(In addition to appearing at The Captain’s Blog, this post is also being syndicated at TheYankeeAnalysts.)
Collateral damage is the “unintended or incidental” consequence of an action. Although unfortunate, collateral damage is usually considered to be a necessary evil required to achieve an objective. Almost 600 years ago, an Italian scholar named Machiavelli articulated a philosophy centered on this phenomenon. In a nutshell, “the end justifies the means”.
This morning, Barry Bonds walked into a federal courthouse in San Francisco to answer charges that he lied during testimony to a grand jury investigating the BALCO scandal that uncovered systemic use of performance enhancing drugs throughout the world of sports. In the seven-plus years since Bonds first testified that he did not knowingly take steroids, the U.S. government has pushed the limits of Machiavelli’s axiom in an attempt to prove their case. Meanwhile, the mainstream media, acting as a self appointed custodian of the game’s morality, has engaged in similar tactics, convicting countless players of a variety of transgressions without anything more than the slightest circumstantial evidence.
The merits of the government’s case against Bonds are open to debate, but the amount of money spent and tactics used to compile evidence make it hard to believe the ultimate goal is justice. And, if it is, what price is being paid to attain it?
There’s no arguing against the importance of upholding the sanctity of the criminal justice system by prosecuting cases of perjury, but that doesn’t mean the end justifies the means. The hypocrisy employed by the government is best illustrated by the many leaks that have emanated from the federal prosecutor’s office. Just as witnesses have an obligation to tell the truth, the government has an obligation to protect the privacy of testimony. To date, there have been no charges filed to uphold that sanctity of that confidentiality.
As shameful as the government’s conduct has been, the sports media’s actions have been even worse. For them, Bonds hasn’t been a means. He has been the end, and the damage done to countless others has been the collateral damage.
From little-league teams all the way up to college and professional ranks, the breakfast of champions these days is likely to be some drug: upper, downer, painkiller, muscle-builder. The genie of the pill bottle threatens both athletes and athletics.” – Jack Scott, director of the Institute of for the Study of Sport and Society, The New York Times, October 17, 1971
Contrary to what many would like to believe, steroids are not a modern creation. The documented usage of performance enhancing substances predates Barry Bonds’ prolific homerun spree by decades. Only after Bonds name surfaced amid allegations, however, did moral outrage ensue.
Most other sports have handled steroid issues without much fanfare. The NFL, for example, had a rampant problem in the 1970s that it eventually (allegedly) brought under control without the fire and brimstone that baseball has had to endure. Of course, if not for Bonds, it may have also been possible for baseball to escape without the level of scrutiny it eventually received.
When Thomas Boswell wrote about suspected steroid use by Jose Canseco before the 1988 World Series, it was largely dismissed. When a bottle of Andro was discovered in Mark McGwire’s locker, the reporter who broke the story was vilified. Even after Tom Verducci blew the cover off the pervasive use and tacit acceptance of performance enhancing drugs in baseball, there was very little groundswell for a moral crusade. However, once the rumors that began to swirl around Bonds were seemingly confirmed by the initial findings in the BALCO investigation, the pitchforks came out in full force. It wasn’t steroid use that was so abhorrent. It was Barry Bonds.
Bonds was never a popular player among the media. To say that the slugger distrusted the press would be an understatement. Throughout his career, he refused to pay deference to those holding tape recorders, so a natural level of mutual contempt arose between the two parties. As long as he was hitting homeruns and establishing his legacy as one of the greatest players in the game, Bonds could get away with treating the media with disdain. When the steroid allegations arose, however, the media finally had the ammunition needed to go on the offensive. The result was a relentless onslaught that sought to destroy Bonds’ reputation and anyone else’s who got in the way.
Getting Barry Bonds spawned a cottage industry of “gotcha journalism” disguised as investigative reporting. Meanwhile, major league baseball, under pressure from the U.S. Congress, created its own collateral damage with the misguided creation of Mitchell Report. Now, after essentially being blacklisted from the game and having various indictments hang over his head for three years, Bonds finally gets the chance to defend himself. Ironically, however, no one seems to carry anymore. And, why should they? Bonds’ reputation has already been destroyed. The mission has been accomplished. The end justifies the means.
Well said William. A modern day Witch hunt if ever there was one. And just as a coincidence, happening to a Black man. What really pisses me off is how ownership and management came out of this unscathed. And then the santimonious ‘reporters’ who turned their backs on the issue when it was happening, and then came out in force once the issue was outted.
I think Bonds purposely did PEDs.
I think his stats have to take a huge hit.
But what an awesome player.
Watching the games, going for #70 and #71 was amazing.
They would not pitch to him.
He may have seen 2 or 3 strikes in an entire game.
But when they threw him one, he put it in the stands.
It was as close to Superhuman as I have even seen.
I am probably in the minority, but I am not completely convinced as to the extent of Bonds complicity with regard to PED use. Regardless of how one feels about that, however, I really doubt whether the issue would have exploded like it did if Bonds’ name had not been involved. It’s almost like all of the overzealousness since then is really about justifying the villification of Bonds.
I don’t know if the ends justify the means, but I will say that Bonds and his chemical co. have made me love the game of baseball less, and I don’t think that I will ever get that bad. I will never forgive them—any of them— for that.
That’s a fair viewpoint, but not one I share. In the whole scheme of baseball history, steroid use really is a major transgression. To love baseball (or anything for that matter) is to accept that it is flawed. I look at PEDs as a relatively minor issue (partly because I seriously doubt their impact on performance and appreciate that their use was tacitly accepted) that has had no direct impact on my relationship with the game.
Having said that, I don’t begrudge anyone for being a steroid vigilante. I just find it curious that much of the ire seemed to originate around the time Bonds was implicated.
It is curious, but not that curious, at least as I see it. As I have argued before, folks got the most worked up when the biggie—the granddaddy record of them all, career HRs—came under threat.
Now, what is perhaps a more intriguing question is why career HRs has been such a revered record, as opposed to any other career (or single season) mark.
Do you really think the career HR record is that much more revered than the single season? I am not so sure. When McGwire broke that one, there wasn’t any outcry despite the Andro revelations. When it became Bonds turn, however, the attitude changed.
I am not trying to paint this as a racial issue (although there may be some undertones). I just really think so much of the uproar was fueled by the wide dislike of Bonds throughtout the media.
As for why HRs resonate, that’s a good question. Maybe its because they are so closely linked to the Babe, who firmly established baseball’s mythical hold on the culture.
Yes, I do think that the career HR record was (is?) more revered than the single season record, partly (and I am winging it here) because the single season record was already viewed as somewhat tainted due to the longer season. Moreover, once Mac and Sosa broke the record in the same season, then Sosa exceeded 60 multiple times, gaudy single season marks became boring. Bonds hit 74? Yawn.
But the career mark remained elusive—all of the suspected juicers assaulted 500 and 600, but sooner or later they fell short. Moreover, the 700 club was the domain of the Babe (as you note) and Aaron, a man universally respected (now) for his dignity and excellence. That a collection of juicers would potentially displace these two created, I think, a lot more furor.
Then add to that the intense dislike of Bonds as an individual (as you note rightly, again), it was even worse.
I think that it would have been a far different scenario had, say Junior Griffey, stayed healthier and managed at the tail end of a long and “normal” career (i.e., no 70 HR seasons at age 38 or whatever) managed to just slip past Aaron.
[…] in the BALCO scandal, one wonders if the moral outrage over steroid use in baseball would have been so vocal? That’s all water on the bridge now, but in the process, several other great players have been […]