Analyzing first hand and other contemporary accounts is a good first step.

[NotAboutEgo]

It is possible to know most anything from the past; one just needs a competent historian who is versed in the topic and the attitudes and rhetoric of the day. Analyzing first hand and other contemporary accounts is a good first step.

Thanks for the info.

[BigStellyPADRES4LIFE]

Did I say that any of what you are saying? You are so misguided. I was simply stating what I heard.

I didnt notice you were quoting a story when i first read it.... my mistake.

But really you think that the MLB cares if women play? If a woman could make the grade sure by all means let her play, when i played little league there was no rule against a girl playing, in fact one of my teammates when i was 10 years old was a girl and she hit one of only 3 true homeruns(out of the park) hit by anyone all year.

Even when i was in pony(13-14) there were some girls who were playing and they got just as much oppurtunity as the guys did. In high school is kind of where that stops.... makes perfect sense since that is when women really kind of begin to plateu with strength and whatnot, there were girls allowed to try out for any level at my high school, just none of them could make the cut(there were quite a few that tried).

Again its not about oppurtunity its about physical limitations.

[NotAboutEgo]

I didnt notice you were quoting a story when i first read it.... my mistake.

But really you think that the MLB cares if women play? If a woman could make the grade sure by all means let her play, when i played little league there was no rule against a girl playing, in fact one of my teammates when i was 10 years old was a girl and she hit one of only 3 true homeruns(out of the park) hit by anyone all year.

Even when i was in pony(13-14) there were some girls who were playing and they got just as much oppurtunity as the guys did. In high school is kind of where that stops.... makes perfect sense since that is when women really kind of begin to plateu with strength and whatnot, there were girls allowed to try out for any level at my high school, just none of them could make the cut(there were quite a few that tried).

Again its not about oppurtunity its about physical limitations.

I disagree. It's not JUST about skill and talent. It's about having the natural skill and talent to be able to hone those to higher levels, AND it's about having opportunities to develop them. Someone could have all the raw talent to be a solid player, but without training facilities, equipment, somewhere to hone their skills and talent, someone who knows what they're doing to guide them, they won't be able to do it. Experience also plays a part in how one develops. Not many are born with the sheer talent to go out and play and kick butt and not have to work at it at all. Most people have to polish their skills and talent... especially to play at the highest levels.

Your statement about women having physical limitations that don't allow them to make a men's high school baseball team is not true as a standard for all women. There are women who are making their high school teams, and more will make them in the near future. The problem has been that most schools have not allowed girls to try out for their high schools' teams. That is the biggest problem... not the abilities of women.

It's not even the case for any women who would try out for MLB. The only thing that would hold women back from making an MLB team is not being able to throw 90+ mph. Would that change if women were given all the same opportunities that men have? Who knows.

Perhaps you should actually learn about women's baseball, watch some games, do more research instead of just making mainstream comments based on the current status quo. Status quo means absolutely NOTHING at all. It's not fact and can't back up the facts. Also, having limited perceptions of reality clouts judgment.

[NotAboutEgo]

I used to have a woman on my women's team who played baseball on her high school's team. Actually, the high school she was going to wouldn't let her play, so her parents moved so that she could go to a high school that did let her play. She was a pitcher. Tell her she has physical limitations that keep her from being able to make her high school team.

[Utility07]

Well, she did, until she moved.

[digglahhh]

I used to have a woman on my women's team who played baseball on her high school's team. Actually, the high school she was going to wouldn't let her play, so her parents moved so that she could go to a high school that did let her play. She was a pitcher. Tell her she has physical limitations that keep her from being able to make her high school team.

Be careful of falling into the trap of anecdotes that you chide others for using.

It is about both limitations and opportunity. In fact, in the case of co-ed play, it is about the opportunity to succeed until your physical limitations (be you of either sex) dictate that you can no longer succeed. If only 1% of all girls who try out for, even, high school level teams, it does not matter much. Every effort should be made to ensure that those 1% of girls get to play. Again, this is all assuming a co-ed dynamic. Most girls/women seem to prefer separate leagues.

[NotAboutEgo]

Well, she did, until she moved.

