Hal McRae, Racism, and the Disputed 1976 Batting Title
I'm teaching a course on the 1970s and the first assignment of the semester asked my students to analyze a magazine advertisement from the period. To make things a little easier, I picked up a box full of old magazines from a few Goodwills and a used bookstore. Probably ten yellowed copies of The Sporting News made it into the collection, and as such, I've been looking through them when I get bored.
Thumbing through the 10/16/76 edition, I stumbled across a stunning story that I'd never heard before: the imbroglio surrounding the 1976 Batting Title.
The '76 batting average race was already noteworthy because two teammates, George Brett and Hal McRae were chasing one another for the title. Brett was 23, and was enjoying his second season as an elite player in the Big Leagues (he'd been ok, but not super in 1973-74). McRae was 30, and was in the middle of his peak. He'd post the best OBP of his career in 1976 (.406) and the next year he added power to his game, hitting 21 homers.
On September 26, McRae led Brett, .337 to .333. Brett was remarkably steady down the stretch however, and when the season ended, he was still at .333, thanks to a, you guessed it, .333 final week (8-24). McRae lagged however, going 5-23 (.217). McRae ended up officially at .332, decimal points (in many sense of the phrase) behind Brett.
But that's just the wide angle version.
As it happened, the title came down to Brett's final AB of the season. When Brett stepped to the plate in the 9th (McRae was on deck) if he got a hit he'd move ahead of McRae, if not, he'd stay in second. Brett flied to leftfield, and when the ball couldn't be caught by Steve Brye, Brett ended up recording an inside-the-park HR. Next up, McRae, who grounded out. Brett is the batting champion.
Now remember, this was 1976, so having the highest batting average was an incredibly big deal.
According to Joe McGuff's story in The Sporting News, titled, "Misplayed Fly Ball Clouds Brett's Title" (page 31)after McRae grounded out he "made two obscene gestures at the Twins' dugout and had to be restrained when Manager Gene Mauch came on the field".
After the game, McRae claimed that the Twins conspired to give Brett the title. Racism, McRae said, was the motivation.
"Things have been like this a long time. They're changing gradually. They shouldn't be this way, but I can accept it." [...] "I know what happened. It's been too good a season for me to say too much, but I know they let that ball fall on purpose."
McRae's claim centered on the argument that Brye was playing too deep (at Mauch's instruction) and that Brye likely hesitated on Brett's flyball, letting it fall.
Mauch called the accusations the "worst thing that's happened to me in 35 years in baseball" and the story includes a number of quotes from other players denying McRae's assertion. Cookie Rojas defended Mauch citing previous experience, but also said he "prays to God" that McRae's statement isn't true, which is somewhat ambiguous. According to the story, there was no enmity between Brett and McRae after the game. In fact, Brett also is quoted as saying, "I think maybe the Twins made me a present of the batting championship, and if they did, I feel just as bad about it as Hal does".
A few days later, on October 7th, Brett stated that he would like to share the title with McRae.
The story was further complicated by the fact that Rod Carew of the Twins finished third that year, finishing .331. Carew said after the game, "that's a bunch of crap when they talk about racial stuff."
I'm ashamed to admit I'd never heard this story and it appears that after a few years it went away. While researching this post, I noticed a few mentions of the game in late 1970s editions of Baseball Digest, but they touched only on the teammates and last game angles.
Here's what amazes me most: this story is buried on page 31 of The Sporting News. Just one more story in the stream of basic pieces that appeared in page after page. No cover tease. No editorial on page two. Nothing.
Can you imagine if this happened today? We'd be viewing replays of the flyball round the clock, with every baseball writer in America essentially required to weigh in on the issue. There'd be a pro-McRae party, to be sure, along with a vociferous party against him. There'd also be those simply arguing that the play might instead just be changed to an error. There'd be a really cool post someone analyzing the physics of the play, and comparing the fielder's position on that play as compared to similar situations. And, we'd also have quite a lot of "if McRae wanted to do something about, he woulda gotten a hit! Scoreboard!" And on and on and on. (For about three days.)
That crazy five minutes ended up being historically important, as it allowed Brett to win a batting title in three different decades (1976, 1980, 1990). Hal McRae, of course, would continue to burnish his reputation as one to fly off the handle. In 1993 a question involving George Brett produced one of the greatest meltdowns of all time.
So what really happened in 1976? Test on Monday.
