The famed and valuable ball hit by Barry Bonds for home run number 756 will not be displayed at the Hall of Fame after talks with the owner of the ball stalled after he refused to donate the ball permanently. "The owner's previous commitment to unconditionally donate the baseball has changed to a loan. As a result, the Hall of Fame will not be able to accept the baseball," the Hall said in a statement. "Should the owner choose to unconditionally donate the ball to the museum at a future date, we would be delighted and of course, accept his offer," it said. One would imagine that an item of such significance would be displayed at all costs, but this is just another signal of the skepticism that awaits players that shined during this questionable time in baseball.
UPDATE: Hall accepts Bonds' ball as a permanent donation after daylong negotiations with fashion designer Marc Ecko, owner of the valuable ball.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Seems more like an issue as to promoting a historical item they can't guarantee will be there than baseball providing an opinion on the Steroid Era.
But that's just me.
Is anyone suprised? Baseball and the HOF are such front runners, they run with anything that is good and and when it turns out soured they turn their backs. The steriod era is part of history. Make a wing and throw all of the steriod abusers and their gear and keep it separate, but dont deprive fans of seeing it. But make sure you pub Sir Bud in that same wing.
Also, the Hall of Fame accepted the ball and - from what was reported - the idea that the ball might not find its way to the Hall of Fame was an overblown story.
Regarding Bucky's comment...should we throw Cal Ripken, Jr. and Tony Gwynn into that same wing?
Resp. to the Cal Comment, Cal Ripken and Tony Gwynn are two of a handful of players who without a doubt deserve not to be in that conv. But if its tainted, say its tainted. The fact that Cal and Tony did it their way and clean is a testiment to how good they were as long as they played, so no to answer your question. You got my point with Bonds and Mcguire right?
I agree, it needs to be acknowledged and I get your point regarding players like Bonds. Seeing as Bonds' steroid use is undeniable, I take issue with him even going into the Hall (I don't buy into this "well, he was a Hall of Famer even before he used" mentality). I definitely agree that it makes the achievements of players like Ripken and Gwynn that much more impressive as it's unlikely that they used.
I just take issue with identifying an entire era's worth of players with the mistakes of some. Outside of possibly acknowledging the influence of steroids in MLB through a side exhibit - the Hall of Fame is, after all, a museum and source for baseball history, good and bad - I think that labeling an entire generation of baseball players as users is a bit unjust.
I'm curious as to how the documentation will read on the ball, as it seems that they'd have to make mention of the asterisk to uphold the historical relevance of such an object. Here's a question for anybody that's been recently (my first and only visit to the Hall was during induction week in 1997): is there any large exhibit or mention of steroids or the "Steroid Era," as it's been dubbed, currently?
Post a Comment