Lack of Standards

As soon as it was official that Mark McGwire would not be voted into the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame, every single sports show out there started talking about how a supposed double standard exists between the National Football League and Major League Baseball. Arguments are arising saying that NFL players get off too easily when they abuse steroids and we hold MLB players to too harsh of a standard. Frankly, anyone who believes this double standard exists in this fashion is full of shit.

Let's examine why the double standard can't possibly exist between these two organizations about steroid abuse. First -- the only baseball players guilty of steroid abuse in the past are out there are because either:

a) They admitted it

b) Another player accuses them of it. Baseball tests the bats more than they test the players.

The NFL, on the other hand, subjects players to random testing throughout the year. Then they are suspended four games for their first infraction, six games for their second infraction, and a minimum of a year long suspension for a third infraction.

Here, players serve their time, pay for their crime and then they get back to playing football. There are the few players who end up going through all three warnings, but they are rare.

That's why if you're on steroids in the NFL, you aren't on them for very long and if you are, then you'd be out of the game for good. That's why Shawne Merriman deserves to be named to the Pro Bowl and the all star team even after serving the four-game suspension.

Baseball, on the other hand, until last year didn't test its players. They didn't serve suspensions for doing steroids, because the owners and the league did not have a method of proving that the players are on steroids. The United States Congress was more active in attempting to rid MLB of steroids then the league itself is.

Now that baseball is starting to catch and punish players for steroid use I think any perception of a double standard will be erased. It isn't about Major League Baseball being the National Pastime or a perception that steroid use doesn't matter as much in football as it does in baseball. It was about the fact that the public in general perceives Mark McGwire guilty of a crime that he hasn't been convicted or punished for. So, most sports writers with a vote have deemed it their place to keep anyone they believe might have been on steroids out of the Cooperstown, even without admission.

In this writer's opinion, guilty or not, Mark McGwire deserves to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame.

Posted 01/10/07 by Jaime Sue | Filed under: General Sports

Trackback

There are currently no trackbacks for this item.

Use this TrackBack url to ping this item (right-click, copy link target). If your blog does not support Trackbacks you can manually add your trackback by using this form.

Comments

While I do agree with you that McGwire should be in the Hall of Fame, you are seriously mistaken if you think there is no double standard between football and baseball when it comes to steroids. It lies not in the length of the penalty but in the public perception. Shawne Merriman can go back to playing football with practically a clean slate because he's "done his time", yet Rafael Palmeiro can't even show his face in public, never mind find a spot on a baseball team. Football fans are far too willing to ignore the fact that a player is choosing to do possible damage to his body and even shorten his life and his career, while baseball fans are ready to condemn a man to death if they even THINK he's a user, never mind whether or not he's actually tested positive. There's got to be a better way to handle the situation in either case.

The fact that Shawne Merriman spent a quarter of the regular season away from his team because he couldn't follow the rules should have been enough to cost him a Pro Bowl spot for this year. The Pro Bowl is supposed to reward a player's performance over the year; giving Merriman a spot is more or less condoning his steroid usage. If he can put up good numbers next year and stay clean, then by all means give him a spot, but not this year.

As for McGwire, his first-ballot non-inclusion is his punishment by the holier-than-thou baseball writers (who don't want to admit that baseball has never been and will never be a clean sport) for not getting on his knees before them and begging for mercy. McGwire, however, is in the same position as the witches of Salem; damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. If he confesses to using performance-enhancing drugs, he will be branded a cheater and never be voted into the HOF. If he says he didn't, they'll say he's a liar and not vote him in, either.

Posted by Jade at 01/11/07 02:53:53

The public had that perception because Baseball players in the past didn't have to serve the time. And on a lot of their "drug" violations are kept secret the first time around and baseball players as a result aren't even punished on their first offense.

Merriman was punished and caught on his first offense. Furthermore, despite the fact he was away from his team for almost a quarter of the regular season he still lead the league in sacks. I think that says a lot about his playing ability and he deserves to be rewarded for that. I assume they've tested him since he got back and if that's so, he's stayed clean.

Posted by Jaime Sue at 01/11/07 13:27:40

It also says a lot that he cheated to get those sacks. I still say no Pro Bowl for him for this year-
if he's clean next year, it shouldn't be a problem.

Posted by Jade at 01/11/07 17:50:18