I've spent the last 2 days listening to the talking heads on T.V. and radio call-in shows denounce and apologize for Barry Bonds. The real problem, in my mind, is what happens to Barry's now very tainted records, the major record he has yet to break, and his inclusion into the Hall of Fame.
For myself, I don't think that Barry's name should ever appear above Aaron, Ruth OR Mays on any official record book (as it pertains to home runs). No question he is a great hitter. No doubt that you can't take a steroid to improve your vision at the plate. But Sammy proved last season that steroids can mean the difference between a fly ball to the track and a home run. I don't think an asterisk is enough. If for no other reason than that Hank Aaron was a truly great player and that Barry is now just the greatest chemically aided player.

Bravo!!!!!

Great post

Instead of an asterisk, how about a little syringe? wink

Here's a question: Do the latest revelations about Giambi and Bonds taint their MVPs and should baseball take the awards away?

~Adam

Why not. The precedent exists at least in International competition. While I'm not willing to question the first four of his MVPs, I think the last three come into serious question.
The syringe will probably be best served as part of his Hall of Fame plaque.

YAWN! This is such a tired Barry Bonds bashing subject. Get over it.

Get over a guy who cheated to get where he's at, Bill? Get over a guy who was a fraud and a liar? Get over a guy who wouldn't achieved what he achieved without the use of drugs?

OK. Whatever you say, Mr. Bonds-can-do-no-wrong-because-he-walks-on-water.

I say take a big eraser to these guys' names on any list of "accomplishments" in their profession.

Why does everyone single out Bonds because of his fantastic record? We now have Giambi and no doubt countless others in the roid camp, why do you have to continue the Bonds rant?

Bonds gets singled out because he will, barring injury, own the single most well known record in all of sports. But he'll have acheived it by cheating.

Bonds gets singled out precisely because of his fantastic, but false, record, just like Ben Johnson was singled out because of his record. Because it really was the steriod record, which denied others their rightful place in their sport's history. I agree with Brooking's Boy that Bonds should not be listed above Aaron, Ruth, or Mays (and that we should see more of Keith Brooking's pictures ). In another sense, the focus on Bonds is totally understandable, since, even without the cheating he has done, he has been one of the best players of his generation. The other guys are not that significant. Yet Bonds has besmirched the game by undercutting the credibility of the sport. He deserves every bit of focus that is coming his way.

How is it a "false" record?

Giambi was, at no time, on a pace to change the game as we know it. Sosa's impact, though impressive, would have been largely a footnote in the face of Bonds' "accomplishments." Bonds is singled out because of where he is poised to stand in the history of the game (On top, at least in the eyes of fans other than me). Bonds is singled out because he believes that, once he passes the Babe in homeruns, Ruth should be wiped out of the history books as a relevent figure (Paraphrasing, of course but he actually said this). Did I miss something or was it Bonds who saved baseball from the Black Sox scandal or is that stadium in New York called "The House that Bonds Built." People didn't want Aaron to get the record because he was black. People don't want Bonds to get the record because, as we now know, he didn't earn it. The integrity of those at the top is always going to be viewed as more important than the integrity of those in the periphery (see your multitude of other juicers). I'd concede Bonds the Hall of Fame, but this record does not belong to him. Bonds' record would be false because there is no honor, integrity, or purity in its accomplishment and baseball is still the only sport left that likes to pretend that those three things still matter. Rant complete (for today).

[ December 04, 2004, 12:59 PM: Message edited by: Brooking's boy ]

I thought I read somewhere that HGH (human growth hormone) does help eyesight.

It used to be that any kid had a chance to grow up to be President or a sports star as long as he worked hard. Now he needs steroids, money, National Guard Officers looking the other way, and a hanging chad or two.

Did Bonds cheat? No hard evidence yet.
Did Bush cheat? No hard evidence yet.

Yet MIB writes:
"Get over a guy who cheated to get where he's at, Bill? Get over a guy who was a fraud and a liar? Get over a guy who wouldn't achieved what he achieved without the use of drugs?
OK. Whatever you say, Mr. Bonds-can-do-no-wrong-because-he-walks-on-water. "

Interesting.

Baseball is going to have to address this subject. The fact is most baseball fans will never accept Bonds as the homerun champion. We now have proof - his own words - that he is a liar, a cheat, and a fraud. The best thing Bonds could do - and he won't because it would take a bigger man - is retire from the game. Now. In return, baseball could leave his records* as they are, but it would insure that 755 would not be surpassed by a cheating criminal like Bonds. Then MLB needs to impose a rigorous steroid testing policy. Impose it unilaterally. Let the union go out on strike, with the issue being steroid use and drug testing. The pressure from the American public, and from players who are clean and don't want to lose their seven figure incomes so scumbags like Barry Bonds and Jason Giambi can debase themselves and the game of baseball, would be tremendous, and I don't think such a strike would be sustainable,

[ December 04, 2004, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: Munson Man ]

