...than to fade away. My old buddy, Neil Young, minted that one, I think; and I believe it's particularly appropriate to examine this statement as it pertains to the existing environment of America's Pastime and steroids. As Bonds strives toward his "tainted" record and an audience largely shocked and appalled looks on with eyes heavily lidded with disapproval and disgust, I would ask a simple question. Why wouldn't a high performance athlete take the risk to improve perfomance? Why wouldn't any of us, in our chosen fields, not take similar questionable steps to increase our bank accounts or status? Have we not? Do we not? One doesn't have to stick a needle containing a questionable substance into our ass to engage in high risk.
I certainly can't condemn Barry Bonds and, in my opinion, those that do are little more than hypocrites, so quick with the rightness of their false judgement, so swift to sheath their secondary blades into Caesar's body. The man is about to achieve the ultimate Everest, the very pinnacle of every schoolboys' fantasy.
It's not a question of what's legal and what's illegal; for humankind has consistently shown an inclination toward illegality, and if the potential reward was high enough most observers would at least understand the risks as possibly acceptable. It's mainly, I think, a question of jealousy and that's sad.
Is it, rather, a moral question about our bodies being temples and about doing nothing to corrupt that so-called perfection? Forget the third martini or the valium or the other "recreational" aspects to humanity's natural quest for the "edge." I say, it's pretty darned normal for an athlete to seek an "edge." I can easily relate to that and imagine that in your deepest moments of self-reflection, so too can most of you. The fear of "burning out" seems an acceptable risk, all things considered. We are here to burn brightly as much as to be a long burning ember, just waiting for that unknowable foot to kick the dirt on you after enduring a cupful of water.
I commend Mr. Bonds, quite possibly the best offensive baseballer I've ever seen.
biggie 4 Wrote:The man is about to achieve the ultimate Everest, the very pinnacle of every schoolboys' fantasy.
I never was particularly interested in setting the alltime home run record, myself. I would have rather a) broken DiMaggio's 56-game hit streak record, b) hit over .400 in a season, or c) won 35 games in a season (as a pitcher).
(Those are all seasonal marks, of course. I don't think, if I had been a successful major leaguer, that I would have had any desire to hang around a few extra years just to add to career totals.)
I also wanted to win the Grand Slam in tennis multiple times, but that's another forum...
--
I think there are two main issues with Bonds setting the career home run record. They are:
1) He's a jerk. Always has been, always will be. Now, baseball has lots of jerks (always has; always will have), but he's high on the list of alltime biggest jerks, at least among prominent players.
2) He almost certainly used anabolic steroids and other PEDs in the latter half of his career.
This goes to your "better to burn out" argument. If Bonds feels that way, it's one thing--but what of other players who don't? Perhaps some of them would like to enjoy a life span longer than your typical WWE performer.
I think it's unfair to present players with a choice of either using PEDs to keep up with the competition or else have their careers essentially come to an end.
i carried bonds' water for a long long time. he is a fantastic player, and that's kind of why i'm riled at him.
i don't think this is a grey area. he is smart, and i think he clearly knew what he was doing. i don't think he had to do it to achieve greatness. i can't give him a pass because all of humanity generally strives and struggles and scrambles around, trying to get to the top of the heap.
if you celebrate bonds' achievements without taking into account the advantage he received from non-human, chemically driven advantages, you diminish the achievement. you just have to, it's the logical result of the celebration
sure, it's a human tragedy, of a kind. but you just can't diminish the achievement by blessing, through acquiescence, a chemical advantage that others did not pursue
i strongly object to his personality creeping into this analysis -- that is really unfortunate and not very flattering to the analysts IMO
Quote:if you celebrate bonds' achievements without taking into account the advantage he received from non-human, chemically driven advantages, you diminish the achievement. you just have to, it's the logical result of the celebration
Perhaps, but that's not really part of my pov, so to speak. I do not sing the praises of the existence of steroids: I sing the praises of the man who, accused of using them, is reaching a high resolution zenith. Quite frankly, I bemoan the existence of those so-called "performance-enhancing drugs." Ir-freakin'-relevant. They were there: they were supposed to "make him better:" he bit into the apple.
Also, who's to say that Barry won't live a long life, fathering a child at 60; instead of withering into some Lyle Alzado imitation.
I believe, pretty much, that most anything is OK in moderation. God knows, I've abused enough substances in my life to know the difference.
BTW, my wife is out of town, at some FLA resort, sipping apple martinis, or so she just told me when she called. I do what any husband does when his wife is out of town--eat massive chunks of red meat, drink too much and consider looking at porn.
