Remember me

Ryan Braun, Steroids, Grendel

December 13, 2011
 
Grant Brisbee of SB Nation, writing about Ryan Braun’s failed substance test last week, made a point about the steroid era that was both incredibly insightful and, in retrospect, staggeringly obvious:
 
[I]t's still premature to turn this into a What Braun Did sermon. But the one thing the Braun story makes you remember, even before you know all of the details of this specific case, is that this crap will never, ever, ever, ever go away. Never. It's here. Forever.
 
This is, methinks, the most cogent comment about the steroid era that I’ve read in a long, long time.
 
*          *          *
 
There are two chief responses to the use of PED’s in baseball, two ‘sides’ that people fall within.
 
On one side, you have what I’d call the ‘angry villagers.’ These are individuals who want to eradicate steroids in baseball; folks who tar-and-feather anyone who looks like they might be a user. They are chasers of monsters in the night, armed with pitchforks and burning torches.
 
On the other side, you have the ‘peaceniks’: individuals who oppose conflict of any kind. These are folks who beg for ‘compromise’ whenever a debate get heated. These guys would’ve been Loyalists during the Revolutionary War; they consider Chamberlain’s plan of appeasement to be sound political strategy.
 
It is very obvious who is winning this debate: the angry villagers are winning. Frankly, they’re kicking Neville’s skinny arse. The angry villagers have prompted Senators to debate steroids on the floor of the U.S. Senate; they have random, aggressive drug tests signed off in the new labor agreement; they managed to keep Jeff Bagwell out of the Hall of Fame. They’ve chased off Dr. Frankenstein’s monster,  they’ve nailed Grendel’s arm to the lodge, and now they’re out hunting for his mother.
 
I am not opposed to this, generally. The whole steroid thing in baseball was getting insanelyout-of-hand, and it is a significant positive that major league baseball took action to punish users and limit steroids from the game.
 
I think, too, that a lot of credit for these changes goes to the angry villagers, the people who weren’t content to bury their heads in the sand every time Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa contorted their weird bodies to hit a home run. Left to its own devices, I think major league baseball would’ve turned a blind eye on the rampant use of steroids for as long as possible, as long as it was turning over profits. The angry villagers didn’t accept this: they didn’t like the falseness of what baseball was becoming. They didn’t like that players were ignoring even the notion of fair play.

I think it is to all of our benefit that the angry villagers won...their argument is a valid one, and they’ve made the game better. Kudos to them.
 
But…it’s time to back off, villagers. It’s time to put the pitchforks away, and disperse the mob.
 
Because Grant Brisbee is right: you can’t chase away all of the monsters. You can’t exterminate PED’s; you can’t have a perfectly clean game. It’s an impossible goal, as impossible in its way as our country’s ‘war on terror.’
 
Baseball before 1992 still had its monsters: it is difficult to see how steroids are drastically different than the ubiquitous use of amphetamines in the 1960’s and 1970's. And baseball of the future will have many more monsters: if we are troubled by anabolic steroids and human growth hormone, what do we make of Bartolo Colon using stem cells to fix his damaged arm?
 
*          *          *
 
What am I saying? What’s the point, Fleming?
 
Three points:
 
1) The anger and passion that led to productive, useful changes in baseball over the last decade is now significantly less useful than it was. A lot has been accomplished, but we’re screaming at shadows, now. We need to let up a bit.
 
2) We need to recognize that there is no end to this battle. Steroids are an example of a significantly larger fight, which is the fight between our want for an even playing field in sports, and the many medical and biochemical advances that are coming down the pipeline. That isn’t going to change.
 
3) We need to have a reasonable discussion about all of this, one that does not start with angry villagers gathering up farm tools. We need have a discussion that is not limited to one goal (the eradication of all drugs, anywhere, ever). We need to consider solutions that are fluid, solutions that can adapt to a world that is adapting, to sciences that are always changing.
 
The angry villagers won us an important battle. But…they’re fighting an impossible war.
 
And they’re fighting against monsters who are not monsters. Ryan Braun, if he did use a banned substance, did not do so out of malice. He did not do it out of some sense of being slighted. If he is guilty, he is guilty of wanting to succeed at a very difficult game. Certainly, he should be held accountable for his transgressions, but it is appropriate, too, to consider the context of those actions.
 
We’re at a point of stability right now. Braun’s positive test notwithstanding, all of the evidence suggests that baseball has gotten a good handle on the steroid issue. But we can’t continue to follow the line of thinking espoused by the angry villagers; we need to consider the peaceniks. We need to examine what the future of medicine and biochemistry is, and how it will influence sports. We need to discuss what we mean by a ‘level playing field,’ and we need to realize that the field has never, ever, been level.
 
And we need to discuss a workable strategy. We need to stop being re-active, and figure out a way to get ahead of the science; predict the changes to come and come up with a satisfying compromise to those changes. We need to let the Neville’s speak.
 
Dave Fleming is a writer living in Wellington, New Zealand. He welcomes comments, questions, and suggestions here and at dfleming1986@yahoo.com. He would like to congratulate his high school Dennis-Yarmouth Dolphins on their undefeated football season, and their Division 2A championship.
 