Baseball is going to have to address this subject. The fact is most baseball fans will never accept Bonds as the homerun champion. We know have proof - his own words - that he is a liar, a cheat, and a fraud. The best thing Bonds could do - and he won't because it would take a bigger man - is retire from the game. Now. In return, baseball could leave his records* as they are, but it would insure that 755 would not be surpassed by a cheating criminal like Bonds. Then MLB needs to impose a rigorous steroid testing policy. Impose it unilaterally. Let the union go out on strike, with the issue being steroid use and drug testing. The pressure from the American public, and from players who are clean and don't want to lose their seven figure incomes so scumbags like Barry Bonds and Jason Giambi can debase themselves and the game of baseball, would be tremendous, and I don't think such a strike would be sustainable,

I meant false in the sense of not valid. For example, Ben Johnson crossed the line at the Seoul Olympics in 9.79 for the 100 meters, which was accepted as a world record. Then the results of his drug test came in and showed that he had used performance enhancing steroids. He was stripped of the gold and the record of 9.79 was removed from the books, since it was not valid. His previous record of 9.83, at the 1987 world championships, was also declared invalid because he had been using performance enhacing steroids.

In the competitive environment of today's game, Bonds is by no means alone in drugging up to compete. But Bonds' records would also not be valid in my opinion given that he didn't rely on his ability and effort alone, as did Aaron, Ruth, and Mays, but used drugs to gain an advantage.

[ December 04, 2004, 05:13 PM: Message edited by: Good Hands ]

Rather than comment twice on this topic, I posted a reply in this thread about this--not that my opinion is any more significant than anyone else's here. wink

Couldn't agree with you more, ump. About your opinion I mean.

Applause for both UMPIRE and MUNSON MAN.

In a day where lying, cheating, stealing, and all form of deception are widely accepted in public and corporate life; I would not hold my breath.

Change will come only with almost complete destruction. When the powers that be are forced to do so because they are way past the point where it hurts their pocket books; onlt they will there be change - for all the wrong reasons.

Rob

Munson Man and I agree you. The league should impose a drug testing policy similar to what the NFL has. Bud Selig could finally show he has some guts by issuing an order to do so. What does he have to lose his job? So what, he is already worth millions and could get another job anywhere. He could make a name for himself in baseball history by taking a stance.

Let the players union try to take it to court or call a strike. If the union hasn't learned anything from the effect of the last strike they surely would this time. The American public would have no sympathy for their position and the leagues' stars certainly will miss those huge paychecks they are accustomed to.

Phillyrunner, I think what Ump said was that Selig couldn't DO such a thing without the players union approving it, and they're not going to approve it. So, Selig can't do anything. MLB isn't like the other sports it seems.

MIB, I realize that player approval is required, but my point is for Bud to take a stance whether he gets approval or not. It's more a matter of principle than practicality. I just would like to see public opinion if such a stance were taken. I have seen where public pressure has helped in changing policy whether right or wrong.

Selig can try and force the issue. Does the office of commissioner still have that clause about acting "in the best interests of the game"? If so he should use it. The union will fight it and win in the short run, but in the long run they'll lose.

I have to wonder if the players really would strike over that. Fehr might threaten, but would he get the votes from the Players Union? You would assume the players who aren't on them would be willing to support a strong policy, and even the ones who are should be able to recognize the need to do it for PR reasons. The ones who really want to take them are going to get around the tests anyway. How many times was Marion Jones tested?

As I've said before, unless Bonds can be proven to have taken steroids after the rule was made, I don't see that you can really do anything to him, or officially change the records. Yep, people are always going to question it, but the fact is that ALL the batting records between ~1990 and today are open to question. Hell, you could go back further. McGwire used androstenodione, which is now banned in baseball, although you can buy it at Wal-Mart. What about all the players who've used amphetamines, reputedly widespread in baseball since the '70's at least.

No. That clause was removed by the Owners following Vincent's departure. He used it; they took offense to that, so they removed it when they forced him out. The Commissioner is really nothing but a figurehead.

Baseball needs someone like Kennesaw Mountain Landis, if you ask me.

I'm glad to see that Hank Aaron has spoken out to express his concerns about Bonds.

Why can't the owners at least take a public stand? They obviously have dollars to promote the sport. Theymay now have to protect it's integrity.

Fans will ultimately determine what they do by their attendance. I may be cynical, but I don't hear anything about season tickets being canceled or the prices dropping yet. Have they?

Hopefully the union will act and not wait around.

But an argument could be made that the teams were complicit in the cheating--or, at least, they benefitted from the extra home runs that Bonds or Giambi hit. Surely the Giants organization saw up close the transformation in Bonds' physique over the years. Did they ever question this? Or did they turn a blind eye? So I don't think the owners are going to come out too strongly against this for fear that some of their own players may be swept up in this scandal.

What will be interesting is the reaction Bonds gets when he goes to visiting ballparks next season.

Don't hold your breath. If the comments of Tom Glavine, a union leader, hold any weight, the union won't do a thing.

This morning on one of the news shows I saw Glavine being asked about this. I'm paraphrasing him, but he was saying stuff like:

"No one's going to ban players. We won't allow that."

"Legislation designed to address this won't stand up in court...it would contradict federal labor law...It sounds great, it sounds tough, but it can't be done. I think it was more of a response of 'Oh my God, we had to do something.'"

"These articles say baseball is reeling from these allegations. To me, there is nothing new."

"In Barry's case, the cloud remains as to whether he knew he was doing it or didn't."

Take these comments as you see fit. They're just a summary of some of the stuff he said when asked about it by a reporter.