The school was discriminatory against her even trying out. It had nothing to do with whether she could or couldn't make the team. You totally missed the point.

[BigStellyPADRES4LIFE]

I used to have a woman on my women's team who played baseball on her high school's team. Actually, the high school she was going to wouldn't let her play, so her parents moved so that she could go to a high school that did let her play. She was a pitcher. Tell her she has physical limitations that keep her from being able to make her high school team.

I said in high school is where that "kind of" stops, there are obviously exceptions there. However when college ball runs around there are very very very few women, and in the minor leagues currently i believe there are none.

Throughout my entire experience with baseball(through high school) I have never ran into a league where the training oppurtunities werent there, all the places that offered lessons, allowed girls to come in just as readily as boys.

[Westlake]

OK A woman struck out Babe Ruth one time.... ooooohhhh now women are just as good as men in baseball. All this means is someone got lucky, there are other people who struck out the Babe. Does this really make them great? Absolutely not!!! Its not in a game situation, really you think Babe was as serrious as he probably was everytime he faced Walter Johnson?

Do you feel the need to troll the Women's forum everytime there's a new thread?

[BigStellyPADRES4LIFE]

Do you feel the need to troll the Women's forum everytime there's a new thread?

How classic calling me a troll.... yes i feel the need to.... no if somebody can really give me good reasons for their stance on that(which i havent heard yet) then ill listen.... nobody gives me conclusive evidence that a woman could make the minors or the big leagues.

[Williamsburg2599]

How classic calling me a troll.... yes i feel the need to.... no if somebody can really give me good reasons for their stance on that(which i havent heard yet) then ill listen.... nobody gives me conclusive evidence that a woman could make the minors or the big leagues.

I guess if I asked you if an African American could make the Majors in 1946 you would say no too?

[digglahhh]

How classic calling me a troll.... yes i feel the need to.... no if somebody can really give me good reasons for their stance on that(which i havent heard yet) then ill listen.... nobody gives me conclusive evidence that a woman could make the minors or the big leagues.


Maybe I'll just start posting about Trevor Hoffman's HOF case here, since apparently we need not post in relation to the topic being discussed.

We've talked about the history of formal bans enacted and lifted by MLB and had some side discussion about how legitimate Jackie Mitchell's striking out of Yankee great was.

Unfortunately for your dead horse flogging fetish, this is not about whether women could make the majors. If, in fact, you believe that it will never happen (which is a perfectly legitimate opinion if you've also given thought to the resource and development issues as well) then you need not even participate in a discussion about the ban because you view it as completely irrelevant, right?

Unless you have information to share about the actual proceedings of the ban, given your feelings, what you have to contribute to this thread can be entirely summed up in one sentence:

Since I don't believe that women are physically capable of playing baseball on a major league level, whether or not they are formally banned is of little to no relevance.

[BigStellyPADRES4LIFE]

I guess if I asked you if an African American could make the Majors in 1946 you would say no too?

There is no correlation between that and the women's thing, black people are just as qualified for the sport, and its clear because one of them....and today many make the cut all the time.

See I Love it, everyone here labels me as a biggot and a sexist, you just assume that carries over to racism. I am not a racist by any stretch of the imagination, and im really not suprised you assumed so.

People cant see the difference between true racism, and just saying you know women arent born with the same athletic potential as guys are at least in baseball.

Only a fool assumes someone elses stance that blatantly.

[Williamsburg2599]

There is no correlation between that and the women's thing, black people are just as qualified for the sport, and its clear because one of them....and today many make the cut all the time.

See I Love it, everyone here labels me as a biggot and a sexist, you just assume that carries over to racism. I am not a racist by any stretch of the imagination, and im really not suprised you assumed so.





Prejudice is Prejudice in my book, whether your degrading someone for the skin color, sex, or shoe size.

People cant see the difference between true racism, and just saying you know women arent born with the same athletic potential as guys are at least in baseball.

How is that not "true" sexism? If that is not sexism, what is? Can you please provide a source of some type of research study that proves your statement? How do you know that women can't play baseball as well as men? And even if that was true, does that mean that a women could not overcome that "obstacle" and still become a pro baseball player?