I am, in fact, sipping on one of those long ago referenced Pinot Noirs, even as I speak. I don't know whether to polish that off and jump right into the Glen Livet, or just call it a day after I drain the bottle. I see nothing worthy in my cable lineup and I for damned sure ain't driving anywhere.
egged on by the diabolical John Dewars, you say to yourself "he has to put that piece of wood on a big league slider. see it, hit it. how does a steroid help him do this?"
"well, he can play longer using them. exercise more, practice more. all these career numbers are due to longevity. it all comes back to longevity."
"yet, he gets that one pitch to hit per game, and hit it he does. a long way. like no one else."
on and on it goes
apple martinis are poison by the way. i believe consuming them is a sin of the first order, tell your wife this as you light that robusto and pull vigorously on the fruits of the scottish heath. not as bad as a chocolate martini but up there, in the sloe gin fizz echelon at least
Well, you know, they aren't all that bad, uh, apple martinis I mean. Understand, I've never ordered or made one for myself but I have had the opportunity for a sip or two at the wife's urging. From my pov, there is no such thing as a martini with vodka instead of gin anyway, BUT, I am not a woman, particularly not a woman who thinks that I am practically sub-human for taking anything NEAT or straight.
I suppose then that you would maintain that Hank Aaron, or any other icon of Baseball's past would NEVER consider taking a substance that would enhance play.
BTW, I've decided not to go directly to Glen Livet.
It's the TIMES, dude. For God's sake, it wouldn't bother me if Barry went OJ or something, but I cannot condemn him for what he is purported (is that a reasonable legal term in this context) to have done.
Think of me when the stone crabs come in. OK.
Well, I have finished my Pinot Noir and just don't feel like any further alcohol intake on this evening would be wise.
Despite the fact that I am, shall I say, tipsy, I have not changed my mind about Bonds, his pursuit of such and such and his reasons thereto.
Let you freakin' Purists scoff all you like. I, for one, was never above listening to the words of an ex-friend of my opponent and learning about his "tells." Any port in a storm and if that port has warm women and cold beer, all the better. (I do not have a naval past but for some reason I often think in Navy metaphors--go figure--one must not discount the possibility of reincarnation, I suppose)
People, you're gonna have to take me is such dosage as you receive, not that you necessarily give a fig. My life is complicated: sometimes I have recess. I always pay though: I always pay. I'm still payin' for sins in the 70's----and you know, that just ain't right.
scotch and wine never worked well for me in tandem.
i don't consider myself into purity all that much. i do think that when you're confronted with something that looks bad you have to say "this looks bad." particularly when the thing that looks bad is a big loomin large mother.
no idea about hank and his temptations. i'm looking at bonds and things look bad
not surprised to hear about those 70's payments, we all have em. nobody emerged from that decade intact, best i can see
So, "performance-enhancing drugs" are a big mother and countless other societal ills are a nolo contendre? That it?
It's not fair, I know, as I'm hittin' somewhat below the belt, but I just see no reason to single this man out for condemnation here, dig?
Yeah, I know, it's been a very long time since I've actually followed wine with Scotch, but you know how the mind works. There are times, even now, when what I'd really like to do is check into a hotel room and drop a tab of acid. Then, I think about whether or not I could actually survive and I decide to pass on it.
Amazingly, after a whole bottle of Pinot Noir I'm not sleepy yet. Probably the vintage, yeah, yeah, I'm sure, the vintage.
I'm drinking a Coca-Cola Classic.
In mind, the problem is that the 'Everest' is that because a man set that standard training naturally. Now baseball is supposed to deem that standard surpassed by a man on a program using a prohibited substance? 756 is just a number. It is Everest because of Aaron.
Spike,
It's late, and the caffeine might well keep you up. I do, however, applaud your choice of soft drinks. I never, though, partake of such after 7PM. You're a risk taker, arent' you?
You know what's really sad about this whole thing, and the position I've taken here? I despise Bonds. But, then, National League players don't really even count anyway.
Quote:a man set that standard training naturally.
No offense, Fayettewolf, but what is natural for one day is not for a time 30 years later----try though you may to say that is not true.
Perhaps you could add to the drama and say that Aaron had to endure so much more crap during his time.
It's all freakin' irrelevant. He HAS reached it and he's still going up to the plate and swingin' to put that trophy on the mantlepiece next to his daddy's picture.
I find it sort of amazing that so many seem to use this opportunity to glorify Aaron, not that he doesn't deserve glorification, but that he, in comparison to the onerous, drug freak Bonds is some sort of Everyman elevated to the godhood.
I hope that this is some sort of sarcastic riff. I think it is.
There are a few things we know for certain in this life. Well...they're so close to being certain we go ahead and make the leap and accept them as such. Among them:
The sky is blue
Our dogs love us unconditionally
Bonds is a jerk and he cheated, and yes, in this world of boozers users and 2-time losers he still manages to be exceptionally grotesque
biggie 4 Wrote:I find it sort of amazing that so many seem to use this opportunity to glorify Aaron, not that he doesn't deserve glorification, but that he, in comparison to the onerous, drug freak Bonds is some sort of Everyman elevated to the godhood.
