ShareThis Page

Biertempfel's MLB insider: Phillips' spat with beat writer goes way beyond the pale

Rob Biertempfel
| Saturday, Aug. 31, 2013, 11:51 p.m.
The Reds' Brandon Phillips sits in the dugout losing to the Colorado Rockies 9-6 after a baseball game, Friday, Aug. 30, 2013, in Denver.
The Reds' Brandon Phillips sits in the dugout losing to the Colorado Rockies 9-6 after a baseball game, Friday, Aug. 30, 2013, in Denver.

Reds second baseman Brandon Phillips interrupted manager Dusty Baker's pregame press conference Wednesday by walking in and cussing out Cincinnati Enquirer beat reporter C. Trent Rosecrans.

A few minutes earlier, Phillips had yelled at Rosecrans in the clubhouse about a tweet that referenced Phillips' on-base percentage. Apparently, Phillips just couldn't let it go.

Phillips: “Hey, Dusty, the fat (nasty word) on the end is worried about my on-base percentage. Why don't you tell him to have me bat eighth with my on-base percentage?”

Rosecrans: “I don't care about ...”

Phillips: “Fat (nasty word). Make him happy, Dusty. Fat (nasty word). I'm tired of you talking that negative (another nasty word) on our team, dog. I found out your Twitter name now, (nasty word). It's a wrap. Just so you (different nasty word) know. (Nasty, nasty word).”

Well, then.

(Full disclosure: I've known Rosecrans for several years and consider him a friend as well as a colleague. Our politics are on opposite sides of the aisle, so we've had our share of disagreements via Facebook posts and text messages, but we've never resorted to the nasty stuff.)

Baseball writers and players are around each other in cramped quarters practically every day from February to October. Sometimes, reporters have to ask or write about non-flattering topics and rash words end up being written, tweeted, blogged and/or spoken. It happens all the time. And, usually, the player and the reporter work it out face-to-face and all is forgotten in a matter of minutes.

What made the Phillips-Rosecrans confrontation different was there was a video camera running as it happened. The whole time, the camera stayed focused on Baker, who was literally caught in the middle and looked plenty uncomfortable.

Rosecrans was just doing his job when he sent out the tweet (which read: “Reds go from a hitter with a .320 OBP in the 2 hole to one with a .310 OBP”). Phillips can take offense if he wants, but he was wrong to turn it into a public spectacle in the clubhouse and manager's office.

The video was all over the Web, so the spat was a hot topic for a few days. But it won't take long for it to fade. In fact, after the game Wednesday, Rosecrans was the first reporter to ask Phillips a question in the clubhouse. Business as usual. Phillips did not respond to the question. That, too, is not out of the ordinary.

As a side note, this wasn't the first time Phillips wound up in the Twitter-related controversy. A year ago, after a game against the Pirates, Phillips sent a late-night tweet that accused Pirates reliever Jared Hughes of making a racist remark. Hughes denied the accusation — there was never any evidence produced that he had said anything offensive on the field — and the two players eventually reached an uneasy truce.

One last thing: Rosecrans got plenty of support via various social media sites, but he took some more hits too. One message sent to him read (and I'll keep the grammatical errors intact to capture the full flavor): “How about you shut your mouth and stop hating on brandon.he's the heart of our team.don't mess with him because you have no ability at anything and are jealous”

What's really hilarious is, after sending that message, the person followed it up by sending Rosecrans ... a Facebook friend request.


That's just too precious.

Rob Biertempfel is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at or via Twitter @BiertempfelTrib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.