Friday, February 5, 1999
Keep the hair ban
Comments from readers who want the Reds to keep their ban on facial hair:
I grew up in Cincinnati but left in 1977 when I got married. I still
follow the Reds and like seeing the clean shaven players. More than one
person I have told was suprised to know that facial hair was not
allowed. I think in today's day and time it takes real chutzpah to hold
your players to this standard. They are not the only people in the
world who aren't allowed to wear facial hair.
The Reds are the franchise that should represent baseball at it's finest.
Unfortunately, the ownership has recently chosen trend over tradition in
the choice of the hideous new uniforms. The ownership has also allowed
itself to lose the tradition of being the site where season truly opens.
For a team with over approximately 130 years of tradition, it would be nice
if something would remain constant and traditional. There is something to
be said for players looking like gentlemen rather than the overpaid
crybabies that they so often exemplify.
Oak Martin, Oxford
NO! The Reds should not lift the ban on facial hair. It's a unique element
of character that the rest of the league associates with Cincinnati. If
Vaughn wouldn't have made a big deal about the issue, you wouldn't even be
bringing the issue up.
An employer should have the right to have it's employees project the image they like.
Vaughn's goatee has got
to go along with Marge!
If Jeff Reardon had to shave his famous beard,
so can Vaughn!!
Make him shave the goatee like everyone else. he is far from a Ken Griffey
Ron Pritchard, Suncook, NH
No facial hair, period. The policy should stand. Deal with it
Fred Lukachinsky, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
No! Next thing they'll allow is perjury and obstruction of justice.
I like the fact that the players do not look like they live in a one room
shack somewhere deep in Montana like so many other players on other teams.
In fact, I do not know of a single player that gave a post game interview
or award acceptance speech crediting facial hair for an outstanding
Players should be more concerned about becoming World Series Champions
rather than split hairs over this subject.
Philip J. Hays,
Keep the Ban, if that's what you want to call it. I consider it a Reds'
tradition, and heaven knows we need to keep a few traditions, because
that's what we as fathers pass down to our kids. We once had heroes,
but everyone seems to want to skewer them every chance they get.
Traditions are all that is left.
Somehow your columnist Paul Dougherty considers the ban as the
antithesis of an era gone awry-the Vietnam Era-and since it's gone so
too should the ban. Bob Howsam has always insisted that it was no more
than a showman's intuition: a pristine stage and its performers is
Everyone who plays for the Reds knows the rule. Everyone who considers
playing for the Reds knows the rule. Everyone in baseball knows the
rule. The rule, like black shoes or sleeveless jerseys, makes the Reds
different. The rule is a small thing that creates a common bond between
the players and at times against the opponent.
If you can play ball with facial hair, you can play ball without
it-particularly if you're paid 2 or 3 or 5 million dollars to do it. If
being clean-shaven shakes your psyche, as has been suggested about Greg
Vaughn, then he shouldn't be a Red.
Ray Stewart, Canton, Ohio
i say keep the facial hair ban.some traditions should be kept.if the
players feel the need to grow a beard or goutee,,,then they have plenty
of time from october til february to do so.lets not change a team policy
that has been a tradition throughout the teams history for a player
(vaughn) who will be long gone by august 1st.
david iannuzzi, richmond, va
Keep the no facial hair policy for the Reds! It sets us apart from the
other clubs and represents Middle America!
Cathie and Lee Kissick,
Orlando, Florida (formerly from Ohio)
The Reds should absolutely NOT change the facial hair policy. The tradition
of the Reds is larger than any one player and we would all do well to remember
that. If Vaughn doesn't like the policy he can play somewhere else. He isn't
going to be worth a damn anyway. This team is already a circus, they don't
need to look like clowns to play the part. Leave the hair issue alone and
let's worry about fielding a team that's not embarrassing to root for.
Keep the "no facial hair" and "clean cut hair" rules. The REDS provide a
welcome image for professional athletes in a time where shoddy dress (baggy
pants, shirt tails out), tattoos, body piercing, and long greasy hair seem to
be in vogue. I remember when the NFL (think they still do, but not as
ruthlessly enforced) levied fines against players when their socks were down
or shirt tails were untucked. This didn't happen when these infractions
happened in the heat of the game but, when an athlete didn't fix his uniform,
or purposely violated the uniform policy. Like it or not, kids are watching
and athletes are role models and kids want to look like their role models.
