Thursday, March 1, 2007

Drugs In Sports - Reality vs. Perception...

Once again, the steroid use has reared its ugly head in the world of sports. This week, according to ESPN, an illicit steroid distribution network, which may be responsible for Internet sales of performance-enhancing drugs nationwide, has been targeted by an upstate New York prosecutor and customers include current Angels outfielder Gary Matthews Jr. former player Jose Canseco, and former heavyweight boxing Champion Evander Holyfield.

In my heart of hearts, If baseball, much less any other sport wanted to stop illicit use of drugs, then Bug Selig and others in position of authority would have the gumption to style the drug testing program held by the Olympics. The World Anti-Doping Agency has railed against baseball’s testing, and I agree with their standpoint. If baseball really wanted to stop the illegal drug use once and for all, they would not curb into the Players’ Association and just add testing for HGH and whatever else.

Someone remind me, how long has the will to win at any cost been in place?

Um, since the beginning of time.

However, if a system is not in place to stop drug use, then why would one stop doing so?

The answer is simple: Money and power. Now, if fans were really that upset over drug use, they'd stay away and demand changes to occur. We still pay X amounts of dollars to see our heroes play & we’ll go to the ends of the earth to get an autograph and get close to our favorite athletes. In addition, entertainment is king.

Human beings will do they need to get ahead, and athletes are no exception. Cheating has been going on since the beginning of time and we live in a culture that actually rewards infamy.

We are all that surprised that cheating still goes on, and is widely accepted?

To be quite honest, a friend and fellow blogger told harked back to when Charles Barkley asserted, “athletes are not role models, parents should be”.

I have now stopped looking at athletes are role models as heroes or icons, & instead I look at them as entertainers. I see athletes today like wrestlers, who have a persona that may or may not be real, but I look at them as what they are – human beings paid to play a kid’s sport and do it the best they can.

However, why does the media seem to focus a lot of scorn and dismay at the hierarchy of baseball, rather than at football or the NHL, which would seem to rely a lot more on power and sheer physical movement, than baseball which seems to be a lot more anaerobic and less active (dependant on position)?

Unlike other sports, baseball’s history is marketed as much as it’s present. I’d venture to say basketball, hockey and football (to a much lesser degree) market their sports’ nostalgia in order keep people in tune with the game. Simply, because of the hallowed records in baseball are so revered, a lot of fans are repulsed by the fact an alleged cheater could threaten a record, whether they are or are not guilty. As baseball seemingly allowed players to cheat and use drugs before 2002, football already had a testing program in place since 1989, although like baseball it does not test for HGH or human growth hormone.

In the case of the public, perception is reality. Football seemed to put the brakes of steroid use, baseball allowed it to go on and on.

Many don’t see basketball as a power sport, and hockey is not on the radar. The only two sports that get scrutinized as much as baseball are track and field and cycling.

To be honest, does anyone care about track and field along with cycling except during the Olympics and the Tour de France? Does anyone get on Lance Armstrong for winning 7 straight Tour de Frances, although there having been allegations of him in the media doping? Again, I believe baseball is target of the media, not because of the reality of drugs in sport, but because due to a history of inactivity & the perception that baseball did nothing to stop a train running off the tracks, and now hallowed records are in danger of being broken.

Athletes in the world of all sports use steroids because they work. Steroids helps to build muscle strength, recover from workouts quicker and other benefits; however, the dangers of drug abuse cannot be understated and they range from baldness, infertility, to heart problems and cancer.

If you got offered X millions for your abilities and could secure your life, your family’s financial future, and possibly for generations, would you or would you not indulge in drug use? This is the ethical question that many struggle with.

I’d love for sports to be clean, and for every athlete to have the social consciousness of a Muhammad Ali or a Carlos Delgado, but the money involved and the adulation is just too much for one to resist heading to the dark side.

To be honest, I don’t care anymore – it’s just entertainment. I mean it’s not like people have stopped going to ball games or still participate in the sport.