Here's a tangential question for the class: How will we all feel in 9-10 years' time when A-Rod, who has been vilified for non-baseball reasons for almost his entire career but stoically continues to play the game, approaches what will then be Barry's record?
this is a stereotypical postmoderrn discussion we're having, isn't it waynehead?
we will celebrate A-Rod or i will anyway.
It is Everest because it is the home run record. It is a big looming mother because it is THE record to break in the game, or one of only a couple
wayne,
Sarcastic riff? Well, my whole verbal groove is riff-like; except for the stream of consciousness "Heart of Darkness" aspect that scares everybody away. I only use that on children now. But "sarcastic"---no, certainly not intentionally so--what I've stated here, wrapped in all this post modernism, is an honest, straight forward statement of my feelings on the topic.
74,
Who knows what baggage will have accumulated for ARod when and if the time comes? As far as I know, the man has a rep for not performing in the clutch, the "clutch" as defined by those fans and media who are desirous of creating said "baggage." We love creating baggage for others: we just love it--it's all part of some schedenfreudesque window that we must create and then open wide to generate greater joy in our own existences. Say it's so: you know it is.
Bonds, and all those other athletes are gladiators. They have one function. We are far removed from the days when the third baseman for the hometown pro team worked part time for your Accounting firm in the off-season. The raison-d'etre of these men is to be the best they can be. Some take greater risks than others to gain an "edge."
I simply cannot, in this post modern Baseball world, condemn him. It's not a question of "liking him." It's also not a question of doing an analysis of these "performance-enhancing drugs," and passing judgement on them as unacceptable for these gladiators. They were available in these times, like Tommy John surgery, and Lasix eye surgery, and a number of athletes chose that path. I'm not trying to draw a comparison between "shootin' up" and using modern surgical techniques to improve the vision---rather, I'm saying that both could very easily be considered "advancements" and acceptable risks BY the men within the industry, so to speak.
Quite frankly, the real problem is that we still, once again in this post modern world, want to idealize these athletes, make them role models and in turn villify them beyond all reason when they don't walk some straight and narrow path as defined by our own minds, minds that often have practically been transformed into lemmings by the resounding over-abundance, for lack of a better word, of publicity.
biggie 4 Wrote:Some take greater risks than others to gain an "edge."
This, to me, is the problem. I don't think that risk should be necessary to compete.
Every three months or so I read about yet another high-profile pro wrestler who dies before he reaches the age of 50 (a number of them don't get to 40). Pro wrestling is probably about 15 years ahead of baseball in terms of heavy PEDs usage, and we are starting to see the results of that type of body abuse (which is what it is, for the most part). While it's true that baseball/football players will benefit from professional wrestling being "first" and presumably avoid some of the usage pitfalls that have bedeviled the wrestlers, I suspect that those sports will start seeing more of these issues come to the fore in the near future.
(In my opinion, it will affect the NFL first, with PEDs usage in that league combining with other medical issues, particularly post-concussion syndrome, to give pro football a huge black eye for a long period of time.)
That's the problem I have with PEDs in baseball.
biggie 4 Wrote:Quote:a man set that standard training naturally.
No offense, Fayettewolf, but what is natural for one day is not for a time 30 years later----try though you may to say that is not true.
I find it sort of amazing that so many seem to use this opportunity to glorify Aaron, not that he doesn't deserve glorification, but that he, in comparison to the onerous, drug freak Bonds is some sort of Everyman elevated to the godhood.
No offense taken. But to say that perhaps Aaron had better science than Ruth, is not the same as discounting Bonds' achievements because he used banned substances to alter his body.
Bettering a marks using improved training and advances in medicine and advances in physical therapy and more research in nutrition is part of sports. I don't think cheating should be rewarded though.
We don't recognize records set on amphetamines in track and field. Why glorify records set on clear?
We do not live in a utopian world. "Cheating" has received "wink and nod" acceptance in pretty much all facets of our lives--then we so often take the moral high ground after this "cheating" has been uncovered. I'm not talking about simply sports, but rather the whole gamut of our daily interchange, be it gaining some unfair advantage in the corporate world, getting an "inside" stock tip, or getting too much change at a convenience store.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not proud of this--I, like the two of you, like to think of myself as clinging to some "idealized" perception of the way things should be and the ethical rightness of my own actions. Generally though we don't look "gift horses" in the mouth and examine as closely as we should.
