From Morgan & Duncan
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/
Do you agree with the author's claim that Bonds' prosecution was a matter of race-related arrogance? Do you think the author's comparison to Jack Johnson is a valid one?
From Sam & Angus & Jack
http://bleacherreport.com/
How does the article portray Bonds? Why is it that both Bonds and A-Rod expressed the desire to keep playing even after establishing themselves as great players? What are your thoughts?
In response to Duncan & Morgan's article,
ReplyDeleteI find it hard to agree with the prosecutor's claim that the prosecution of Bonds was racially motivated, largely because the author doesn't cite a whole lot of evidence that this particular case was everything that it was because Bonds is black.While it is possible, any motivation on the part of the prosecution could be attributed just as easily to contempt for Bonds because of his PED usage or abrasive personality as it could be to his race. The comparison with Jack Johnson is valid to an extent, but the biggest issue that I have with it is that Jack Johnson was convicted almost 100 years ago. Things have changed significantly since then. Additionally, Johnson (at least based on the information in the article) did not do anything to break the rules, while Bonds more than likely used performance enhancing drugs. PED usage is something that the author makes little mention of, and it could be a valid reason as to why the whole ordeal has been so lengthy and dramatic. Even at the end, the author writes that Bonds was a "larger-than-life figure whose greatest sin was being an unlikable home run king." Given that Bonds was, again, almost definitely someone who broke the rules, I would argue that his lying and PED usage was his greatest sin, not just his poor public image.
In response to Duncan & Morgan's article,
ReplyDeleteI find it hard to agree with the prosecutor's claim that the prosecution of Bonds was racially motivated, largely because the author doesn't cite a whole lot of evidence that this particular case was everything that it was because Bonds is black.While it is possible, any motivation on the part of the prosecution could be attributed just as easily to contempt for Bonds because of his PED usage or abrasive personality as it could be to his race. The comparison with Jack Johnson is valid to an extent, but the biggest issue that I have with it is that Jack Johnson was convicted almost 100 years ago. Things have changed significantly since then. Additionally, Johnson (at least based on the information in the article) did not do anything to break the rules, while Bonds more than likely used performance enhancing drugs. PED usage is something that the author makes little mention of, and it could be a valid reason as to why the whole ordeal has been so lengthy and dramatic. Even at the end, the author writes that Bonds was a "larger-than-life figure whose greatest sin was being an unlikable home run king." Given that Bonds was, again, almost definitely someone who broke the rules, I would argue that his lying and PED usage was his greatest sin, not just his poor public image.
Sam R.
Oh god it posted the whole thing over again I'm so sorry.
ReplyDeleteWe forgive you sam.
DeleteDuncan & Morgan
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that the prosecution was racially motivated and the article did not provide any true evidence to why had believes that besides the case from 100 years ago. While reading this I though back to all of the evidence and stories that we have read about and while baseball and Bonds may be one of our focuses, William C. Rhoden still should have known more about the story of the man that he is writing about. The article is biased and barely makes reference to Bond's alleged use of PED's. While race could be a factor there is more than enough evidence open to the public that is able to justify the prosecution of Bonds. From the title or the article, "Again, a Star Is Prosecuted for His Unlikability," you can see the bias showing though from the beginning. In regards to the Jack Johnson comparison there is nearly nothing to compare because the times have changed and the situation is completely different, one being a man who rides across the country with prostitutes, which, based on the "factual article," was made illegal because of him. In the case of Bonds however there was more than just him doing this and he violated the integrity of the game and gave himself an unfair advantage.
Sam & Angus & Jack
Initially Bonds is portrayed as a player with a dark past, but an incredible record as a baseball player. Throughout it we see references to his steroid use and the scandal that has arose around him, but we also see him as a person who is being an advocate for player’s rights. Even after establishing themselves as great players both Bonds and A-Rod want to keep playing for multiple reasons. They both want to prove that they are the best, they both want the record and they want to establish their right to be in the hall of fame.
Morgan and Duncan
ReplyDeleteI can't believe that Barry Bonds' trial is race related in today's "post racial society." Many other players have been called out for the use of performance enhancing drugs and I think the attention is focused on Bonds as it has been throughout his career. Being so entitled and arrogant, not to mention the home run king, brings a high profile and a lot of scrutiny. The combination of his arrogance and his achievements make the Barry Bonds decision a very important one, but I don not think one that has to do with race.
Angus
Morgan, Duncan
ReplyDeleteI don’t believe Bonds’ prosecution is a matter of race. No matter how cocky, brash, and unapologetic he may be, the root of his trial is simply the fact that he violated the MLB drug policy. It is convenient to bring up the topic of race when discussing Bonds, because in many ways he fits the societal stereotype of an impenitent black man. In all truth, I think it is ridiculous to simply try to blame everything on racial boundaries in society- Bonds cheated! The color of his skin shouldn’t matter; the idea that race it is the main reason behind his trial and all the scrutiny upon him simply makes for a controversial topic, especially given that Barry Bonds is such a big name.
