英语论文网

nged clubs he played in or he managed and he readily accept such changes and this can be treated as pragmatism from his part just like Constantine whose policy was marked by a high degree of pragmatism so that he even changed the capital of his empire out of sheer pragmatism.
Furthermore, an important part of Constantine’s politics was aimed at the unification of West and East of Europe and Asia. To a certain extent the changes of clubs made by Tony La Russa during his career as a payer and manager may be interpreted in the same way as an attempt to unify baseball teams from different parts of the US as a part of one sport of one country but this kind of unity is rather spiritual while Constantine rather tended to physical unification through cultural, religions, economic and political expansion of Roman Empire to East and West.
Managerial abilities and inclinations of Tony La Russa compared to Constantine I worth particular attention. Generally speaking it is possible to estimate that Tony La Russa attitude to his players is much more human compared to the attitude of Constantine I to his people but it may be explained by the huge time gap between them and the enormous difference in moral and ethical views of their epochs. Obviously Constantine did not pay much attention to actual needs of his people. For instance, his introduction of Christianity as the official religion of Roman empire was made practically violently despite the exiting variety of different religious cults, which had deep historical roots and a lot of adepts who really believed in different Gods the new official religion suggested them instead. It means that individuals were of little importance for Constantine.
As for Tony La Russa, it should be said that he appreciated individuals much more than the ancient Roman emperor but still his attitude to his player was and remains in fact quite seriously criticized because it is considered to be impersonal attitude. What is meant here may be clearly explained by George Will who, in his book “Men at Work: The Craft of Baseball”, characterizes Tony La Russa along with his long-time pitching coach Dave Duncan as “making more use of statistical analysis than any other team in the major leagues” (2004:381). It means that statistical data are more important for Tony La Russa than personalities of his players but it does not necessarily mean that he won’t give a chance to a person whose statistics is not perfect yet.
Finally, it should be said that both Constantine I and Tony La Russa were real leaders in the field they worked. It is evident that they had a strong charisma that made people follow them, believe their ideas which were quite innovative and even extraordinary to a certain extent. In fact it is their charisma that made both Constantine and Tony La Russa so significant personalities in the history of world politic and sport correspondingly.

Conclusion  结论

Thus, taking into consideration all above mentioned, it is possible to conclude that Constantine I and Tony La Russa are very similar to one another in their style of work and some traits of character, but there are also some differences which are not only the result of their indvidual inclinations but simply the result of difference in the epochs, life style, mentality, social surrounding and social status. Anyway their contribution in the world politic and sport are obvious but at this point it本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。