Tim McG Posted May 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 It is what I have been saying all along. Nice post, Matthew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 Here's an LA Times article worth reading, I think: Jackie Robinson can't sub for Barry Bonds Baseball stands to lose its remaining black fans if it downplays Bonds' stellar achievements. By Zev Chafets April 14, 2007 LA Times April 15, by decree of Major League Baseball, will be Jackie Robinson Day. On Sunday, a player on each big league team will be designated to wear Robinson's uniform number, 42. The Dodgers, Robinson's club in its Brooklyn incarnation, intend to go one better; every player will wear the hallowed number. Jackie Robinson Day is an exercise in racial public relations. Baseball desperately wants to repair its connection to the black community, whose younger generation seems to regard the national pastime as only slightly more relevant than curling. How did this happen? In the bad old days of segregation, Negro League stars such as Satchel Paige and Cool Papa Bell were cultural icons, and young black athletes gravitated to the game. Robinson was followed by a starburst of great players. Willie Mays, Roy Campanella, Larry Doby, Hank Aaron, Ernie Banks, Don Newcombe, Monte Irvin, Frank Robinson, Willie McCovey — these were men who fell in love with baseball when it was still forbidden. That love was unrequited, even after baseball grudgingly integrated. No one knew this better than Robinson. He watched as great franchises such as the Red Sox, Tigers and Yankees resisted integration for a decade or more. He saw black players forced to repress their athletic creativity and cultural identity in order to conform to the conservative norms of baseball. And he keenly felt his own exclusion from the game after his playing days were done. Sick with diabetes, Robinson was honored by Major League Baseball at the 1972 World Series. He was under-whelmed. "I'd like to live to see a black manager," he said with bitter irony. Nine days later, he was dead. Thirty-five years later, there are just two U.S.-born black managers and one general manager in Major League Baseball. Football and basketball are the African American sports now. You see it in the stands, where the number of black fans at baseball games sometimes doesn't reach triple digits. You see it on the field too; most of today's great black players come from Latin America. The most luminous exception is Barry Bonds, who will be wearing 42 for the San Francisco Giants on Sunday, instead of his customary 25. Bonds is easily the greatest player of his era. He is a seven-time MVP. He holds the record for most home runs in a season. Now he is closing in on the all-time home run title, which Hank Aaron took from Babe Ruth in 1973. Bonds is a cantankerous figure (he has that in common with Jackie Robinson) and widely hated by sportswriters and fans. Baseball purists despise him for allegedly having used steroids. This, they claim, profanes baseball's holy of holies, its statistical integrity. How can you compare records if they are compiled under unequal conditions? This is, in a word, nonsense. Ruth broke into baseball when a dozen homers led the league. Then the grandees of the game decided to soup up the ball — a form of artificial enhancement at least as intrusive as steroids — and presto, the Babe (and, in his wake, others) hit 50 a season out of the park. Despite this great break with the past, baseball venerated Ruth. When Hank Aaron, a black man, broke his record in 1973, Commissioner Bowie Kuhn didn't bother coming to the game. The snub left Aaron embittered. He (and millions of his fellow African Americans) correctly saw it as another example of baseball's Negro Problem. Now it is Bonds' turn. He'll probably pass Aaron this season, a feat that will be greeted — outside of San Francisco — with near universal resentment and animosity by white fans and writers (the press boxes of baseball are even more monochromatic than the stands). Commissioner Bud Selig says that a new home run mark will be treated as a routine event, just another record being broken. He might not bother to attend. Baseball's few remaining black fans will see the double standard. What's so bad about what Bonds is accused of, they will ask? He used drugs? See Jim Bouton's great baseball diary "Ball Four," on the rampant use of amphetamines in the Golden Age of Mickey Mantle. Bonds broke the law by allegedly taking illegal substances? The Babe himself openly boozed his way through Prohibition. Bonds broke baseball's rules? If that were a major crime, spit-baller Gaylord Perry wouldn't be in the great hall at Cooperstown. Whether Selig and the writers and the fans like it or not, Bonds is the black Babe Ruth. If they demonize him, put a disqualifying asterisk next to his records and ban him from the Hall of Fame, a thousand Jackie Robinson Days won't bring back the missing millions of African American fans. It's fine to venerate No. 42, but Robinson is a page in the history books. It's what happens to No. 25 that will determine the next chapter in the star-crossed relationship between blacks and baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 (edited) But if you never bring them up because Righetti sucks or the PCL is a deceptively easy pitcher's league or whatever the issue is... what is gained then? Again, Cain is a young guy... One concern is that Cain and Lincecum apparently hate each other, but for hte money they are making (even at the min) I think they can learn to deal. Good point. It's tougher on us long suffering Giants fans, I suppose....been pulling for my guys since the early 60s. Edited May 6, 2007 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 Apparently there