Curt Flood In Why I Am Challenging Baseball

468 Words2 Pages
Curt Flood, in Why I Am Challenging Baseball, continuously makes fatal mistakes that work against his argument. In the article Flood repeatedly falls back on the point that he is not in control of his wage because he has nowhere else to work. Flood states while explaining how he cannot argue for his pay, “And if you don't like it, you can quit baseball and find some other way of making a living”(Flood 127). What flood is failing to see that if he really wants to be paid more money he should have pursued a different profession. Flood’s profession is literally a game that children play. Why should he get paid more than any other profession? Baseball is a game, not a job. Expecting to get paid more than a typical worker in the United States for playing a child's game is absolutely ludicrous. If Flood is angry he doesn't get paid enough as a baseball player he should find a different profession. Later in the article Flood compares baseball players to slaves. Flood states, “the reserve clause…show more content…
Flood mentions how he is, “property of the Cardinals”(Flood 126). He then further explains this by mentioning how players are sold like livestock between clubs. This is obviously morally wrong. No managers should have so much control over their employees that the employees are compared to livestock. Not only should employees respect their managers; but managers should also respect their employees. Flood describes these managers as, “someone playing God”(Flood 126). A manager should be an authority figure over their employees, however, a manager should not be so much of an authority figure that the manager is compared to God. The issue with the reserve clause is that it concentrates too much power in too few of hands. Concentration of power only leads to corruption of power. This corruption is evident since Flood compares the managers to
Open Document