Some thoughts after reading the Sosa thread

[TroyF]

This is a quote from the Sosa thread:

I can't believe that people are so stupid that they think Sammy would send a corked bat to the HOF. Then to say that he didn't send corked bats to the HOF PROVES anything is even dumber.

Listen, I like Sammy. I don't have anything against him, at least until this. I do get tired of people, who so obviously cheated, make up stupid excuses and let the lemmings around them defend it. His comments that said he was "innocent" are why I'll never respect the man again. Even if it was a mistake, he is not "innocent." He cheated. And the fact that he can’t admit that suggests to me he has cheated in more than just this.


This point was echoed by QS and some others in the thread. Before I get into what I want to say, the last sentence is factually incorrect. Sammy, by admitting it was a mistake, is admitting that he cheated. His response is that he didn't KNOWINGLY cheat. Whether you believe that or not, the sentence is still incorrect.

My thoughts on this go many different ways. The probability suggests he probably cheated more often than once. The probability is that he is indeed lying. The question is, what if he isn't?

Has anyone here ever did something wrong one time and been caught? I have. What was your response? Did your boss or parent look at you while rolling their eyes and "say, sure you've done it only one time. . . ?"

The easy answer here is to not do anything wrong. Sosa should never have had the corked bat in the stadium for anything, much less near his regular bats. Still, is there not a chance he's telling the truth? For all of us passing judgement on him (yes, even I think he's lying. I think he knew he was taking the bat up there), do we not give him the benefit of the doubt until more corked bats are found? Would we have given a player like say Kent Hrbek more leeway in his prime?

I'm not saying it's wrong to lose respect for the man. I'm not even telling you not to hate his guts and hope he strikes out in every at bat for the rest of his career. Those are choices we all make, myself included. (I think Scott Pederson is guilty as hell for instance)

I'm just wondering if anyone steps back and thinks about the possiblity that maybe our thoughts are wrong? How would you feel if you were PROVEN wrong?

TroyF

[TroyF]

Quick Dola here:

I really dislike this guy, but it's some food for thought.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/morgan_joe/1563765.html


TroyF

[Ksyrup]

I've made the same point over and over - it doesn't really matter at this point what the truth is, because we'll never know the truth, and for every person who believes that this was a one-time, innocent mistake, there will be another who believes he's corked every bat he's ever used, and another who believes that the truth lies somewhere in between.

Is it possible he's not lying? Sure. Is it possible he is lying? Sure. I think what QS said about knowing human beings and seeing so many people lie when they come face-to-face with cheating, stealing, etc., plays a huge part in the conclusions we draw. Scott Peterson was convicted in the media before any tangible facts surfaced connecting him the murder. That story could very likely have ended within a couple of a days given another set of facts, and all of those who automatically assumed it was him, would have been proven wrong. But so far, they haven't been, and it appears that once again, someone who professes their innocence was lying.

I don't see how this is any different, other than Peterson may be lying to save his life, whereas Sammy mimght be lying to protect something a lot less valuable.

[INDalltheway]

Awesome article. Another thing I can go show the people who argued with me about this situation!

[WSUCougar]

I hear what you are saying, Troy, but I’m not sure it matters in that respect. I’m also not sure what your point was with the Hrbek reference.

However, once a person has demonstrated their willingness (for lack of a better word) to cheat, trust goes out the window. Doubt creeps into your mind. Up until the other day, I would have given Sosa every bit of the benefit of the doubt. Now, he gets no slack whatsoever. Do I think he’s lying? What difference does it make? Let’s say he’s telling the truth. Even if he is, how many times has he “accidentally” gone to the plate with a corked batting practice bat, and NOT been caught?

Another way to view it is that every MLB player has the potential to use a corked bat. Some raise more suspicion than others (Brady’s Anderson’s fluke 50+ homerun season a few years ago comes to mind), but they’re all in the same pool of potentially-guilty players. I think most reasonable people follow the innocent-until-proven-guilty premise. Then whamo! A corked bat appears…the “smoking gun,” if you will. Once bitten, twice shy. Sosa has gone from a player who had the potential to use a corked bat, to one who has definitely done so. He’s crossed over the line and can’t go back.

