Every Rose Has Its Thorn

Junior year has been a bear to say the least. A lot has changed since my last few posts, granted they are growing even fewer in number and further in between. I've been named the Sports Editor of my school newspaper, gotten a 220 on the PSAT, decided to go into cardiology, won awards for outstanding mock trial work as an attorney, and begun to question my formerly staunch libertarianism. That being said, I am still a passionate sports fan, and though my time here grows less and less, I appreciate whoever still reads these posts. Here is a persuasive essay--forced to be in the Rogerian format--I have written for my English III class, with a few extra paragraphs split up for ease of reading, which will be followed by an opposing view by the end of the week.

“The man I marvel at is the one that’s in there day after day, and night after night, and still puts figures on the board.  I’m talking about Pete Rose.” 

--Sparky Anderson

    On August 24, 1989, then-MLB commissioner Bart Giamatti delivered an edict that would forever change the face of professional baseball: Pete Rose, manager of the Cincinnati Reds, was forever banned from the game he loved. Baseball’s hit king had been swiftly and unceremoniously dethroned. Gone were the cheers, the certain Hall of Fame induction, and his career, all, of course, for betting on his team to win the games in which it played. Though this was a clear violation of the written rules all players and managers must abide by—as supporters of the punishment often cite---a lifetime ban, especially in light of recent developments, is quite clearly too severe a penalty. The man that played the most games in league history, collected the most hits, a 1900s All-Century selection, two Gold Glove awards, three batting titles, and an MVP award, deserves better. It is time for the ban to be lifted and to release Pete Rose from his prison without bars.  

     Though Rose admittedly did break rules, it is important to note that his gambling never actually affected the outcomes of games, which was the intent behind the rule itself. The stated goal of a manager is, quite obviously, to win games. And considering the fact that Rose almost exclusively bet on the Reds, always to win, he was only providing himself another incentive to do so. There were not instances of point-shaving, spread covering, or game-throwing—such were insults to the man’s competitiveness. His goal was to win every game, every season. Further, the punishments for actually affecting games by means of PEDs, scuffing baseballs, or impeding runners—the largest of which being a 162 game ban held by Alex Rodriguez—pale in comparison to Rose’s which obviously did not affect his managing as it only further incentivized him to perform at  a high level.  "I bet on my team to win every night because I love my team, I believe in my team," Rose said in an interview with ESPN. "I did everything in my power every night to win that game.” Is that not the true meaning of competitive baseball?

     The man has been punished for supporting his team, while others have comparatively walked away unscathed for deliberately affecting games, and many have walked right into the place Rose will never be: The Hall of Fame. The most obvious symbol of Rose’s punishment, the Hall of Fame markets itself as a testament to the history of Major League Baseball. Outside of a performance-based election by either the Veteran’s Committee or the Baseball Writers’ Association of America, there are no real standards for entry. Yet, interestingly, a large majority of the proponents of Rose’s suspension act as though it is a cathedral and that he is stuck at the gates. He is, many claim, morally unfit for the honor. By violating the rules of the game, he knowingly sacrificed his chance at immortality. However, many other players of dubious character have been allowed on the ballot and have actually been enshrined in Cooperstown. 

     To name a few: Ty Cobb was a racist, Don Sutton doctored baseballs, Willie Mays and Hank Aaron used amphetamines, and John McGraw even tripped baserunners while the umpires were distracted. Goose Gossage even wrote a book about his illegal escapades. Further, the Hall already profits from his contributions to the game. There are over twenty pieces of Rose memorabilia in the Hall of Fame. Why they cannot enshrine the man who gave those pieces meaning is beyond comprehension. If the Hall truly serves to memorialize the history of the game, “Charlie Hustle,” a man who has admitted his wrongdoing and repented, deserves to be a part of it. 

     The most obvious contribution Pete Rose made to baseball was his superlative work ethic. Though some believe that by gambling he violated the central tenet of the game, that he sold baseball’s soul for personal gain, it is quite clear that he actually supported it. Rose embodied the ideal competitor. He ran to first base on walks, slid headfirst into bases, and took the competitive spirit and fire the game cherishes to an entirely new level. He never took a play off. He even took an exhibition game—the All-Star game—and turned it into a lesson on hustle, separating catcher Ray Fosse’s left shoulder in a successful effort to win the game for the National League. Winning was all that mattered. And though Rose was not the most gifted hitter, nor the best fielder, nor even the best athlete, he was the best hustler—the central dogma of the sport. Enshrining Rose, or at least lifting his ban, would represent a symbolic return to the fundamental values—grit, competiveness, hustle, and a “win at all costs” attitude—of the sport that supporters of the ban say he somehow violated. It is quite obvious that a league without Rose is a league without its soul. 

     Pete Rose is the victim of an unfortunate double standard. “…to be honest with you, I picked the wrong vice. I should have picked alcohol. I should have picked drugs or I should have picked up beating up my wife or girlfriend because if you do those three, you get a second chance,” he said in an interview. Though tactless, he might be right. Though some believe Rose deserves a ban for violating the rules of the game, such a view is misguided. By supposedly degrading the integrity of the game, Rose brought forth one of its greatest attributes—will to win honestly. He never threw a game. He never artificially boosted his performance with PEDs like Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, or Barry Bonds, all of whom are still in good standing with Major League Baseball. He never deliberately or directly affected the outcomes of games. All he did was be the 28^th greatest hitter in league history. Should he have done any of these despicable actions in place of betting on his own team, ironically, he would have a place in Cooperstown by now.  And that has to change. Let the king return to his throne. 