The REDS' players clean cut appearance is a welcome site.
Just watch "When it was a Game," the "Lou Gehrig Story" or watch films
of the Big Red Machine and check out the players appearance-enough said.
Avid REDS/BENGALS fan
NO!!! NO!!! NO!!!
Its time someone takes a stand on these I Do What I Want Or I'll Demand A Trade (i.e. Ron Gant demanding a trade because he got into a fight and didn't get paid during his suspension) - give me a freaking break!! The only reason Paul Daugherty agrees is because he's a cheese sucker - taking the side of a 6 million dollar ballplayer. What if it was a little no namer from Indianapolis making the grade to play for the Reds? The way Daugherty is, he would blast him for the thought. But since its 6,000,000 man - yeah, lets scrap this 100 year old tradition. Who are we kidding, he'll be traded before we know it and then we'll be stuck with a bunch of foo-man-choo Mike Piazza looking geeks.
There are things about the Reds that should be left alone. That is what separates them from the rest of the MLB. I grew up in Cincy, and I now live in LA - and let me tell you - baseball out here is nothing like it is in Cincy. I went to opening day last year in Houston. No parade, no tailgaters, about 25,000 empty seats and one boring crowd. I've been to opening day in Cincy when it was snowing, people freezing their !@# off at the parade, in the parking lot, at the game - and loving it. Not an empty seat in the house.
Please, these guys get away with enough as it is. But just because he is worried that losing his facial hair is going to lose endorsements, reduce his power swing, or whatever - big deal. I've got two words for him - Pete Rose.
If he needs a Mach 3 razor and cream, please put it on my Visa.
Los Angeles, CA (Cincy at heart) Go Bearcats!
Mr. Vaughn should absolutely not keep his goatee. Plenty of other former
Reds have had to shave their face, why would this situation be any
different? Where would the line be drawn? Mustaches, goatees, beards?
How long can they be? It is an all or nothing society, and someone is
always looking to push the extent of the rules and regulations. Letting
Mr. Vaughn keep his goatee opens up room for more problems with players
that want to look like grizzly Adams just because they can. I think the
team has always look clean, classy, and professional and I think we should
keep it that way.
Big money has stripped baseball of most of its traditions. Thank God
for Marge who is not afraid to act as she feels when upholding a
tradition, as trivial as it may be. Paul Daugherty needs to get a
clue. He is all for just throwing out the tradition because a player
who makes 5 million a year doen't want to shave is precious goatee. For
5 million a year I'll shave my legs and ask how often you would like me
to do so. Greg Vaughn is a big boy, I'm sure he'll get over it, just as
he will have to get over winning ball-games.
Greg Vaughn now WORKS for the Reds and their fans. He needs to accept
the long standing policy or go play somewhere else. Their is something
to be said about looking neat.I don't care if every other team allows
players to have hair to their ankles, beards, earrings and mustaches.
I still think the Reds policy is a good policy and they should make NO
NO. The Reds should not change their policy on facial hair.
However, if a change is made, the change should NOT be made for a specific
case. The change should be made when no specific individual is involved.
The perception will be that a player (Vaughn) is so valuable that the Reds
should "cave in" on a long standing policy. If the change occurs without a
specific trade in mind, it would be easier for me to accept.
I was a season ticket holder (4 tickets) since the mid 1960s and Crosley
I stopped when the league went on strike.
Didn't go to a game between the strike and 1997.
1997 bought 2 tickets for 10 games from a disinterested friend.
1998 bought 2 tickets for 20 games from same friend.
1999 will buy 2 tickets to 30 games from same friend.
If the Reds change their policy BECAUSE of a specific player, I am "out of
Goatees, with apologies to Greg Vaughn, look ridiculous on most men, as
do handlebar mustaches, mutton-chop sideburns, soul patches (little
tufts under the lower lip), and eyebrows that grow together. The Reds,
on the other hand, always look clean and sharp. The players may whine,
but do Reds fans really want a bunch of 70s style, Rod Beck-type
goofballs running around out on the field? Facial hair and weird
haircuts for ballplayers went out with Charlie Finley's Oakland
How many millions of dollars are they going to pay
Greg Vaughn to play a game? For half of that, they
can shave my head!! The "no facial hair" policy is
meant to improve discipline. To make you make a
sacrifice for the team. We don't need another Eric
Davis poisoning the club house with discontent. If
this is too great of a sacrifice for Vaughn to make,
maybe he isn't the team player the Reds need.
