I have deliberately avoided talking about Barry Bonds because I haven’t thought that he deserved noticing. Where there is hype, arguing that it is overhyped just contributes to the hype. Silence is your best weapon. Now, I’m ready to talk about Barry Bonds.
I don’t think he broke the record. He took steroids. They were against the rules. He cheated. You don’t get to cheat at a game and then claim that you won. It’s like the little kid who puts his pieces back on the checkerboard and claims they’ve been there the whole time. He can claim he’s better than you at checkers, but you know the real story.
Bond’s pretenders have a quick reply: “He’s innocent until proven guilty. He’s never tested positive.” Weak. I’ve never seen a videotape of Jeffrey Dahmer killing anyone, but I know that he killed them just the same. Bonds doesn’t get to pick which test proves him guilty. Read the grand jury testimony, look at the evidence, hell, look at his forehead. I don’t need a piss test to be convinced that he’s a cheater.
The Onion, of course, gets it right.
Uh, Dan, steroids were not “against the rules” when Bonds allegedly took them. Against federal law, sure, but major league baseball did not have an anti-steroid policy in place during the time in question. Just wanted to point that out…
Oh Wayne. . . you’re so San Franciscan.
I’m struggling to find a primary source, but I believe that it has long been against the rules for a player to take an illegal substance. I can find a number of secondary references, like this one (http://blogs.chron.com/sportsjustice/archives/2006/03/on_books_bonds.html):
“Commissioner Fay Vincent sent the clubs a memo in 1991 reminding them that players were forbidden from taking any illegal substance. He specifically mention steroids in the memo and encouraged the clubs to take a get-tough policy on players thought to be using steroids.”
It was against the rules. He cheated.