Same thing with a cheating spouse. Once is more than enough. Trust is lost forever.

[GrantDawg]

Since this was my post, I'll respond.

Originally posted by TroyF

This point was echoed by QS and some others in the thread. Before I get into what I want to say, the last sentence is factually incorrect. Sammy, by admitting it was a mistake, is admitting that he cheated. His response is that he didn't KNOWINGLY cheat. Whether you believe that or not, the sentence is still incorrect.


He has been quoted repeatly as saying he was innocent. Innocent means not guilty of cheating. Therefore, even though he admits that he used a corked bat, even though we all know he used a corked bat, he says he is innocent. HE IS NOT INNOCENT. Ignorance does not exclude you from the law (or a rule in this matter). Therefore the staement was correct.

My thoughts on this go many different ways. The probability suggests he probably cheated more often than once. The probability is that he is indeed lying. The question is, what if he isn't?

If the probabilty suggests, then why are you saying we shouldn't follow the probablity?

Has anyone here ever did something wrong one time and been caught? I have. What was your response? Did your boss or parent look at you while rolling their eyes and "say, sure you've done it only one time. . . ?"

Yup, and 90% of the time they are right that it wasn't the first time. Once more, one time is enough to get punished and change perception you might have of someone.

The easy answer here is to not do anything wrong. Sosa should never have had the corked bat in the stadium for anything, much less near his regular bats. Still, is there not a chance he's telling the truth? For all of us passing judgement on him (yes, even I think he's lying. I think he knew he was taking the bat up there), do we not give him the benefit of the doubt until more corked bats are found? Would we have given a player like say Kent Hrbek more leeway in his prime?

Nope, but I hated Hrbek (cheating little snit, pulling Gant's leg off the bag). I wouldn't give freakin Dale Murphy any more "benfit" either. My respect for the player would drop and I would look suspicously on anything else they might do. Now if he said "I cheated. I needed an edge. I'm sorry." I wouldn't lose quite as much respect, and would forgive him. Lying and covering up always ticks me off more than the actual infraction. And lying on top of cheating makes me the more suspicous, which is my point.

I'm not saying it's wrong to lose respect for the man. I'm not even telling you not to hate his guts and hope he strikes out in every at bat for the rest of his career. Those are choices we all make, myself included. (I think Scott Pederson is guilty as hell for instance)

I don't hate him. I did lose respect for him. I never have hated him, or the Cubs (how can you hate the Cubs?). All I'm saying is that I'll never trust him like I once did. I not suggesting strip his homerruns from him, or ban him from baseball.

I'm just wondering if anyone steps back and thinks about the possiblity that maybe our thoughts are wrong? How would you feel if you were PROVEN wrong?

Everyone has been PROVEN wrong before. It is how you handle it when it happens that makes the difference.

[TroyF]

If the probabilty suggests, then why are you saying we shouldn't follow the probablity?

Simple, because the probability isn't always right and passing judgement on a person based on just that is never right.

TroyF

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by TroyF
If the probabilty suggests, then why are you saying we shouldn't follow the probablity?

Simple, because the probability isn't always right and passing judgement on a person based on just that is never right.

TroyF

What judgement? Did he break the rules? Yes. That is a judgement, but it also a fact. Passing judgements on the facts is wrong? Sorry, disaggree there.

All I've ever said is that makes it likely in my mind that he has broke other rules which is exactly what you said. I never said tar and feather the guy or anything of the like. I haven't really seen anyone else say anything of the like either. So what's your beef?

[Kodos]

I'm just glad that when HornsManiac faced a similar situation here at FOFC, he fessed up and took the fallout like a man.

[Anrhydeddu]

He has been quoted repeatly as saying he was innocent. Innocent means not guilty of cheating. Therefore, even though he admits that he used a corked bat, even though we all know he used a corked bat, he says he is innocent. HE IS NOT INNOCENT. Ignorance does not exclude you from the law (or a rule in this matter). Therefore the staement was correct.

