Oriole owner Peter Angelos' stand against using inferior baseball players -- opportunistic no-accounts dressed in major-league uniforms -- has brought an overwhelming country-wide reaction he finds both surprising and, to use his word, "humbling."
The veteran of 40 years in the legal world outlined the situation in blunt terms and also applauded the president of the United States for entering into the fray that has brought a work stoppage of a mere sport. It's an action without precedent in the history of the country.
This wasn't President Franklin Delano Roosevelt flashing his green light for baseball to continue during World War II but something entirely different -- the nation's chief executive getting in the middle of a disagreement between labor and management, having to do with a mere recreational pursuit, and trying to resolve it.
"I believe it was proper for President Bill Clinton to get involved," Angelos said. "I commend him. I also hold to the opinion that ultimately Sen. Bob Dole and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich will put aside all political aspects and demonstrate what I feel will constitute an excellent example of bipartisanship that is in the best interest of the nation."
The mail to Angelos has been in support of what he stands for, but he isn't trying to curry favor, to seek compliance from others or to initiate a grandstand play. In fact, a subsequent letter from a West Coast fan moved him emotionally and made a profound impression.
Angelos' position constitutes a one-man crusade among the owners since he's out on the limb alone. But, upon reflection, the media and fans are behind him in voluminous numbers. That wasn't his intention. He took a stand, not realizing what the mood of the American public was going to be. He didn't perceive himself in the role of a "folk hero" but that's precisely what has happened.
Could he, this so-called modern Peter The Great, possibly attempt in one phrase to define the situation?
"Yes. It's a sacrilege," he said.
From the Angelos perspective, the paralysis of what was once considered, in another time frame, a sport, is what he terms an "unfortunate case of hatred between the owners and players that is actually a continuing war that has been going on for a quarter of a century."
How true. Would the owner of the Orioles convey his innermost feelings regarding the way the fans have lined up behind him?
"I am absolutely amazed because I had no idea there was going to be such a groundswell of support," he said. "I didn't know this would be the case. My feelings were mine alone. I didn't know how the public felt and how it might respond."
Now he has been joined by other partisans to the cause, which amounts to almost universal support from sportswriters and ticket-buying spectators. From the standpoint of this reporter, rather the game not resume at all than to accept substitutes.
Angelos refers to some of the owners of clubs in the American and National leagues as "stubborn, arrogant and stupid." Angelos is not the sole objector but says a couple other owners have agreed with him on his stance but, for their own political agendas, prefer to keep their sentiments off the record.
He insists the time is near where there is not going to be any recourse.
"Part of the obligation of a government is to settle disputes when a deal can't be worked out," Angelos said. "My conclusion is that government intervention should be addressed rather than let the natural course of actions play itself out.
"There should be a point where the warring sides need to be saved from themselves. It's not in the public interest to let them kill themselves. Neutral sources, such as elected officials, should assert control and take action."
When did Angelos, more experienced than any baseball owner in the ways of labor-management negotiations, realize that conditions were bleak for a settlement?
"It was almost from the outset, when the owners had a meeting and we were shown a slide-show that related the cumulative financial losses for the clubs would be from $100 million to $150 million for the 1994 season," he said.
"I believed and said then that the figures should be shown to the players association and to the public. If the report was accurate and valid, it would hold up under scrutiny by all sides."
It still perturbs him that Richard Ravitch, then chief negotiator for the owners, insisted early in the strike game that "rational persuasion has no place in these negotiations." That certainly conveyed the message that club ownerships didn't want an alliance with the players but were deliberately driving a sharper wedge between themselves and their adversary.
A letter from a fan, one Jack Brandon of scenic Half Moon Bay, Calif., got Angelos' attention. The writer, who recalled as a child seeing Carl Hubbell pitch an 18-inning shutout for the New York Giants, said he was resisting all efforts by the Giants, now in San Francisco, to renew his ticket order and applauded the Orioles owner for not allowing scabs on the field.
In his comments, the senior citizen told Angelos, in part, that he wasn't given to writing fan mail but couldn't let another day pass without notifying him of his own feelings.
". . . Baseball has been and always will be a significant part of my life," Brandon wrote. "Several months ago on a business trip to Baltimore, I had an associate drive me around Camden Yards. Hopefuly, sometime in the future, I will be there again and be able to see a baseball game played by major-league players. If so, you can be sure I will be rooting for the Orioles. Not because I have cast off my lifelong love of the Giants. But rather because I am a fan of Peter Angelos. Good luck."
This is the kind of passion Angelos has created and it wasn't by design. He thought he was going to be all alone in the position he took, in virtual isolation, but that's not what transpired. The multitudes are cheering him as a national baseball hero, even though he can't swing a bat or throw a ball. Other owners should know that nobody likes him but the people.