Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Post #11: Drugs & Alcohol in 1986 (Due April 17)
Not necessarily the same class of PED as talked about in Game of Shadows, but amphetamines and alcohol we abused regularly in the mid-80s, especially on the championship Mets. An interesting piece from an insider about the culture of the team. Should these players be banned from Hall of Fame consideration? Their records torn down? What are your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am amazed the Mets were able to win while drinking alcohol between innings. While I do understand how it could “take the edge off”, one’s athletic performance is definitely affected after a beer or two. While I think the alcohol should not keep the players out of the Hall of Fame, the amphetamines should. However, I do not blame the players for taking these drugs, because professional baseball players had been using them for decades. The group mentality definitely made taking such permissible, even if it was ethically questionable. Because it was a longstanding practice in the MLB to take amphetamines, I dont think their records should be torn down either. However, the use of taking amphetamines and alcohol should definitely be outlawed by the MLB.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting that many professional sports leagues, including the MLB, care more about players taking these types of drugs rather than steroids. Even though these drugs decreased performance, many leagues spent, and still spend, millions of dollars drug testing and suspending players who take them. I think this shows that the MLB didn't really care about steroids increasing performance and more cared about their image. The clubhouse attitude that surrounded these drugs is very similar to the attitude that surrounded steroids in A Game of Shadows. I also understand why the Mets' players waited to admit they were on these drugs, they didn't want to ruin what little image they already held from that year. The Mets are seen as winning the series that year because Bill Buckner let a ball go through his legs, and admitting to drug use would further illigitamice their title. This article helps show the attitude of players towards all drugs, and the attitude the MLB holds.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that Darling describes the amphetamines and alcohol as “more performance reducing than anything else” but that they were primarily used to calm players’ nerves and help them get in the right playing mind set. While it is sad that players got to such points of exhaustion or anxiety that they felt like they needed substances to get them through a game, it doesn’t make their actions excusable, nor was their usage was a long-term solution to their issues. I also think it’s morally questionable that they kept their usage so secretive and didn’t question the deceptiveness of what they were doing. While I think their missteps should be acknowledged and looked down upon, drug abuse has a longstanding place in baseball history so the fault can’t be placed on the Mets. It is a slippery slope because they did mess up, but it was not entirely their fault. Rather than taking a punitive approach and focusing on punishing those who already used drugs and alcohol, the MLB should take a more restorative approach and work on how they can prevent these things from happening in the future.
ReplyDeleteI think this article highlights a huge problem in Baseball. The way the MLB is set up, players feel they need drugs, alcohol, steroids, etc to simply make it through the season. Playing 162 games in a season proves to be too much for a human athlete, and if these players are reaching for synthetic ways to numb their pain, then it is clear something should be done (i.e. less games per year). Additionally, it is unfair to incriminate players for use of substances, when they are in physical pain and see it as the only way to stay in baseball and continue making a living.
ReplyDeleteThis article highlights a very interesting and unique part of baseball history. I have heard of players using amphetamines during this era in the mlb, prior to this article, but never viewed it in a negative light. While I do not think that the mlb should allow the use of amphetamines, I do not think they should punish the players that used them. It is hard to compare the use of amphetamines to steroids as steroids have a much bigger effect on a players performance. However, it is clear that mlb players have a history of using drugs or supplements to soften the pain of the season. Maybe the change should be in the form of a shorter season or longer time between games, rather than punishing players who clearly have been pushed to a breaking point.
ReplyDeleteI was fascinated by this article. I think the topic of using substances to get through the season is a controversial one, and is apparent in every sport. For example in football, some players have spoken out saying the league would not exist if players did not use marijuana for pain relief. Personally I do not really have a problem with that. The fact that the Mets drank during games almost makes them seem more fun and likable. The article mentioned how players of Mays and Aaron's generation would use "Cuban Coffee" among other substances, showing the practice of amphetamines use dates back a long time. I really doubt that alcohol and amphetamines give players a huge physical advantage like anabolic steroids and HGH do. I think these substances were used to keep players alert through the long season. Therefore I do not believe the accomplishments of these players should be tainted at all.
ReplyDeleteThis article brings to light an issue that remains prevalent in various professional sports: that the season may prove to be unnecessarily long. For example, some NBA players have recently stated that it is not necessary for there to be 82 games for it to be decided who the best teams in the regular season are. I think that at the time of the article, this issue was much more pressing, however. The article noted that one of the primary reasons that the players were using alcohol and amphetamines was to make it through the season and fight through injuries. In modern times, sports medicine has improved to the point that players receive treatment daily not only for their injuries but also for general health and stamina, and thus they are able to prolong their seasons and careers. I do not believe that these players should be held out of the Hall of Fame. In contrast to the steroids and HGH of the modern era, the consumption of these drugs did not enhance their performance. If anything, the consumption of amphetamines and alcohol detracted from their athletic abilities.
