I love the game of baseball. I have been playing since I could barely walk, and possibly my favorite thing to do in the entire world is to pitch a baseball game. As I have watched the game evolve throughout my childhood and teenage years, the use of steroids has tarnished the reputation of the game that I love. Playing on team after team, I had the values of integrity and respect for the game instilled in me. The use and abuse of steroids by professional players directly contradicts the very nature of America’s pastime. With this said, the issue at hand is if these players who have either been proven, admitted to, or suspected of using performance enhancing drugs should be eligible for hall of fame induction. I believe that such players have undermined the true spirit of the game, broken an inherent promise to the game of baseball and therefore should not be considered for enshrinement in baseball history. However, having played the game I realize the level of difficulty that playing professionally entails and therefore have extreme respect and admiration for the accomplishments of some of these men. In light of their extreme talent, and impact on the game of baseball I would agree however, that some of these players may deserve a second chance when considering hall of fame induction.
Some say that arguably hardest thing to do in all of sports is hit a baseball. Even though I may be slightly biased, I agree with this statement. Therefore I do understand when people argue that even though some of these players used steroids, they should still be considered for the Hall of Fame. Even though a player such as Barry Bonds may have used steroids, he still possessed the hand-eye coordination to blast 762 baseballs out of the park over his illustrious career (“Major League Baseball”). While these drugs may have made him stronger, there are plenty of Venice Beach juiceheads that could not hit a baseball if their life depended on it (Tobin). Strength plays s role, but skill plays a larger one. It is this fact that I find it hard to dismiss when thinking about these players; they are undoubtedly and irrefutably extremely skilled. Should their use of steroids be overlooked because of their exceptional talent? It is a valid point that must be considered. To consistently perform successfully at the highest level of competition is an accomplishment that deserves recognition regardless of what the athlete has put into their body.
Even though many of these athletes are exceedingly talented, I argue their personal decision to use steroids puts them in another category. They cheated, and they should be punished. The current MLB steroid policy states that players will be suspended 50 games for one positive test, and 100 games for a second. A third positive test results in a lifetime ban from the game. The original policy, which was in effect during the “steroid era” (1990’s-early 200’s), established penalties of a 10-game suspension for a first failed test, 30 games for a second, 60 games for a third, one year for a fourth, and a fifth positive test would be up to the commissioners discretion (“Major League Baseball”). While the current restrictions more harshly discourage steroid use, these players still put banned substances into their bodies. Some of these athletes claim that these supplements were ingested unknowingly, but this is just a petty excuse. Any professional athlete should have, and would have full knowledge of what materials were going into their body. A study by the Physics Department at Tufts University also shed some light on the steroid issue. They found that a slight increase in bat speed due to increased physical strength from steroid use could result in 50%-100% more home runs (Tobin). This is an alarming statistic that just goes to show how potentially unfair steroid use can be. It is cheating. After all, this is their job and how they support their families. Why would they want to undermine their livelihood?
Also, I think that another factor in many players steroid use stemmed from a financial viewpoint. If they perform better, they receive more money. And to perform better they must use steroids (Hill, par 5). Roger Clemens, one of the greatest pitchers of all time, made 119 million dollars throughout his career, and made 53 million of them in his final five years of playing. Consequently this is right during the time period that he is alleged to have used steroids (Hill, par 6). Another example is Barry Bonds, who made $115 million of his total $187 million over the last seven years of his career—right when his connection to steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs was the strongest (Hill, par 7). This is an unfair and selfish attitude to have, and disrespects all the players who play the game cleanly, fairly, and strive to be the best they can be without the help of modern day medicine. I believe that steroids have helped to boost the salaries of professional athletes to the astronomical figures that are exhibited today. The bottom line is that even though these are extremely talented human beings, they made the choice to unfairly get the upper hand, and take their game to the next level artificially. Not through hard work, determination, and pure skill like their predecessors to the HOF.
While the two sides do have different opinions they also overlap, creating an interesting conundrum. As stated above, these athletes are the best of the best; the cream of the crop. They are able to do something, that only a tiny, itsy, bitsy fraction of the world’s population can achieve. This does deserve some sort of recognition even if they made the wrong decision to use steroids. People make mistakes, is this one simply to large to forgive? Some players have come out publically and admitted their steroid use and apologized to fans, fellow players and the game itself. These men arguably deserve more respect than players who continue to deny use. Also, both viewpoints would agree that the Hall of Fame immortalizes players into the game’s storied history. It is a greatly respected, and sought after accomplishment that represents a player’s commitment and dedication to the game. It is a place for the best of the best and only the truly deserving should be inducted. But should steroid use be grounds for exclusion?
While using steroids is cheating and banned by MLB, I think that a compromise is necessary to address this issue. The current MLB steroid policy should be enforced with full effect, no questions asked. Current players need to have learned that these actions are unacceptable, and that nothing of the sort will be accepted in the future. Steroids are intolerable, and people who use them will be punished.
As for past players, who played when regulations were more lax, I suggest that a situational approach is necessary. Players like these should be considered on a case-by-case basis, and there should be an overarching committee that either deems them eligible or ineligible for consideration into the HOF. Perfect instances are players like Alex Rodriguez and Andy Pettite who have admitted their drug use, and are sorry for what they have done (Hill, par 8). They knew they were wrong, apologized to the public, and gained back a lot of the respect that they could have lost by not admitting or denying their use. They should be looked at in a different light than somebody like Barry Bonds, who has been accused of steroid use multiple times but continues to deny it.
Furthermore there are rare situations where it may be true that a player was given and unknowingly took a supplement, or was prescribed drugs by a doctor that contained banned substances leading to their positive test result. While cases like this are rare, they can happen and it would be unfair to punish a talented player for something that truly wasn’t their fault. Also, I believe that all players should be considered innocent until proven guilty. Just because a player has been suspected of using performance-enhancing drugs, doesn’t automatically cast them out of running for the Hall. Exclusion from the ballot must be based on hard evidence that undoubtedly depicts the player as a user.
In conclusion, players are voted into the HOF based on the following criteria: ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contribution to the team or teams on which they played or to baseball in general (“Major League Baseball”). The use of steroids directly undermines some of these very qualities that Hall of Fame players are supposed to epitomize. As a result, I believe that these players should not be considered for the HOF. However, I am willing to compromise, and examine players on a case by case because of their exceptional talent, contributions to the game, and hard work and honesty regardless of whether they decided to use steroids or not.
Works Cited
Hill, Jemele. “Do Steroid Era Players Value the HOF?” ESPN.com. (28 Mar 2011). 28 Mar 2011.
“Major League Baseball.” WikipediaOnline. (25 Mar 2011). 27 Mar. 2011.
Tobin, R.G. “On the potential of a chemical Bonds: Possible effects of steroids on home run production in baseball.” American Journal of Physics. January 2008. Volume 76, Issue 1.
No comments:
Post a Comment