Lessons Learned

In my first real post I talked about how bored I was of the steroids talk. I talked about how the report won't have much impact on the game itself and that MLB would be better served to spend those funds in other ways.

Well, today I'm fascinated by the 'Clemens' hearings on the Hill. Do I think they are a monumental waste of time? Yes. Do I think they are a glorified witch hunt out to bag a big name in Roger Clemens? Yes. So, why am I writing about this? Because, it seems people still haven't figured out the court of public opinion.

Baseball is a game that almost celebrates cheating. Whether it be the grounds crew shaving a mound down a few inches, watering the basepaths, growing jungle like infields or players stealing signs, cheating has been a part of baseball since the game's inception. Gaylord Perry, a well known and well liked pitcher, threw a spit ball for much of his career and. He seems incorrigible, not dirty. So, being linked to steroids, if they are as pervasive in the sport as thought to be, would not totally destroy a reputation.

The American public seems to operate this way; if you screw up in any fashion, don't lie about it. And, that is especially true when giving testimony to the grand jury (see: barry bonds) or to Congress because the spectre of jail time looms over them for perjury. Accept responsibility, show remorse and the public will come back to you. The cover up is always worse than the crime. Ask Nixon.

Thinking about this reminds me of my favorite cheating story in baseball history. A few years ago Jose Guillen, now playing for the Royals, was on assignment in the minor leagues after an injury. He was just going to be down there for a few games to get his timing and legs back. In one of those games he broke his bat and cork was discovered. These games and statistics didn't matter at all in the grand scheme of things and Jose Guillen was still out there looking for an edge. I guess the phrase "If you're not cheating, you're not trying." applies here. In spades.

*This is all based on the assumption of Clemens's guilt. Which, judging from the testimony of Pettite and Clemens himself, seems likely. I still can't believe he threw his wife under the bus in saying that she used HGH. Good grief. I doubt very much that she learned about HGH and its effects at her book club.