var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
catnapped
October 12, 2009 12:22 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

Cue the cries of \"frivolous lawsuit\" in 3...2...1...

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Blackfished
October 12, 2009 2:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@catnapped: Has the term \"conversion\" ever crossed your mind?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Greasy Thumb Guzik
October 12, 2009 4:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Blackfished:
Not only conversion, but theft & fraud. Possibly grand theft if a collector is willing to pay more than $300 for the ball.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
EdnaLegume
October 12, 2009 12:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@catnapped: seems it was more of a scare tactic than an actual suit for damages. it worked too.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
GyroMight
October 12, 2009 12:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Up next in the news: Phillie's player Ryan Howard's 200th home run ball up for sale on ebay.

Reply
13 replies
\"user-pic\"
forgottenpassword
October 13, 2009 8:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@GyroMight:

he can buy it back if he wants it so bad. He shoulda made an offer. Being a rich baseball player & all.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SOhp101
October 12, 2009 8:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

There must be two completely different sides to this story because I've read a different article that stated Webb offered a personal meet/greet and a signed baseball if she would let him have the one that made is 200th home run. She agreed and they did that, but later the parents sued and demanded the ball back. He didn't want to deal with a lawsuit because it would damage his reputation so he just gave the ball back.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
theblackdog
October 13, 2009 3:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SOhp101: Don't forget that he also didn't show up to the meet/greet.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Kogenta
October 12, 2009 7:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@GyroMight: You have to wonder, I remember reading a while ago about some other piece of sports memorabilia like this that someone had. The IRS decided to place a value on the said item. Because of it's \"rarity\" it was valued at quite the loaded sum, and they had to pay taxes on it since it was \"income\".

So I'm wondering if the IRS is going to descend on this too, because I can totally see this ending up being a case where the tax on that ball would bankrupt them if they didn't sell it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Scatter
October 12, 2009 12:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@GyroMight:

Or being used as a dog's play toy in the back yard.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
swingchickie
October 12, 2009 12:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@GyroMight: seriously.


i hope this little girl really appreciates this down the road... that ball is really meaningful to ryan howard.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
edosan
October 13, 2009 8:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@swingchickie: This guy makes fifteen million dollars this year. He can buy the ball from her if he wants.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Xerloq
October 12, 2009 4:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@swingchickie: If it meant so much to him, how come he knocked over the wall, hmmm?!?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
October 12, 2009 3:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@swingchickie: If it was that meaningful to Ryan, he would have caught it and kept it. Instead of, y'know, trying to steal it from a twelve-year-old little girl.
It's a shame the stadium didn't allow guests to being their pets in as well, that way Ryan could have kicked the little girl's puppy on the way out.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 4:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: lol, did you just suggest he catch the very same homerunball he just hit?

Also, he didn't personally take it, the team did. So that giant bird thing of a mascot they have could kick the dog.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
October 12, 2009 5:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coren: Yup. As a sly way of suggesting that Ryan's claim of it being \"his\" ball is laughably absurd.
Unless he's the Flash.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 5:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: What claim? The Marlins got her to give up the ball, and

\"The ballclub wanted to give the ball to its star player. And that's where things got complicated. \"

That doesn't sound like he had anything to do with it, or even had knowledge of it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
MattSaintCool
October 12, 2009 5:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: That little girl stole the Flash's ball! Get her!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
October 12, 2009 12:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@swingchickie: One, can we stop referring to a 12 year old pre-teen as \"little girl\"? I know the orginal point of use was to highlight the dishonesty of the situation, but it's demeaning.


Two, I'm not sure how you can muster up any sympathy for Howard with his bait and switch. There was no reason for them to use such an underhanded tactic. Generally players will offer money, prizes, tickets, whatever but this time they went in with the assumption that the young fan with immigrant parents could easily be swindled. These goons just flat out lied because they thought they'd be able to get away with it. I hope she does sell it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
BklynHotniss
October 12, 2009 10:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinkishDelight: Ah, Roman Polanski would be proud...
The ball player should have just asked for it nicely. She's only a little girl who without the influence of any adults would have accepted something else in return.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
October 13, 2009 12:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@BklynHotniss: Erm I think someone beat you to the joke about 6 and a half hours before you.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
October 12, 2009 3:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinkishDelight: (nothing personal - I just saw your \"12-year-olds aren't little girls\" so I went for the yucks. :D)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
October 12, 2009 5:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: It was funny. No explanation necessary :o)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
speedwell (!)
October 12, 2009 2:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinkishDelight: You're right, she's not just a \"little girl,\" she's a fan. They treated her like a \"little girl,\" not like a fan.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ScarletsWalk
October 12, 2009 12:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@swingchickie: And it's not meaningful for her?

He can keep the bat, the batting gloves, the helmet, the uniform, etc. A child caught the ball and his team stole it from her and from what was implied from the article I read yesterday, he knew about it and refused to hand it back.

She said she had no intention of selling it and I believe her. She doesn't care who hit the ball or its significance. She's twelve and got a souvenir that she herself procured and not some lame-o consolation prize that the team tricked the minor into receiving without parental ok.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
The Porkchop Express
October 12, 2009 5:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@ScarletsWalk: never mind the fact that we all know he did it, it goes in record books, he may be able to keep the next one or buy this one, he makes tons of money to do this....


she is a little girl.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
idip
October 12, 2009 12:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@swingchickie: Although it may be meaningful to him... catching home run balls can be VERY meaningful to fans as in a full stadium it can be almost impossible to retrieve one.

Ryan Howard never owned the ball. The fact that she had it and then they tried to trick her to get it back is just terrible. She deserves keeping it. If she wants to sell it, that's also her choice as it is HER ball.

If Ryan Howard wanted to purchase the 'meaningful' ball from her, that is also an option. Yet.... he or his representatives tried to steal the ball.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Rachacha
October 12, 2009 1:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@idip: Exactly. I would not have had a problem if Howard dried to trade her the ball for some of his personal items, perhaps a signed and framed jersey and his batting glove and a personalized note thanking her for returning the ball to him, but to try to do a bait and switch on a collector's item, that is just wrong.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pwillow1
October 12, 2009 12:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@idip: Amen. This whole think reeked. The representatives for the team tried to steal the ball from a child to award to a multimillionaire ball player. I'm sure someone could have afforded to purchase it if they had wanted it so badly.

I don't blame the family one bit for enlisting the help of a lawyer in this. Professional athletes have never passed up the opportunity to press their cases for more money. Are the rich the only ones who have the right to sue?

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
jparadise
October 12, 2009 12:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"My ball\" = \"my college tuition\" probably. Good for her.