The Reds should keep the facial hair ban. As Mr. Daughtery column
says they made Jeff Reardon shave off his beard, so why should we relax
the ban for Greg Vaughn? Should we do this because he hit 50 homers last
year and he is a superstar? Absolutely not because superstars should
not get special privileges or rights. Plus Mr. Vaughn probably won't be
here past next July anyways so he can just shave it off and grow it back
when he gets traded. If a player like Jeff Reardon has to shave it off
why not Vaughn?
I think he should have to shave. This has been a long tradition
associated with the Reds. Why change now for one player?
Brian from Covington
Would you draw a mustache on the red's running man? Hopefully you say,
"No". It would be putting an ND on the dome of Notre Dame. That is
what Lou Holtz was told when he wanted to be an ND or something on
Notre Dame's helmets.
There is no respect for tradition and discipline today. The no facial
hair rule represents both. Are they here to play baseball or look a
certain way. It is bad enough they started to wear red cleats instead
of all black. Something should distinguish the oldest team in baseball
from the rest of the teams.
No facial Hair.
I'd gladly shave my goatee for $5.7 M
Sorry Greg it's time for a new uniform and a new look. Rules are rules,
get over it, lets play ball.
Jim Watkins, Westwood
here we go again - trying to change rules to accommodate some overpriced
athlete. remember when deion sanders wanted to have shorter sleeves
because he thought they looked cooler? he started cutting them off,
which was a violation of the rules. so instead of having him pay some
fine or conform to the rest of the team, what happened? the uniforms
were changed for HIM. one man.
now we have greg vaughn. he's upset at the fact that he can't keep his
goatee because it would be in violation of team rules. to him i say "boo
hoo." was it his goatee hitting all of those homeruns last year or
leading his team to the world series? no.
can someone please remind him that he is getting paid millions of
dollars to play a kid's game! a few rules to live by won't hurt him.
hell, for his salary i would gladly shave my entire body and play in a
james f kilbane
The facial hair policy is part of what stands the Reds apart. The Reds
strive on tradition. We always had the first game of the season. We start
the season off at home. The players have to shave. ESPN has already taken
away the privilege of the first game away. We need to hold on to what keeps
us distinct. In Vaughn's case, maybe an exception can be made. Arizona
gave an exception to Randy Johnson. You need to both keep tradition and
keep the big boys happy.
I vote that the facial hair ban SHOULD REMAIN INTACT. However, if
Marge does rescind the policy and Vaughn has a great year, sign him
to a contract so he can stay.
E. Scott White, Huntington, WVa
I believe it's time to let it Go. But a compromise may need to be reached
with Marge. Maybe she could lift the ban on facial hair, but the team would
agree to still impose the ban on long hair and jewelry. The team could also
promise Marge that they would keep the facial hair neatly trimmed.(No Al
Hrabosky's or Goose Gossage ungroomed mustaches).
p.s. I remember the Jeff Reardon incident. He should have kept it on.
Maybe he would have pitched better for us.
It may not be the most important or necessary of rules, but it has been
in place for a long time and stands for something many people believe
in--a professional and "clean cut" look. I'm so tired of teams,
businesses and others bending over backwards and changing the sky to
placate these ego-maniac atheletes--not to say Vaughn is--but let's make
a statement for EVERYONE adhering to the same rules for a change.
San Francisco, CA,
Lifetime Reds fan
No! My reason is it promotes team cohesiveness. Yes, each player is an
individual, but when a player thinks about well wishes for his follow
teammates before trying outshine his teammates through personal
appearance, then he has arrived -- a team player.
Remember, Mariano Ducan? Think about it.
Gary L. Lang
No, it's a trait of the BIG RED MACHINE
Who should you change for?
John W. Kyle
Readers say hair ban should go
Comments: Drop it