[NotAboutEgo]

There is no correlation between that and the women's thing, black people are just as qualified for the sport, and its clear because one of them....and today many make the cut all the time.

See I Love it, everyone here labels me as a biggot and a sexist, you just assume that carries over to racism. I am not a racist by any stretch of the imagination, and im really not suprised you assumed so.

People cant see the difference between true racism, and just saying you know women arent born with the same athletic potential as guys are at least in baseball.

Only a fool assumes someone elses stance that blatantly.

You may not be racist... but....

[Utility07]

Its not sexist if there is a valid biological difference.

[NotAboutEgo]

Its not sexist if there is a valid biological difference.

There's no valid biological difference argument until it's proven that no woman could ever be good enough for MLB. That has NEVER happened. Your opinion is NOT proof.

[Westlake]

Only a fool assumes someone elses stance that blatantly.

You come in here just to troll and not even talk about the subject at hand, and then you call a 15 year old kid a fool. Boy, you're a class act.

[Captain Cold Nose]

You come in here just to troll and not even talk about the subject at hand, and then you call a 15 year old kid a fool. Boy, you're a class act.

In this case, here, though, it's practically justified. Williamsburg's question, though, is absolutely unjustified. Let's not accuse people of things based on less-than-summary information. A does not always mean B.

[NotAboutEgo]

In this case, here, though, it's practically justified. Williamsburg's question, though, is absolutely unjustified. Let's not accuse people of things based on less-than-summary information. A does not always mean B.

I would agree with you here, but calling someone a fool, especially calling a 15 year old a fool, should be unjustified as well.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I would agree with you here, but calling someone a fool, especially calling a 15 year old a fool, should be unjustified as well.

Yes, but fool is a far less dangerous label. Beyond who called whom what, it is irresponsible to throw that characterization out there when nothing really warrants it, no matter the age. Stelly being dismissive due to ignorance on what exactly is all out there is no reason to brandish him as some kind of hate monger. Just leave the name calling for other boards, please.

[dw8man]

I would agree with you here, but calling someone a fool, especially calling a 15 year old a fool, should be unjustified as well.

Just to be really nitpicky.....what does age have to do with anything? Calling someone names, no matter what age, is not really needed. Should we treat the 15 year old differently? I am assuming that the 15 year old (I am repeating that because I do not know the gender and am afraid to use he, she or it because I might offend someone) would like to be treated like an adult and therefore must learn to ignore or deal with unkind remarks.

Also, why is the use of fool much worse then implying that, or calling, someone is racist/sexist?

[NotAboutEgo]

Just to be really nitpicky.....what does age have to do with anything? Calling someone names, no matter what age, is not really needed. Should we treat the 15 year old differently? I am assuming that the 15 year old (I am repeating that because I do not know the gender and am afraid to use he, she or it because I might offend someone) would like to be treated like an adult and therefore must learn to ignore or deal with unkind remarks.

Also, why is the use of fool much worse then implying that, or calling, someone is racist/sexist?

I NEVER said it was much worse. I said it should be unjustified as well. Reread my post.

Even though kids need to learn to deal with the "real" world, kids have very different frames of mind. Try to remember back to when you were a kid. It's no different than you getting upset about your son's teacher saying he doesn't want to learn just because he's a male.

I think it's worse when a grown person calls a child/adolescent names such as a fool. Also, if the mods are going to slice and dice certain comments that are made in relation to sex and race, they should be more critical of people who call names. That's all I was saying.

Did my comment need to be sliced and diced and analyzed so much?

[Ubiquitous]

This is nice and all but it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

So does anyone actually know anything about this supposed ban on woman at the major league level? If not I suggest you move along and find another topic in which to dissect the adult/child fool dynamic.

[Williamsburg2599]

In this case, here, though, it's practically justified. Williamsburg's question, though, is absolutely unjustified. Let's not accuse people of things based on less-than-summary information. A does not always mean B.

I'm sorry that I assumed someone who made a sexist comment could also be racist, but I was not trying to accuse anyone, just using an example from baseball and America's past. I probably should of worded it "Wasn't the same said by some people back in the early 40's and before about black players, that they couldn't handle MLB play?" It was not intended to be an attack on Stelly himself, but on the mindset that not every normal human being can't make it to the pros. But as I said before, Prejudice is Prejudice.