Sam, Angus, Jack
In this article, Bonds validated an image of himself that I have long thought to be true- a very proud competitor who understands that his time is past. His support of Alex Rodriguez attempting to break his record, even his enthusiasm, made me realize that he simply wanted to see someone do what he once himself could do: break records that no one thought would be broken. Bonds certainly wished to keep playing for a while, but it appears he has moved on and wishes to see others (in this case, A-Rod) succeed. He has become more of a mentor figure as opposed to the star. A-Rod is reaching a similar twilight in his career, yet he still seems set on playing for as long as possible. I think that competitors like these two players will do anything to continue playing as long as possible, and to be the best they can be-small wonder why they both used PEDs. The drive to succeed is simply too strong to resist, and they succumbed to the temptation of these drugs, which they believed would make them not only better players, but legends.
Griff
How does the article portray Bonds? Why is it that both Bonds and A-Rod expressed the desire to keep playing even after establishing themselves as great players? What are your thoughts?
ReplyDeleteThis article portrays Bonds as the unlikeable guy we have come to know that he is. It parallels Bonds and A-Rod as major record holders who, despite their obviously astounding achievement, have tainted that achievement by cheating. Essentially, the article points to the clear truth, that their records hold very little substance given the ways in which they were achieved. I think the way it describes them as "hanging around" really conveys some serious arrogance.The article describes what they have done as "an assault on baseball history" and I think this really captures what Bonds and A-Rod have done. Sure they have left a mark, but being notorious in that way sure doesn't seem positive to me, and the mark they have left is definitely not a good one.
Morgan
Joseph Kakkis
ReplyDeleteSam Angus and Jack
Bonds' quotes from the present suggest he has (finally) matured. In the article, they note both positives and negatives of Bonds' past, including his far-fetched lawsuit that all 30 clubs blackballed him. It goes back to his desire to be the greatest. The greatest in sports play 20 years then retire at 40ish. In what other profession does that happen? None. Players who love the game want to play until they can't walk. A-Rod is the same way. He just wants to play ball.
Morgan and Duncan
I don't think that Bonds' prosecution was race-related. The government went after him because he was the face of the MLB AND STEROIDS. In order to fix the MLB when the MLB wouldn't, the government had to go after the biggest face of both issues. I think that there are similarities between Jack Johnson and Barry, but that is more towards the effects of "upsetting the racial order" as the article says. It does seem that as both became rich, they did isolate themselves from others of their own race. However, that does not relate to the prosecution of each.
Sam, Angus and Jack
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, this article seems to paint Bonds in a slightly different light than in other articles we have seen. While it does talk about him with the same negative connotation as many other articles we have read, it also spares a tad bit of pity it seems for the fact that teams may have conspired to keep him out of baseball. Some people simply won't stop until they are the very best, and it seems as though this is the motivation behind Bonds' and A-rod's actions (including their extensive careers and histories of PEDs). I for one believe that trying to intentionally keep A-rod out of baseball would be a good idea and a first step in exorcising the steroid demon from baseball
-Duncan
Morgan and Duncanc
ReplyDeleteI definitely believe that the author's comparison to Jack Johnson was valid. They were both black superstars in their chosen sport, who both may have done something wrong. Jack Johnson narrowly violated the Mann Act and Bonds most likely violated the MLBs anti drug policy. They both recieved harsh punishments for their actions as well. In 1910, Jack Johnsons punishment sort of makes sense, as it was not a time for racial equality, but now, the length trial to prove one man lied about taking steroids is absurd. It most likely will cost him his place in the MLB hall of fame, despite the fact that he has hit the most home runs the league has ever seen by a single player. So, yes, the comparison is valid, as both black superstars who made a mistake have been prosecuted and (are in the process) have recieved more than the punishment they deserved.
Sam Angus and Jack
the image portrayed by this article is almost the polar opposite than the one painted by Game of Shadows. Here, it shows him as a happy mentor to one of the leagues all time great sluggers, while the book showed otherwise. as for both men's desire to contiue playing, there is a difference between being great and being the best. Being great is amazing, only few are better, you're an all-star, and most likely a hall of famer, but being the best you are a sure fire first rounder (unless of PEDs) as well as the aforementioned qualities of being great, aside from the fact that no one can say they are better than you. It is the ultimate pursuit of perfection. Why stop at great, when the finish line for immortality is just a few seasons ahead?
Connor Roach