Reply
7 replies
\"user-pic\"
j-o-h-n
October 12, 2009 6:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jparadise: I'm suspecting the IRS has made a note of her windfall...that ought to take care of that.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
zibby
October 12, 2009 3:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jparadise: Less'n she's going to Zeb Turnipseed Community College, that ball isn't going to help all that much. That said, if she's going to sell it, now is the time - Howard is a one-dimensional player that will break down on the relatively early side of his career with decent stats, but not nearly as decent as people have him penciled in for. Oh, and he's now a proven no-class bum.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 5:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@zibby: How? His part in this was giving back the ball and paying her attorney fees.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
runswithscissors
October 12, 2009 4:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@zibby: Hey! I graduated from Zeb Turnipseed Community College. Goooooooo Fightin' Turnips!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
cabjf
October 12, 2009 12:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@jparadise: Paid for by Ryan Howard too. I bet he'd love that ball back.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Nate128
October 12, 2009 3:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines: Because $15,000,000 a year just isn't enough. Howard's gotta have his baseball back, too, even one caught by a twelve-year old and his organization will be damned if they don't get it back.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Radi0logy
October 12, 2009 12:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@cabjf: Yeah... he's not well compensated.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
taney71
October 12, 2009 12:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Sports teams are getting ridiculous. Think of the fans first you idiots. They pay for everything in that stadium even the players salaries.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
SJActress
October 12, 2009 6:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@taney71: No, actually, advertisers pay for most of that...I mean, we buy their products and all, so it filters down, but you could say you pay EVERYONE'S salary if we went that route.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
pda_tech_guy
October 12, 2009 12:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

You know, even though There are always 2 sides to a story, it doesnt seem like howard asked for the ball. I am almost sure that if Howard would have asked for the ball back, they would have given it up. But no, they offered to autograph the ball, then switched it on them. The lawsuit was deserving.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 1:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pda_tech_guy: No, they didn't switch it on her. They asked her what she would like in exchange for the ball, and she asked for a ball signed by Howard. That's how she herself recounts the exchange: [www.myfoxphilly.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Thanatos
October 12, 2009 5:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: @pda_tech_guy: Well who do you think is going to get the truth out of the matter a local Philly FOX station who could potentially piss off Phillie fans or a CNN? I'm more likely to believe CNN.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 6:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Thanatos: Maybe the one that has a video of the girl saying that she asked for a signed ball in exchange for the one she wanted.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 6:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: the one she caught, not the one she wanted.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 6:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Thanatos: Well I'll go with the one that has video of the girl saying she agreed to trade.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Thanatos
October 12, 2009 10:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coren: @bonzombiekitty: Eh my bad i read both articles but didnt watch the video.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pda_tech_guy
October 12, 2009 2:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty:

IF this is true, then it changes EVERYTHING!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
utensil42
October 12, 2009 3:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pda_tech_guy: No it doesn't. She's under 18 and thus cannot enter into a binding contract, verbal or otherwise. The Philly's representatives knew this and did it anyway.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pda_tech_guy
October 12, 2009 3:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@utensil42: yeah, it doesnt change anything legally, but it proves that the phillies arent total douche bags. They asked for the ball, to give to the home run hitter, she agreed, in exchange for a signed ball, then she threw a fit because the ball was not given to her in person.

I am sure they didnt realize she would change her mind. This is just like a man having sex with a woman, then she changes her mind a day later, and calls it rape.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Pink Puppet
October 12, 2009 7:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pda_tech_guy: Well, aren't you just a charmer?

Keep your disgusting misogyny to yourself, pal. It isn't welcome here.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 12, 2009 6:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pda_tech_guy: \"This is just like a man having sex with a woman, then she changes her mind a day later, and calls it rape.\"

Yeah, I can see how wanting a home run ball is totally like lying about being raped. Except that I can't. And your example reeks of misogyny.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Easton21
October 14, 2009 5:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@squinko - is pretending there's a star: Oh, please.
Can't someone get away with an opinion these days?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
whey
October 12, 2009 4:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pda_tech_guy:
\"I am sure they didnt realize she would change her mind. This is just like a man having sex with a woman, then she changes her mind a day later, and calls it rape.\"

WTF?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Mythandros
October 12, 2009 11:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@whey: That happens A LOT more often then you might think, it's truly sick.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 13, 2009 1:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Mythandros: Any statistics from non-biased sources to back that up? Or are you just making crap up based on non-existent anecdotal evidence? I'm going to go with the latter.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
CyGuy
October 12, 2009 1:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pda_tech_guy: Actually, prison time is what they deserve, theft by deception is no different than shoplifting a $15,000 diamond necklace from a jewelry store at the mall. I bet a 12 year girl in FL (where they try to put under age kids away for life) who tried to avoid charges for theft wouldn't be able to get off without jail time simply by offering to give it back.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
tailstoo
October 12, 2009 12:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Good for her - she caught it, she should get it. Ryan makes a pretty good penny - if he wants it, he should buy it from her. It would be a nice start to her college fund, or an account to help her survive the upcoming jobless economy.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
11hawkinst
October 12, 2009 11:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tailstoo: Oh yeah, she put a lot of effort into getting that 200th home run ball - you know, being at the right place at the right time. It's not like Ryan Howard put any effort into hitting the 199 other homers to get to 200.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
elysse
October 12, 2009 12:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I heard about this on All Things Considered. The attorney that Korva spoke with, I can't remember if he was def or pros.. although likely prosecution, sounded WAY skeezy. He jumped from \"it's not about the money, it's about the moment\" to \"they can't just give her another ball that's not worth the 15k$ THIS ball is worth.\" in the same sentence.

That said, it's truly pathetic that it took a lawsuit to get the Phillies to return the ball. the attorney also said that if athletes can sell their championship rings, belts, or specific balls to collectors than she should be offered the chance to as well.. even though the Phillies said that they should get the ball because \"all she'll do is sell it on ebay\"...

What in the world ever happened to sport for fun? The franchises, endorsements, city politics (i.e. \"we're all broke but we can so totally afford this megamillion dollar staidum..\").. it's all getting out of hand.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
October 12, 2009 6:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@elysse: Even if \"all she's going to do is sell it on eBay,\" what's that to them? If the club and/or player want it badly enough, they can bid on it, should the ball go up for sale.

I didn't watch the interview, but read this second article, and I agree with the attorney; the club was trying to get one over on this kid by giving her something that they knew full well was of far, far lesser value than the ball she caught. I don't think for a second that it was accidental that they left her grandfather sitting in the stands and instead had her and her brother come up to the clubhouse without any adult there besides team bigwigs asking for the ball. Most kids would cave faced with that and just ask for whatever, especially if they didn't fully realize how much the ball they caught could be worth.

Even if the girl agreed to the swap and then changed her mind, the Phillies set the tone of this situation by being skeevy and underhanded first. You don't spirit a couple of kids off to the clubhouse without their chaperon and start trying to wheel and deal with them for the baseball they caught in a deliberate attempt to lure them into giving up something that's potentially worth a significant chunk of money. Can you conduct yourself like that? Probably. Should you? No, for just this reason- it looks pretty blatantly underhanded, makes the player himself look like a jerk, and if the kid changes their mind, you don't have a leg to stand on. Shame on the Phillies for being underhanded and stupid about the whole thing.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
rlee
October 12, 2009 6:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@elysse: I heard that interview as well. My take was that there was no \"switcheroo\" -- the club said Howard wanted to keep the ball, and they would trade it for a (different) autographed ball; the girl agreed to the trade. The attorney's position was that that was not a fair trade, and the club had taken advantage of a minor. He may be right, but I agree he did come across as a bit sleazy.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
smiling1809
October 12, 2009 4:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@elysse: If they don't want her to sell it on Ebay, then they need to offer her an Ebay price.


She caught it, if she wants to sell it on Ebay, she should be able to.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
wagenejm
October 12, 2009 1:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@elysse: The only difference is that the $15k was part of the suit, and a means of encouraging them to either pay up or give back the ball. Since they gave back the ball, there's no money involved.

Most likely the lawyer was trumpeting the value of the ball simply to bring attention. At least he wasn't saying it was worth hundreds of thousands of dollars :)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
elysse
October 12, 2009 12:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@elysse: ugh s/than/then. Edit button, plz!

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
SpruceStreetPhil - in a new Pine flavor
October 12, 2009 12:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I say we split the ball down the middle and give one half to both parties.