Troy, I got to agree with GD on this. I also agree that there is no objectivity. Your bias in loving his enthusiasm is no different than my bias in his self-centered, whiney and now, cheating act.

[Katon]

Originally posted by GrantDawg
My thoughts on this go many different ways. The probability suggests he probably cheated more often than once. The probability is that he is indeed lying. The question is, what if he isn't?

If the probabilty suggests, then why are you saying we shouldn't follow the probablity?

Innocent until proven guilty is one of the basic principles of the American judicial system. It's alright to suspect that he did more then we have evidence for; it isn't alright to act upon that without solid proof. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused.

As far as my views go, I think it was highly unlikely that this really was the first time he went up there with corked bat in hand, but I also think that, considering the amount of broken/donated bats Sosa has had without cork, it is rather unlikely that he's been corking seriously for a lengthy period of time. He was cheating, however, and he should suffer the full penalty, although the thought of things being twisted to give the Yankees a harder time by pushing back the suspension somehow fails to break my heart.

[Easy Mac]

The thing is, Sports are not the judicial system.

[kcchief19]

Whoa, cowpokes. A lot of the argument above against Sosa seems to be vented towards the "fact" that he is proclaiming himself as innocent. Feel free to cite the source, but I have not seen anything indicating that he has ever said he said he was innocent.

"It's a mistake, and I take the blame for it."

The above is a quote from Sosa and has been the center of all the comments I have seen from him. Perhaps I have missed where he proclaimed his innocence.

That being said, a preponderance of the evidence suggest that what Sosa has said happpened is highly improbable. It seems very possible that Sosa has used a corked bat at some time in the past. However, it is possible that this was exactly what he said: a mistake.

Regardless, certainly his reputation is tainted. Getting caught like this happens so infrequently and rarely to a superstar, so this will follow him around for the rest of his life, all the way to the Hall of Fame -- where he will still end up one day.

Baseball has only ond Golden Rule -- you can't bet on baseball. Everything else goes.

[pjstp20]

Originally posted by TroyF
Quick Dola here:

I really dislike this guy, but it's some food for thought.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/morgan_joe/1563765.html


TroyF

Articles like these are the very reason this situation pisses me off towards ESPN and MLB. True, it does shed a different light on the subject but because of the lack of objectivity by the aforementioned orginizations, I can't trust it. There seemed to be a huge effort to exonerate Sosa, rather than let the whole truth be known. I'm not sure of the other players guilty of this offense so I'd like to ask: Did major league baseball take their whole bat collection and X- ray them? Or were they given their penalty and that was the end of it?

Also about the 76 other bats. Why does it matter that he only had one? I mean he obviously saw the need for one during bating practice/exhibitions, so why not a back up if that one breaks? Another reason I find it MORE suspect that there was only one, is because every ML official, and all the commentators/broadcasters at ESPN were saying the same thing: Let's wait for the bats to be examined before we pass judgement. They were so worried about the integrity of the sport and Sosa's career, when in fact a huge percentage of the general public (myself included), didn't think Sosa did this throughout his career, just lately.

I think there had to be at least a couple more corked bats, and that doesn't lead me to conclude that Sosa made a habbit of using them his whole career, or even that his excuse for using it this one time is false. The fact is MLB thought the general public would, so they had to cover it up if there were more, and that is why the examination of the 76 bats became the key piece of evidence that would justify Sosa's career. If you think I'm a conspiracy freak, just think of what people would think if Mickey Mantle was discovered to use a corked bat, the sports credibility would take a tremendous hit, but for me it already has.

[clintl]

As far as I can tell, MLB has done everything they could reasonably be expected to do to investigate the matter, and they handed out a penalty that is exactly the same as has been given out historically to lesser players who committed the same offense. I don't understand exactly where you think MLB is granting any favoritism to Sosa. I sure don't see a single shred of evidence that anything of the sort is happening.

