BREAKING NEWS: BONDS USED STEROIDS!!!
Sports Illustrated has cracked the story. I am flabbergasted.
Seriously, though, should this guy me admitted into the Hall of Fame? Rose is banned for being a liar about gambling. This guy lied about cheating at the game itself. He intentionally sought to become the HR King through illegal and unsportsmanlike means. He does not deserve our reverence or our praise... he doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.
Seriously, though, should this guy me admitted into the Hall of Fame? Rose is banned for being a liar about gambling. This guy lied about cheating at the game itself. He intentionally sought to become the HR King through illegal and unsportsmanlike means. He does not deserve our reverence or our praise... he doesn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.
posted by TheJackSack at 2:07 PM
12 Comments:
You may be right about sports writers, but it's largely a red herring.
I lean towards Adam's position on this one, though I think that if you keep Bonds out you have to keep a bushel of other guys out for the same reason, and that's going to be hard to do. I certainly wouldn't protest if he's kept out, I just don't know if it can be done.
But one thing is for certain: Bonds is a fraud and deserves nothing but ridicule. And not simply because he used steroids, but because he's been crying for a decade about not getting his due, all the while knowing he didn't deserve it. He's no damn good.
I think that the hall of fame voters have an easy out in this situation. Just don't vote for Bonds (or any of the other obvious steriod users) on the first ballot. It sends a message and will get a ton of bad publicity for the player, but it prevents the situation of keeping people out when there is no hard evidence. It's fortunate that what ballot a player gets in on actually matters to people, because it creates an easy punishment.
Tony makes the bottom-line point here: How do you exclude Bonds and others for "cheating " by using steroids? What's the process? Pete Rose was subject to the unilateral ruling of Commissioner Fay Vincent. Bud Selig is a coward, and probably knew a bit more about steroid use while it was going on then he would like to have revealed too. So, without a "clean" authority to make a unilateral ruling, the responsibility falls upon the sports writers.
Here is what's at stake if you let Bonds and others like him into the Hall: you diminish the value of the Hall and the Home Run record. Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron are important historical figures for their own individual reasons- Ruth for being the man who built the Yankees Empire and Aaron for breaking racial barriers. Both men became icons through the Home Run record. What has Bonds accomplished other than numbers? In fact, he's detracted from the game by only placing value on a record through selfish and illegal means. This is the type of player we should turn our backs to, not reward with the very recognition he lied and cheated towards. He may be a jerk, he may be a racist too (so was Ty Cobb) but its the cheating that we can't ignore. The cheating here was systematic and grossly intentional. He wasn't merely corking a bat, he went far beyond that to change his body.
If the evidence in this book is what amounts to legal proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) then Bonds should be expelled from the Hall of Fame.
I'm with Dodort.
I find it hard to believe that a book by a couple of reporters would be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, if there was such evidence, Bonds would already be in jail. It's really just a question of whether baseball needs to use such as standard, or can keep people out of the hall for less than it would take to criminally convict them (sorry for getting my law school on, also, Bonds would need to be in the hall before he would be expelled).
Dodort, read what I said:
"If the evidence in this book is what amounts to legal proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) then Bonds should be expelled from the Hall of Fame."
The key word is "if"-- I am not saying he is guilty as charged. I do believe if you took that evidence to a court and presented it to a jury, with supporting testimony and documents corroborating thsoe claims, you would have a very good case against Bonds. And the reason a DA has not gone after him is not a simple one, remember Bonds testified before a grand jury ivnestigating BALCO, so there are some legal machinations taking place.
I don't think he needs to be convicted for his expulsion to be valid, only that the evidence be properly evaluated as legal proof.
Yes, you're correct about the "expulsion" term... how about "banned?" Ban Bonds! Kinda catchy...
Flakseed oil. This guy is a lying S.O.B.
He had immunity for what he testified about, but you're right, he did not have immunity for perjury. I'm also not sure if he gets immunity for steriod use, since he didn't actually testify about it (but considering the news has been focusing on perjury, he probably did). Perjury is still a very serious charge (although, as Mr. Steiner can tell you, it won't gey you impeached). Also, the IRS might get him. The book talks about how he sold a bunch of memorabilia to pay for his girlfriends new house, and never reported it to the IRS. Although I don't know if tax evasion could be grounds for keeping someone out of the hall.
Not to reframe the issue too much here (being whether Bonds should be in the HOF) but I am deeply disappointed by the lack of effort by MLB to investigate this issue. Gretzky's wife is embroiled in a gambling ring, and the NHL immediately jumps to and starts their own independent investigation. MLB apparently has something to hide here, and to what extent the owners were aware of the use by players of performance-enhancing substances is an issue they would want to bury. But guess what, you must address that issue, in addition to the rest that follow.
Jason Giambi was outed as a user and had to pay a price with the fans before he could be reclaimed as a hero. In fact, his behavior through all that adversity has made him a much-adored member of the Yankees. Sure, his reemergence as a power hitter is part of that, but that's the thing with steroids- they don't make you into Babe Ruth, they take pre-existing talent and augment it beyond what one can attain through natural means. Giambi took his medicine and now he's beyond the steroids issue. Bonds has denied, lied and carried himself as a complete victim even though it is his behavior that prolongs this whole situation.
And one excuse I cannot accept is that baseball wasn't testing for these substances in the late 1990's, so they didn't break any of the rules. Are you kidding me? well, if that's the case, then Bonds should proudly state what he was doing because he wasn't cheating at all, right? Wrong.
MLB (under Selig) has only shown cowardice on this issue.
And if the book's claims are totally false, where is Bonds' defamation lawsuit against the authors? Hmmm....
From sports writers and MLB promoting this shit to stupid fans eating it up, there is plenty of blame to go around. But it's all irrelevant now. The only thing left to do as baseball fans is to take today's players and their numbers far less seriously, especially when compared to the stats of their predecessors.
Post a Comment
<< Home