 

Images retrieved from: realclearsports.com, intoon.com, gifsoup.com, and
latcrossword.blogspot.com

A Pointless Lance

     Cancer. We have all been affected by it in some way, shape, or form. Whether it be through the loss of a loved one as I have, or through the suffering of those inflicted by it, cancer is by far the most researched and prominent disease in our world today. Because of the press and the stories about our own unbearable pain, organizations like the Susan G. Komen and others have poured billions of dollars into research for cures. Celebrities aren't afraid to voice their support either, as stars ranging from actress Christina Applegate to Sharon Osbourne have supported cancer organizations. None the stars however, are as active in campaigning or as polarizing as cyclist Lance Armstrong.

     Armstrong has been the guiding light for cycling for years. Who would be a better representative than a man who only has one testicle? While I say that in jest, Armstrong's story was the perfect one for his sport. The man had testicular cancer that spread to his brain and lungs and still won seven Tours de France. He was Tim Tebow, at least in a come-backy way, before Tebow was even a time of day. The man even appeared on popular children's show Arthur as a character named Vance Legstrong, inspiring a young child to do his best and to have confidence. The man is a good person. At least I hope he is.

     Armstrong has been a leading supporter of cancer research, as was stated above, and has even considered a career in politics to support his cause,, though he ultimately sided against it, fearing, and rightly so, that if he campaigned and was elected as a member of a certain party, he would alienate members of the other, effectively slashing support he would have had as a lobbyist, which he and his Livestrong organization act as. He helped with a proposal, which the state of California is in the process of approving, that would put a $1 tax on tobacco products, the proceeds going towards cancer research, effectively cutting risks for lung cancer while helping find ways to cure the others. His impact on cancer is not what has been questioned as of late, as his record of charitable actions is undeniable. The issue, at least to most of the mainstream media, is that he used performance-enhancing drugs.

     I really don't know if Armstrong did performance-enhancing drugs, nor do I care. All I know is that he never failed a test, and that the allegations against him are from disgruntled teammates and very elaborate as well. That's all that anyone can prove beyond a reasonable doubt as of now. I know what Livestrong has done for the world, and I would still support him if he was proven to to use drugs. What Lance Armstrong has done for cancer patients and the entire world far outweighs any sort of bad. He instilled hope into the hearts of millions. He took cancer, looked it straight in the eye, and gave it a Chuck Norris roundhouse kick to the groin. The greatness he achieved made me believe I could do anything if I put my mind to it, just like Armstrong did. I looked to him for inspiration when I tore my labrums in both of my hips. Well, ripped is an understatement...think shredded, as I couldn't kick a soccer ball without screaming, but I digress. Armstrong's contributions to the medical field and to cycling are undeniable. Hell, if he asked me ten years ago to help him dope to win,  I probably would have done so for the sake of those bed-ridden through the atrocities of cancer like my uncle was. That's not being selfish, that's being selfless. If Armstrong saved one life a day juicing, the whole universe would support him. He has.

Image retrieved from: www.wjla.com

Who Cares?

     Every once in a while, someone, or something, does something so stupid and inconvenient that you cannot even dream up half an idea that could explain why. I have done posts defending such acts, such as the post covering marines overseas, and spoke out against them in a post about the Miami Dolphins. Today, it is much to my chagrin that I have to tell you that it has happened once again. Not surprisingly, the government is to blame. No, this is not a botched military attack or a foreign relations meltdown. This directly affects YOU. That's right...you. The government is taking your hard earned money and using it to prosecute legendary pitcher Roger Clemens.

     Clemens, 49, was the most prominent and unexpected players named in the infamous steroid expose known as the Mitchell Report. Inside the four hundred nine pages were the names of eighty nine players ranging from baseball heavyweights like Barry Bonds and the aforementioned Clemens, to forgotten players like Paul Lo Duca and Mike Stanton (the pitcher, not the Marlins outfielder). Many of the players mentioned have vehemently denied their supposed using of performance enhancing drugs (PEDs), while others have agreed with the findings. However, when called to the stand to testify in a court case, both Bonds and Clemens were asked if they had ever used PEDs, they both responded with a "No." Red flags couldn't have gone up faster. Bonds was widely believed to be doping, as his body, along with his head, kept getting bigger, and bigger, and bigger, and bigger, while certain parts of his body, according to his girlfriend, kept getting smaller and smaller-all symptoms of anabolic steroid use. Clemens, however, had no real evidence supporting the Mitchell Report's claims, except for his trainer and alleged steroid dealer Brian McNamee's word. McNamee had a book coming out, and has recently been accused by Clemens' lawyer of fabricating claims to boost book sales. (Other evidence consisted of a needle and syringe stored and preserved in the sanitary confines of an empty beer can.) If Ryan Braun can get off the hook with a urine sample being held in a refrigerator too long, why didn't Clemens get the same treatment?

     Clemens is being charged in federal court with perjury for stating what I believe is the truth. During his remarkable career, his average fastball velocity never jumped suddenly, nor did his foulball rate, strikeout rate, or walk rate. He was just unhittable. In fact, all of them went down with age. He followed a natural career statistical slide as he aged, his just took a whole lot longer, a fact pointed to many of his accuser. Plus, he never grew bulkier or more muscular as he aged, never needed any bigger helmets or shoes, or smaller....you know.....

     The worst part here is that the government is using YOUR tax money to help finance this trial. It is unfortunate, because, honestly, nobody was physically harmed by Clemens' use or non-use of anabolic steroids. There's nothing at stake besides his legacy as a baseball player. If the United States of America is this worried about whether or not someone used steroids, I can only imagine how much more absurd a larger, and frankly relevant, case would be. In all honesty, I do not think Roger Clemens used PEDs, nor do I care. I care about the useless spending that has now become second nature to our government. I care about the use of our tax dollars to continually charge a man who may not even be guilty in the first place. I care about the degradation of the United States of America.

Images From: www.sportsillustrated.cnn.com