clock menu more-arrow no yes

Everyone else has weighed in, including here on this site.

Honestly, I just really don't care. I'm bored with the story, and have been for, (how long has it been?), lets see four years now. Thats basically it. I've assumed he probably did something for, again, years, although I don't think it did him much good. Maybe I'm just a highbrow son of a bitch, but I've just never cared. Never found jokes about head size or puns or neologisms ending in 'roid funny or interesting.

As Bonds did his thing the last two seasons the coverage and outrage was intense, and exactly no one that I can recall in the paid press made the case that he could have been innocent, or should have been treated as such. For that reason, a lot of the outrage and insistence that this is important because the law is now involved rings a little hollow. Nine months ago everyone piggy backed on illegally leaked testimony because the story was better than the scruple. Now, we get to hear from the scruple police about the sanctity of civil procedure.

Peter Gammons told Sportscenter last night he was saddened by the whole thing (I believe the first sentence I heard was "I feel sad") and this too has been a popular tack. To be frank, I'm embarrassed to hear Gammons say things like that. Embarrassed that his emotional world, especially considering what he's gone through in recent years, could even possibly be so naive and pollyanna that he might actually be sad, really sad, about such a minor and sordid affair.

On a recent chat at Baseball Prospectus someone asked if there was a connection between the upsurge in domestic violence charges against athletes and steroids, a chilling and profoundly telling example of our continued refusal to act like adults when evaluating problems. Not to get all political on you, but it disgusts me that the scrutiny and diligence given to this testimony, to say nothing of the media coverage of it, essentially outstrips a whole host of lies under oath made by public officials. Lies that have done a helluva lot more damage to our national innocence than anything involving sports.

But there's nothing easier than moralizing about something thats irrelevant. Ninety-nine percent of us -- actually, its higher than that -- are totally unaffected by steroids and steroid laws, which certainly makes the pile-on easier. Hell, even the Vick outrage forced a few people to reconsider their relationship to animals, but no one really needs some general anti-steroids reinforcement.

Hopefully, this story will one day end. I'll probably be 40 by the time it does. But hopefully,  the most boring topic on the internet, on talk radio, on PTI, ever, will go away.

Did anyone notice that baseball announced its raking in record profits this week? Good thing nearly every team receives huge public subsidies and tax breaks. Or, if we must crusade against substance abuse and protect the children, did anyone outside deadspin and the Orioles blogs notice that Aubrey Huff went on the radio and said he wakes up with a hangover at 1PM every day during the season?

Print journalists still have the power to set the agenda and still have the ability to act in the public interest. In this instance, I believe, they have failed. If people truly care about this story, then they are simply pandering to the base interests of the consumer. My sense is however, no one could possibly care about this story that much. Both Chicago dailies went double-barreled on outrage columns. Unbelievable, really. But perhaps I shouldn't criticize. For all I know the sports editors there toned down the reaction and only allowed two columns on the matter. We'll never know.

Anyway, look at me. Here I am starting to preach, starting to use the petty actions of an insignificant and flawed man as a chance to step on the soapbox and air some old grievances.

We now return to regularly scheduled programming.