April 04, 2006

And so it begins... yet another stain on the American public. Let the meatheads unite, as immaturity abounds... Worst fan behavior of all time: the moron who set off the Pistons / Pacers brawl by tossing the beer at Ron Artest.

posted by MW12 at 10:50 AM on April 04, 2006

I would never do it but I am glad someone did. There is a minimum of outrage by the sports media complex over Bonds and his obvious cheating. He approaches Ruth's record and many who believe in baseball and its history are offended. I expect (but do not condone) more antics as the more expressive fans come out of the woodwork. America is tiring of cheating and associated cover-ups, real or imagined and in this case they are seeing Selig and the press treat this with kidd gloves = coverup.

posted by mikemora at 11:16 AM on April 04, 2006

That attack on the Royals coach was insane! And don't forget about the battery tossing incidents with John Rocker.

posted by fenriq at 11:17 AM on April 04, 2006

I think people are getting way to worked up about Bonds -- tossing syringes is tacky and over-the-top. Let it go. Enjoy the game or stay at home.

posted by bperk at 11:21 AM on April 04, 2006

Worst fan night ever was Disco Sucks Night at Comisky between games of a double header. Barry is going to get fans doing anything and everything to him. He might as well get use to it.

posted by dbt302 at 11:42 AM on April 04, 2006

I truly feel sorry for the fans such as "bkdet" that do not believe or make excuses for Bonds turning into Incredible Hulk before our very eyes. I think the syringe was uncalled for but I still laughed. Bonds breaking the homerun record will happen, whether there is an asterik or not. But I do believe that there will be the question in everyones minds that he did cheat. He will never get the respect of breaking such a huge record.

posted by sgtcookzane at 11:56 AM on April 04, 2006

Bonds and his obvious cheating And your proof is? Because the media says so, and everyone knows that they are NEVER wrong.

posted by graymatters at 12:05 PM on April 04, 2006

Poor Bonds. All he ever wanted was a group hug with McGwire and Sosa circa 1998. Worst fan behavior? This isn't really bad, but it was hilarious. The Vet, 2003, one guy got the entire stadium to boo the Rockies' bat boy. He had snubbed a kid, faking a ball toss over the dugout. The next time he came out, a guy booed him, then a few guys, then the entire section, etc, until the whole stadium was in on it. The boos rained down in anticipation when bats were left at the plate. After a few innings, he came out and tossed a few balls into the stands, got a big ovation, and was cheered for the rest of the game.

posted by cl at 12:15 PM on April 04, 2006

My favorite fan misbehavior story is this one (I confess to not remembering all the details exactly so the following is copied from here): September 18, 1993: The Yankees defeat the Red Sox, 4-3, because of a fan who runs out on the field. With NY trailing, 3-1, with two outs and a man on 1st in the 9th inning, Mike Stanley hits a fly ball to left that apparently ends the game. Umpire Tim Welke, however, had called time when the fan bolted onto the field, giving Stanley a second chance. He singled on the next pitch. That was followed by a hit by Wade Boggs, a walk to Dion James, and a single by Don Mattingly which drove home the tying and winning runs. The Bonds story is, of course, appalling. I don't believe at all, though, that stories like this are "stains on the American public" or representative in any way of American sports fans, baseball fans or even Padres fans. There were over 43,767 people at the ballpark yesterday, and 43,766 of them did nothing particularly newsworthy (that I'm aware of). Good percentage. It is also worth noting that in the case of this ONE fan, the needle had been removed from the syringe -- this was not a weapon, not an intent to injure, just a message. Appropriate? No. Fans shouldn't be throwing anything on the field. But it's doesn't quite fall under abominable behavior either.

posted by BullpenPro at 12:24 PM on April 04, 2006

There were over 43,767 people at the ballpark yesterday, and 43,766 of them did nothing particularly newsworthy (that I'm aware of). The guy in Section 232, Row 17, Seat B didn't flush the toilet on his way out of the can. Pig. I'm glad it was a little harmless humor from some San Diego fan rather than a bullet or someone jumping onto the field to attack Bonds. I'm afraid we're not far from that, and despite how much I might detest Bonds, he doesn't deserve that. Heck, he doesn't even deserve most of the crap that gets dumped on him.

posted by wfrazerjr at 12:42 PM on April 04, 2006

fans are losers and our society is a joke. We now rival the europeans in classless behavior at sporting events. Run for the hills ... it's the collapse of western society centered at PetCo Park. God help us.

posted by gradys_kitchen at 01:06 PM on April 04, 2006

Wow, what a short article. "I don't judge them," Bonds said. "I have to concentrate on baseball. I leave that up to you guys to make those statements in the paper." Ha! I have to give Barry some credit here. He didn't give them anything new to work with. He didn't get mad either and throw it back at anyone. But yeah, judging from what I have read in all of these Bonds threads, I would say he is going to have to expect something like this at every game this season. Other than the normal filth that spews from an angry fans mouth (some of which we discussed here) I have never seen anything that bad at any of the few games I have attended.

posted by njsk8r20 at 01:15 PM on April 04, 2006

If I were a major league pitcher, Barry Bonds would never see another pitch to hit. I would hope that ALL pitchers would do the same. Cheating dopers should have no recognition let alone RECORDS.

posted by Carle G at 01:17 PM on April 04, 2006

If Barry Bonds never saw another pitch to hit, he would set some pretty unbelievable (and unbreakable) records. On preview: bperk, you are much faster and better than I.

posted by BullpenPro at 01:24 PM on April 04, 2006

Or is this some internet-athletic-research site that conducts sterile sports analysis. I'm going to start using this discription. My wife is always asking me what I'm working on and this sounds like important work.

posted by Termite at 01:38 PM on April 04, 2006

"What is that horrible screaching sound coming from jerseygirl's room?" "She said she was going to her room for 17 seconds, 1000 hours, 100 years or until 10:15 Saturday night, or however long she damn well felt like." "Whatever, she's wearing all black again isn't she."

posted by tselson at 01:54 PM on April 04, 2006

Alright, guys, I'll bring the pitchforks and you bring the flaming torches and syringes and we'll storm the castle and demand the head of Frankenstein...er...Bonds!!

posted by THX-1138 at 02:00 PM on April 04, 2006

If anyone needs me, I'll be in my bedroom listening to old Cure CDs and crying in the dark. So, you'll be reliving the night of my Senior Prom?

posted by wfrazerjr at 03:06 PM on April 04, 2006

If anyone needs me, I'll be in my bedroom listening to old Cure CDs and crying in the dark. Been there, but for me it's Led Zeppelin...on the headphones...loud...feel the pain...........

posted by commander cody at 03:54 PM on April 04, 2006

Barry is going to get fans doing anything and everything to him. He might as well get use to it. Let's take the story and replace "Barry Bonds" with, oh I don't know, "Derek Jeter", or "Albert Pujols". And let's replace "syringe" with "small pocket knife" or "unidentified sharp object". Would anyone still think it was something a player would "have to get used to" if the scene was only slightly changed? If anyone needs me, I'll be in my bedroom listening to old Cure CDs and crying in the dark. The "Mixed Up" compilation album is still one of my favourites, and it's been 16 years since I picked it up.

posted by grum@work at 04:01 PM on April 04, 2006

See if i lived near an MLB team (that was good unlike Toronto) i would go to a Giants game just to heckle bonds. I'm a huge heckler, im that one guy that goes too far i must say. I hate bonds and my copy of game of shadows is on its way so i can hate him even more. I hope he dies from roids i really do.

posted by buffalo will never win at 04:20 PM on April 04, 2006

Let's take the story and replace "Barry Bonds" with, oh I don't know, "Derek Jeter", or "Albert Pujols". And let's replace "syringe" with "small pocket knife" or "unidentified sharp object". If they try something at the All Star game it won't happen. Security was so tight at Comerica that I saw someone have their nail clippers taken away. Now if I were going to try to attack someone, I'd be much more likely to buy a souvineer bat and do it than try nail clippering them to death. We now rival the europeans in classless behavior at sporting events. Until someone throws shit at Barry Bonds I think that the USA will stay below Europe.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 04:28 PM on April 04, 2006

To Chicobangs, you printed And T$PORT4lawschool, given your username, the fact that you've decided that evidence is no longer necessary to convict him, even in the court of public opinion, is kind of rich. You took what I said out of context and created a made up in your mind innuendo. I never said that in the frame you manufactured, if one plans to get rich they need understand what they are stating. Respectfully t$port4lawschool

posted by T$PORT4lawschool at 05:21 PM on April 04, 2006

That was then this is now go giants

posted by fingers at 05:33 PM on April 04, 2006

God bless Barry Bond. Bond saved baseball. What ever is in the dark will come to the light. Get over it. a waste of energy.

posted by nate at 05:53 PM on April 04, 2006

God bless Barry Bonds. Bonds saved baseball. What ever is in the dark will come to the light. Get over it. a waste of energy.

posted by nate at 05:56 PM on April 04, 2006

owlhouse's flaming Italian scooter I believe, when I was in college, that one of the local bands called themselves just that very thing.

posted by BullpenPro at 06:08 PM on April 04, 2006

T$port4lawschool: "Where there's hearsay, there's probable truth." bperk: "Law school should be teaching you to seek more than circumstantial evidence before drawing any conclusions." Key West Jeff: "Bperk, you dope. You have got to be BLIND not to see all this circumstantial evidence. Everywhere. Convicted, easily, because I don't have time to collect actual facts -- I'm too busy plotting the most devious, undoubtedly moronic stunt ever witnessed on national television." Can I have 10,000 marbles, please?

posted by BullpenPro at 06:17 PM on April 04, 2006

Bonds and his obvious cheating And your proof is? you need proof? i suppose hes like that because hes been eating alot of pork and beans.to say hes never been on riods is an insult. NO TALENT+STERIODS=BROKEN RECORDS but why is everyone flaming bonds theres mark,and 85% of baseball i remember they cut to national news when mark was breaking the record and he admitted he was on steriods. what a fuckin joke

posted by p0p3y3 at 06:20 PM on April 04, 2006

I say * by the records it's that simple. see ya!

posted by scottyog at 06:29 PM on April 04, 2006

Fenriq, Last night I responded to your comment about "expecting too much from an astros fan" and hoped you would respond back. I hope you got my point about Bonds. Let me reiterate, Bonds is again a vastly talented ballplayer, surely enough to probably at least approach and perhaps break the homerun record. Make no mistake about it, HE CHEATED...so has many others. If he was liked across the board, this would not seem quite the big deal it is, but because he is a no talent ass clown when it comes to fans, it is a huge deal. I lived in the SF Bay Area for 16 years and went to Giants/Astros games before he went to the Giants as well as during, and although the fans wanted him on the team, he was not and is still not liked. He is vastly overrated...overall, but still tremendous talent. Also like I said before regarding your Astros fan comment, unless you are a White Sox fan, your second rate team watched the World Series from OUTSIDE the chalk lines...maybe the Astros will do the same this year, I hope not! Until they do, they are the reigning N.L. Champs..Regardless, I hope your team brings you as many thrills as the Astros did for me. Good Luck

posted by astrorocket at 06:45 PM on April 04, 2006

a lot of ball players have good hand eye cordination and still hit fly ball out to the outfield and not home runs and are considered to be not to talented. so Just to say Bonds is talented because he hits so many homers and not fly ball outs HMMMMMMM Steroids.

posted by twgibsr at 07:05 PM on April 04, 2006

Admit it; we're all going to ride our fiery Vespas to the sports bar and watch that Giants/Cards game to see the "hilarious" hijinks that key west jeff has in store for us. Let the mirth-making ensue.

posted by THX-1138 at 07:15 PM on April 04, 2006

I agree with you wingnut, especially since we see the same thing over and over again in these Bonds threads. We might as well make a section like the Locker Room for all things Bonds.

posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 07:32 PM on April 04, 2006

I hope Pujols hits 90 or 100 Dingers this year and everyone can just sit back a laugh at "The Ass Clown." Do you actually stop to think before you type things, or are you suffering from a case of textualized verbal diarrhea?

posted by grum@work at 07:40 PM on April 04, 2006

et my hair on fire while I punch myself in the face as I storm into jerseygirls bathroom so I can beat everyone up at first base because they're listening to The Cure. Who listens to the Cure in a darkened bathroom? That's ridiculous!

posted by jerseygirl at 07:44 PM on April 04, 2006

astrorocket: Frankly, Barry Bonds is not overrated. And face it, the Astros arent going anywhere this year. But at least you can remember last year , right?

posted by STUNNER at 07:50 PM on April 04, 2006

Oh, and Lyle Alzado may have taken a ton of steroids, but despite what he believed, they didn't kill him. Brain cancer, which has nothing whatsoever to do with steroid use, did. So leave him out of this discussion too, please. I thought he'd died of embarrassment from his acting career?

posted by commander cody at 07:57 PM on April 04, 2006

I thought he'd died of embarrassment from his acting career? That's quite possible, though I always thought he was the best part of "Ernest Goes To Camp."

posted by chicobangs at 08:19 PM on April 04, 2006

ben johnson??? never had gold stripped cause he NEVER tested postitive.YOU BETTER LOOK UP THE 92 OLYMPICS YOU MORON THEY TOOK HIS GOLD MEDALS NOT MEDAL,,,, MEDALS BECAUSE YES... GIVE THE MAN A MARBLE HE TOOK STERIODS I DONT BELIEVE IN * THATS BULLSHIT

posted by p0p3y3 at 09:34 PM on April 04, 2006

QUESTION: did he at least HIT him in the ASS? and the worst fan behavior in north america...by far....THE RICHARD RIOTS....not only did they call the game. THEY TRASHED DOWNTOWN MONTREAL!

posted by tommybiden at 09:44 PM on April 04, 2006

And Philly fans still gety a bad rep.

posted by GoBirds at 10:15 PM on April 04, 2006

chicobangs "brain cancer, which has nothing whatsoever to do with steriod use, did" Before you correct me on Alzado's cause of death, you better Yahoo "Lyle Alzado" and read the 3rd one down titled "Memorial to Lyle Alzado. After reading the last line it states that cause of death was brain cancer due to EXCESSIVE STERIOD USE! Fenriq, sorry I missed your response...can you repeat it? Stunner, what team do you support? You may be right, but the Astros will still be a favorite to go back to the big show by a lot of people. Fenriq OK, do you believe in you heart of hearts that he didn't use steriods? You are right, we don't have a smoking gun to prove it, do you or anyone else have proof that he didn't? Don't give me that "innocent until proven guilty" line as he is not in a legal court of law. Proven fact that steriod use increases aggression, did anyone actually see him abuse his former wife or would you believe her just because "she said so". I was in the Navy and knew a guy who was on steriods and saw the difference it made in his appearance and demeanor...I had proof because he admitted it to me when I kicked his ass in front of about 20 people for picking on a small guy he thought he could humiliate....steriods made him huge...but sure didn't help him that day...do you really believe Bonds is clean or do you just want to believe.

posted by astrorocket at 11:02 PM on April 04, 2006

I think there is truth in what EVERYONE is saying about Bonds, such as: 1) did he cheat? absolutely, of course. 2) will he admit it? absolutely not. 3) great player? without a doubt 4) no talent ass clown to fans? unmatched 5) his right to be an ass clown? sure is 6) Jeff Kent's drinking buddy? not in this lifetime...sorry I couldn't resist! 7) dogged and badgered by media? constantly and last but not least... 8) Bud Selig knew, approved and enabled Bonds and countless others by his inaction that will lead to not only bogus stats, but is directly/indirectly responsible for the future health problems of all players due to his vanity while this occured on his watch. Fenriq...thanks for the kind words about Bagwell, although he hasn't officially retired. he is pretty much done..a 2 1/2 minute standing ovation shows respect for his loyalty after 15 years with one team. Hey how about trading him back to Boston, as a DH so he could play for the team he grew up supporting...is Larry Anderson still around?

posted by astrorocket at 11:44 PM on April 04, 2006

astrorocket, whether or not Bonds used steroids is not the point. The point is that the man has been unjustifiably vilified because he's not friendly to the media or many fans. No, its not a court of law, its the highly suggestible court of public opinion where the burden of proof is laid squarely on the alleged perp rather than on the ones making the claims. That's my problem with this witch hunt. And sorry but anecdotal evidence of 'roid rage isn't applicable here (but good on you for standing up to an asshole who was bullying a smaller guy).

posted by fenriq at 01:16 AM on April 05, 2006

So what round did he go in your fantasy-league draft? Fifth round in mine, which is about where I had him pegged.

posted by ajaffe at 08:21 AM on April 05, 2006

Bonds has no respect for any of us, and has even told us that over and over again. Now we should be concerned about him? Who cares!!!

posted by INOALOSER at 10:47 AM on April 05, 2006

Just as an aside, and perhaps others have feelings about this, MLB has increased security around BB, should they do so? Or should it be the Giants' responsibility, or even BB's himself? Let's examine this from the media's point of view: Option A: The league provides extra protection. Media response: Typical MLB! Protecting only the superstar players and ignoring the steroid problem. Option B: The team provides extra protection. Media response: Typical Giants! Making extra concessions for Bonds over the rest of his teammates and ignoring the steroid problem. Option C: Bonds provides his own protection. Media response: Typical Bonds! He's so sheltered from the rest of the world that he needs an extra-large entourage to keep us away from asking more questions about the steroid problem.

posted by grum@work at 12:17 PM on April 05, 2006

Just as an aside, and perhaps others have feelings about this, MLB has increased security around BB, should they do so? This whole mess is a result of their incompetence, they should pay for it! And as for the rest, this is just the first game. Someone threw it out and no one knows if they intended to hit him with it or not. It should definitely be taken seriously. BTW, Bonds on Bonds last night was interesting, is he playing the sympathy card or is he really ready to contemplate the hereafter? I think there is a very good chance that Bonds is a whole and complete person and not the one-sided caricature that we see. He could well well do some contemplative thinking and I wouldn't find that the least bit surprising.

posted by bperk at 12:20 PM on April 05, 2006

BullpenPro is right on. One of the upsides to Barry having a Jackie Robinson complex is that he's trying awful hard to act like him in public. 162 games of this is sorely going to test that, but roid rage is not an issue right now. If he was on the juice at all, keeping this temper alone would be a reason to stop. Think of it this way. Imagine, oh, Albert Belle in exactly this position (which, all other things being equal, was entirely conceivable ten years ago). They'd be playing his games in steel cages, in empty stadiums, on closed-circuit TV by now.

posted by chicobangs at 12:47 PM on April 05, 2006

Bullpenpro, good points on Bonds' patience and tolerance. Can you imagine the shitstorm if he did react? On the security thing, I do think Jesse Jackson should go back to trying to defend jerks who start school riots and keep his ego out of this issue altogether. And MLB should be providing extra security for Bonds, they singled him out with this investigation (regardless of Selig's assurances that the investigation goes beyond Bonds) and should be responsible for keeping him safe. In fact, isn't baseball responsible for protecting all the players and staff? Oh, and this is probably a bad idea but I'd like to see some of these tough guys who throw crap from the crowd anonymously get confronted one on one by Bonds and see how tough they are then.

posted by fenriq at 01:15 PM on April 05, 2006

Didn't they used to play basketball behind bars in the arenas? Chicken wire.

posted by yerfatma at 02:00 PM on April 05, 2006

Doesn't MLB already provide extra protection for Bonds? They made an exception for him to wear extra armor on his arm so he can lean over the plate.

posted by INOALOSER at 03:26 PM on April 05, 2006

or batteries.

posted by jerseygirl at 04:23 PM on April 05, 2006

Ow. Ow. Ow. Ow. HEY!

posted by BullpenPro at 04:52 PM on April 05, 2006

If I were europeeing I think i'd be tired of the fece's comments

posted by Folkways at 06:58 PM on April 05, 2006

No, I do not condone the throwing of ANY object onto the playing surface at ANY time by ANYONE, and I hope that they catch the one who threw the syrienge and make an example of him/her. The point I was trying to make is that everyone apparently was acting as if this was meant as a physical threat to Bonds, one that could have resulted in grave serious injury to the man. I was simply making the point that it most likely was not. Do I think that there is the possibility that some attention hungry psychopath will put the man in jeopardy before the season is very old? It certainly think it is a possibility and I hope that MLB, the Giants, every club that hosts them and Barry himself do all that they can to minimize the threat. I agree that Bonds has shown great restraint during the last several months. I agree that much of what is going on rests squarely on the shoulders of MLB itself. I agree that Bonds is aruably the greatest hitter of our time, and has an argument for all-time. All of that being said, I also agree that he most likely cheated, that he should be made to pay the consequences for that cheating (yes, even if it is at the expense of making him the "posterchild" or "sacrificial lamb" that MLB uses to hold up and say "see we ARE doing something to clean up the game) and that anything that MLB does should not be held to the same burden of proof as a court of law would require. Joe Jackson and Pete Rose, looking back from 2006, should probably both be in the HoF. What happened to each of them was a travesty when seen from the next century. But, the decisions that were made in each of their cases by the Commisioner at the time were made in the attempt to preserve THE GAME. It is very likely that in 2056 or 2036 that our children and grandchildren will say that Barry Bonds deserves to be in the HoF, that the way that MLB had (will?) treated him was (is?) a complete embarrassment. But, the powers that be in the grand old game do not have the luxury of looking back from 30 or 50 years in the future, they have to make a decision NOW on how to save THE GAME, even if it is at the cost of the legacy of a (perhaps) well-deserving individual. Whether or not it can be proven to the extent that a court of law would find Bonds guilty, is there ANY among us who would argue that steroids is good for THE GAME? Given that fact that steroids can be seen as a greater threat to baseball than organized crime was in 1919, should the Commisioner's office act in a way that is any more lenient or forgiving? The ultimate way that Bonds will be viewed will have to wait for heads to clear, and dust to settle. Perhaps it will be that the SpoFites of 2036 will lead the way for his induction into the HoF, or the removal of an asterisk. My argument is that if we wait for the heads to clear and the dust to settle BEFORE there is any decision made by the Office of the Commissioner of Major league Baseball, then perhaps there will be no argument to clear Bonds' name because Major League Baseball will be as relevant to our descendants as the National Association of Professional Base Ball Players is to us today.

posted by elovrich at 09:41 PM on April 05, 2006

In what way is performance enhancing drugs a "threat" to baseball? The integrity of the game survived "greenies" and cocaine abuse in the 1960s and 1980s.... Using a P.E.D. suggests that the player is attempting perform above and beyond his natural abilities. He is attempting to do better on the field of play If a player takes an action that inflates his performance past that of his "natural ability" (your words) doesn't that threaten the integrity of the game? Whether it is cork in a bat, altering the surface of the baseball or USING SUBSTANCES WHICH HAVE BEEN BANNED BY THE COMMISSIONERS OFFICE. The threat from illegal drugs was faced and responded to by banning them. The same instrument that banned all illegal drugs also banned steroids (see my earlier posts about this). That I feel that Bonds needs to be punished has nothing to do with the fact that it is Barry Bonds, but that he is the highest profile player that there are apparently valid allegations against. I am glad that the investigation has begun, and that it will encompass more than Messr. Bonds. If there is enough evidence gathered to convince Selig that Bonds used, i hope he bans him. I also hope that if there is enough evidence to convince Selig that ANY OTHER player used then that player will be banned also. This includes (insert the name of any likeable player here). If there is evidence found to convince the Commissioner that steroid use was widespread (say more than 8 percent, or 2 players on each 26-man roster) then I hope he contemplates segregating the entire period from consideration for career records. As for your argument about when the rules were different and the record book. It is a specious comparison at best, as the use of steroids over the last 15 years HAS BEEN against the rules of baseball. IN addition to being illegal. And for those that are about to argue that Ruth drank during Prohibition. If I recall correctly, the 18th Amendment addressed the production, transportation, and sale of alcohol, not the consumption of the same so no, Ruth did not break the law by drinking during that period.

posted by elovrich at 08:36 AM on April 06, 2006

Regardless of whether use of PED was against the rules or not, the punishment for breaking that rule was never that one be banned from baseball. If we found out that sometime during the 2003 season, Pujols smoked marijuana, should he be banned from baseball? He broke the same rule. A rule that is not enforced and that has no consequences for breaking it are not really rules at all. And, to only enforce those rules against one individual is discriminatory.

posted by bperk at 09:12 AM on April 06, 2006

So, because MLB did not enforce a rule in the past, for whatever misguided reason, then they should be prohibited from enforcing it in the future because to do so would be discriminatory to the first person penalized? Absolutely not, but MLB should not be able to retroactively enforce those rules against select players.

posted by bperk at 11:24 AM on April 06, 2006

The threat from illegal drugs was faced and responded to by banning them. "Greenies" have been around since the 1960s, and only THIS YEAR have they been specifically banned by baseball. If you are going to retroactively punish Bonds for using steroids, then they better retroactively punish Willie Mays for his P.E.D. use as well.

posted by grum@work at 12:05 PM on April 06, 2006

Like this: In addition, John Milner testified he took a stimulant called "red juice," which he found in the locker of Willie Mays when they were with the New York Mets. "The great one. Yes," Milner said. "I don't know what kind of speed it was, but it kept your eyes open." Stargell, Madlock and Mays denied using stimulants and were later exonerated by the commissioner's office. There is a statue of Mays outside San Francisco's ballpark and one of Stargell outside PNC Park. Although, in this instance, it states that Mays provided the substance, not that he used it. A fine line, and I personally find the supplying of drugs even worse than their use, but still, you should document accusations of drug use that you make with a source that is at least somewhat credible.

posted by elovrich at 02:57 PM on April 06, 2006

bperk: Agreed. I am overzealous in the advocating of banning in this case. I will tone down the rhetoric if those that are adamant about insisting that MLB needs a 'smoking gun' in order to proceed against any player for the violation of steroid policydo likewise. MLB is not a court of law and does not require the same level of proof to act in protecting itself. As far as I am aware, every player contract contains a 'detriment to the game' clause wherein any action by the player that is detrimental to the organization or MLB baseball is grounds for termination of the contract. I am not an expert in labor law in all fifty states, but I am fairly certain that the basics are the same, if you violate the terms of an employment contract, the contract can be terminated. So, if the actions of a player (Barry Bonds, for instance) are determined to have been detrimental to an organization (oh, perhaps the SF Giants Baseball Club) or to MLB in general, then that player can either be sanctioned according to the prevailing rules (suspended) or have his contract nullified. In the current marketplace, would YOU as the GM of a club, be willing to offer him a new contract until you were certain that he was clean? So, call it an outright ban, call it blackballing, call it good business, the effect would be the same. The player's career would effectively be over. I am intrigued to see, however, that the argument amongst the Bonds supporters seems to be going from "he didn't do it" to, "it wasn't against the rules", to "it isn't fair to single him out for punishment", and finally now to "it isn't right to ban him when the punishment in place is suspension." Oh, and the argument that the rule didn't have a pujnishment defined is inaccurate, the punishment was left to the Commissioner's Office to include up to permanent expulsion from the game. For reference see the memo HERE