I NEVER said it was much worse. I said it should be unjustified as well. Reread my post.

Even though kids need to learn to deal with the "real" world, kids have very different frames of mind. Try to remember back to when you were a kid. It's no different than you getting upset about your son's teacher saying he doesn't want to learn just because he's a male.

I think it's worse when a grown person calls a child/adolescent names such as a fool. Also, if the mods are going to slice and dice certain comments that are made in relation to sex and race, they should be more critical of people who call names. That's all I was saying.

Did my comment need to be sliced and diced and analyzed so much?

Thank you for defending me NAE, but I think I would have to agree more with dw8man. I would prefer to be treated as an adult around here. (I am 15 and male, by the way.) I know my views may be different from some adults around here on many topics because of my age and life experience (or lack there of), but I would hope that most people agree that it would be unjust to ban women from the MLB just because of thier gender. I did not find the "fool" comment offensive, maybe unwarranted, but not offensive. I thank the people who came to my defense, and sincerely apologize to Ubi and other mods for bringing this up again, but I felt like my age and how I am treated because of it was a topic I needed to address, and I felt like I needed to speak for myself about it. I chose to put my age in my profile (which is optional) because I hoped that it would not matter to anyone here at BBF. No need for anyone to reply to this part of my post. (If someone has a does want to reply to this, my PM box is open.)

Now, back to the topic at hand, doesn't MLB have to tell someone if they go and add/drop a rule? How the heck was this kept hushed up so long?

[MSUlaxer27]

Now, back to the topic at hand, doesn't MLB have to tell someone if they go and add/drop a rule? How the heck was this kept hushed up so long?

MLB changed a rule that at the time in the pre "enlightened" Title IX era effected: 0% of the players, 0% of the teams in MLB and 0% of the minors league teams. MLB really wasn't looking for female players nor are they now, so who would you tell? I hope we can agree that ban or no ban MLB has never seriously looked for women players.

The ban was like one of those silly laws that exist in the US. For example I remember reading somewhere that it's illegal to carry an ice cream cone in your back pocket in some town in Arkansas... but nobody does this anyway. The ban against women in the majors was the same...it would apply to such a minute part of society that the ban was in fact redundant (and by this I don't mean the approximately half the population that is female, but the .0001% of the population that "actually" might have been effected by this rule).

[Ubiquitous]

Even if it was like the laws that make it against the law to walk an alligator down main street on Sunday there would still be a record of it "on the books" somewhere. To the best of my knowledge there has never been a written down ban at the major league level. If there has never been a written down rule at the major league level then how can the majors then lift that ban? Secondly if there was in fact a lifting of a ban how can anyone tell? It is like the owners saying there is no ban on blacks in baseball yet there were no blacks in baseball. And like the Jackie Robinson case the only sure fire guaranteed lifting of a "ban" is when the supposed banned race/creed/sex gets to play or at the very least get serious opportunities to play.

I have never found anything on a ban of women at the major league level. I don't think any of the owners or execs ever lost any sleep over that possibility, so they never felt the need to ensure that it never happened. They dropped the hammer down on the minors because the minors were almost always a much more "gimmicky" group of businessmen.

[MSUlaxer27]

I have never found anything on a ban of women at the major league level. I don't think any of the owners or execs ever lost any sleep over that possibility, so they never felt the need to ensure that it never happened. They dropped the hammer down on the minors because the minors were almost always a much more "gimmicky" group of businessmen.

True, they have always been completely willing to do anything to put people in the seats, much, in my opinion to the detriment of the game. I go to games to watch baseball, not to watch dizzy bat races or whatever "special event" is occurring.

That being said, Bill Veeck did bat a midget, how much different would it be for a minor league team to use some local female celebrity to pinch run? Both make a mockery of the game.

By the way, there is a height requirement in MLB, how come little people aren't clamoring to get their ban lifted? Eddie Gaedel's lifetime OBP is 1.000!

[Ubiquitous]

I don't believe there is a height requirement in the MLB. Bill Veeck found a loop hole in the rules that at the time allowed a person to play as long as the team submitted the contract to the league office. Bill waited for the weekend when he thought nobody was in the office and submitted Eddie's contract. By sheer luck the League president was in and saw the contract and immediately said no. Bill being the cagey guy he was turned off his communication devices so that the League couldn't get through and tell him no. After Eddie the rules became more clear, now the league office has to approve all contracts before the player is allowed to play not merely have the contracts be submitted.

[BigStellyPADRES4LIFE]

Williamsburg, apology accepted, I understand why you might have brought it up in the manner you did. Its the logical conclusion to my stance if no line is drawn, but i do draw the line, however its not that i think women should be banned, its that i dont think allowing women to try out, would result in one making the MLB.

But since i have been harped on so much for just trolling ill stick to the topic, sure by all means let them try out.

[Brian McKenna]

I don't believe there is a height requirement in the MLB. Bill Veeck found a loop hole in the rules that at the time allowed a person to play as long as the team submitted the contract to the league office. Bill waited for the weekend when he thought nobody was in the office and submitted Eddie's contract. By sheer luck the League president was in and saw the contract and immediately said no. . After Eddie the rules became more clear, now the league office has to approve all contracts before the player is allowed to play not merely have the contracts be submitted.

Don't know if there is a specific height requirement rule in MLB but as we all know there doesn't have to be a specifically documented source to curb certain practices.

Not only did Harridge indeed void Gaedel's contract, in essense, because of his height, but Veeck was planning on bringing in another circus performer - a very tall one - that Harridge also curtailed.

As suggested, I don't think it is true that Harridge was frantically trying to void Gaedel's contract before the Sunday incident. For one, he would have no idea who Eddie Gaedel was. Secondly, it was rather routine to have contracts sit over the weekend waiting for the AL president's perusal. Third, what would be his basis nixing the contract of one Eddie Gaedel when Harridge didn't even know who he was - which had to be common for most minor leaguers added to rosters.

The whole "Bill being the cagey guy he was turned off his communication devices so that the League couldn't get through and tell him no" story sounds like one of Veeck's yarns.

Harridge got word about the incident in STL and then acted.

[Ubiquitous]

Okay I got the details a bit wrong. According to Bill Harridge saw the action unfold on the teletype and it wasn't about the contract. The contract was mailed on Saturday and would not arrive until Monday.

From Veeck as in Wreck
The battle with league headquarters had begun before Eddie stepped into the batter's box. Will Harridge, the league president—for reasons best known to himself—had gone to his office that Sunday and had seen the report come over the Western Union teletype that I was trying to send a midget up to bat. While Hurley was still looking over the papers, our switchboard operator, Ada Ireland, sent word to me that Harridge was on the phone threatening to blow a fuse unless someone in authority came out to talk to him. I sent back word that we had all disappeared from the face of earth.

A few minutes later, I was told that Will was trying to get me on the office teletype, which is in direct communication with headquarters. I told him to turn off the machine.

The next day, Harridge issued an executive order barring Gaedel from baseball. A new rule was promptly passed making it mandatory that all player contracts be filed with and approved by the president.

[NotAboutEgo]

Below is an article from Wikipedia.

Eleanor Engle
From BR Bullpen
Jump to: navigation, search
Weight 132 lb.

Eleanor Engle was a 24-year-old stenographer and local softball player when she was signed by the Harrisburg Senators on June 21, 1952. She played shortstop in practice the next day but manager Buck Etchison opposed her appearance on the club and said he had not been consulted about the signing. George Trautman, with the support of Ford Frick, cancelled the contract and said any further attempts to sign female players would face harsh penalties. Engle never played in a game for Harrisburg. It is unknown whether she had the required talent — she never appeared in the AAGPBL, though its operation covered the years she would have been a viable player. One scout said "she threw like a girl" and one director of the Harrisburg team said she could hit better than some of the other Senators. Bob Hope and Leo Durocher sent her telegrams of support. The 1953 Baseball Guide writes off the incident as a publicity stunt.