56 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'm kinda surprised you've never heard that story before
They used to talk about it from time to time, especially when Hal was manager.
Hal always acted like he had a chip on his shoulder, so I don’t know if I really believe it was racially motivated or not. But if it was, that’s a pretty big dick move.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
I don't know how to evaluate the claim without video
and of course, since this is MLB, there’s NOTHING online
CONSPIRACY
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 9, 2010 10:17 PM EST up reply actions
can MLB bungle the web anymore
you can watch thousands of great NBA clips from the last 30 years, but anything from a baseball game gets taken down immediately
listened to a Bill Simmons podcast today, where he asked Stern about this very issue
Basically, Stern said the NBA’s position on youtube, etc. was that the public was gonna get there hands on whatever it is they wanted to see no matter what the NBA’s policy is, so why not go ahead and allow it; i.e., any and all publicity is a good thing.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
I Was 21
Living in Topeka and following the Royals as closely as possible. I remember this very well. My experience with black/white relations tells me this was not impossible, and I well understand McRae’s suspicions. That said, I doubt this really happened. It was the last game of the year, and nothing was at stake. If he indeed let the ball fall, the batting title probably was not the reason. McRae could have rendered the whole thing moot by getting a hit, and he didn’t. Byre had nothing to do with that.
Who had the better year?
Brett 333 .377 .462 .839 144
McRae 332 .407 .461 .868 153
Looks like Hal wins in the real world. Brett did K an unbelievable 36 times in 705 PA’s with 298 TB’s.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
if only we had a stat that weighted each event properly
maybe an on base average, but weighted….
Brett 1976: .381 wOBA (33.8 wRAA in 705 PA)
McRae 1976 .395 wOBA (35.4 wRAA in 609 PA)
McRae was the better hitter in his best year ever (one of the 3-4 where he was above average as a player, quite overrated career) with 5.4 WAR. Great Year — h eck, McRae didn’t even hurt the team on the bases like he usually did and was only slightly below average in grounding into double plays. He even managed to outplay Amos Otis in ’76.
Brett, on the other hand, despite being outhit by McRae, was, as usual, much, much better than him at everything else —on the bases, avoiding the double play, good defense at third. 8.0 WAR season according to Rally, one of the 3-4 best seasons by Brett.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 9, 2010 11:57 PM EST up reply actions
McRae had 73 RBI
Brett only 67, therefore McRae was better!
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
wow
who was hitting in front of those guys that year?
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 10, 2010 10:00 AM EST up reply actions
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/KCR/1976-batting-orders.shtml
Jim Wohlford (.314 OBA), Tom Poquette (.361) and Amos Otis (.341).
George and Hal were simply not clutch.
For context though, there were only three 100 RBI guys in the AL that year. Hal’s 73 RBI were actually 22nd in the league.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Feb 10, 2010 10:24 AM EST up reply actions
I, too, am surprised you never heard this one.
Bill James has also referred to it on more than one occasion.
If that happened now, the most godawful part would be that even though Brett had nothing to do with it, and even though Brett said “if they did, I feel just as bad about it as Hal does,” 4,395,243 idiots on ESPNConversation would be going off about how Brett was a cheater who stole the batting title and we should hang him from the top of the Crown.
This space for rent.
WHY WON'T GEORGE APOLOGIZE!
Then when he apologizes….BRETT’S APOLOGY NOT ENOUGH!
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
it's funny
i had heard about it but never knew the particulars…i couldn’t figure out how racism could play a role. i assumed it had something to do with the rounding of the averages or something like that…now i know the whole story. thanks for posting this.
"He once had an awkward moment, just to see how it felt...he lives vicariously...through himself- He is the most interesting man in the world"
by Home Run Tony Cogan on Feb 9, 2010 11:14 PM EST reply actions
To paraphrase Brent Musberger, I was "looking live" when it happened
I was 12 years old at the time and sitting down the left field line with my brother and friends when it happened. Brye played deep that series because of the turf and not wanting balls to skip by him. On that play the ball was hit fairly high and it looked like he’d get there then at the last second he pulled off. The ball bounced over his head and into the corner with Brett coming around for an inside the park homer. McRae even shook Brett’s hand afterwards. After McRae bounced out then all hell broke loose. Being at the game we couldn’t tell what the commotion was. Mauch saying it was the worst thing that’d ever happen to him in baseball meant a lot considering his Phillies blew a 6 game lead in the final week in ‘64. As for Rojas’ statement, it was directed at Brye, not Mauch because he went on to say the sun being in Brye’s eyes cause “If not, I hope his conscience bothers him every day of his life.” There’s a paperback book called “Showdown:Baseball’s Ultimate Confrontations” that details about it also.