/

The good ole Solomon trick.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Jeremy82465
October 12, 2009 12:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Earlier reports didnt state it like this. From all the stories I read last week they offered her a new autographed ball so he could keep his 200th homerun ball. She accepted but when she got home and told her parents they threatened to sue to get it back. Instead of drawing it out in a legal battle (which im sure he could do considering his has the money) he gave it back to the little girl. I dont know why this story made him out to be a villian that I highly doubt he is.

Reply
9 replies
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
October 12, 2009 6:11 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jeremy82465:

She might have \"accepted\", but she is not an adult. You don't go offering deals to kids. \"Yo..Johnny...that is a really nice diamond ring your mommy gave you to drop off over there at the jeweller to be cleaned. I'll give you this nice ice cream cone for it.\" \"Sure mister!\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
SJActress
October 12, 2009 6:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Saboth: Whether she said that or not, it wouldn't hold up on the Phillies' end. You can make a contract with a minor.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
October 12, 2009 7:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@SJActress:

I'm pretty sure the parents must be present for most contracts with minors, verbal or not, especially regarding items worth a decent chunk of change.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
burnedout
October 12, 2009 1:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jeremy82465: Not a \"new autographed ball\"...

\"A Phillies employee, Jennifer says, told her if she handed over the ball, she could come back after the game, meet the slugger and get him to autograph it. She gave the ball up. In exchange, she got cotton candy and a soda.

Jennifer went back to her seat but returned to the clubhouse after the game -- this time, with her grandfather and the rest of her party. They waited. The Phillies slugger never showed up.

A security guard walked up and gave Jennifer a ball autographed by Howard. But it wasn't the one she caught.

This ball was clean and polished. Jennifer calls it \"the fake one.\"\"

[www.cnn.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 3:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@burnedout: CNN has it wrong, that's not how the girl recounts the exchange again, from [www.myfoxphilly.com]

------------
The ball was caught by 12-year-old Jennifer Valdivia. She says she was quickly approached by stadium security guards who escorted her to the Phillies locker room, where, she says, a team official asked her -

\"'Could we have the ball? We'll give you something back, anything,'\" recounts Valdivia. \"I'm like, 'Okay, can I have a baseball signed by Ryan Howard?'\"
------------

The girl herself says she agreed to exchange. What apparently didn't happen was that she was supposed to be able to meet Howard, which didn't happen.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Jeremy82465
October 12, 2009 3:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@burnedout: I cant say thats not how it happened, but like I said, I am just relating it how I read it somewhere else:
\"Howard hit the home run at land Shark Stadium against the Florida Marlins on July 16, and as is customary, wanted the ball back.


So Phillies staff invited Valdivia to the club house for a one-on-one meeting with the star, which would have been enough for any other fan. But the Howard also autographed a baseball in exchange for the historic one.


The kid accepted the deal, but after she told her parents, the family told the Phillies and Howard they wanted the ball back. We think you see where this is going.


The family then hired an attorney, who then filed a lawsuit to get the ball back, claiming it was Valdivia's ball and that Howard took advantage of the little girl. Instead of playing baseball tug-of-war with a kid, Howard just gave the ball back.\"


[www.nbcmiami.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
burnedout
October 12, 2009 1:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jeremy82465: It wasn't Howard who was the bad guy, but the Phillies tried to do this on his behalf. One thing that was left out of this recounting is that she and her brother attended the game with their grandfather who doesn't speak English. Instead of asking to speak with a parent, the Phillies pulled her aside during the game (without an adult present), took the ball, offered to get it autographed and told her to come back to the clubhouse after the game. She went but no one showed up. So she went home and told her mom which is when her mom hit the roof. It's one thing for the kid to be taken advantage of, but the Phillies really should have had the conversation with a parent present.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 12, 2009 1:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jeremy82465: They didn't offer her the new autographed ball. They told her that they were going to give her back that specific home run ball and then didn't. I'm sure if they would've said, \"Howard wants the ball, why don't you bring your family here and we'll give you a tour, give you some shirts and hats and hey, here's Howard and he'll sign this new ball for you\", it would've gone down a lot smoother.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 5:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@squinko - is pretending there's a star: In *this* article. He mentioned earlier ones that contradict it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 1:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@squinko - is pretending there's a star: According to the girl herself, they asked for the ball and told her they'd give her anything in exchange, and she asked for an autographed ball.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
skyman8880
October 12, 2009 12:56 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I smell Horse-puckey going on here. The little girl traded the 200-ball away for an autographed ball. As far as I can tell, nobody forced her to trade it away, and the deal was done. It was only when a lawyer got involved did this even become a story!

Besides, the 200 Homerun ball obviously meant more to Ryan Howard, who has already gone and sealed and marked it in a way to show it as a trophy.

This still seems a case of Buyers Remorse to me. The deal was already done, and a week later, someone said, \"OH NOES!!!\" and wanted to reverse it.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 12:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I've heard a slightly different version of this story. According to the other news reports I've read, Howard offered the girl an exchange of the home run ball for a signed ball, which she accepted. It wasn't a subversive switch-a-roo according to [www.nbcmiami.com]
and
[www.phinallyphilly.com]

She told her parents about it, and it seems that they didn't raise care about it until they found out the value of the ball.

Reply
7 replies
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
October 12, 2009 6:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty:

This is probably why it is a scummy idea to offer deals to kids. \"Your honor, my client said \"a\" ball, not \"the\" ball, under article so and so, blah blah blah, the 12 year old should know from common law that this means...\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 6:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Saboth: But it wasn't a scummy deal in that way. According to her own account of the event, they wanted the ball and asked what she wanted in exchange for it, and she said she wanted a signed ball in return. There's nothing in what she said that indicates that she thought she was going to get the original ball back w/ Howard's signature. She knew it was a signed ball in exchange for the one she caught (and according to her she was also supposed to meet Howard).

Again, it's a different discussion on whether or not they should have made such a deal without a parent present (they shouldn't have), but things didn't go down the way the CNN article states.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
burnedout
October 12, 2009 1:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: You don't think a blog named \"Phinally Philly\" won't be a little biased in favor of Howard? Maybe you should pick a better source to get the real story...

[www.cnn.com]

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 3:06 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@burnedout: The articles I quote are referencing other articles like the local news that quotes the girl herself saying that when the team asked for the ball, she asked for a signed ball in return.

I'm not saying anything about whether or not the team should have asked for the ball in the first place or if they had the right to make such an exchange. I'm taking issue with the article saying the team switched the ball without her permission, when the girl herself says she agreed to the exchange.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 1:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: From my second link, this is what the girl said:

\"'Could we have the ball? We'll give you something back, anything,'\" recounts Valdivia. \"I'm like, 'Okay, can I have a baseball signed by Ryan Howard?'\"

So they didn't trick her. She agreed to it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
MissPeacock
October 12, 2009 1:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: Were any adults with her when they asked her what she would like? She's only 12. It kind of sounds like maybe they were taking advantage of her since she didn't realize the significance of what she had?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 12, 2009 2:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@MissPeacock: She had her grandfather with her, who is a Cuban immigrant that didn't speak any English. So either way, any verbal agreement made with the girl wouldn't have been legal.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
October 12, 2009 1:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: The NBC Miami \"report\" is actually an opinion piece based on Fox Philly's write-up. Of course the rest of the details of what occured were conviently left out of NBC's piece.


The ball was caught by 12-year-old Jennifer Valdivia. She says she was quickly approached by stadium security guards who escorted her to the Phillies locker room, where, she says, a team official asked her -


\"'Could we have the ball? We'll give you something back, anything,'\" recounts Valdivia. \"I'm like, 'Okay, can I have a baseball signed by Ryan Howard?'\"


Jennifer received the autographed ball after the game, but not the face-to-face meeting with Howard she believes she had been promised.


