And now we can add steroid use to the growing list of non-baseball issues
that have been monopolizing the sports pages this season.
Athletes on steroids?
Seems impossible, doesn't it? Especially in a sport that has no drug testing
policy in place. Should baseball players be tested for illegal substances?
The answer is simple - only if you want players to stop using illegal
substances.
Obviously there shouldn't
have to be mandatory drug testing. Obviously any athlete should - on his
or her own - avoid taking a drug that is proven to be extremely harmful
to your health. But then again, it shouldn't be necessary to have seatbelt
laws either.
If baseball's management
is really interested in knowing just how "rampant" steroid use is within
their sport all they have to do is have the players vote on a drug testing
policy. It's a safe bet that the percentage of "no" votes will give them
a pretty good idea how many players have something to hide.
I find it hard to
believe that steroid use could be as widespread as is being reported.
The numbers don't add up. In 2001, just a dozen players hit forty or more
homeruns. If these muscle-enhancing drugs are so prevalent, how come that
number is so (relatively) low?
If strength was the
only necessary tool for hitting a major league fastball then Arnold Schwarzenegger
would be in the Hall of Fame and Babe Ruth would have been a peanut vendor
at Yankee Stadium.
Of course the conspiracy
theorists will scrutinize every individual accomplishment with skepticism.
Hmm Barry Bonds hits forty-nine home runs in 2000 then goes crazy in 2001
with an unbelievable seventy-three. Maybe it was the achievement of a
lifetime, or maybe it was steroids.
Well, Babe Ruth hit
twenty-nine homers for the Boston Redsox in 1919 then blasted a record
fifty-four with the Yankees in 1920. Was it the start of the Boston Curse?
Or possibly the result of some sort of early twentieth century hormone
injection.
And Roger Maris went
deep thirty-nine times in 1960 and thirty-three times in 1962. Sandwiched
in between was his record-breaking sixty-one in '61. Was he hopped up
on steroids or did he just have a phenomenal year?
The documented health
risks that come with steroid use are enormous. Then again, the threat
of cancer hasn't stopped millions of people from smoking or chewing tobacco.
But reading down the not-so-short list of steroid side effects, I found
the mother of all deterrents.
"Genitalia dysfunction."
The very words send shivers up my spine. I don't know everything that
genitalia dysfunction entails, but I do know one symptom is shrinking
testicles. That should be all that needs to be said to any man considering
the use of steroids to enhance his on-field performance.
We take calculated
risks every day when we get behind the wheel of a car, step onto an airplane
or climb up on a ladder. But to take a drug that could reduce my boys
to the size of raisins? Not even the Yankees have enough money to make
that worth my while.
This is the kind of
"side effect" that would make any bad habit real easy to quit. If "may
be hazardous to your health" won't cut it, how about "may turn your gonads
into good-n-plenty".
Slap that warning
label onto the side of a can of Coors Light and you'll be able to count
on one hand the number of drunken fans at the next home game.
Baseball is suffering
through it's worst image problem since the '94 strike. The last thing
the sport needs is the image of a bunch of testosterone-filled muscle-heads
running around a baseball diamond with plenty of bats and gloves, but
no balls.
Forget about drug
testing. You want to know who in Major League Baseball is using steroids?
Ask each team's equipment manager which players have requested smaller
jockstraps.
(There goes another
shiver up my spine).
*********************
|