Home Run Derby

David Chalk of Bugs and Cranks and I are engaging in a well intentioned, respectful debate on Barry Bonds, Home Run ball #756 (and its asterisk) and a call to boycott the Baseball Hall of Fame. 

David got the ball rolling with his call for the boycott, which led to my post saying we should boycott Barry Bonds.   After David read my post, he authored another post clarifying his position, stating the real issue here is about injustice.

Well, I thought I could address David’s writing with a simple comment attached to his post, but alas, I have more to say.  

Here is the comment I posted earlier today at Bugs and Cranks …

David,

First, thanks for engaging in the debate. There is nothing more American than two people with opposing views being able to share them in an attempt to better educate the masses, especially about America’s pasttime. With that in mind, since you ask a couple of questions of me, I thought I would try to answer them here instead of another post. If it gets to long, I may end up posting at HRD anyway.

First, the OJ comparison. It wasn’t meant to be spiteful, but more a humorous attempt (albeit in poor taste) of making the point that acquittal doesn’t equate to innocence. No need to delve into OJ anymore than that. I think more telling was my other example to make that point but not quoted here:

“We can even apply this to baseball - Eight players of The “Black Sox” scandal were acquitted of throwing the World Series in 1919, but Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis still banned the players from the game for life”

Second, my point of the presumption of innocence in the United States isn’t quite captured here. My point is it only applies to someone tried in court. It is not a right to afforded all citizens in all aspects of life in the United States. Do me a favor, go take a quick read of the Constitution (the source of our rights). Pay particular attention to Article 4 (the Judiciary) and Amendments 4 (search and seizure), 5 (due process), 6 (criminal prosecutions), 7 (common law suits) and 14 (equal protection) and notice that nowhere does the words “presumption of innocence” appear.

Amendment 6 is especially interesting since it guaratees the right to a speedy trial, a jury, to be charged for specific crimes, to be able to confront one’s accusers, to be able to call one’s own witnesses and to have counsel. But nowhere does it talk about the presumption of innocence.

My point was this. When you say “This is The United States Of America. Baseball is the National Pastime of The United States Of America. If a man declares his innocence, he is considered innocent until he is proven guilty”, I think you imply that considering him guilty is somehow un-American. I think your application of the presumption of innocence is misguided.

And since were on the point of innocence, it is time we stop the fairy tale that Barry may never have used steriods. Barry, in his testimony to the Grand Jury, stated he used the cream and the clear, although he didn’t think they were steroids. So at best he was duped into using steriods, but he was a user nonetheless.

Ugggh, this is already too long. Going to have to post it and continue at homerderby.com. Sorry, sometime I get on a roll and won’t shut up. Here are the other topics, I will bring up:
- separating race from baseball and you question for clarification of what I mean.
- Marc Ecko and what I percieve to be a double standard you have for him
- Barry Bonds, his record, his steroid use and his standing in public have nothing to do with INJUSTICE.
- Any other tangent that crosses my mind.

Thanks again for your thoughtful comments. I admire your passion.

So let me continue. 

David, you say:

“…I don’t understand how you can divide race and baseball.  I don’t know how to read Nick here — is he agreeing with TSF that Eckho has betrayed hip hop, betrayed black and urban communities by his attack on Barry? If you see that, how is that not connected to baseball?”

I may have over-simplified my writing to speak of separating race from baseball.  I am sure there are many Barry Bonds’ haters out there that speak ill of him because he is black.  Had Mark McGwire broken Hank Aaron’s record while using steriods, maybe the country would have treated him differently, I don’t know. 

Not being a black man, my understanding of race issues is different than that of someone in the “urban,” “hip hop,” and/or “black” communities.  Some people may feel betrayed by Marc Ecko.  I just think he is a stupid business man.  Why alienate a portion of your consumer market to make a statement on baseball?  Doesn’t make sense to me. 

My point was, boycotting him for race issues might make sense for people who feel betrayed by him, but boycotting him because he branded a baseball doesn’t seem to be relevant. 

While we are on the topic of Marc Ecko, I want to point out a bit of double standard you have here.  Back on October 3rd, you wrote a post on the results of Ecko’s internet vote called “On Bonds, Branding and Democracy.”  In it you wrote:

“Barry is a human being and deserves to be treated with a modicum of respect.”

The point that I get from that is while Barry is controversial and standoffish, he shouldn’t be the target of the hate he receives and should be treated with a reasonable amount of respect.  Why does that apply to Barry and not Marc Ecko?  Doesn’t your intentional misspelling of his name throughout your posts (among other things) reek of disrespect?  Marc Ecko may be an attention whore and an egomaniac, but he is still a human being. 

The answer here is that respect needs to be earned, not given by entitlement.   Barry Bonds has earned your respect but Marc Ecko hasn’t.  That’s your business and decision to make.  I have little respect for either Bonds or Ecko based on their actions.  I think it’s important to not have a double standard here.

As for the premise that the HoF is “making history” by displaying the branded ball, I have to reject that.  The controversy surrounding Barry Bonds is well documented and has been part of the public consciousness for sometime now.  It is part of the historical record.  The HoF can control one thing and one thing only.  Whether or not the ball is displayed. 

What Marc Ecko does is under his control only and there is nothing the HoF is doing that is complicit with his actions.  They would display the ball however they got it.  In fact, they prefer to have it un-altered.  But it isn’t within their control.  Ecko will brand it regardless if it goes on display.

My feelings on displaying the ball and its history are based on the following belief I have attained in my 36+ years on this planet.  I would rather see, read and experience all that history has to offer and interpret it for myself, than to have someone else determine what is right for me to see and make an interpretation based on a filtered set of information.

To their credit, the Hall of Fame isn’t merely putting the branded ball on display.  They are including the story behind the ball and why it’s in its current condition.  Presenting all of the circumstances and allowing the public to interpret them as they see fit. 

Finally, the injustice argument is a non-starter for me.  I don’t believe that it is an injustice that Barry Bonds holds the All-time Home Run record.  I think his treatment by public in general is warranted because he brings most of it on himself.  That is NOT to say the hateful, bigoted, threatening actions of the radical anti-Barry camp is warranted.  To me, they are far worse an issue that Barry being the Home Run King. 

My problem with Barry is that he continues to deny his role in an issue that has dramatically altered the identity of my favorite sport. 

His actions continue to encourage cheating in a sport that I hope to teach my kids as they grow older.  

He continues to lie about his use of steroids, yet there is a portion of the population who treats him as a hero.  Barry is OK with the hero treatment, but doesn’t care to have anyone criticize him. 

My issue with Barry isn’t a percieved injustice, it’s his integrity, or better put, his lack of integrity.  At least Marion Jones was “man” enough to finally admit what she had done and returned her gold medals.  With that act she was able to restore at least of shred of integrity in her world. 

Barry, as long as he continues to deny his use of performance enhancing drugs, has none.  I can’t root for someone who has no integrity, nor can I understand why anyone would. 

 UPDATE:  Steve over at Bugs has a new rebuttal, check it out.  I have posted a lengthy comment over there, instead perptuating a never ending thread of posts between our sites.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 6th, 2007 at 12:54 pm and is filed under Barry Bonds, BlogThink, Giants, Milestone Home Runs, Stats, Steroids. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.