 
 

COMMENTS (12 Comments, most recent shown first)

raincheck
I myself did not undertand it when PEDs became all the rage. I always preferred the comforting hug of a full sock, or the pure freedom of no sock at all. PEDs are neither. They trap my foot yet leave my ankle bare and cold. I can't help but wonder if they aren't really more for my shoe than for me - to protect it from my offensive feet. And I surely don't see how they extended Roger Clemons' career.​
2:37 PM Dec 28th
 
ErieBuffalo
If only they examined the baseballs used as aggressively as they did the players steroid usage instead of the MLB controlled "study" that was done to say the balls had nothing to do with the numbers put up in the "steroid era".
9:11 AM Dec 26th
 
Chihuahua332
There have been a number of good points raised here including a number that I have voiced previously (but not as eloquently).

I personally do not have a problem with the idea of enhancing performance. Whether it is through training techniques, diet and exercise, research, or whatever, that's what atheletes are supposed to do. Gatorade is now marketing a three-step line of products for atheletes to "Prime, Produce and Recover". Now that is a far cry from certain steroids and other drugs but the point is that atheletes get paid to push their performance.

My litmus test is whether there are clear health risks associated with the performance enhancer. If the enhancer or drug is deemed to be safe for the general public to take then why not allow it? The goal is to create a level and reasonably safe playing field for all current players. It's great if we can raise the overall bar of performace over time. It's called progress.
12:47 PM Dec 14th
 
sheepshack
I am an angry villager, but agree this problem will never go away. I just wish the media would report it in 15 seconds, or less, and get on with what's happening and important in the rest of baseball. The horse is dead!
9:15 AM Dec 14th
 
bbbilbo
Thanks Dave. Very good point, that we need to try to keep thinking ahead. The problem for baseball, as with society, is that the rules (law) always fall behind innovation. aaI've always been a reader of Science Fiction because it's a place where people are loooking ahead and asking the questions that are relevant today [i] and will be tomorrow.[i] I can remember several stories that have asked aboput the intersection of medical/biologiical science and sports; if I was home I'd cite some of the better.
7:36 AM Dec 14th
 
ahemolysin
"Ryan Braun, if he did use a banned substance, did not do so out of malice." Really? According to Manny Ramirez, he wanted to have babies and that's why he took those drugs. Not out of malice? I don't but that for a second.
7:34 AM Dec 14th
 
PeteRidges
I never liked the acronym PED*. I would have gone for something like "HDD: Health-damaging drugs". This especially means steroids, which have very nasty effects. I don't want to tell young baseball players that they have to wreck their bodies if they are to have a chance of making it in the game. But things like coffee, eye surgery...they don't damage you, so I don't have a problem with players using them.

*I realise that the horse has bolted and died of old age.
4:02 AM Dec 14th
 
renny
I'm very sympathetic to your argument because what never gets talked about is panning back to the big picture, as you suggest. That is, what about eyeglasses improving someone's vision enough to play in the majors when without that intervention they'd not be able to compete equally with a 20/20 player? What about insulin? What about anti-Tourette's drugs? What about antibiotics for that matter--a logical extension would be "you should've died from that infection when you were in Junior High so you can't play baseball now." asthma drugs, etc etc.
On the other hand I'm so pissed at Braun.​
12:24 AM Dec 14th
 
ChitownRon
Nice and timely article. The rush to judgement for Braun
seems to be less than for the other stars from the past.
Maybe that is good. As a fan of the game, I go on 1 standard alone. If the game is played and completed, than all the stats count. Until they start taking away victories and stats due to cheating, why should I go thru the motions to figure out who did, and who didnt use PED's. If it doesn't matter to MLB in the win/loss column, why should a fan care. Here is an idea for MLB. If a player was banned for a year ( without pay ) for the 1st incident, maybe the guessing game would go away.
6:37 PM Dec 13th
 
bill byrd
i agree, its good stuff got changed by the "angry villagers" but it is time to back off, and the fact that so many people have rushed to judgment on braun is not okay, especially with there being such a compelling argument that he has not used PED's
6:14 PM Dec 13th
 
DHM
Great job, Dave. I agree with what you are saying, but you'll have a hard time getting people to rally around moderation, understanding, objectivity, and rational thought. My favorite quote is about the "level playing field". Anyone who is competing against anyone else at anything is always looking for an edge - it's human nature. My biggest problem with PEDs in general is the refusal of the FDA to conduct testing, and the lack of education and information available. It's all speculation and anecdotal evidence.

But man, I followed every day of the 98 HR race and damn that was exciting...
4:48 PM Dec 13th
 
flyingfish
Thanks for this, Dave Fleming. I've long said that we have a real problem defining the problem because it's a spectrum and not a bright line. There is no bright line, although there are places clearly on one side of the line or the other. It goes from taking an aspirin to make a headache go away so someone can play, to repairing a broken limb, to Tommy John surgery, to anti-arthritis drugs, to insulin, to HGH, to coffee, to steroids, to greenies, you name it. How do you draw the line? I don't know and I'm glad I don't have to. I think aspirin clearly is OK and HGH clearly isn't OK, but man, there's a lot closer to the middle that I don't know how to decide about.
4:25 PM Dec 13th
 
 
©2024 Be Jolly, Inc. All Rights Reserved.|Powered by Sports Info Solutions|Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy