Barry Bonds
ray a
5,703 Posts
Hero or Goat?
ray a
5,703 Posts
ray a
5,703 Posts
Comments
I'm not so sure we should castigate Bonds for the steroid issue. Correct me if I'm wrong, but these are not illegal drugs, just banned from use in baseball as a fairness issue. You and I could take the same steroids and not be guilty of anything. How many other athletes have used steroids similar to Bonds and get away with it? Why pick on Bonds?
He's a goat because (1) he's a proven a#%hole, (2) his 756 may have been ill-obtained and (3) in Hank Aaron's time, they didn't have the technological and pharmaceutical advances in training, materials and therapy that they do today.
You could say that although Bonds' feat is impressive, Aaron's is even more so due to the conditions under which he achieved it.
Edit: In this particular instance Guys are people of the masculine persuasion.
OK, Coffee, you mention technological advances with training. That's true, so we should put an asterisk next to anyone who set a new record as a result of better training techniques?
I don't really see him as a hero, mainly for his attitude and approach to the game. He acts likes the fans are a mere necessary evil to put up with.
I don't think you need to put an asterisk down next to new records...after all, there are many records being broken in sports where you can more easily compare "apples to apples." I'm just saying that in Aaron's heyday, it was, excuse the pun, a different ballgame.
Anyone else think its interesting that the players' group lobbied so hard (and won) for baseball players to NOT be tested for performance enhancing drugs?
He is the worst kind of human being and he stole a cherished sports record (if not the most cherished) from a true hero with the aid of chemical substances. He cheated.
The only consolation I have is that Barry Bonds has to live with himself.
How is Barry not the problem?
I-N-D-I-V-I-D-U-A-L
R-E-S-P-O-N-S-I-B-I-L-I-T-Y
Remember, he said he thought he was paying thousands of dollars a month for "flaxseed oil".
Frank, would you overlook an employee who breaks the rules and maybe even does something illegal merely because he is perceived as valuable to the organization? That's what MLB is doing.
But I read the Sports Illustrated article closely and it was a very thorough, very damning blow by blow account of Bonds steroid use.
Bonds was obsessed with achieving super stardom and willing to go to any lengths to achieve it.
What I meant by "he has to live with himself" was that by all accounts, he is a nasty human being. I think his steroid use has accentuated his anger problem.
I dont see him enjoying what he gave everything to obtain.
Everything stated on this thread is heresay,
FACT: Bonds has NEVER failed a steriod test.
His accomplishment of hitting 73 homeruns in 2001 and hitting the all time record of 755 now 757 could not be done just by allegedly taking performance enhancers it takes eye hand cordination. He has been playing baseball since he was 5yrs old. He has accomplished this feat from hard work and practice. He may not be liked by many people but so what, my son went up to him before a game and he was very nice to sign a baseball for him for free, many players charge for it.
He plays because he loves the game as his father, brother and godfather do/did.
Hero to both of my sons.
Giants Fan
Though I agree that Bonds isn't exactly a happy person.
You are correct in that none of us have actually met the man but he has a well documented pattern of surliness and egotism.
I found the Sports Illustrated report to be fair and objective. It wasn't an opinion piece. It was dates, names, and specific details.
I know it's a rough time when you learn your heroes have feet of clay, but I was talking to a friend of mine in the Bay area last week and he says he's amazed at the level of denial there.
>investigative report hearsay?
>
>You are correct in that none of us have actually
>met the man but he has a well documented pattern
>of surliness and egotism.
>
>I found the Sports Illustrated report to be fair
>and objective. It wasn't an opinion piece. It
>was dates, names, and specific details. [/font]
I agree. Even if you ignore the steroid use, there's enough about Bonds' behavior that, in my opinion, should cause serious concerns about him being considered a "hero" by anyone, especially children.
Though to be fair, when you say the "Sports Illustrated investigative report", are you talking about the "The Truth: Barry Bonds and Steroids" article that appeared in March 2006? If so, I have to admit that that that article did contain plenty of hearsay...it wasn't exactly a "Sports Illustrated report" - it was an excerpt from the book Game of Shadows, though that book at least was written as an investigative piece. Still, it wasn't entirely clear to me how much of what was written was based on fact and how much was conjecture. In that article, at least (which I just reread online), there are many factual-sounding assertions for which the authors do not provide the bases (or if they do, they're not mentioned in the article). Take the following quote, for example:
"On the West Coast, Barry Bonds was astounded and aggrieved by the outpouring of hero worship for McGwire, a hitter whom he regarded as obviously inferior to himself. Bonds was 34 years old, had played in the big leagues for 12 years and was known for an unusual combination of speed and power. Before the 1993 season he had signed what was then the richest contract in the game: $43.75 million for six years, and he knew he was on his way to the Hall of Fame. For as long as he had played baseball, Bonds had regarded himself as better than every other player he encountered, and almost always he was right."
I mean, all of the above may match what we've seen of Barry Bonds' demeanor, but I doubt Barry Bonds himself gave this account of his feelings. So it seems odd to me to assert so matter-of-factly what Bonds was thinking and feeling. Similarly, things like:
"Of course Anderson's primary job, and the real reason he was hired, was to provide Bonds with performance-enhancing drugs and to track his regimen. Anderson obtained the drugs and administered them. In file folders, and on his computer, he kept calendars of Bonds's use of the substances, recording the drugs, dosages and cycles."
While this may be true, we have no idea where the authors of the SI article get this information (and, if I recall correctly, the authors have refused to identify some of their sources).
I enjoyed the article, and I know the authors have been commended for their investigative work in the area of steroid use in baseball, but I'm not exactly sure I'm ready to look to this article as the paradigm of objectivity.
Of course, you may have been referring to a completely different Sports Illustrated article, in which case feel free to ignore the above. :-)