Tuesday, March 07, 2006

Shocking...or, absolutely expected

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.



Anonymous said...

A Sports Trainer being interviewed on an LA Sports Radio Station..was asked what was the over/under on Bond's Life Expectancy. He said, "14 years..but since i'"m a Dodger fan I hope its alot sooner."

Ed said...

Unless the SF Chronicle is part of the grand jury, they did not leak the testimony, someone leaked the testimony to them and they reported it. Leaking the testimony is illegal but reporting the leak is (apparently) not illegal. Happens quite often, it is nothing unique to this Bonds/Chronicle instance.

You seem to be implying the Chronicle is after Bonds. I think they are just digging for a story to sell, have the resources to do the digging, and found a story. Like any other big business involved with journalism.

Contrary to you, I think the book will be interesting and shed credible light in at least a few areas:

-Bonds made himself very knowledgable about performance enhancing products, contrary to playing dumb "I thought it was flax-seed oil".

-The Giants had strong enough suspicions that they did some background checks, confirmed a lot of what they suspected, but then chose to back off.

-The idea that Bonds got involved with steroids because of his jealousy of McGuire and disgust that a white guy was breaking the homerun record. That's a different guy than the one who is always saying "I'm just here to win. All I care about is winning a championship."

Perhaps this is too personal a question - Have you ever had yourself tested for steroids? Why or why not?

Daniel said...


I in no way think the Chronicle, as an entity, is after Bonds. However, I do think that there is only so much "new" that could come from this book, seeing as how its writers are from the same newspaper that has been breaking stories about Bonds for the last couple/few years.

And as far as the leak goes...obviously there was someone who initially "leaked" the story to the Chronicle, but reporting the story is continuing the "leak" -- had the Chronicle decided not to report it, it would've stopped where it was. Instead, the story was reported...so I count the Chronicle as part of the leak.

Not that I would have expected them not to report it -- it is their jobs, after all -- but if the media weren't so willing to report these things, the impetus for someone leaking information wouldn't be there, would it?

So, forgive me a bit if I see the Chronicle as linked irrevocably to this process. However, I would not even try to support an argument that the Chron is after Bonds -- they're just following the trail of bread crumbs. No, it's only about half the nation that's after Bonds.

Anonymous said...

I think I speak for most baseball fans not drinking the Orange and Black Kool-Aid..when I say that either Bonds should make good on his promise and jump off the bridge...or end up in jail getting assfucked by illegal Mexicans every night.

Ed said...

Excellent! Well articulated and argued points there, Anonymous. Oh yeah, you too Anonymous.

Daniel said...

And should "Anonymous" strike once more, that will end the era of anonymous comments.

I really try to leave things as free as possible, but there's always a lurking moron ready to spoil it for everyone else.

bacci40 said...


these guys use quotes from kimberly bell....

that is good journalism?

I think not

Anonymous said...

Does that mean I'm not invited to the "Lets Bash the Fat White Man Party"..when Barroid breaks Ruth's record..if he does break the record?

Anonymous said...

Daniel, I'm ready to register for the site whenever you are ready to require it.


Daniel said...

Don't worry about it, BB. You know you're welcome here.