Sources: 1953 Baseball Guide, The Sporting News Baseball Trivia 2, article about Engle on Minor League Baseball.com


This article is from Baseball-Almanac.com. Some people keep saying that Mitchell's performance of striking out Ruth and Gehrig was nothing but a stunt. According to author Michael Aubrecht, it wasn't. The 8th paragraph states that MLB placed a formal ban on women playing in MLB.

It is a simple word. Yet this 4-syllable noun has echoed like a cannon blast through the trenches of our society since the beginning of time. In the late 1940's and 50's the word "equality" emerged as the trumpet call for the women's movement in their quest to bridge the "gender gap." Today, it is inscribed on handle of the feminists' hammer that threatens to shatter the so-called "glass-ceiling." Many still feel that the "battle of the sexes" is far from over and that for every victory — there has been defeat.

Throughout the history of sports, the roles of women have often come under fire and the true integration of both sexes on a "level" playing field is still up for debate. I personally don't consider myself to be a "sexist", but I still find it hard to believe that the majority of female athletes could compete in certain contests that require brute-physical force such as professional football. However... I have no problem envisioning a female taking charge on a baseball diamond and as anyone who knows anything about the All-American Girls' League can see - "throwing like a girl" isn't always a "bad thing". Over the past century, many women have repeatedly risen to the challenge of their male counterparts, often changing opinions and the way we (as males) look at the fairer species. One lady in particular not only dominated the male players of her time - she dominated three legends and became an inspiration both on and off the field.

In 1931, the owner of the Southern Association's AA Chattanooga Lookouts signed a talented, 17-year-old pitcher named Jackie Mitchell. Desperate for an "edge" to increase ticket sales Joe Engel opted to bill his team as the ONLY club to feature a female on the mound and the demure Mitchell fit that bill. Although she was not the first female player to sign in the minor leagues as Lizzie Arlington had broken through that barrier in 1898 while pitching a single game for Reading PA's team against neighboring Allentown, she was by far the best and would soon prove it to herself (and the world) against three of the greatest.

As was customary back in the day, major league teams often traveled the country playing against members of their minor league's farm system. This gave the locals an opportunity to see big league players in towns that did not boast big league franchises. It also kept the players in off-season shape - both in body and mind. In April of '31, the New York Yankees stopped in Chattanooga for an exhibition game, on their way home from spring training down south. Billed as a huge event due to the appearance of "Murderers Row", over 4,000 fans turned out along with scores of newspaper reporters and photographers.

Lookouts manager Bert Niehoff initially started the game with Clyde Barfoot, but after he surrendered a double and a single, the signal was sent out for Jackie Mitchell. Imagine the expressions on the Yankees' faces when the rookie southpaw (in a custom-made baggy white uniform) stepped up on to the mound to face their team. Even worse, imagine the pressure she endured, as the first batter of her baseball career was none other than the "Sultan of Swat" Babe Ruth!

Mitchell's pitching arsenal consisted of only 1 pitch - a dropping curve ball known as a "sinker" and she used it like no other ace had before (or after). A grinning Bambino took ball one, and then swung at (and missed) the next two. Jackie's fourth pitch caught the corner of the plate for a called-strike infuriating an embarrassed Ruth who promptly threw his bat and stomped back into the Yankees' dugout.

Next up was non-other than "The Iron Horse" Lou Gehrig who followed the Babe's lead and swung at three in a row for "K" number two. In just seven pitches, Mitchell had sat down two of the greatest sluggers ever to don the pinstripes. After a lengthy standing ovation, Jackie walked Tony Lazzeri and was pulled in favor of the returning Barfoot. Despite her historical performance on the mound, the Yankees went on to win the contest 14-4.

A few days later, Baseball Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis voided Mitchell's contract, claiming that baseball was "too strenuous" for a woman. It was a gross injustice and an obvious ploy to curb the embarrassment of their bruised male egos. (MLB formally banned the signing of women to contracts on June 21, 1952).

Determined to press on, Jackie began barnstorming, traveling across the country pitching in exhibition games and in 1933, she signed on with a men's team known as the House of David (for their long hair and beards). Mitchell traveled with them until 1937, but eventually became disenchanted with the recurring "circus-type" antics that she was called upon to do like playing an inning while riding a donkey. Fed up with baseball, she later retired at the tender age of 23 and took an office job with her father's company.

