[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

While there is plenty of blame to go around (most lies with the umps), I think it’s wrong to lionize A.J. for a "heads up" play if he knew Paul caught the ball on the fly. There is nothing admirable about an athlete trying to bait an umpire into making what the athlete knows is a bad call. I realize such deceptive tactics are widely revered in the modern day "win at all costs" sports ethos—wide receivers routinely scoop up passes on a short hop and signal first down, basketball players regularly knock the ball out of bounds and point to their opponent, etc. But why should deliberate attempts to break the rules of the game be characterized as “heads up”, “smart”, “gritty” or otherwise good, instead of just plain ol' cheating?

I don’t think it is a sufficient response to say that it's the player's sole job to win and the job of others to enforce the rules. If that were true, it would be acceptable for players to use steroids so long as they could avoid getting caught. That would help them win, after all.

I suspect A.J. and McGraw would be a good match. But it bears noting that the player McGraw is most closely associated with is one of baseball’s most honorable gentlemen, Christy Mathewson. Frank DeFord recounts in his recent book that one time Matty slid home in a cloud of dust, blinding the umpire and, in despair, the umpire turned to Matty and said, "I couldn't see, Christy, how do you call it?" Matty replied without hesitation, "I was out."

I hope my kids follow Matty’s example.