won't be a month of rumors or a nationwide tour, ESPN is reporting that Roger Clemens Will Return to the Yankees Fine. It will make his return to Fenway that much uglier than its ever been in the past, and it will make beating them that much more satisfying. Seriously, I'd rather have Lester back and working towards being an effective major league pitcher than Clemens. That's a much better "feel good" story anyway. I can only imagine how much money Cashman offered to get him to make this decision now before their season slips away. Too bad there is no way that he can be ready to help them through the White Sox - Mets - Red Sox - Angels - Toronto portion of the May schedule. He might make it back in time to help with the beginning of June schedule, which is a series at Fenway and at Chicago before interleague play takes over. IMO, the Yankees will be very lucky if they stay five games behind by the time Clemens returns. One question: Who will they blame when Roger blows his hamstring? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald byrd 4 EVA Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 Peavy was awesome today 7 Innings 1 hit 1 ER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 (edited) Not that its a surprise to anyone, but there can be no doubt whatsoever that Clemens' agent is lying through his teeth when he claims that both Houston and Boston told him that they would rather have Clemens start at the end of June, and only the Yankees wanted Clemens now when he's "ready" or close to it. We're supposed to believe that its entirely coincidental that the Yankees desperately need Clemens immediately, and he just so happens to have sped up his workouts. Yeah right. We're also supposed to believe that the Red Sox said "No thanks, Roger, we'd like Julian Tavarez to continue to make starts until the end of June. It won't help us if you take his spot at the end of May. No thanks, we want you a month later." Yeah right. I'm waiting in vain for someone to pose this question to Clemens, "The Red Sox have the best record in the league and are second only to the A's in pitching. Don't they have the better chance to win it all, considering that you are a six inning pitcher and the Yankees have huge problems in the bullpen?" Edited May 6, 2007 by Dan Gould Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 (edited) Looks like the Yankees are making some rather odd choices of late. In the cellar: Blame Joe Torre. A-Rod is hitting again: Congratulate Steinbrenner. No bullpen help: Blame Torre. Dump Randy Johnson then p/u Clemens in May: Congratulate Steinbrenner. Clemons goes on the DL or can't get past the 6th: Blame Joe Torre. I'm starting to see a pattern here..... Edited May 6, 2007 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen archer Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 6, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? Yeah, but he isn't playing for San Francisco....and he's the correct color. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Larsen Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? I don't understand your point. Bonds was rewarded with nearly 20 million and gets accolades from SF fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 (edited) What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? Yeah, but he isn't playing for San Francisco....and he's the correct color. Funny, Sosa no doubt used Steriods, but isn't an asshole....is he booed in the AL? I like the fact Sosa has been doing fairly well this year....Bonds, breaking another black man's record pisses me off. Why? Because Hammering Hank Aaron didn't cheat! Oh yeah, and Bonds is a compete jerk. Edited May 6, 2007 by BERIGAN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 Astros must be plenty pissed off right now as well..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? Forget him. This will allow Lester to continue his development from June to the end of the season. He should be ready to really excel next year, and we'll be going after them with three starters 27 or less, and Bucholz likely to get the call by the middle of the season. And this year I still prefer our rotation and bullpen to theirs (so long as Dice-K works through his issues). And how about Pedroia? Up near .250 now. If he's finally settled into a groove at the plate, he and Crisp will make it a very strong bottom of the order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 Scott Proctor should be suspended for his actions in today's game. It all starts with an extremely cheap play by Josh Phelps, going three feet to the side of the plate to hit the catcher for no apparent reason. At least he took his retaliation like a man and trotted to first, and then Proctor throws behind someone's head ... what a punk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted May 7, 2007 Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? Yeah, but he isn't playing for San Francisco....and he's the correct color. I have liked the Giants for years, dating to when I was a child living in California. My son's t-ball team last year was the Giants, and he loves to wear his jersey still, even though he's a "Husker" this year. My dislike of Bonds isn't his color or that he's playing for SF. I'm not sure why you think the fact he plays for the Giants has anything to do with anything. My dislike of Bonds has everything to do with him about to break the most sacred record in baseball, and perhaps all of sports. THE Home Run Record. The Home Run Record is about to be broken by a guy that's cheated to get there. That's the problem I have with Bonds. Quibble that he would have gotten 500 home runs without steroids, and I'd agree with you. Maybe even 600. But he wouldn't have the record in my opinion without his use of steroids. I'd love to see the home run record won by someone worthy of being on the same mantle that Aaron's held on by most people (granted, there were alot of mixed feelings about him back in the 70's, but I believe time has shown that he is a dignified, classy sportsman who is worthy of being called a sports hero). If that means Pujols some day, great. If it had meant Ken Griffey Jr, that would have been great too. I still truly don't believe race is the issue, at least for me. It's the fact that Bonds cheated to get THE most important record in sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 Tim Lincecum's MLB debut so far: First pitch was a strike. Then two balls. A hit. Another ball to the #2 holer...HR. A two run jack to a guy who hasn't hit one out all year. Shades of Foppert. I think I'm gonna be ill.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald byrd 4 EVA Posted May 7, 2007 Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? Yes. excellent point. myopic east coast sports media Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? Yeah, but he isn't playing for San Francisco....and he's the correct color. Funny, Sosa no doubt used Steriods, but isn't an asshole....is he booed in the AL? I like the fact Sosa has been doing fairly well this year....Bonds, breaking another black man's record pisses me off. Why? Because Hammering Hank Aaron didn't cheat! Oh yeah, and Bonds is a compete jerk. Really? You mean like Wade Boggs cheated on his wife? Better ask a Chicago fan about that one. Sosa had a very unflattering nickname given him by Cubs fans. Corked bats and steroids and he gets a free pass. [Light brown, you see...kinda like a tan you'd get at the beach ]. Tell me....what proof do you have that Aaron didn't use performance enhancing drugs, eh? No proof must mean he was juicing. Being the BEST = Steroids....my newspaper sports reporter pissed at Bonds and in search of a headline told me so. Let's examine the pseudo evidence the sporting jackals of the yellow journalistic Hearst Corporation used to hang Bonds, shall we? Look how big he was compared to his rookie year. And, damn...those biceps. I'll even bet his hat size is bigger now, too. Maybe he has an ex-wife or ex-girlfriend we can ask about some ironclad hearsay regarding some doping charts that may or may not exist. Fair is fair. Ya think? Babe Ruth was a jackass [and he cheated on his wife], too. Drank illegal booze openly during prohibition. Why isn't there an astrisk next to his name? Guess what? So was/is Bob Gibson, Don Drysdale, Billy Martin, Julian Tavarez, Tommy Lasorda, Jeff Kent, Mike Schmidt, Brooks Robinson [racist], Tom Seaver, Earl Weaver, Eric Gagne, Ricky Henderson, Buddy Bell.... I could go ON, Berigan. Seems we are awfully selective as to which ballplayer is an asshole and who isn't. What is with you guys when it comes to kissing everybody's ass? Atletes are paid top play the game between the lines and not to kiss every baby within the entire continental United States, OK? Certainly it shouldn't be contigent upon sucking up to some wet-behind-the-ears reporter who constantly prods Bonds with question of his marital status. I mean, geez. Can we get a break on this "nice guy" bullshit? Edited May 7, 2007 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) What i don't get is everyone thinks Bonds is cheating and everyone here thinks Roger juiced up BUT he gets rewarded with 20 million plus a new hummer accolades from the NY media and fans ..... isn't he a cheater ? Yeah, but he isn't playing for San Francisco....and he's the correct color. I have liked the Giants for years, dating to when I was a child living in California. My son's t-ball team last year was the Giants, and he loves to wear his jersey still, even though he's a "Husker" this year. My dislike of Bonds isn't his color or that he's playing for SF. I'm not sure why you think the fact he plays for the Giants has anything to do with anything. My dislike of Bonds has everything to do with him about to break the most sacred record in baseball, and perhaps all of sports. THE Home Run Record. The Home Run Record is about to be broken by a guy that's cheated to get there. That's the problem I have with Bonds. Quibble that he would have gotten 500 home runs without steroids, and I'd agree with you. Maybe even 600. But he wouldn't have the record in my opinion without his use of steroids. Glad you aren't a racist, Aggie...but I fail to see how you have no problem with Roger Clemens or others like him accused of juicing, but you do have an issue with Bonds. Makes no sense to me. Juice is juice. And if we are going to astrisk Bonds, then we need to do a complete investigation of any ballplayer since steriods were available in the early 1960s. If you're content to damn one, then I say damn them all. I'd love to see the home run record won by someone worthy of being on the same mantle that Aaron's held on by most people (granted, there were alot of mixed feelings about him back in the 70's, but I believe time has shown that he is a dignified, classy sportsman who is worthy of being called a sports hero). If that means Pujols some day, great. If it had meant Ken Griffey Jr, that would have been great too. I still truly don't believe race is the issue, at least for me. It's the fact that Bonds cheated to get THE most important record in sports. Funny you should use the term "mantle." A certain highly touted Mickey Mantle was a falling-down drunkard. But he's in the HOF. Where do you draw the line, then? Which drugs are "OK" to use and which ones are not? Seems to be a fair amount of selective reasoning going on in the sports world of late. I mean...since the Black Babe Ruth in Barry Bonds was unfairly blasted by the headline seeking jackals of the sporting media. Edited May 7, 2007 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted May 7, 2007 Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 Glad you aren't a racist, Aggie...but I fail to see how you have no problem with Roger Clemons or others like him accussed of juicing, but you do have an issue with Bonds. Makes no sense to me. Funny you should use the term "mantle." A certain highly touted Mickey Mantle was a falling-down drunkard. But he's in the HOF. Where do you draw the line, then? Which drugs are "OK" to use and which ones are not? Seems to be a fair amount of selective reasoning going on in the sports world of late. I mean...since the Black Babe Ruth in Barry Bonds was unfairly blasted by the headline seeking jackals of the sporting media. When did I say I didn't have a problem with Clemens? If he's been 'roiding, he's as much of a loser as Bonds is. My comments are about Bonds - if you wish to change the topic to someone else, by all means go ahead. My comments about Bonds still stand. I don't care whether Mantle was a drunk, or whether Ruth was, or anyone else. Alcohol isn't a performance enhancing drug/illegal substance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) Glad you aren't a racist, Aggie...but I fail to see how you have no problem with Roger Clemons or others like him accussed of juicing, but you do have an issue with Bonds. Makes no sense to me. Funny you should use the term "mantle." A certain highly touted Mickey Mantle was a falling-down drunkard. But he's in the HOF. Where do you draw the line, then? Which drugs are "OK" to use and which ones are not? Seems to be a fair amount of selective reasoning going on in the sports world of late. I mean...since the Black Babe Ruth in Barry Bonds was unfairly blasted by the headline seeking jackals of the sporting media. When did I say I didn't have a problem with Clemens? If he's been 'roiding, he's as much of a loser as Bonds is. My comments are about Bonds - if you wish to change the topic to someone else, by all means go ahead. My comments about Bonds still stand. I don't care whether Mantle was a drunk, or whether Ruth was, or anyone else. Alcohol isn't a performance enhancing drug/illegal substance. In Ruth's case it was illegal. OK? Same damn thing Bonds is accused of. So tell me, is cortizone a performance enhancing drug? It kills pain, doesn't it? How about asprin or ibprofren? It stops swelling and makes pain go away. Would allergy meds count? They make it so your eyes don't swell shut and sneezing stops. Ointments, linements, Neosporin, geez...I could go ON. Seems to me, you guys are all wigged out about a drug that builds muscle mass. Nice. Once again for clarity [ready?] muscle mass does not, will not, can not make you hit homeruns. PERIOD. That isn't its purpose. Are we clear on that yet? Edited May 7, 2007 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted May 7, 2007 Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 Once again for clarity [ready?] muscle mass does not, will not, can not make you hit homeruns. PERIOD. That isn't its purpose. Are we clear on that yet? Nope. I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion. I completely disagree with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 Once again for clarity [ready?] muscle mass does not, will not, can not make you hit homeruns. PERIOD. That isn't its purpose. Are we clear on that yet? Nope. I'm not sure how you arrive at that conclusion. I completely disagree with that. Not sure...? But you are sure that steroids do cause a ballplayer to hit HRs? Uh, 'splain please? I have no idea how anyone can claim ballplyers on 'roids automatically hit HRs. There is no evidence to support it, no justifucatioin to balance it. I stand for hard, quantifiable, qualifiable, REAL evidence, Guys. Hearsay, envy, personality conflicts and hatred do not count. Now how 'bout it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted May 7, 2007 Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 Go back and read my (and others') comments in this thread, about why many many people believe increased muscle mass can cause a ball that would otherwise fly only to the warning track to be able to gain additional distance, due to increased power by the hitter. If you don't understand that, then there's no use in further discussing the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) Glad you aren't a racist, Aggie...but I fail to see how you have no problem with Roger Clemons or others like him accussed of juicing, but you do have an issue with Bonds. Makes no sense to me. Funny you should use the term "mantle." A certain highly touted Mickey Mantle was a falling-down drunkard. But he's in the HOF. Where do you draw the line, then? Which drugs are "OK" to use and which ones are not? Seems to be a fair amount of selective reasoning going on in the sports world of late. I mean...since the Black Babe Ruth in Barry Bonds was unfairly blasted by the headline seeking jackals of the sporting media. When did I say I didn't have a problem with Clemens? If he's been 'roiding, he's as much of a loser as Bonds is. My comments are about Bonds - if you wish to change the topic to someone else, by all means go ahead. My comments about Bonds still stand. I don't care whether Mantle was a drunk, or whether Ruth was, or anyone else. Alcohol isn't a performance enhancing drug/illegal substance. My problem is with the absurdly over focused media and the minions who support them relative to Barry Bonds.....and only Bonds. Any example I bring to the discussuion beyond that is to make a certain point regarding the lack of balance as to to who or whom is juicing. No more, no less. Edited May 7, 2007 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.