\"They lied to me and I was like really sad that I couldn't meet Ryan Howard,\" Valdivia tells Fox 29.


Not at all intimidating for a 12 yo.


Regardless you can't enter into a legally binding agreement with a minor. She still would have won her case if taken to court.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Tomorrowmorrowland
October 12, 2009 2:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinkishDelight: It seems like the Internet lawyers have this one all decided today; but, here's an interesting question: who actually owns the ball? Does it belong to MLB? The Phillies? Consider this, if your seat is loose at the stadium, do you get to take it with you? Can you remove the bathroom fixtures? What if the Miller Lite distributor drops a keg and it rolls in your direction? Do you get to claim it? Of course not.

And, while I'm no more lawyer than most (if not all) of the \"lawyers\" who are making their pronouncements today, I'd bet that the same goes for a baseball. MLB may have decided that it's just easier to let a caught ball go (for goodwill purposes) than it would be to track down every foul ball and home run. I'm not sure that is an automatic relinquishing of ownership, though. They might just as easily say, \"sorry adolescent girl, that ball is ours and always has been; your ticket doesn't net you ownership rights to MLB/Phillies property just because you caught it or found it in the stands.\"

She may never have owned it in the first place. In any event, based on the articles, there certainly seems to be more to this than, \"those meanies took my ball.\" Of course they should let her keep it, but if she agrees to give it up...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dodger88
October 13, 2009 2:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tomorrowmorrowland:


Once she got the ball in the stands, it belonged to her. Neither the player nor the team has any right to it. This is pretty straight forward. In 1921 a 31-year old fan named Reuben Berman caught a foul ball. Back in those days, the \"custom\" was for the team to get all balls back. Berman refused and when the security guards came after him demanding that he give the ball back he threw it into the crowd. Berman was removed from his seat and thrown out of the ballpark. 3 months later he sued for mental and physical distress for the humiliation he suffered in front of the crowd. The judge found in favor of Berman and a jury awarded him $100 (not an insignificant amount for 1921) and precedent was set. [There is a nice article discussing this in a 1995 issue of Baseball Digest]


Subsequently, in 1923, an 11-year old boy named Robert Cotter caught a foul ball in Philadelphia and refused to give it back. A guard for the Phillies dragged the kid to a police officer demanding he be arrested for theft. In spite of the reluctance of the officer, the Phillies pushed for the arrest as a \"test case\" and had the child thrown in JAIL overnight. The Phillies argued to the judge that they had the right to force fans to return their property. The judge basically ripped the Phillies a new a** and said he wasn't going to rule that a child was a thief just so the Phillies could save the cost of a baseball. He told them, you wanted a test case, well, there it is! [By the way, there is actually a nice article discussing this in much better detail written by Daniel McQuade on Philliesnation.com].


Perhaps the little girl should be happy they didn't try to have her thrown in jail for reneging on a deal and making the big-bad baseball player cry?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
October 13, 2009 12:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dodger88: Leave it to a commenter with Dodger in their sn to school us all. With references for further reading to boot!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dodger88
October 15, 2009 1:47 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinkishDelight: Did I mention that this was going to be on the test?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
October 12, 2009 4:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tomorrowmorrowland: Sigh.
The lengths some people go to so they can rationalize stealing from small children...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Tomorrowmorrowland
October 12, 2009 5:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: Sigh.
The lengths some people go to so they can show off their knee-jerk reactions...

I haven't decided where I sit on this, because as many people who RTFA have pointed out, there are some serious discrepancies in the stories. I suspect the adolescent probably should keep the ball and all will be right with the world. But, if she made a deal and greedy mommy don't like it, that's a shitty lesson to teach a child and a shitty thing to do to a player who has broken a record and is by all accounts as nice a person as the darling little angel who got her ball stolen by the big mean men.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
October 12, 2009 6:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tomorrowmorrowland: Oh, please. If the team wasn't trying to put one over on her, why wouldn't they have brought her adult chaperon back to the clubhouse when the security guys came to get her and her brother? That seems like basic common sense to me, whether the guy speaks English or not. For one, I don't believe for a second that there's not someone at the Marlins stadium who couldn't have translated for him if necessary (in fact, I daresay Jennifer could have done so herself). For another, whisking a couple of kids away to the team's clubhouse without the adult who accompanied them seems like a liability waiting to happen- and sure enough, the team ends up looking like a bunch of jackasses who try to hoodwink kids out of the home run balls they catch. Anyone with an iota of common sense could have seen it heading in this direction, whether she agreed to the switch or not. The team shouldn't have attempted to make a deal with her without a parent or other adult present to ensure that she understood what the agreement was and recognized what that ball she caught was potentially worth.

Frankly, I don't think they would have talked to her sans adult supervision if they weren't trying to put one over on her. They knew that the ball could be pretty valuable and were hoping to get it in exchange for basically nothing. Knowing that the kid probably wouldn't realize what kind of leverage she had for negotiation, they cornered her alone to try and make a deal. I have no sympathy for the club or the player now that it's backfired.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
October 12, 2009 10:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FaustianSlip: The people who're asserting that one can have a meeting of the minds with a twelve-year-old reveal more about their own mental capacity than of the girl's.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Sudonum
October 12, 2009 3:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tomorrowmorrowland:
Ever been to a baseball game? At the beginning of every MLB game I've ever been to (too many to count), an announcement is made that tells the fans that any balls they catch in the stands are theirs to keep as a souvenir. It might even be printed on the back of a ticket, just like the standard Hold Harmless in case you get hit in the head by that foul ball.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Tomorrowmorrowland
October 12, 2009 5:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Sudonum: If that's true in this case, then my question isn't valid. And I've seen some actual lawyers argue that being able to take a ball you catch is essentially an unspoken part of the contract created by the ticketing process. Not very convincing on its own, but if it's on the ticket, tough shit for Ryan Howard.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ShruggingGalt
October 12, 2009 1:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinkishDelight: bingo. She could have voided the \"agreement\".

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Cyco
October 12, 2009 1:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The version of this I read last week was not as underhanded and this one. When I first read the story, they brought the girl to the back to meet the player and they offered her a trade, the homerun ball for an autographed ball, no devious tricks. When the girl meet up with the parents, they flipped out and charged that the girl was tricked, making it out that the parents were the greedy ones. In the end, they got the lawyer involed and the switch back was made without it going to trial. Not saying which story is correct, just posting about the first one I read.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
smiling1809
October 12, 2009 4:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Cyco: She was tricked b/c she is a child and had no idea what that ball was worth. Unless they told her the ball was worth $15,000 or so when they asked her to switch, then they were wrong. Kid's aren't really capable of making informed decisions like that.


So, to me, it is still as bad as it originally sounded.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 5:58 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@smiling1809: I'm not sure how it's as bad - in the first one she agreed to get something else she wanted. In the second, assuming the first is true, she lied about what she was promised and the team meanwhile comes off shadier for not delivering.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
October 12, 2009 6:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coren: Because even in the first instance, the team cornered her in a room with a bunch of adults, deliberately leaving her adult chaperon seated in the stands (there's no one there who could have translated so he knew what was going on? C'mon), fully aware that a kid probably wouldn't understand right away just how much the ball could be worth and hoping to get her to agree to hand it over for pennies. No surprise that it worked (when I were that age, I probably would have agreed to hand it over if faced by a bunch of adults telling me to do so, too), but the club deserves to have egg on its face for this one. Even if nothing deliberately underhanded was going on (which I don't believe- they would have had her grandfather back there, otherwise), they should have had the common sense to make sure that an adult came back there to okay any deals or trades, not least because she's a minor and can't enter into a contract.