posted by elovrich at 04:32 PM on April 06, 2006

To assume that he kept the bottle in his locker without ever using it is like trying to say that Bonds purchased P.E.D. from Balco but never used them. Again, I agree with you, but this is the logic that the Bonds defenders are using. Without a smoking gun, there is no way to justify finding him guilty through the preponderance of the evidence. Considering the maximum penalty is permanent expulsion, and the minimum penalty is to do nothing, you are suggesting that a "defined" punishment included any and all punishments available. Again, we are in agreement. But in this case I will defend the openness of the penalties and say that I am not in favor of mandatory sentencing. If a CupofCoffee player is found with steroids in his locker, and is clean after that and there is no evidence, apocryphal or otherwise, that he was a longterm user, I feel that the same punishment as is levied against someone who has been a longtime user and has denied such use in the face of evidence against him would be unjust. Does this mean that I think Bonds is a long time user and should admit everything whether he is guilty or not? Of course not. BUT, if it is found that he IS a longtime user, and that he in fact did not come forth when given the opportunity to do so, then I say throw the book at him, or anyone else who would fall into this situation. My case is not made against Barry Bonds the man, I do not know him, I respect what he accomplished early in his career. While I am suspicious of his recent production, I still repect the talent that he obviously has to hit a baseball as far and as often as he does. My case is against anyone that casues harm to the game I so dearly love. And if it means making an example of one individual, or a dozen, in order to get the idea across to the players that steroid use is not accetable, nor will it be tolerated or condoned, then, as unfair as it may seem, I am for the harshest available punishment. If any professional athlete can honestly say that they were unaware of what they were putting into their bodies, they are either a liar, and think that the average fan is a dolt, or incredibly naive. This goes doubly for someone who has the reputation that Bonds has for being in complete control of everything that goes on around himself. Are we supposed to believe that someone that is so controlling of every other aspect of his life would not be clear on what they were administring to themselves? If a player comes forward and admits to using steroids, and in so doing contributes to cleaning up the game, you are damn square that I think they deserve a break. And if there is nothing that points to a player other than inuendo then yes, they should not be touched, although they may be subject to an investigation. I guess it boils down to this, if you come forward and speak out during the current investigationm then you will be afforded the lowest current suspension. If you do not, and evidence that would convince a "reasonable and prudent man" comes to light, you will be questioned about this evidence, if you admit to its truth, you would receive something less than the current maximum suspension, but more than the minimum. If you deny any wrongdoing, and cannot at least show that the evidence against you is flawed in some repect, then the devil take you, and good luck boxing groceries.... Is it possible that someone will be punished for something they have not done? Yes, it is possible. Is it likely? Not if the "reasonable and prudent man" test is met. It would be a shame, yes, but the greater shame would be to be paralyzed waiting for a smoking gun to act at all. I apologize if I speak in hyperbole, but I fear that if steroid use, and the use of all illegal/controlled drugs is not stopped dead in its tracks RIGHT NOW, then the game I love will be inalterably changed forever.

posted by elovrich at 07:28 PM on April 06, 2006

elovrich: That pretty much diffused any and all problems I had with your point of view. While I might not agree entirely with what you said (punishment for previous transgressions), I do agree with your logical breakdown of your argument/explanation. The only thing I'd have any quibble with is the phrase "inalterably changed forever" language. I think it's a bit strong, but it's a passionate response to a problem so it's definitely understandable.

posted by grum@work at 12:08 PM on April 07, 2006

Fuck you.

posted by yerfatma at 03:49 PM on April 07, 2006

BTW; grum, that is why I apologized beforehand for the hyperbole..... *s*

posted by elovrich at 06:17 PM on April 07, 2006

Remember 5 cent beer night at the old Cleveland Muni Stadium? Total chaos... Or death to disco? Or bottlegate? When the Browns fans threw beer bottles at the officials? I love the Browns but I was not proud to be a Browns fan at that time.

posted by ctownguy at 02:11 AM on May 03, 2006