Recently, Tampa Bay Rays ace Blake Snell made some waves with his commentary about being asked to return to play during the COVID19 pandemic. During the video, Snell spoke about his fears about contracting coronavirus, and that he was going do demand to be fully compensated if his employers are going to force him to assume the risk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjC-1G7dvLM

This has caused any number of responses. There were those who pointed out this is a change in Snell’s initial reaction to the virus. Initially, in Spring Training Snell had said, “If I get it, I get it” while calling the virus over-hyped. (Tampa Bay Times). Of course, Snell and the rest of us know much more about the virus than we did then.

There was Ken Davidoff’s article in the New York Post claimed Snell was showing “tone deafness while successfully claiming the moral high ground.” Jason Whitlock of Speak for Yourself says Snell’s video was a bad look. This is just a small sampling of what has been a larger position that players should not be speaking about the virus and their pay during these times.

This is not unusual. Pandemic or no pandemic, players are usually reminded that it is not a good look for them to be arguing over millions to play a game.

What is interesting about this is for some reason, the owners are not held to the same standards. While there was a rush of articles on Snell, there have not been a similar rush of articles criticizing MLB for looking to withhold player wages at a time where people are being put out of work.

That includes people who rely on baseball for their income. That’s stadium employees who are being furlough or effectively laid off. That also includes people who are not employed by teams but by other local industries which heavily relies upon MLB for their income.

There is also the matter of employers pushing to both have their employees go to work during this pandemic while also trying to drastically cut their pay. Assume for a second these weren’t baseball players. Let’s say these were Amazon employees or employees of literally any other business. Would people be calling those employees tone deaf for wanting to be paid their full salary while taking on the risk of infection for the coronavirus?

If not, why do they do it with baseball players? Are they really siding with the MLB owners who are furloughing employees and trying to pocket all the money they can for themselves instead of helping those sick and out of work?

Instead of looking at Snell as a baseball player, we should look at him as a human being. The same goes for any other player. For example, there is Mike Trout who was criticized for not wanting to pursue the Arizona plan or similar plans partially because his wife is pregnant with their first child.

Baseball players have families which include at-risk family members like elderly parents and pregnant wives. They also play for elderly managers like Dusty Baker and Joe Maddon. They are also teammates with cancer survivors like Anthony Rizzo and Jon Lester.

Why should these people return to play and take on the risk contracting the COVID19 virus, getting sick, and potentially dying? Why should they be expected to expose family members to the virus or put themselves in isolation from their families for months? Why should they be expected to do that at a pay cut?

Keep in mind, that’s just not a pay cut from their normal salary, but also from the reduced salary previous agreed upon by both sides in March.

Whether people like to see them as such, baseball players are first and foremost human beings. As human beings, they have a right to be fairly compensated, and they have the right to demand their agreements be honored. In no other industry would anyone tolerate business owners reneging on collectively bargained deals to force their employees expose themselves and their families to a pandemic. For some reason, people seem to be okay for elderly managers and cancer survivors to have to do that because their uniform is a baseball jersey.

That’s not alright.