The Phillies behaved sleazily even before they allegedly switched the balls out; trying to get a kid on their own so you can take advantage of their lack of maturity to sucker them is pretty sleazy, in my book. It's also stupid; they should have realized that this could come back and bite them in the ass.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 6:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FaustianSlip: It wouldn't make a difference, he can't speak English so it wouldn't be a valid contract regardless.

And the picture you paint is different from what she does - she said she had the option of getting anything, and that's the price she named. Not \"they were all telling me to give it back\" or anything like that. I can see how she might be intimidated, but if that's the case, I can't imagine why she wouldn't say she was when she was reporting it.

I kinda don't trust her story on this since she's told two very different versions, one seemingly designed to garner sympathy and get what she (her parents) want. Which is probably her parents getting involved, but who knows.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
October 12, 2009 8:25 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@coren: It doesn't matter- just having him there would have mitigated some of the sleazy appearance of the whole thing. Put it this way: why wouldn't they have had her grandfather come with her? I can't think of a single reason except to try and take advantage of the fact that it was a kid that caught the ball, and they'd probably be bought off for far less than an adult, which doesn't really work if you have their chaperon come along. Whether the guy spoke English or not is really immaterial to the fact that he was the adult accompanying these kids, and he wasn't present for any of the deal making going on in that room. That's a huge red flag to me, regardless of what the kid said she wanted to do at the time.

She's twelve. She does imply in the linked article that she was intimidated- she said her mother was mad, and she said, \"What did you want me to do? They were asking for it back.\" That, to me, says she felt intimidated.

The bottom line is that it was totally inappropriate for the Phillies to bring her in alone and start making deals with her. She's twelve years old- no one exercising an iota of good judgment would have brought her in there and started making offers without an adult present unless they were trying to take advantage of the situation (which I think they were). What the kid agreed to and what she's saying now aren't really relevant to the fact that it's fairly evident that the Phillies exercised poor judgment in the way they handled the situation and probably were trying to pull the wool over this kid's eyes.

And really, the fact that all she asked for (according to this other article) was an autographed ball doesn't mean that they couldn't have given or offered her more or better stuff. It had to have been evident to the adults doing the negotiating that she didn't really know how much the ball might be worth, but instead of saying, \"Sure, we'll get you an autographed ball, but how about a jersey and stuff,\" they jumped on the first thing she said. A soda, some cotton candy and a three-dollar baseball? Sold, and for a lot less than we would have spent buying the ball off an adult!

It was a scummy way to handle it, and I suspect the people handling the situation on the Phillies' end had enough experience to know that. They just hoped they wouldn't get caught.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 1:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

From [www.myfoxphilly.com]

[quote]
The ball was caught by 12-year-old Jennifer Valdivia. She says she was quickly approached by stadium security guards who escorted her to the Phillies locker room, where, she says, a team official asked her -

\"'Could we have the ball? We'll give you something back, anything,'\" recounts Valdivia. \"I'm like, 'Okay, can I have a baseball signed by Ryan Howard?'\"
[/quote]

So she wasn't tricked into exchanging the ball like the article here states. But, she apparently didn't get to meet Ryan Howard and she says she was told she would be able to do.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
smiling1809
October 12, 2009 4:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: It was a trick if she had no clue what that ball was worth. She obviously had no clue. That would be called taking advantage of her since they conveneiently left out the part about the ball being worth enough to pay for her first year of college.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Dunkelzahn
October 12, 2009 1:19 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty:


Ouch. Now I don't feel as bad for this young lady. They made an offer, she accepted. It no longer seems as deceptive a practice as everyone is playing it out to be.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
utensil42
October 12, 2009 3:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Dunkelzahn: But she's 12! A 12 year old in that situation is likely to be intimidated into the agreement and/or not understand the agreement.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pmcpa4
October 12, 2009 4:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@utensil42: I'm SURE there was a parent or adult with her. No 12 year old is going to a game alone.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
October 12, 2009 6:43 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pmcpa4: No, there wasn't. Her grandfather didn't go to the clubhouse, ostensibly because he doesn't speak English, but I don't really buy that. It's a stadium in Miami; I have no doubt that there was someone there who could have translated for him- or Jennifer probably could have done so herself. It's the lack of adult supervision of this wheeling and dealing by the team that puts them in the wrong. Whether she agreed to it doesn't matter; she's a kid who had no idea just how valuable the ball was. For the team to try and capitalize on that (which they were) was just out of order.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
whey
October 12, 2009 4:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pmcpa4: Yes, her immigrant grandfather that does not speak English was with her at the game, but did not go to the clubhouse.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Klaus_Kinsky
October 12, 2009 1:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

No matter which version is true, a 12 yo was swindled out of something that she had no idea the worth. It doesn't matter that they gave her a choice... unless she was at least 18.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
burnedout
October 12, 2009 1:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Klaus_Kinsky: Exactly. They shouldn't have had that conversation with her by herself. She should have had an adult present to help her make that decision.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Megalomania
October 12, 2009 1:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Klaus_Kinsky: First, they weren't taking advantage of her being a 12 year old, they would have made the offer to anyone. Second, when she decided she wanted the ball back, the people she tried to get it from didn't have it. Third, Ryan Howard probably didn't even know she wanted it back until he found out about the lawsuit, and just immediately gave it back when he found out. It was a misunderstanding, and no one ended up 'swindled'.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
gparlett
October 12, 2009 1:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Klaus_Kinsky: One of my friends once saw an 8 year old kid trying to buy a soda with a $100 bill. The vending machine kept rejecting the bill, so my friend walked up and said \"I will give you four quarters for that\" and the kid took him up on it.

My friends was being an incredible jerk to a little kid. So was the team in this case.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
fantomesq
October 12, 2009 3:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@gparlett: And you're still friends with this person? I don't know whether I'm more disgusted that he would do this or that you would be proud enough over the situation to retell it... stealing money from a kid. Shame on your friend!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
drizzt380
October 12, 2009 5:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@fantomesq:
I don't think he was proud about his friend. He called him a jerk.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
October 12, 2009 7:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@drizzt380:

Also..why the hell does an 8 year old have a $100? I'm 35 and the highest denomination I carry around is $20s.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
chersolly
October 12, 2009 1:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

With the girl or the ballplayer, the ball is still going to end up at a memorabilia show at the Cincinnati airport Ramada in 15 years.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
TCama
October 12, 2009 1:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

There's probably something in fine print on the back of the ticket that says that home run balls that you catch are not your property and the team reserves the right to take them back if they so please.

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
strathmeyer
October 12, 2009 8:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: Then the team should also pay for it when a ball breaks my car window???

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
October 13, 2009 7:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@strathmeyer: No, but if your car can make it up to the clubhouse, a player will autograph the ball for it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
October 12, 2009 6:18 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: Too hard to enforce. By claiming that's a legal contract, in this instance it would have been unenforceable because the girl was under 18 and the grandfather who went with them did not speak English and could therefore not agree to a contract he did not understand. There would be plenty of other situations like that.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Sudonum
October 12, 2009 3:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: At the beginning of every MLB game I've ever been to they announce that balls hit into the stands are free to the fans as a \"souvenir\".

Reply
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 12, 2009 2:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TCama: They should start doing that now.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
TinaBringMeTheAx
October 12, 2009 1:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

It's really this simple: A 12 year old is not able to enter a legally binding contract. The Phillies should have insisted that one of her parents be there to authorize the deal.

