Q:
A lot of media outlets, especially ESPN, turned their coverage to cheating in sports immediately after Barry Bonds set the new homerun record. As someone who has received a lot of press for the controversial “Spitter” pitch, what are your thoughts?
A:
When I played baseball a lot of pitchers tried to get an advantage. One way was to make the hitter think there might be something on the baseball. Maybe there was and maybe there wasn't, but the point is the pitcher knew and the batter didn't. That's called a psychological advantage. That's the main thing we did in my day.
It was very similar to using a corked bat during batting practice; the ball would jump off the bat and inevitably the opposing pitcher, who is watching from a far…trying to get an advantage…would say to himself ‘man this guy is really swinging the bat well'. It would mess with his mind.
Q:
What reaction have you witnessed so far to Barry Bonds becoming the new homerun champion?
I've been in Denver and the responses that I've seen have all really been positive about Bonds. It's just something the media and all of those who don't want to accept it just have to live with. Barry has taken the test he's required to take and it's been negative.
People, in general, are resistant to change and those associated with baseball are no different. It's like when they changed the baseball from horse hide to cow hide – it was very soft and loose and the ball didn''t travel far, then they glued it together and now they've changed or improved it to where it jumps and we're seeing the numbers of homeruns that we are. I remember when wood bats were used in college and high school before changing to aluminum bats because of the cost. Aluminum bats are something that most of us wish we could get rid of but we can't, we just have to live with it. You just have to live with what Bonds and McGuire have done and put your own thoughts away and go from there.
Q:
What's the difference between cheating and psychological tricks? Where do we draw the line?
A:
I always go back to taking advantage of the situation. If the catcher gives a sign that is easy for the opposition to pick up then you've got to expect that it's going to happen. If a pitcher tips the pitch because of his wind-up then the opposing team is going to take advantage of it. It's the same for all sports. If a defensive player learns the pattern of a split ends habit and can associate those with different routes then we've got to expect him to anticipate the play. It's the same thing with baseball – if you know a pitcher is throwing a fast ball by the way he winds up then that's what you are going to be prepared to hit. Its part of the game, players do what they can within the rules to improve their chances.
Q:
Do you think the media makes too much of Bonds and cheating?
A:
I think ESPN has overdone the negative coverage and pretty soon the viewers are going to get sick of it. A player still has to have hand-eye coordination in order to hit the ball. I haven't heard of any medications that help hand-eye coordination yet. Everybody thinks the negative stuff is what is going to get fans to the ball park, but I think it's the good things that are going to get the fans to come out. Fans, they enjoy competition. I went to a dinner last night and a luncheon today in Denver and they were talking about the Rockie's playing great ball; they're not talking about one of the Rockies' being tested. I think ESPN is overplaying it really.
Q:
So you believe the sports media over-sensationalizes their coverage in order to create a story?
A:
Absolutely. You hit the nail on the head. They are over-emphasizing what's going on. They aren't spending enough time comparing the different record-setting ball players and the times in which they played. More focus should be on the Babe Ruth era - he was the greatest homerun hitter of his time - and then you take Henry Aaron, he was the greatest of his time, now we have Bonds, and in a few years it's going to probably be Rodriguez. Someone else will come along, they always do.
Q:
Is it kind of like comparing Tiger Woods to Jack Nicklaus?
A:
Exactly. You know Jack Nicklaus didn't have the knowledge of how athletic training benefits a golfer nor the access to equipment in order to workout. He didn't have nutritionists, trainers and other experts advising him day-to-day. Tiger Woods has all of these things so naturally he should be a better player. Just look at the difference in equipment the two have access to during their prime years. The same is true in baseball. When I played, we didn't have the training or medial equipment or experts that they have now. We didn't even have a whirlpool.
Q:
What was your reaction to the Hank Aaron message when Barry Bonds broke the 755 record?
A:
I thought that was just outstanding. I am sure the Commissioner got Henry to record the message. The Commissioner and Henry are very close friends. It was the right thing to do. And I thought Barry Bonds saying to Rodriguez - I saw it on tape - 'You don't have to worry about when you pass my record I'll be pulling for you. I'll be on the front row pulling for you'. And I thought that was very good of Barry Bonds. It took a lot of class.
Q:
Does A-Rod have that many homeruns left in himself?
A:
Oh absolutely! I think he's definitely going to hit 800 or more. And Barry knows that.
Q:
Does Dale Murphy hurt his own legacy by saying the things he did about Barry Bonds?
A:
I would think so. I know Dale Murphy and he's one of the finest gentlemen I know. I didn't like his attitude while talking about a fellow baseball player. So, maybe Barry isn't the easiest guy to get along with or even that nice a guy sometimes. It's just one of those things. I was surprised when I saw the Dale Murphy tape. I don't know why he took the stand that he did. I was just very surprised because I know what type of gentleman he was for many, many years. It sounds like he's going into politics doesn't it?
Q:
Just one more follow up on the media and baseball. How does the coverage of Barry Bonds compare to when you played baseball?
A:
The difference is back in the '60s and early '70s is that writers covering the game of baseball were there to report what went on during the game. I think now too may of them are reporting on what is going on before or after the games too much. If Barry Bonds went 0 for 4 then he's going to be upset and react that way. If a pitcher is knocked out in the second inning he's going to be in a foul mood, and if a writer wants to talk right then the conversation may not be too pleasant. The player makes his living through the game and it is very hard on him when he doesn't perform well, it's like he let the team down, let his family down. In these situations players sometimes say stuff they shouldn't and it gets turned around. When I played, baseball writers told the story of what happened during the game and left our personal issues out of the article. That's the way it should be. We always remember those reporters for that respect. But now I think they just have to cover everything about a player to fill up all the time on air and space in magazines so they can keep selling advertising.
Writer needs to report the game itself, maybe a Hollywood writer should include what's going on before and after for a movie, but I'm just saying we need to get back to telling just what happened on the field and leave the rest alone.
Q:
Let's talk about Tom Glavine winning his 300th game. Did you talk with him?
A:
No I didn't. I sent a message to him by ESPN, of course, [chuckles] to congratulate him. Tell him that I was looking forward to having him join the club and for him to get many more. I was hoping he'd go nine innings but he came out about the sixth inning.
Q:
Did watching Tom Glavine accomplish 300 wins bring back memories?
A:
I didn't watch the whole thing because I was disappointed that he didn't continue to pitch. I was just hoping he'd go on and show how much he wanted it. I thought they would have given him a couple more innings, but he didn't finish his game and he turned it over to the bullpen.
Comments