If not for the blatant railroading of Kenesaw Mountain Landis, who knows what could have been? Would Mitchell have eventually worked her way up into the "big show" opening the door for future female aces? Would the All-American Girls' League have been simply the Major Leagues with less-men in the line-up? Maybe. Perhaps we would be watching Rogers Clemens or Randy Johnson going up against a much better-looking rival. Regardless of what could have been, Jackie Mitchell's story has become an inspiration to generations of female athletes. Who knows? Maybe one day we'll see a modern version of MISS Mitchell on the mound. I just hope that MR. Giambi and MR. Jeter can deal with a strikeout better than their forefathers from the 1931 team.

So, was there a reason why the minors said women couldn't be signed to minor league contracts and MLB formally banned women from playing in MLB, since it didn't affect anyone?

[NotAboutEgo]

Lizzie Arlington signed a minor league contract before Mitchell did.

[NotAboutEgo]

This is from the National Baseball HOF web site...

http://baseballhalloffame.org/education/primary_sources/women/article_01_Transcript.htm

Article titled "Gal Shortstop's Bid Given Short 'No' by O.B. Officials" published in The Sporting News, July 2, 1952
{Full Article}

{Part 1}

Gal Shortstop's Bid Given Short 'No' by O.B. Officials

Signing of Woman Player by Harrisburg Brings Bar on Feminine Performers

By JOHNNY TRAVERS

HARRISBURG, Pa.

Take it from Ford Frick, as commissioner of Organized Ball, a woman's place is not on the diamond. Frick agreed with President George M. Trautman of the National Association, Manager Clarence (Buck) Etchison of the Harrisburg club, and Umpire Bill Angstadt of the Inter-State League, after the Harrisburg club signed Mrs. Eleanor Engle, an attractive 24-year-old stenographer as a player, June 21.

Mrs. Engle took the field the next day and worked out at shortstop before the Senator's game with Lancaster. The 132-pound stenographer scooped up a few grounders and took a turn at bat in the practice session, but she didn't play.

"She'll play when hell freezes over," was the forceful way Manager Etchison had declared. The 24 male directors, including Dr. Jay Smith, president of the club, didn't consult him when they signed Eleanor. "We've signed her and that's that," Dr. Smith said.

"She can hit the ball a lot better than some of the fellows on the club," he said.

The final say, however, rested with Trautman (backed by Commissioner Frick) and it was "No." Furthermore, any club trying to use a woman player will be subject to severe penalties, the brass shouted. Even President Bill Veeck of the Browns, who presented a midget in a game last year and tries many bizarre promotional stunts, declared it was going too far.

[Ubiquitous]

If that is true then it looks like Landis created an unwritten rule that no women were allowed. Which I could believe happening, considering that it was an unwritten rule that blacks were not allowed. But I still don't quite understand the "MLB formally banned woman on July 21, 1952" or whatever the passage was. I think almost all of that is based on the whole "with permission from Ford Frick" thing in regards to the minors, which isn't the majors.

[NotAboutEgo]

If that is true then it looks like Landis created an unwritten rule that no women were allowed. Which I could believe happening, considering that it was an unwritten rule that blacks were not allowed. But I still don't quite understand the "MLB formally banned woman on July 21, 1952" or whatever the passage was. I think almost all of that is based on the whole "with permission from Ford Frick" thing in regards to the minors, which isn't the majors.

It sounds like the author included as additional info, since he mentioned that women were banned from signing minor league contracts. The Mitchell thing happened way before MLB's ban on women. I see it as he included the info to say that there was also a ban placed on women playing in MLB.

[Ubiquitous]

For me I would like to see something concrete on the whole "real" ban on women. I fully believe that the majors never wanted women to play and I fully believe that Landis would put a stop to it if some owner tried. So in that sense yes I believe the Majors had a ban on women. But I don't think it was a written ban like some have stated, nor do I believe the majors lifted the ban. Because a)they don't have women in the majors, b) they have nothing written down so it is kind of impossible to lift a ban especially since there is still no women in the majors, and c) outside of Schueler drafting his own daughter I don't think any major league team has made any serious attempt at getting women to play major league baseball.