by KCROYALS64 on Feb 9, 2010 11:45 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
the sun is plausable
The sun field during most of the season is RF; however, late in the year, it does come at a different angle, and LF could be impacted. Toss in that it would have been about 4 pm, which would put the sun at about the rooftop level in early October…
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
ok, lets backtrack
1. apparently this story is common knowledge to many (egg on my face there)
2. nevertheless, part of what I’m interested in is thinking about how this would be handled today as a comparison, and the fact that, at the very least, the Sporting News quasi-buried the story
it might be worth checking the KC papers from the time
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 10, 2010 12:50 AM EST up reply actions
there's also a wire version of the story
that recounts the events, but doesn’t say why McRae thinks that the Twins conspired against him, only that he does
I'm a little surprised as well
that you’d never heard of this particular kerfuffle. McRae’s charges are conspiracy-theory garbage, and very unfair to Steve Brye and the Twins. It’s tough to believe that the other team would go to such lengths to ensure that a white Royals player beat out a black Royals player for the batting average title. Why should they care? Black guys had been winning batting titles since the early ’50s.
Use Occam’s razor on it: the answer that requires the fewest contingencies is most likely to be correct. That answer is: Steve Brye accidentally bungled a hard-hit ball by George Brett. Why would Brye go out there and make himself look bad on purpose to screw McRae out of the batting title?
If this had happened today, though, there’s be an enormous stink. Al Sharpton would picket the Royals’ games, and Fred Phelps would picket Al Sharpton, and President Obama would call Steve Brye “stupid” before apologizing publicly to him over a beer on the White House lawn. The Spanish press would make a big deal of it and report it as usual: “American racism is just terrible, while we ourselves are tolerant saints. Except, of couse, for Gypsies. And Arabs. And Jews. And black or Indian Latin Americans.”
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
by Juancho on Feb 10, 2010 5:43 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not sure Occam's razor cuts either way on this one
How is “mental error” any more or less complicated than “racist”? In this context, it seems an awful lot like 6 of 1, half a dozen of the other.
And, of course, the Cobb/LaJoie race of 1910 makes it impossible to ignore the fact that opponents occasionally care about this sort of thing enough to alter the outcome. If the Browns can play a 3b too deep for a full series, how can you really argue that an outfielder wouldn’t be willing to make a slow break on a single flyball to accomplish the same thing?
I’m not saying he did or didn’t… just suggesting it’s a pretty close call to make, and only Steve Brye really knows.
Steve Brye and Gene Mauch said they didn't do anything wrong
Why not believe them, especially since they’d have had to get the whole Twins team in on it if they wanted to deny McRae the batting title. Nobody knew Brett would hit that ball where he did. It could have been a pop-up to second or a grounder to short.
The other thing is that I haven’t seen a clip of the play and so can’t judge whether Brye misplayed the ball at all, or whether it was a mental or physical error. The official scorer must have given Brett a hit rather than charged Brye with an error when it happened, and he was right there watching. So that’s somebody else who would have to be in on it if it were a conspiracy, since if it were scored an error, it wouldn’t help Brett’s BA. Not to mention the umpires – you never know what kind of call one of them might make.
So, let’s see. In order to be sure of denying Hal McRae of the batting title, you’d have to get all the Twins’ defensive players, the Twins’ pitcher (since if he walks or hits Brett with a pitch, or strikes him out, it doesn’t help his BA. He’s got to throw Brett a fat one to whack), the official scorer, and the umpires in on the conspiracy.
Occam’s razor says Brye made a bad play on a hard-hit ball, all by his lonesome.
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
I tend to agree
I don’t know how someone determines in a split second “Hal is black/I don’t like Hal, so I’m going to screw him out of the batting title by letting George get this hit” and it seems impossible to premeditate such shenanigans.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
but you should take into consideration
that they never call errors on outfielders for poor route-running. i can’t recall an error called when it didn’t make contact with the outfielder or his glove. did kerry robinson get charged with an error when he mistakenly jumped the wall?
You are right that Occam's razor would suggest Brye did it all by his lonesome...
…but I wasn’t talking about any conspiracy theories. I was talking about two theories that don’t involve conspiracies:
1—Brye was playing too deep or got a slow break (or whatever) because of a mental error; or
2—Brye was aware of the circumstances and was playing too deep or got a slow break (or whatever) on purpose.
Occam’s razor can’t pick between those two theories, because they are of equal structural complexity. I agree with you otherwise… I was just pointing out that it isn’t an Occam’s razor “situation.” (Or, at least, it isn’t until we start adding co-conspirators).
BTW...
…in regard to your question about why we wouldn’t trust Steve Brye, I tend to agree. I wasn’t saying that he did it on purpose… I was just saying that if we believe him, we’re simply believing him… which is fine. As I said, only he knows.
The problem is that McRae accused
Brye and Mauch of being racist conspirators with no proof. We’ve used the Razor to show that there couldn’t have been a conspiracy. And it’s a smear of Brye to suppose that he’s such a nasty racist that, on his own, he’d botch a play on purpose so that a white guy would win a batting title.
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
It's news to me...
I consider myself a pretty knowledgeable Royals fan, and I’d never heard this story before, or, if I had heard it, I’d forgotten it. I’m always interested in lacunas like this. Stories/facts that are commonly known but that you just somehow missed. No apologies or egg on your face here.
by billexgordler on Feb 10, 2010 7:01 AM EST up reply actions
I think some of us are too young to have heard it
I was born in 1979, there’s no particular reason I should have heard about it.
you could have told your mom to go to the game
so that you could witness it through cellular osmosis or mitosis or ….something. I mean, if you were a real fan.
Air Cassel - approved for takeoff
Always in motion is the future.
-- Yoda
Don't feel bad
I had never heard it, although I deserve some slack since I was -3 years old at the time.
Your posit on the reaction in today’s environment was so spot-on, I read it to my wife, who laughed out loud.
by chiefstatnut on Feb 10, 2010 10:55 AM EST up reply actions
The 76 batting title race was awesome
As I recall, (and without looking it up), there was actually 4 guys with a realistic shot at winning the title going into the final weekend – Brett, Mac, Carew, and another Twin (not sure who?). In one of those wonderful scheduling coincindences, the Royals and Twins played each other the final weekend at the K. Alas, this was one year before I began working there – but I still remember listening to each and every one of those ABs by the 4 guys involved.
For some reason, I can remember that Ron LeFlore of Detroit finished 5th in the batting race – but for the life of me can’t recall who was 4th? Lymon Bostock, perhaps? Bostock is a forgotten player who was shot to death a few years later…
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
Good memory
Bostock was 4th. Royals Brett and McRae finished 1-2, Twins Carew and Bostock finished 3-4.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Feb 10, 2010 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
didn't you write that a twin was in third place?
So if the twins were going to do anything wouldn’t they just walk or bean both brett and hal and try to get their guy the title?
My stories a lot like yours only more interesting because it involves robots!
This is where
McRae’s conspiracy charges ring most false. If the Twins were going to rig anything it would seem most likely they’d do it for their own player.
As to memory, I vaugely recall the whole affair, but not being here at the time I didn’t pay it as much attention as I might have otherwise.
And as to the reaction, Mauch’s “worst thing ever to happen” would be complicated further by the horrific characters who would be coming out of the woodwork as his “defenders.”
The only thing that might dampen the furor is that, after all, we’re talking about the Royals and Twins. Get the Yankees, Red Sox, or Cubs involved and we’d have Armageddon.
Murphy was an optimist.
by The Ol' Perfesser on Feb 10, 2010 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
If the Twins were going to rig anything it would seem most likely they’d do it for their own player.
…except that the Twins don’t get to play defense against their own hitters. How do you “rig” a game to get your own teammates hits? That would be like gamblers paying the 1919 Reds to win the Series. It doesn’t work that way.
They could intentionally walk Brett and McRae
so that they’d get no chances at improving their BAs, while hoping that Carew or Bostock would get several hits and improve theirs. But that would be such poor sportsmanship that Gene Mauch would not have allowed it.
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
walking them wouldn't be a great idea
it’s hard to add much to a .330 average in the last game of the season. the twins would have been better off hoping for a couple hits from their BA leaders and hoping Brett and McRae went hitless.
