There's been a book written that goes into detail about alleged steroid use by Barry Bonds from 1998, and for at least five years afterward.
Those who are paid to say things about these types of events are saying that it is now harder than ever for Bonds to deny steroid use (see Ken Rosenthal's response to the book).
Those who are not paid to say things about these types of events, like me, say...that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
Why is it harder? Nothing has changed. It's simply another accusation, and it's not even really a new one -- the two gentleman who wrote the book are San Francisco Chronicle reporters. Yes, reporters of the same newspaper that leaked Bonds' grand jury testimony, and the same newspaper that has been finding bits of circumstantial evidence for years now.
So, again, why is it harder?
I suppose it could get even harder to deny if some guy from Idaho comes out and testifies that on April 28th, 2002, he saw Bonds using the cream and the clear while sucking on a lollipop and playing Super Mario Bros. on the Gameboy in downtown Sausalito. I mean, that's about as much new proof as this book provides, coming from the source that it does -- which, essentially, is the San Francicsco Chronicle.
The story will sweep the nation, just as it shouldn't. There isn't anything new here -- most of the nation believes he took steroids, so is this book supposed to make those people believe even more than they already do?
No, I bet that many think this book might sway people like myself, who suspect Bonds of steroid use, but simply refuse to raise allegations on something that I cannot verify for myself. And, furthermore, people who would rather see concrete proof (like say, a failed drug test or some DNA samples) before grabbing my torch and noose.
And now, Bonds will have 10 times the steroids questions and probes to deal with, though all those asking the questions and doing the probing should know that he'll keep denying it. He hasn't a choice, now, whether he's lying or not, so why ask? Why not wait for concrete proof, which I guarantee that gobs of people are working to get?
But no, instead we'll have this farce continue -- Bonds being tried in a court of public opinion that has already deemed him guilty, yet doesn't seem to get tired of "new" allegations and "proof" that Bonds has done something that most folks are sure he's done anyway.
The merry-go-round goes 'round, and we just keep hopping on thinking it'll take us somewhere new and interesting.
Mr. Rosenthal says he "can't wait" to hear what Bonds will say. Personally, I can't wait to hear people like Rosenthal say exactly what I know they'll say after they hear exactly what they should know Bonds will say. Nothing more entertaining than getting exactly what you think you'll get. It's the spice of life, I tell ya.