ReplyDeleteI do think that these players should be banned from HOF consideration because they took these substances in the hopes that their performances would be enhanced. Just as steroids are supposed to put you over that edge in the attempt to be great, amphetamines and alcohol were used in the attempt to give these players an edge in winning the ball game. If the Mets were the only team during this time to be using these substances, they should definitely be punished because they unfairly gained an advantage while the other 29 teams did not cheat in any way. In addition, the grueling 162 game schedule is simply too much for these ball players. If players feel the need to cheat and gain an unfair advantage to survive the season, the MLB should look into shortening the season. This would create a more honest environment amongst the players in the MLB. Players would also be able to perform really well without feeling the pressure to use substances.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to what my classmates have already said, I am amazed on what the mets players, and many other players, did in order to push through the rigor of a long baseball season. Although it is sad to know that for a long time sports have only been a source of entertainment and the sports community is only interested in big plays, I do not believe that the use of different drugs are the right way for athletes to approach their aches and pains. It is also important to note that the use of drugs is not only the athletes fault but should also be aimed at the audience because they are the ones that motivate the player to turn to drugs. I am still not too sure if their names should not go on the hall of fame or if their achievements should be torn down because what they were able to achieve was great.
ReplyDeleteI think that these players should not be kept out of the hall/ have their records taken down. The reason I say this is that practices like taking the amphetamines were very common as emphasized by the line "passed around like candy". If it was the whole team that was doing the drugs though, that individual team (within that season) might be subject to removal of records. The players would be paying the price with the health side effects these drugs would have caused in their bodies, so they should not be punished much more by having records removed etc... Baseball is a game of team chemistry and clever ways of finding the advantage. These practices followed those two traditions so I think its ok to let the players slide and not penalize them.
ReplyDeleteI think that these players should not be kept out of the hall of fame nor should their records be taken down. I think that although these forms of drugs, especially the consumption of alcohol during games, is not something that would enhance ones performance all that much. As a player I would encourage opposing players to drink alcohol because amidst relaxing the player I feel as though it could also make it harder for someone to perform at a high level. I do also think that these drugs unlike steroids do not alter someone's physical ability. Taking amphetamines or drinking alcohol would not speed up someones swing or enable them to hit farther like steroids do. Thus I do not think the use of these drugs should not taint the amazing skill these players possessed. It is a shame how many baseball players seek drugs to achieve some form of edge but I feel in this particular case these players relied on these drugs more for the confidence they provided and less the way with which they helped them perform. All in all I do not think these players should have their records taken down because these drugs did not alter the natural skill and talent of these players.
ReplyDeleteI was shocked at how much these players were putting in their bodies. As athletes, I would assume they would be acutely aware of what they were consuming as it has a direct effect on the health of their bodies: the key to their success as athletes. It amazes me that the drugs and alcohol actually enhanced their performances. It seems just as drugs and alcohol take the "edge off," they also would slow down the players reaction times. As Connor said, I do not think the drugs or alcohol usage of these players should tarnish their talent. However, I do think it should not be taken lightly in the future as it is crucial to focus on maintaining athletes' health.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what a lot of my other classmates have said in that I do not think that these players should be kept out of the Hall of Fame or have any of their achievements lessened. I think that it is almost more impressive for the '86 Mets team to take amphetamines and drink beers during the game and still perform well enough to make a run at the World Series. I think that instead of taking away from the achievements of the past, the better thing to do would be create rules to make for a better future in baseball which, if I am not mistaken, have already been done since 1986. So let the team get all the praise they want, but at the same time, preach doing the right thing. These drugs were also just a part of the game at the time. I bet that, while the Mets are the most infamous team for doing these things, a lot if not all of the other teams did the same things during games during the '80's. If this is so, were they not just acting on an equal playing field?
ReplyDeleteSimilar to many of my classmates, I agree that these players should not be viewed as lesser and be kept out of the hall of fame. I was amazed by the fact that these players were able to perform at such a high level considering they were pumping their bodies with amphetamines and drinking beers during the game. Rather than punishing the players, I believe the right step would be for MLB to come to an understanding about why the players did what they did, the long season. The players sought out solutions that would give them an edge and help them survive the long, draining baseball season. Major League Baseball is an entertainment business and the more games there are played, the more profit, yet this comes at the price of the player's health. MLB needs to prevent these types of controversies in the future by focussing more on the players health and less on the possible profits.
ReplyDeleteFor some reason the issue of steroids and the issue of drugs and alcohol feel like very different situations morally. It might have something to do with the prevalence of drugs and alcohol in American society as a whole or the fact that needles just seem so gross, but something about the 1986 Mets seems better than the steroid users of the late 90s and early 2000s. In terms of Hall of Fame eligibility, I believe that any player, whether they use steroids or not, should be allowed to be inducted to the Hall of Fame. Not because I value cheaters, but because I believe that the sport of baseball has been so poisoned by the need for money and entertainment value that the use of steroids is a natural evolution of the game.
ReplyDeleteThis article was really interesting to me. I am a little bit confused how drinking beer between innings helped the Mets win, considering alcohol actually impairs motor skills drastically. I agree with many of my classmates that these players should still be allowed to be inducted into the Hall of Fame. I think that steroid or alcohol use during games is reflective of the entire American baseball culture, therefore these players achievements shouldn't be lessened or diminished because they participated in and embraced a culture that most other athletes of the time dabbled in at one point or another.
ReplyDelete