Mauch is a $#@! liar
until I see his birth certificate. And, no, Hawaii doesn’t count.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
after a quick google search
I noticed two possible explanations:
1) Mauch may have ordered his players to allow Brett a hit
2) There may have been sentiment that a position player should win the batting title, not a DH. (Remember, this was 1976, and the DH was relatively new, hence, possibly not liked by purists at all)
So, if there was an intentional deciding of the batting title by Minnesota, it may or may not have been for racial reasons.
Regardless, only the people involved know for sure.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
Yeah, but
1) Mauch wasn’t a racist, as far as I know. It’s hard to see how a racist would be a successful manager by the mid-‘70s.
2) Carew and Bostock were both black, and in the running for the batting title. They would not have followed such orders; in fact, they’d have gone straight to the press. But Carew did the exact opposite thing: he called BS on the rumors.
3) It’s hard to believe there was such anti-DH feeling that a team would intentionally give up a hit, much less an inside-the-park homer, to decide which opposing player would win the batting title.
I feel like I’m arguing the “Oswald did it alone” theory, which by the way I am completely convinced of.
By the way, Bostock was a very promising young player, a lot like Ken Griffey Sr. He was, sadly, murdered the next season in what might have been a case of mistaken identity. It’s surprising that not many people have heard of him today, because he was an All-Star caliber player who died tragically while active and in his prime. There are a lot of possible Lyman Bostock “might-have-beens.”
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
Royals history
Thanks for posting this story—if for no other reason than that we need to keep our memories of the Royals of the late ’70s alive!
I too am one of those Royals fans born too late to really know the Royals of the late ‘70s (though one of my very first memories is of being with my family watching the 1980 Royals-Phillies Series on television). But I definitely remember my grandfather telling me about the end of the 1976 season and the dispute over the batting title. And he was certain that the Royals of the following year were the best team we’ve ever fielded. I know those teams well—even though I never saw them play. More posts like this (at least until the season starts)!
77 team was the best Royal team I ever saw
The loss to the Yankees that year still haunts me to this day. Up 2 games to 1, then ahead in the top of the 9th of the deciding 5th game – it just seemed like they were gonna win it all that year. Yankees went on to an easy WS win too – should have been KC.
Freddy Patek wasn’t the only guy crying that day…
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
24 out of 25
That 77 team was actually in a tight race in September. They proceeded to win 16 straight, lost a 2-1 game on a Friday night vs Seattle (?), then reeled off 8 more wins in a row. Division was clinched with the 4th of those 8 wins, as I recall. Most incredible stretch run one could ever hope to witness.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
More on the 77 streak
Looked this up:
In addition to the 24 out of 25, prior to that they won 11 of 14, for a total of 35 out of 39.
On August 17th, they were in 4th place, 2 games out of 1st. They then went 35-4, clinched the division and were up by 10.5 games by the end of that stretch.
Mr Glass, this is a pro sports team, not a retail store - run it like one!
Kind Of Odd
That Cowens and Mayberry both kind of flamed out after great years and then recovered their form, at least somewhat, elsewhere in their 30’s.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Feb 11, 2010 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
Race and the Royals
I remember this incident well, along with many other mentions of race in stories of that era. Frank White openly questioned why he, a KC native, didn’t receive many local endorsement offers, and race was suggested as one explanation.
The Royals in their glory years had 6 African Americans in the everyday lineup: Mayberry/Aikens, White, Wilson, Otis, McRae, Cowens/Washington (which shows how much ground MLB has lost in signing top talent from Black communities over the past generation), and KC has never enjoyed a reputation as being a real progressive town, in terms of race relations. Just from reading the paper every day, I got the impression that those tensions stoked some resentment in the clubhouse. Part of it stemmed from the fact that Brett emerged as the best player on the team (I read, “We’re not the Kansas City Bretts” on more than one occasion), and part of it was that being white meant he got better treatment from both fans and the press.
It still floors me to think that McRae said Don Mattingly deserved the 1985 MVP over Brett. I have to believe that the 1976 batting race and other perceived slights played a role in his thinking.
Gotta love Hal
a guy who’s maybe the 4th best position player on the team during the glory years thinks HE’s being overlooked
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 11, 2010 3:35 PM EST up reply actions
sorry --
“position” player
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 11, 2010 3:36 PM EST up reply actions
I had never heard this story before
Probably has a lot to do with it happening before I was born. But it’s an interesting story.














