Voting, On Roids

Friday, July 24, 2009


The steroid era has provided baseball writers with nearly endless fodder for speculation and rumination. But it has also handed them a huge problem: with so many players under suspicion, who are the writers supposed to vote into the Hall of Fame? Chicago Sun Times senior sports reporter Rick Telander recently proposed that the Baseball Writers of America Association develop guidelines on how to vote on players suspected of using steroids. The plan was narrowly defeated in a BBWAA vote. Ken Davidoff, national baseball columnist for Newsday, says he opposed the idea, though believes that writers shouldn't have Hall of Fame voting privileges in the first place.

    Music Playlist
  • That's What You Get With People Like That On Cruises Like This
    Artist: Solex

Comments [9]

Daniel Bashian

steroids have somewhat ruined the game. Players stats in the last 15years are all questionable to me ,yet all the players to me are innocent until there is evidence that they have taken illegal porformence inhansing drugs. Mark mc guirer is one of the biggest suspicions but there is no proof of him using illegal drugs during his time, and he has never lied under oath like barry bonds whos home run records should be thrown out when considering him for the hall of fame.

Apr. 28 2011 04:43 AM
Dion "Twayne" Watson from Southside

I dont think roids should be banned from any sport because , to me roids are just the same as energy drinks and energy bars. They all give you an unfair advantage. So in my eyes it really doesn't matter if sport players use steriods.

Mar. 02 2011 11:37 AM
Alex from Minneapolis

Mike - well done this week. It felt a little like the kids got to raid the liquor cabinet while the 'rents were away. Good for you, and for OTM, for letting you talk about the sports, your area of expertise.

I hope they tap you again to guest host, or for another sports media piece.


Jul. 29 2009 01:38 PM
alex from Brooklyn

I love sports. I've been watching and playing since I was a child. There is plenty about sports media that OTM could address.

However, this piece fits right in with all the other pieces of the week, in terms of quality.

Does Mr. Pesca really think that the only measures of morality are whether a crime has been committed, an indictment made or a conviction obtained, as he suggests? Why would a show of OTM's caliber even suggest such a thing?

There is a valid media story in here, but was flubbed badly, from conception, to intro to execution. The primary OTM question should be about the relationship between journalists and making of the news. Should sports journalists vote of post-season awards? Should the vote on the ultimate mark of career recognition? This was left to the end, with barely any discussion of the issue.

The next issue could well be the responsiveness of the media to changing social morays, and perhaps attempts tying that into the decline of the most traditional of news media (i.e. print newspapers).

But this story failed to explore either of those issues, or any of the others that the event that inspired the piece might have lead to. Instead, time was given to the substance of the sports issue (i.e. the role of PEDs in blah blah blah), rather than the role of the media. I am fascinated by the substantive sports issue, and welcome discussion of it. But not on OTM. It is the wrong show, and a waste of donation to WYNC.

Jul. 29 2009 12:17 PM
David Villa from Austin TX

Not even close, Jack. I'd rather hear about space exploration than social commentary. An interesting angle on a headline that wouldn't otherwise interest me is not parroting views. For your sake I have listened again, and thank you. I feel I have to take a different position. It is appropriate, I think. I must have been put off from the previous segment, also sports related, which I still find entirely off the mark. I'd rather not hear them at all, but I shouldn't have been so negative above.

Jul. 29 2009 02:02 AM
Jack from Chicago

You people need to expand your limited horizons. Sports is an important part of our culture and sports media draws attention across races, genders, ages and more the way nothing else does. But I get it, you come here to hear someone parrot your views on topics about which you think you know everything anyway. What sad pathetic lives you lead!

Jul. 28 2009 11:07 PM
David Villa from Austin TX

I don't listen to this show for sports. Unlike the previous segment, this one doesn't seem entirely inappropriate, but personally I barely understood the discussion and don't care enough for the full story to listen again or figure it out. Sports is to news as NASCAR is to sports. Events are just as synthetic as the turns are predictable. Frankly I don't care about a game so boring and slow as baseball where each individual error is counted, and ranking something that isn't newsworthy doesn't make for something that is. Next time leave it out or at least put it at the end so I can shut it off sooner.

Jul. 27 2009 04:39 AM
Eli from Brooklyn

It was amazing that in indicting everyone from Bud Selig to Donald Fehr for the steroid scandal, Rick Telander completely ignores the baseball writers' complicity in the 'roid era. From SI glorifying the giant sluggers in their 1998 baseball preview to their collective overwhelming defense of McGwire's use of androstenedione, the baseball media played a very large role in the rise of the steroid era. For them now to self-righteously turn on players with alleged (or even confirmed) PED use is the height of hypocracy.

Jul. 26 2009 09:11 PM
T. Halliday from NY

Please...leave sports out!!! I listen to On the Media for information on everything BUT sports. I love NPR for NOT having screaming sportscasters yelling information at me. The broadcaster this week has that louder, coarser presentation style. Please, leave the sports to the other networks and stations and keep the wonderful, thoughtful presentation style and subjects that are "On The Media".

I just wanted to let you know my opinion.

Thank you.

T. Halliday

Jul. 25 2009 02:55 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.