There's a lot of different issues in this debate--when something was officially determined to be illegal and the reasoning behind that determination--what are the actual differences in these substances and what is reasonable usage and what is abuse--why is something that enhances performance in a professional sport actually considered illegal anyway--why wouldn't a professional athlete follow the advice of those he might view as "medical" or performance advisors------but don't address these because I'm quite aware that holes can easily be shot through them by taking a strict legal/illegal, moral high ground position.
Rather, look at what we actually know--a highly paid, high performance athlete has been "accused," to the point of almost universal acceptance of those allegations, of gaining an unfair advantage over his peers by taking substances that engender a quick bright flame of Godzilla ball followed by the certainty, or so we are told, of a Boris Karlof mummy that lies in a effete stupor because somebody accidentally flushed the "prayer for the dead" parchment down the toilet.
I don't know what Barry Bonds has or has not done. I don't know how harrowing the risk was. I do know that he is being proclaimed to be a "ring leader" so to speak---ie., if Baseball takes an Enron "hit," then old Barry's gonna be playing either a Skilling/Fastow/Lay role. This may be deserved and it may not.
Whatever this creature that Bonds has become actually is, the fact remains that he is on the verge of a momentous accomplishment---and all we want to do is put an asterisk by his final figure.
It is only a "momentous accomplishment" because we compare it to the accomplishments of others. If Barry had his original cap size, the accomplishment would be comparable. If Barry had bionic arms and bionic eyesight would this be a "momentous accomplishment"?
"...and all we want to do is put an asterisk...."
it's the last thing i want to do but it is the thing that i think we have no choice but to do. stylistic point.
i think we all understand where everyone's coming from. me, i don't think we can indict all of humanity as fallen and sinful and, upon doing so, let rather obvious sinful behavior pass. it doesn't get any more high visibility than this, we can't pretend it doesn't exist. i don't think we can credibly say, really, "i don't know what Barry has done or hasn't done." he's told us what he's done. to hold him accountable, we only have to ask ourselves if he understood, or should have understood, what he's done. and as i've said, i think that question is easily answered as well
it is a momentous accomplishment, no doubt about it. the question on the table is what it represents and what is our response
So, Barry is bad: he's very bad. He is the wall-sized depicted symbol of the Steroid Era in Baseball. It will be the Steroid Era, you know. Everyone, save perhaps Bud Selig knows this. The stats of many a great individual season may end up with asterisks before we're done. Team championships may carry the asterisk as well. The whole "Era" is afoul with taint, fogged in a chemical haze. And yet I think back to earlier times, times that escape the visual parsing---and remember Grady Anderson hitting 50 homers--and remember little Davey Johnson hittin' in the high 40's with the Braves of the 70's--and in those same 70's, showing up early down at Fulton County Stadium and watching the visiting Pirates work out and realizing how much Dave Parker stood out in that yellow uni--how much bigger and stronger he looked, how super-heroesque he appeared, AND, often acted in games.
One is left to wonder WHY, let's say, Cal Ripken has not come under this microscope--he of the most amazing and, quite frankly, ridiculous record of them all--consecutive games. Wonder how he stayed so healthy? Would he not have benefited from an occasional day off? Would the team have not benefitted as well. I don't mean to denigrate Cal--just askin' questions, you understand. It's all about QUESTIONS, you understand.
I hope I'm still alive to witness the final battles of this great debate---the possible legal battles over what to do with ALL those statistics--the possible backlash of protest from Bonds' proponents about Hall of Fame snubbing, let's say. Frankly, I hope he takes Pete Rose along for the ride. I mean, let's figure this one out--is illegal drug use more onerous or less than gambling. For that matter, is association with dog fighting worse than rape. Don't take that the wrong way, quite frankly, I find Michael Vick somewhat subhuman, and have for some time.
Maybe, just maybe, and definitely if I were writing the screen play for this debacle, I would open the final act of this drama having Joe Torre, or maybe Tony LaRussa awaken from a crazy dream and it's the early 90's all over again. Sometimes, ONLY a deus ex machina can save the lame elephant from the barbaric hordes of squealing mice. Anyway, it's damned hard to see how Baseball will not be absolutely and irrevocably ruined by this; but then, maybe Curt Flood and free agency already did that anyway.
Barry is bad...good vs. evil...sin!?!?
That is not what I am saying. For me it is not about punishment. It is about perspective. I understand that there are hall of fame pitchers that might gotten the stats that pushed their numbers into the HOF range by occasionally doing something illegal to the ball. I don't think that makes their membership questionable.
I just don't think that Barry Bonds should go into the record book with numbers that overshadow those of players whose careers wound down naturally without their being some notation that acknowledges thie fact that Barry was on an illegal program. Just as I wouldn't think a pitcher whose arm at 40 had tendons and sinew replaced with springs and pistons should surpass Cy Young's win total in the books without at least a small footnote.