As far as the ESPN columnists are concerned, those guys were hired to be analysts and give opinions, like political op-ed columnists. They are not reporters, and being objective is not their job.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by kcchief19
Whoa, cowpokes. A lot of the argument above against Sosa seems to be vented towards the "fact" that he is proclaiming himself as innocent. Feel free to cite the source, but I have not seen anything indicating that he has ever said he said he was innocent.

If anybody has a way back machine.....the article from ESPN on the first day he returned to play and the croud cheered him, his response "I am glad they believe I am not guilty. It is good to know people belive I am not guilty." I couldn't find it.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by Katon
Innocent until proven guilty is one of the basic principles of the American judicial system. It's alright to suspect that he did more then we have evidence for; it isn't alright to act upon that without solid proof. The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused.

And no one is trying to convict him in a court of law on anything. The court of public opinion is a whole other matter, and "innocent till proven guilty" is not the standard used. The thing is, he is a proven cheater. Now, the burden is on him to prove to be trust worthy again.

Claiming you picked up the wrong bat is a baaaaaddd way of trying to regain trust.

[pjstp20]

Am I the only one who thinks something a bit strange is going on here?

[RonnieDobbs]

Originally posted by pjstp20
Am I the only one who thinks something a bit strange is going on here?

No, I'm sure Oliver Stone is on the same page with you.

[mckerney]

Originally posted by pjstp20
Am I the only one who thinks something a bit strange is going on here?

Rob Dibble seemed to think that Sosa was getting preferential treatment. He said that the suspension was too light and it would probably get reduced in appeals because of who he was, while when Dibble got suspended he appeals weren't even considered. He also said that the testing of 79 of his bats didn't prove much to him because players usually have a lot more than that with them.

It also seems that with the delay in the appeals MLB is trying to make sure that Sosa plays in the series against the Yankees.

[andy m]

i am just surprised that people are getting so worked up about it. let sosa take his punishment and move on. get over it.

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by andy m
i am just surprised that people are getting so worked up about it. let sosa take his punishment and move on. get over it.

I agree 100%, it's over, lets move on.

[Katon]

Definitely. How many spinoff threads has the Sosa issue spawned, anyway? He'll serve a suspension; he deserves the suspension; let's leave it at that.

[Cards4ever]

Don't get me wrong though, any good cork jokes are appreciated!

[pjstp20]

Originally posted by RonnieDobbs
No, I'm sure Oliver Stone is on the same page with you.

Lol, I was expecting and probably desreve that, but I will stand by my convictions.

[pjstp20]

In response to the last few posts: It's a discussion board, if you have no interest responding to or reading about specific topics, feel free not to click on them. Or you can create your own discussion board and allow topics that only interest you. Have a nice day.

[Cards4ever]

So, we can't be of the opinion that we think the whole thing is overblown and can't express that opinion?

[GrantDawg]

Ignore that edit. Hit the wrong button.

[pjstp20]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
So, we can't be of the opinion that we think the whole thing is overblown and can't express that opinion?

No you can say whatever you want, but so will I. If you guys wanna move on go ahead, but some people may not. This topic is about dead anyway so you'll get what you wanted.

[Blackadar]

Originally posted by Kodos
I'm just glad that when HornsManiac faced a similar situation here at FOFC, he fessed up and took the fallout like a man.

ROFL

[KWhit]

Originally posted by andy m
i am just surprised that people are getting so worked up about it. let sosa take his punishment and move on. get over it.

You're right. I mean what's the big deal? Hall of fame players are caught cheating everyday, right?

[pjstp20]

Originally posted by KWhit
You're right. I mean what's the big deal? Hall of fame players are caught cheating everyday, right?

Yeah really, this isn't gonna go away once Sosa is through serving his suspension time. It's gonna follow him in some way his whole career and beyond.

[Cards4ever]

I don't know, Gaylord Perry seemed to do ok.