[Williamsburg2599]

Has Selig ever voiced his thoughts on Women in the majors?

[NotAboutEgo]

For me I would like to see something concrete on the whole "real" ban on women. I fully believe that the majors never wanted women to play and I fully believe that Landis would put a stop to it if some owner tried. So in that sense yes I believe the Majors had a ban on women. But I don't think it was a written ban like some have stated, nor do I believe the majors lifted the ban. Because a)they don't have women in the majors, b) they have nothing written down so it is kind of impossible to lift a ban especially since there is still no women in the majors, and c) outside of Schueler drafting his own daughter I don't think any major league team has made any serious attempt at getting women to play major league baseball.

The ban may have not been a written ban (I don't know if it is or not), but still could be a ban even if it's verbal. I was told by a historian that the ban was lifted... however that was. I will see if I can get more info on that.

The fact that MLB has been a good old boys network suggests that even if there wasn't a written ban (more than one source has stated that it was a formal ban), it would be a known thing amongst MLB teams, managers, owners, etc. that women weren't and haven't been to this day welcome in the league.

It's the same for women umpires. Now MLB is trying to look like a saint by "allowing" a woman umpire to umpire a spring training game. It can be looked at as progress from one perspective, but it has taken forever for MLB to do so.

Pam Postema was making her way up the ranks (umpired at the Triple A level for 6 years) and most likely would have made it to MLB if Bart Giamatti hadn't passed on at that time. After he passed, Postema's contract was cancelled by the Triple A Alliance, and she never made it to MLB. Basically, the MLB commissioners after that were against women umpiring in MLB.


The following info is from http://www.exploratorium.edu/baseball/postema.html:

In 1969, Bernice Gera (1932-1992) was the first woman to go through umpiring school and get a contract to work in the minor leagues. The day before she was going to umpire her first game, she received a letter from the president of the NAPBL (the minor league system), informing her that her contract had been rescinded. No reasons were given. Gera took the case to the New York State Human Rights Commission, which ruled in her favor. The NAPBL appealed, and the appellate court upheld the ruling in Gera's favor. The league appealed again, and was again rebuffed. A year later, without giving any reasons, the league gave Gera a contract and told her to report on June 23, 1972. She umpired a single game, and then resigned. "I was physically, mentally, and financially drained," she said. "It is hard to get used to having people spit at you and threaten your life."

[Brian McKenna]

The voiding of Engle's contract sounds like a ban to me. It was a decision administered and on behalf of both MLB and the National Association. The NA president stood at the head of the NA but he still answered to MLB.

A ban in no way needs to be formally written down. It can and has been done in professional baseball:
-orally
-by word of mouth
-by colleagues' pressure
-by general understanding
-by edict as the voiding of Engle's contract.

Baseball officials throughout the land saw and understood Engle's voided contract as a line they themselves should not cross.

[TG Coach]

The info I got at the conference was that MLB quietly lifted the ban by nit publicizing it. I would think that such an event would warrant getting the word out. I never said that MLB should actively be promoting women's baseball.

The guy who hosted the conference who gave us the info on the ban being lifted is a historian and researcher at Saint Mary's U in South Bend, Indiana, and he's been involved with women's baseball since he was in high school... therefore, he researchers all kinds of things that relate to women's baseball such as this. It's common knowledge amongst a lot of baseball enthusiasts that there was a ban placed on women in MLB; however, no one seemed to know of the ban being lifted back in the 1960's.

I'm able to find info while doing a web search about the ban MLB placed on women, but I haven't been able to find info on that ban being lifted while doing a search. If anyone can find any, please post it.

I understand what you're saying. Like I said, the info I got was that the ban was lifted sometime in the 1960's, and MLB kept it hush hush. I don't know much more about it and would be just as interested in finding documentation on it. I will see if I can get some from the historian who gave us the info.

I'll guess MLB lifted the ban to avoid legal issues in the future. But they figured publicity wasn't needed due to the irrelevance of the change.