Upon catching the ball, it became her property.

The \"contract\" to trade it for a signature was invalid on its face, so the ball was always her property and neither the Phillies nor Ryan Howard ever had legal possession of it.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
fantomesq
October 12, 2009 3:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinaBringMeTheAx: Seconded. This is the case in a nutshell. I'm shocked that they didn't have policies in place to gets parents' permission in these situations.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mralmostpopuarl
October 12, 2009 1:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinaBringMeTheAx: Explain to me how it's her property? She caught the ball. She didn't purchase it. It technically belonged to the team, who then had the option of letting her keep it or not.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
mralmostpopuarl
October 12, 2009 1:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wait, wait, wait. What are these claims that she owns the ball? Did she buy the ball? No, she caught it. Now, I know that there is a tradition of GIVING the ball to the person who catches it, but for all intents, the purchaser of the ball is the owner (i.e. the team). They didn't have to give her anything, but they likely figured it wasn't worth the fight. But what a horrible lesson to teach. Finders/Keepers? Really?

Then on top of that they sued for $15,000 after fully admitting that the ball wasn't worth anywhere near that. Also they agreed to pay the lawyers legal fee? Seems like they went well out of their way for the girl (and her greedy parents).

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
nuton2wheels
October 12, 2009 1:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What this was just an old, used baseball with the guy's signature on it? Doubt she'd know the difference, unless there was something distinctive about the original...

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
fantomesq
October 12, 2009 3:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nuton2wheels: She said she knew the difference between \"her ball\" and the fake due to the scuff marks on hers.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
burnedout
October 12, 2009 1:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nuton2wheels: My thoughts, too. Just stamping \"200th Home Run\" on it doesn't make it real.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
utensil42
October 12, 2009 3:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@burnedout: When it was sent back to her, it included a letter of authenticity from the Philly's. Whether or not it's the actual ball doesn't really matter now that she has that statement.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Shappie
October 12, 2009 1:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Who's to say they didn't give her another used ball in the place of the \"Actual\" ball? How would she know what the real ball looked like?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
utensil42
October 12, 2009 3:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Shappie: When it was sent back to her, it included a letter of authenticity from the Philly's. Whether or not it's the actual ball doesn't really matter now that she has that statement.

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
uber_mensch
October 12, 2009 1:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Personally, if I was the little girl, I would now take the ball and publicly destroy it, just to prove to the world who really owns it.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 12, 2009 2:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@uber_mensch: And she could do that, if she wanted to grow up to be a gigantic asshole.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Alarm Bell
October 12, 2009 1:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What has this country come to, when a 12-yeard-old girl brings on a lawsuit? Or when an adults thinks it's ok to sue on BEHALF of a little girl, and ask for tons of cash to boot?

Can we not think of any other ways to solve a problem? Maybe i need to be more of a sports fanatic, but I think if she got another autographed ball, she should say \"thank you\" not \"gimme.\" And what 12-year-old says \"My Ball?\" That's what I'd hear from a 3-year old learning to talk for the first time. Everyone here needs to grow up.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Tightlines
October 12, 2009 1:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

She felt her daughter had been duped, robbed of something potentially worth thousands of dollars.

And there's your money quote right there, no pun intended.

I'm a Philadelphian and a die-hard Phillies fan. Ryan Howard is, by all accounts, a stand up guy. This wasn't his doing.

Obviously most of you are not baseball fans. These situations happen all the time. Someone hits a milestone home run, the team asks for the ball in exchange for something else. It's very common. Most people, however, are not selfish little brats about it, and give the ball back.

Reply
11 replies
\"user-pic\"
drjayphd
October 13, 2009 12:30 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines: Well, there's always the ball-hawks who have outlandish demands, but they're probably bigger fans of money than baseball. Most of the time, at least that I've heard, they're more reasonable about it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Saboth
October 12, 2009 7:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines:

Yes...they are idiots. \"Hey, multi-billion dollar franchise that pays grown men millions of dollars to play a kid's game...please take back this ball for free that I might have passed on to my grandkids, or made a few hundred or thousands of dollars off of on Ebay. It might even have made up for some of the outrageous park and merchandising fees I've paid to MLB, but I insist...please take this item, as a gift from me to your rich ball club, at no charge.\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
FaustianSlip
October 12, 2009 6:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines: If it happens all the time, the team had to know that when a kid catches the ball, their parents or at least the adult accompanying them should be there when any deals are made. They deliberately took her and her brother off to the clubhouse alone to \"ask\" for the ball back. If you're twelve and whisked off to the team clubhouse by security personnel and faced by adults \"encouraging\" you to return a ball you caught, are you really going to put up much of a fight, especially if you don't understand immediately how valuable the ball might be? Of course not.

The team knew what they were doing when they opted not to wait to contact her folks or at least have her grandfather come back and find someone to translate for him (this is Miami, after all- I'm sure that could have been done without a lot of trouble). If they really wanted to make a transparent, above-board deal with the kid for the ball, they would have done so. The fact that they didn't says more to me about the team than someone who admits he's biased and a huge fan proclaiming that the kid is a \"spoiled brat.\" They took advantage of a kid to get a potentially valuable baseball for basically nothing. For a team that rakes in millions and a player that rakes in millions every year, that's pretty scummy, whether the kid agreed to it or not. A baseball, some cotton candy and a soda? Jesus, at least give the kid a jersey or a trip to Philly to tour the stadium or something.

And frankly, as an adult, had the kid told me, \"Okay, I'll swap it for an autographed ball,\" my first reaction would have been, \"Sure, we can do that, but let's see if we can't get you some other memorabilia, too.\" Knowing what the ball might be worth, most people would want to at least get them something approximating that value. Not these people!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
AgamemnonV1
October 12, 2009 4:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines: I don't know what's more disgusting: that a team swindled a girl out of a baseball, or the team's fans are calling the girl a brat because some chump who makes $15 mil a year couldn't even offer something decent in return. Oh yes, I'm sure he's just a stand up guy, especially after this bit.

@bonzombiekitty: That is not in the slightest a reputable or notable source. CNN broke the real story and there's no doubt that CNN is a notable source. Sorry, the team's fans can't even make a 12-year-old girl look bad in this base, especially when the group on the other side of the fence makes multi-millions every year. Oh yes, I feel SO sorry for Howard, who is probably set to pay for his children's children's children's college education.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AgamemnonV1: Besides the ludicrous statement that it's not a reputable source, when there's video of the girl saying she agreed to the exchange, this has nothing to do with making the girl look bad. It has to do with making CNN look bad for crappy reporting. It also has nothing to do with feeling sorry for Howard, who probably had no idea any of this was going on.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 4:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AgamemnonV1: Not a reputable source? It's the local news station. They talked to the girl! THERE'S A VIDEO OF HER SAYING IT.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 4:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: I just want to make this clear - I'm not commenting on whether or not the team should have asked the girl to trade the ball. I'm commenting on the cnn article stating that the Phillies took the ball and gave the girl a different, signed ball against her knowledge. That simply isn't true. The girl says herself, and there's video of her recalling the incident, that the team offered her anything in exchange for the ball and she requested a signed ball in exchange. She agreed to the ball exchange.

If you want to comment on whether or not the girl should have been able to make such a decision, etc, that's different. But the Phillies did not switch the ball against her knowledge.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dbshaw
October 12, 2009 2:45 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines: I think the difference is that in those cases they ASKED if it was ok to switch and the person AGREED to the switch.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
utensil42
October 12, 2009 3:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dbshaw: And, the person they asked was over the age of 18 or had their parents present for the agreement. Not the case here.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 3:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@dbshaw: But they DID ask and she DID agree to it (regardless of whether or not she should be making such an agreement) Again, in her own words:

from [www.myfoxphilly.com]

The ball was caught by 12-year-old Jennifer Valdivia. She says she was quickly approached by stadium security guards who escorted her to the Phillies locker room, where, she says, a team official asked her -

\"'Could we have the ball? We'll give you something back, anything,'\" recounts Valdivia. \"I'm like, 'Okay, can I have a baseball signed by Ryan Howard?'\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
squinko
October 12, 2009 2:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines: Way to bag on a kid dude. How do you know she wasn't pressured into this by her parents? It's not like a 12-year old can hire a lawyer for something like this.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TinaBringMeTheAx
October 12, 2009 2:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines: She is 12 years old. She cannot enter into legal contracts. The Phillies had no business dealing directly with a 12 year old girl, and they should have known that.

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Aladdyn
October 12, 2009 2:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The girl asked for a ball autographed by him in exchange for the homerun ball. I call shenanigans on Phil for his inflamatory writeup


[www.myfoxphilly.com]

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Aladdyn
October 12, 2009 2:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Aladdyn: oops just read some more, I guess its CNNS fault for leaving a few inconvienient facts out of their story.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TinaBringMeTheAx
October 12, 2009 2:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Aladdyn: The Phillies tried to trick a little girl into trading a thing of value for a thing of no value.

Shame on the Phillies.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Hogan1
October 12, 2009 5:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinaBringMeTheAx:


Uhh...This is common in baseball. First/significant home run balls have sentimental value to a player (Because they are people too, not emotionless automations blinded by the almighty dollar like some on here seem to think). They'll often offer autographed balls, bats, photo ops, tickets, etc in return for them.


In any case Phil Villareal completely sensationalized and modified the story for his own purposes. The girl was told she was going to be given a DIFFERENT ball. Granted they shoud have asked to speak to an adult in this situation as the failure to do so is the single factor that created this mess.


In the end, this whole story is nothing more then a tale of greed on the part of the girls family.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TinaBringMeTheAx
October 12, 2009 8:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Hogan1: But she also thought she was going to meet whatever the hell the ballplayer's name is, and she didn't.

So even discounting that she was not competent to execute a contract, there was clearly no meeting of the minds. She thought she was getting something that the Phillies did not deliver.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 6:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Hogan1: No he didn't - he reported based on the CNN article, which was inaccurate. I doubt he knew that at the time - he wasn't basing this on the Fox Phillys article linked up thread

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Aladdyn
October 12, 2009 2:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinaBringMeTheAx: If your read the article she doenst say she was tricked she asked for an autographed ball. She says the problem was she didnt get to meet him. All her words, not mine.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
TinaBringMeTheAx
October 12, 2009 2:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Aladdyn: The point is that a 12 year old is not legally competent to make such a deal.

This was not trading a cherry ices for a grape ices in the school yard. This should have been a serious negotiation with an offer, consideration and acceptance between competent adults.

The Phillies had no business making a deal with a 12 year old.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Aladdyn
October 12, 2009 3:17 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinaBringMeTheAx: I agree with you that parents/gaurdians should have been involved. My point is that CNN left out the fact that the reason why the girl got an autographed ball was because thats what she asked for.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
dbshaw
October 12, 2009 2:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

They're lucky it was a lawsuit. I would have went to the nearest police station and sworn out a complaint for theft.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
vladthepaler
October 12, 2009 2:57 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm glad the girl won this. What a horrible way to treat a fan.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Colonel Jack O'Neill
October 12, 2009 3:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That was a frivolous lawsuit.
All she wanted was an autograph ball by Ryan Howard, and she got it, but it was the mother who made a big deal about it.

Howard had nothing to do with it, he probably didn't even care about it, it's the team spokeperson, or the team rep. who wanted the ball.

One day that ball would have been in the Hall of Fame, but it's not cause of the mother.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Dodger88
October 13, 2009 3:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Colonel Jack O'Neill:


According to the Mirriam-Webster Dictionary, Frivolous (as used in this context) is defined as \"having no sound basis (as in fact or law)\". In other words, the case has no legal merit.


Since the girl's family is 100% correct as a matter of law, then by definition this was not a frivolous lawsuit.


Perhaps you meant to say that this lawsuit was unnecessary? In that case I agree. The girl's family should never have needed to file the suit since the Phillies should not have made a deal with a minor in the first place. And once the family voided the \"deal\" the Phillies should have immediately returned the ball.


The problem here was not that the mother sued to protect the rights of her daughter, the problem was that the Phillies refused to obey the law until their hand was forced by a lawsuit.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
formergr
October 12, 2009 3:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wow, whenever I heard this story referenced on the news last week, I came away with the impression that 1) girl caught ball, 2) team asked her for it saying the player wanted it, 3) girl gave it because she was nice, 4) greedy mom found out and went apeshit at lost potential income and sued.

I had NO IDEA the team tried to trick her under the pretense her ball would be signed, and then switched it with a fake duplicate ball-- that is appalling. Glad she got it back!

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 3:20 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@formergr: They didn't trick her with a fake ball. The CNN article has it wrong, the girl said she agreed to the trade.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
formergr
October 12, 2009 3:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@bonzombiekitty: Thanks, I'm reading other articles now, and it's becoming more clear. The post should probably be updated to note the point of contention in the stories...

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
bifloman
October 12, 2009 3:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Just because she caught the ball, does she really own it? Tradition and past experience implies that whoever catches the ball keeps it. But legally, isn't the ball still the property of the team?

Reply
1 replies
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
axiomatic
October 12, 2009 4:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Well this solidifies for me that baseball is not ready for me to start watching it again. I quit witching baseball because of the ridiculous prima-donnas playing the game. They are apparently still there and ruining the game still.

The fans are EVERYTHING. Do not anger the fans, especially little girl fans.

Stay classy baseball. You have yet to win my viewership and my ticket money back.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 4:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@axiomatic: Prima donnas? In this case at least I don't think it had anything to do with Ryan Howard. It seems as though he had no idea any of this was going on.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
FiorellaMajumdar
October 12, 2009 4:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

The 200th homerun of a player's career is pretty important, and forcing him to give it up is selfish and petty. They should have maybe forced a photo op or something else that would provide memories for this child rather than teach her the lesson of \"If you want something, take from the person who has it.\"


It's in times like this when the joke about 20,000 lawyers chained together at the bottom of the sea seems appropos.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Dodger88
October 13, 2009 4:44 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FiorellaMajumdar:


\"forcing him to give it up is selfish and petty\"


No one is forcing him to give anything up. In order to give it up he needed to own it legally. He never legally owned it, therefore he couldn't be forced to give it up.


\"rather than teach her the lesson of 'If you want something, take from the person who has it.'\"


Funny, but I was thinking the same thing, except it was the Phillies who wanted something, so they took it from the little girl who had it by negotiating with a child who didn't understand the economic significance of the transaction...


Here's an analogy for you: A little kid finds a rare penny on the ground that is worth $100k. Adult asks her what she wants for it. She says a piece of gum. Adult gives her the gum and she gives adult the $100k penny. Parents find out and demand the return of the rare penny. Adult says \"Tough sh*t that's not my problem, she made a deal.\" Parents sue to get coin back. In your bizarro-world, the child and the parents are the bad guys and the adult who ripped off a clueless child is the injured party… Yeah, that makes sense.


