- Jan 17, 2014
- Reaction score
That's a really fucking awesome discussion question.Andrew Scheid said:
In an alternative universe, the Tribe are using technology to steal signs in the 2016 World Series.
Chapman throws his 3-2 (count) hanging slider to Santana, and instead of Los sitting on 100 mph, he knows the slider is coming and hits the first walk off G7 homer in the WS since 1960.
Years later it's revealed that he had advanced knowledge of what pitch was coming, and there is a groundswell of rancor towards the Indians organization.
Do your intial feelings of utter ecstacy morph into a memory that is tainted and even ambivalent? I honestly don't know.
I'm not sure of the answer this moment. But I will add a different thought: it's interesting how we draw these lines on the slippery slope -- lines between things that we accept as legitimate (and even as recommended) versus things that generate outrage.
For example, take the whole HGH/steroids/BALCO-type performance enhancement. I think most of us would initially agree that it's cheating and shouldn't be allowed. But why is that? Why should those be outlawed, whereas plenty of other types of performance enhancement -- lifting weights, flexibility training, specialized nutrition, allowed medications -- aren't? (And in fact, they're recommended, if not mandatory.)
Same thing with sign stealing. Being able to surreptitiously steal the other team's signs has been a part of baseball since about 30 seconds after signs were first used. Is it fundamentally any different when a team uses a coordinated, technology-driven effort to obtain that information?
None of that will stop me from believing that the Astros are a bunch of cheats who deserve ... well, maybe not an eternity in hell, but at least some time in an unusually warm, brimstone-filled environment. But I have a hard time with setting down an objective rationale for which behavior falls on which side of the line, other than the infamous Justice Stewart "I know it when I see it" line.