out-effin'-standing take on bonds...

Is murder even in the rule book? I'm sure it's there somewhere between how to call balls and strikes and the definition of the ground-rule double.

 

Outstanding. Simply outstanding.

 

A great read, brilliantly written by someone who can put the language -- all of it -- to work in magnificent fashion. And so what if it was written a few days ahead? Do you write all your obits on deadline as well? There is such a thing as being prepared.
Kudos.

 

It read like it was written 4 months ago and crafted meticulously since then. Nothing wrong with that at all. Prepared, indeed.

 

Barry Bonds would have been better off if he had ripped off Khalil Greene's pants and raped him at shortstop. [/paulzeise]

 

There's a vision that will haunt me tonight as I try to fall asleep.

 

Outstanding.

Overwritten? It's not as if she were covering a little league game. This is one of the most hallowed records in sports. I believe that gives a writer some leeway.

 

best sports columnist in the country, and it's not even close ... really too bad they hide her behind the Times Select wall ... i can't believe anyone is calling this overwritten ... in 8 years when A-Rod is going to break the record, young writers will look back to see what people were saying about Bonds at the time he tied Hank's record - and this is the column they will use for comparison

 

Not in the context of sport, no it would not.
Launching oneself at another in order to inflict bodily harm would be against the law in society: In football, we call it a tackle.
Launching one's left hand at another's face would be against the law in society: In boxing, we call it a jab.
I could do several more of these, but in the interest of time, I'll not.
Baseball had plenty of chances -- three decades' worth -- to determine that steroids and stimulants were against its rules. Baseball chose not to act. Many players -- dozens and perhaps hundreds we do not know about -- took advantage of this inaction. Perhaps they even perceived it as tacit approval.
To determine this somehow was "cheating" is cheating the truth.

 

Exactly.

You've really got two choices. And only two choices.

1. Accept baseball's blind eye toward steroids and accept EVERYONE who played during that era (because hundreds did steroids) and accept every record.

OR

2. Abandon baseball for what it did. For destroying the link to compare past and present achievements. That means abandoning EVERYONE who played during that era and everything that was accomplished during that era. It means abandoning any interest in the Hall of Fame, because the numbers that used to signify immortality now are run of the mill.

Abandoning ONE player while forgiving the other 600 as well as the game itself is not an option . . . but it seems to be the one everyone is running toward. It reeks of misplaced bitterness, the kind that Dick Young exhibited when he single-handedly attempted to perpetuate the Roger Maris "asterisk" myth (obviously, he succeeded somewhat).

 

Well, baseball DID have a specific rule against "the possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance" (even if the owners/Selig chose to turn a blind eye for so long.) That rule was in place in 1991:



http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/format/memos20051109?memo=1991&num=1

Regardless of their inaction, using steroids illegally WAS against the law and it WAS, specifically, against the rules of baseball ... long before the Great Home Run Race or the Next Great Home Run Chase.

 

They also had rules against spitters and emery boards and all kinds of other things.

The people that were caught were punished. Somewhat. Those that weren't caught --- or who received a slap on the wrist --- were not punished. See Hall of Fame, Perry. Same as the hundreds that "weren't caught" doing steroids. Or the thousands that "weren't caught" doing amphetamines.

Heck, when "The Giants Won the Pennant!!!!!!" . . . they did it by cheating.