Maybe the Phillies should have let this go to court after all. They could have raised the classic \"No Backsies\" legal defense. Certainly that would hold up in court!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
yevarechecha
October 12, 2009 6:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@FiorellaMajumdar: Yeah, they should have given her something else BESIDES the ball. Not just swap one milestone ball for a random ball that's \"autographed\" (but is probably a clubhouse attendant faking it). I thought in most cases like these, the fan gets a bat or a jersey or something. Not just a different baseball.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Moosenogger
October 12, 2009 4:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm sure the family checked the ball about 10 different times to make sure this was the true 200th.

Shame on the team for trying to swindle her. Fans aren't morons - they know if they're holding something priceless. If the player wants his record-setting ball, then he can buy it fair and square.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Tightlines
October 12, 2009 5:00 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is such a stupid argument. Good to see Consumerist commenters defending filing a lawsuit over a freaking baseball. So pathetic. \"You can't enter into a contract with a minor.\" Are you kidding me?

Ever see a bat fly into the stands when a player swings and misses? You know what they do? They ask for it back from the fan who caught it, then make sure he or she gets something in return. It's common fucking courtesy. Now we're teaching children that being gracious is an undesirable trait to have? We're okay with that? Just because someone happens to make money, we can automatically be assholes towards them? Ryan Howard, whose parents marched with MLK Jr., whose mother handles all of his finances and literally gives him an allowance, who donates more time and money to charity then any of you ever will, is a prima donna because he accomplished something no one else in baseball ever had and he wanted something to commemorate it? Screw you dickwads, I'm going home.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
morlo
October 12, 2009 5:39 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Tightlines: Howard should have asked his mom to pay off the girl then. He doesn't deserve the ball more than she does.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 6:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@morlo: To my knowledge, Howard didn't have anything to do with this. I haven't read anything that indicated that Howard even knew what was going on until there was a lawsuit about it.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
coren
October 12, 2009 6:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can the blaming of Ryan Howard stop already? I have no idea who he is other than this stuff I've read today, but he has NOTHING to do with this, other than hitting the homerun and ending up with the ball - which he gave back when he found out what happened. He didn't trick the girl, he didn't take the ball, he didn't refuse to give it back.

Even in the inaccurate CNN article, it doesn't say he played a hand in this, so at the very least let's stop blaming him, by all accounts he's a standup guy.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
DD_838
October 12, 2009 6:16 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm sure this has been already said... that ball is destined for Ebay.

Simply put with all boo hoo's aside, that ball is not the girls property. Just cause she caught it doesn't make it hers. The ball belongs to the team, stadium or whomever PURCHASED it.

Also, the article says they were suing for the ball and $15,000+. Where does the 15k come in?? Distress caused by switching a new ball for one that was hit once with a bat? I don't think so.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
strathmeyer
October 12, 2009 8:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@DD_838: 2/10, not sure what your were going for. Making blatantly false statements is an old trick here and unlikely to get much of a rise out of anyone

Reply
\"user-pic\"
bonzombiekitty
October 12, 2009 6:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@DD_838: Arguably, since the girl caught it, it DOES make it hers. Every MLB game I've been to has announced that if you catch the ball, you keep it. This includes several Phillies home games.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
nstonep
October 12, 2009 6:29 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Or...the phillies just had some guy smack a baseball around a couple of times then put the letters on it and handed it to her.

Still...who'd expect anything BUT this from an organization in Philadelphia. Break out the D batteries folks!

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
j1s
October 12, 2009 8:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So, what's with this sentence:

\"The ball was caught by 12-year-old Jennifer Valdivia. She says she was quickly approached by stadium security guards who escorted her to the Phillies locker room...\"

Where are the parents in this whole meeting in the locker room? Who in their right mind would let their kid go to the locker room by herself????

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
knyghtryda
October 12, 2009 8:31 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Sometimes, it takes a stupid lawsuit to make stupid people do the right thing. Frivolous? Probably. Necessary? Probably too. The kid was being a kid, and the adult was unfortunately also being a kid. In my book the adult loses big time.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
strathmeyer
October 12, 2009 8:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I love everyone here blaming the little girl. It's what makes The Consumerist worth reading. I'm going to go out in public and just start asking children for things, at least I know someone will support me.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
HammRadio
October 12, 2009 9:04 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

if a 12 year old can't enter a legal contract... then I should be able to go to any kids lemonade stand. Get a glass of lemonade. And not pay for it?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Dodger88
October 13, 2009 3:25 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HammRadio:


Well, you actually have that kind of backwards. Under the law, a minor does not have contractual capacity. Therefore they (the minor) can raise it as a defense and void the contract (this is the general rule... there are a few limited exceptions that are not relevant here). You, as an adult, cannot raise this as a defense unless there is another reason for your incapacity (ex. mental retardation, insanity, etc).


By the way, statutory rape is based on the same theory- Since a minor cannot legally consent to sex and since rape is essentially sex without an individual's consent... by statutory definition, sex with a minor is rape.

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Judge_Smails
October 13, 2009 12:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I bet she didn't get the actual ball back anyway. It's sitting on a shelf in his house and he is laughing his ass off over it.

Reply
1 replies
","
\"user-pic\"
Devientse7en
October 13, 2009 12:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Excuse my lack of understanding (I haven't been to a baseball game in about 17 years), but I must be missing something.

There are a lot of comments regarding legal issues. Underage girl entering legal contracts and the team \"stealing\" the ball. But at what point did the baseball (Purchased and owned by Major League Baseball for use by the team) become legal property of the girl? If I remember correctly from the Barry Bonds case, doesn't transfer of the ownership occur when the ball is hit AND the team/MLB has no intention of retrieving it thus it becoming abandoned property? Clearly the team wanted the ball, thus intent to retrieve and it no longer being abandoned and remaining property of the team/MLB.

Treating the ball as property of the girl just for catching it is fairly loose ownership. If a peanut guy throws a bag to someone and a random guy jumps up and grabs it before the intended party, do they then gain ownership of the peanuts? Does it matter if the person is a 12yo girl?

Not trying to place blame, just gain an understanding about the comments where people are calling the team \"thieves\" and assuming ownership for catching a ball. If I am wrong and it is stadium policy that ticket holders can catch and keep balls I would love to know.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ninjatoddler
October 13, 2009 12:21 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

So how do we know the ball she got in the end WAS the one that came off the homerun?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
drjayphd
October 13, 2009 12:28 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Dunno why so many people are piling blame on Ryan Howard. I'm guessing this was done without his input, by the team. Especially in light of his community work, I'd like to think Ryan Howard personally didn't have anything to do with this incident, unless this guy was somehow involved...

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
StarVapor
October 13, 2009 2:51 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Smart kid....dumb team and player agent.

Reply
","","","","","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Kevin Kuzia
October 13, 2009 9:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What's funny to me about all of this is that it does not quite add up. Ryan Howard is one of the few class acts/nice guys in baseball, so the idea that he sought to swipe this ball from a little girl just doesn't pass the sniff test.

People are building it into this shady back room deal where the Phillies are try to \"steal\" this ball from the girl. Even if the team was seeking to get the ball for Ryan Howard, it's not like they have a direct financial gain in this. Their player is ending up with the ball, not them and I doubt he is selling it (it's not like he is Pete Rose).

But beyond all of that, I think that this sets a rather ugly precedent for fan/player interactions whichever way it comes out. It's no wonder there are a lot of athletes who don't want to interact with fans or sign autographs when it has just become about the money for the fans. That's just twisted.

Reply
","","");