I mean, hey, if Tom Yawkey and Kenesaw Mountain Landis are your moral pillars, I am shocked Hank Aaron and Willie Mays ever got in the Hall.
Basically, with members like Bill Conlin, the baseball writers have said that it is just fine to have sex with children but even the suspicion of steroids? No way, Jose.
My real issue is the baseball writers applying arbitrary morality to the whole thing. Racists and wife beaters and amphetamine users and on-the-field cheaters are fine, but if you used STEROIDS - oh noes! lordy lordy! What about the sanctity of the game? What about the children? Give me a fucking break.
/mini rant
Why is Mike Schmidt here? Because he said in an interview that if they were around when he was a young player, he absolutely would have used steroids. I think it is time for us all to be honest with ourselves about the steroid era. It was just that, an era. Just like the dead ball era, the expansion era, or the pre integration era. The baseball writers need to learn some of the history of baseball before they start applying their misguided criteria to the whole thing.
3 comments:
I'm more on the Frank Robinson side. And I don't recall Schmidt condoning the use of PED's (maybe that's not your point). I think he also said in his book that if he had been "taking" he would have hit 800+ home runs. Lots of intelligent and sincere fans disagree about this so please don't take my comment as disrespectful.
The problem isn't that they kept Bonds and Clemens out. That's a debate where neither side can prove the other wrong. The problem is that they went and kept Biggio and Piazza out. Why? Because they played at the same times as some players took steroids?? Dumb.
Well said. F' the writers. Used to be they blamed their JV coach for cutting them freshman year, now it's their moral character that made them not take steriods that thus prevented them from being MLB Stars.
Post a Comment