Skip to main content

Bonds hits 756

So I just got a phone call from a friend of mine (who may or may not revel himself in the comments) who told me he just watched in person as Barry Bonds broke Hank Aaron's career home run record. And these are my immediate thoughts on that.

1. Congratulations to Bonds. Breaking Aaron's record is an amazing accomplishment. It's funny to me that if Bonds hadn't become unstoppable in this decade, he probably would have gone down in history a little underrated.

2. To everyone who says Bonds cheated to get this record: go ahead. Tell me what rule he broke.

The more I think about it, the more I come back to that. Isn't breaking a rule the definition of cheating? Even assuming Bonds took steroids before they were against the rules (something almost everyone does assume), he's never failed a drug test, as far as we know, since testing was implemented. (It's possible he failed in that first year when testing happened but there were no punishments or publicity for failing. And is it just me, or do you think Major League Baseball is going to test him tomorrow ?)

So I'm not sure he ever really "cheated". On the other hand, it's almost certain that the cutting edge of performance-enhancing drugs is ahead of testing. If you want to assume the worst, Bonds could certainly be taking something undetectable. But you could say that about any athlete, and I'm not familiar with any evidence that Bonds is taking anything right now.

Is taking steroids without a prescription illegal? Yes. I'm just not sure if that's relevant to whether Bonds cheated at baseball per se.

Now, is it morally wrong? I wouldn't take illegal drugs just to be stronger for a lot of reasons, and some of them have to do with my own values. So yeah, I certainly don't support Bonds' steroid use, if it's true. But I also don't condone calling a guy a cheater and trashing him at every turn if he didn't really cheat. Why not just say you don't like him because he's a jerk? Plenty of proof of that.

I'm not just playing the devil's advocate here; I really haven't decided what I think of Bonds completely. I just wish baseball had taken a firmer stance against steroids earlier, and I wish the players' union hadn't treated testing (and the health of its members) as nothing more than a bargaining chip.

3. Bonds' new record does nothing to diminish the fantastic career Aaron had. Aaron was a terrific player: a rookie of the year, an MVP, and a gamer and a legend in every sense of both words.

And I don't mean to disrespect Aaron in any way. But even though he's held the career home run mark my entire life, I never thought of him as necessarily the greatest home run hitter ever. Is Dan Marino the best quarterback of all time just because he threw for the most yards?

You're free to make up your own mind about Bonds, too. If you're really that torn up that his name's in some book (which might not even be a real book, for all I know), then you need to get out more.

Comments

John said…
I personally don't care one way or another whether Bonds' name appears in the record book, and I am far from being a baseball enthusiast, so perhaps my opinion isn't worth too much on this topic. But it seems characteristically baseball lame to have all of this controversy when (1) without steroids, the game never would have come back from the 1995 strike; (2) the league clearly acquiesced in steroid use by not prohibiting it and turning a blind eye to players bulking up; and (3) everyone wants to complain but no one has a clear solution to what to do about Bonds' record. And I agree that without proof Bonds broke a rule of the game, the league has little grounds to complain about his record. This isn't Pete Rose.

What I find perhaps most ironic is that no one talks about Ruth's records being illegitimate even though he played in a league that prohibited black players, many of whom were arguably the best in the world at the time. So Ruth had an unfair advantage over players from other eras that might have been even bigger than whatever advantage Bonds got from steroids - but no one suggests that should tarnish Ruth's legacy.

All in all, I am happy that Bonds broke the record at home, so we could all be spared the indignity of fans booing at him.
10:04 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The NFL hates you.

It's no joke. It seems like the more devoted of a fan you are, the less the league cares about your continued patronage. The best example is the league's blackout policy, a wonderful gift from the league to its teams granting them added market pressure to charge whatever ridiculous amount they want for tickets. If a game doesn't sell out, the home market doesn't get to watch it on TV. (Basically, a 75-mile radius around the stadium doesn't get to see the game on TV if all the tickets aren’t bought first.) The NFL, like a needy girlfriend, says, "Hey, fans, you like us? Prove it." Then the league asks us to prove it again and again, week after week, year after year. I live within 75 miles of what should be John Elway Stadium, but Broncos fans are pretty much shielded from this stuff, right? Not all of them. One of my friends is as supportive a fan as the NFL can have: he's a Broncos season ticket holder and an NFL Sunday Ticket subscriber. That mean...
4 comments
Read more

An innocent mistake

Sorry. Here I am to catch up on a few things from the past week... 1. Vince Young will be on the cover of Madden 08. Good for him, I guess. Much is made of the Madden curse. It's not a self-fulfilling prophecy, but it almost feels like one. The real problem is that a) football is a very violent game, and b) Electronic Arts typically selects a cover athlete who's already very well-known. Unfortunately, the players are therefore often a year (Shaun Alexander) or more (Ray Lewis) off their actual prime, and old enough that a serious injury is more likely. Young is an up-and-comer, and to avoid a horrible pun let's just say he has less age than most of those guys. I think he'll be fine. 2. Of course, the reason EA went with such a youthful player is that superstar Chargers back LaDainian Tomlinson turned them down . Why? Money. No surprise that'd be a point of contention, considering how "generous" EA is with its regular employees . 3. That's why re...
5 comments
Read more

Super Bowl XLVI revealed!

The Patriots and the Giants. Things just work out sometimes. * * * Two new teams, the England Patriots and the York Giants, will play for the NFL title in Super Bowl Forty-Six in two weeks. I can't wait. The matchup comes too late, and after too imperfect of a season, to make up for the wounds inflicted by the Giants in early 2008. The Patriots' undefeated season, a 16-0 masterpiece in which they set the league's single-season scoring record, broke at the hands of the upstart Giants in that year's Super Bowl. The way the Giants won made their win feel especially flukish...Eli Manning, known more for his entitled attitude than his athleticism (the only player to which his moves have ever been compared favorably is his brother Peyton), somehow scrambled free of a Patriot pass rush in the closing minutes, and lofted a pass down the middle of the field to David Tyree, who caught the key throw against the top of his helmet. Then a touchdown pass to Plexiglass provided the wi...
3 comments
Read more