[GrantDawg]

But you can't think of Gaylord without thinking "spitball." Sosa is still going to be a first ballot HOF, and he should be. But this incident and steroids suspicion will always be attached to his name.

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by GrantDawg
But you can't think of Gaylord without thinking "spitball." Sosa is still going to be a first ballot HOF, and he should be. But this incident and steroids suspicion will always be attached to his name.

Do you, or anyone here honestly believe that he used a corked bat for a majority of his HR's?

I'm a Cardinals fan and even a cub getting busted for corking his bat doesn't get me up in a lather. I have never been a Sosa fan even, but, I just don't see a reason to be outraged about this incident. He got suspended and it's over with, time to move on.

[Craptacular]

Actually, it's not over with, because he refuses to accept it.

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
Do you, or anyone here honestly believe that he used a corked bat for a majority of his HR's?

I'm a Cardinals fan and even a cub getting busted for corking his bat doesn't get me up in a lather. I have never been a Sosa fan even, but, I just don't see a reason to be outraged about this incident. He got suspended and it's over with, time to move on.

Nope, but you can read my other post for my opinion on the rest.

[Cards4ever]

I highly doubt that he will actually go to the appeals process, I'm sure the Cubs wanted him to play this weekend.

[pjstp20]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
Do you, or anyone here honestly believe that he used a corked bat for a majority of his HR's?

I'm a Cardinals fan and even a cub getting busted for corking his bat doesn't get me up in a lather. I have never been a Sosa fan even, but, I just don't see a reason to be outraged about this incident. He got suspended and it's over with, time to move on.

I think if Sosa said something to the effect of: look I've been struggling and I felt a lot of pressure to perform up to my usual standards, so I made a lapse in judgement and thought that corking my bat would be the way to do that. I've learned from this and I won't do it again.

Sure there would still be a media frenzy but I don't think it would be as bad. Instead we have excuses and justifications which to me is B.S. I dont think Sammy has done this his whole career, and I think he'll be a hall of famer, but the lying is what killed him.

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by GrantDawg
Nope, but you can read my other post for my opinion on the rest.

I did, I laughed my ass off about the Hrbek thing and then couldn't read the rest. I still remember the classy death threats over the whole deal. Ever think that the person you should be most upset at is the umpire or even Gant for being so friggin' stupid?

I'm out of this whole Sosa deal, I think he's a average player(less than average fielder) who was able to be lucky to play in Wrigley during a high offensive era.

[Craptacular]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
I highly doubt that he will actually go to the appeals process, I'm sure the Cubs wanted him to play this weekend.

I hope that's what happens, so it leaves no doubt about what the intentions were.

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by pjstp20
I think if Sosa said something to the effect of: look I've been struggling and I felt a lot of pressure to perform up to my usual standards, so I made a lapse in judgement and thought that corking my bat would be the way to do that. I've learned from this and I won't do it again.

Should he also add that he hopes Santa still brings him a present?!

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by Craptacular
I hope that's what happens, so it leaves no doubt about what the intentions were.

It's all about the money, I think we all know that, 2 big TV games against the Yankees? You sell alot more gear with him in the lineup.

[Bonegavel]

Just out of curiosity, did anyone analyse the video after he realised the bat broke? Did he looked concerned? This may have been covered, but his initial reaction is worth investigating.

If I knew I was using a corked bat and it broke, it would be very evident on my face or in my actions after the fact. If Sammy simply ran to first and didn't even glance back, I doubt if he is that good of an actor to make a split second decision to act like nothing happened.

Having said this, the fact that broken bats are a rare occurence (subjective, I know), and the fact that he was discovered to have a corked bat via breakage, this really points to the fact that this wasn't the first time. I am not a big believer in coincidences, but the word exists in the english language for a reason.

There is no doubt, however, that this incident fuels the fires of those who don't care for Sosa. Now they can use this to say, "see, he's been cheating." On the other hand, Clinton and O.J. proved that there are people that won't be swayed no matter what evidence comes to light.

I reread the last paragraph and realised I've been rambling. Sorry. I must get back to work.