When we stop having a Pollyannaish view of athletes, we can further understand the drug debate and why humans give into temptation.

5 comments:

Signal to Noise said...

Baseball is especially guilty not only because of history, but because it is intellectualized and romanticized to an extent way beyond most other professional sports -- the people who write about this take the tarnishing of their game as a personal affront.

susan said...

Thanks for your work, but there isn't a more scandal-ridden outfit than WADA. The 'global' scene in sports is all back-room payoffs, also a matter of public record. You may not wish these things to be so, but they are. Finally, Carlos Delgado's action to which you refer wasn't one of social consciousness, or conscience. He can have whatever opinion he wants, but the eyes and ears on him on a Mets field have paid to see a ballplayer on a team. He was simply rude and discourteous to misuse the venue for his 'social' statement. The same would be true of this type of action at any entertainment venue. There's something called limits--persons like yourself who are all "heart" think the idea of that is horrible. Limits are quite necessary, as you'll learn some day.

Unknown said...

Ms. Mullen,

Thanks for your opinion - I appreciate your opinion about the issue. I'll agree to disagree with you on some points, but I very much respect what you wrote.

I never said WADA was wonderful or such; however, the point was I trying to make was if MLB was serious, they would adopt a standard that meets or exceeds WADA so that fans could feel the sport could be as clean as it could be (though the cheaters will always be one step ahead.)

About Delgado - you have a point. A sports venue should be one where sport takes precedence, not personal or political opinions; however, I respect he took a stand in what he believed in and expressed it.

No matter what we think, at least in America, he would not face the ultimate penalty unlike in some places.

About "limits", you are right - but I also think it takes an even braver person to go against the fold.

Maybe my mentality my be based on youth, my background, or perhaps my idealism, but I respect and appreciate athletes who take a social stand, whether we may agree with it or not.

Anonymous said...

Way to go MOF. Nice post and response to previous comment.

I agree that perception is just about everything. I believe that about %1 of NFL players test positive for steriods. Do you believe that number is correct? Me neither. Although I'm sure that most have moved on to HGH some time ago.

Part of the reason baseball is seemingly treated so much harder in the media when it comes to PED's is because the writers feel as though they did not do their job very well back in 98 with McGwire and Sosa and they are trying to make up for that.

It's almost comical how the story dealing with the Steeler physician buying $150,000 worth of HGH is being relatively ignored....

idunno

Anonymous said...

I've been writing about last week's events on my Angels minor league blog at http://futureangels.mlblogs.com/.

It seems that a lot of this ties back circumstantially to the Orioles in the time around 2002-2004. Specifically, David Segui.

Matthews and Jerry Hairston were on the Orioles at that time, and so was Jason Grimsley. Segui admitted last July he was the one who directed Grimsley to a doctor where Grimsley could "legally" obtain HGH with a prescription.

Since I'm not all that familiar with the Orioles organization, especially at that time, I'm curious what is your take about Segui's possible involvement with all this.

That said, so far there's no evidence that Matthews did anything illegal. HGH, specifically Genotropin, wasn't banned by MLB in 2004. Reportedly Matthews had a prescription when the substance was shipped.

Nor is there any evidence that the Genotropin suddenly turned him into a more productive player. Genotropin seems to have been used more for accelerating recovery from muscle injury. Matthews was suffering from a hip injury at the time, and eventually was taken out of the lineup for the rest of the year.

Segui told ESPN that he recommended HGH to Grimsley, who was about to get Tommy John surgery, as it would supposedly help him heal quicker.

Feel free to go read the details at my blog, but your input on that moment in Orioles history would be appreciated.

Proud Partner: Ticket Network

We have top views at Orioles, games, plus a loaded NFL, schedule. Check these tix to Dallas Cowboys, Pittsburgh Steelers, Atlanta Falcons, New England Patriots and Denver Broncos.

Proud Partner - Crisp Ads

CrispAds Blog Ads