Manny Ramirez, SoCal and Steroids: How Could Life Be Wrong?

Today is Wednesday, August 3, 2011.

Twenty-five years ago today, an aging slugger, whose public image was extreme in some ways, gained a little attention on a Sunday afternoon in a pleasant Southern California city.

Dodger great and All-American Boy Steve Garvey had a homer and three RBI in a victory over a contending team.

The significance was short-lived.

Twenty-five months ago today, an aging slugger, whose public image was extreme in some ways, gained some little attention on a Friday evening in that same pleasant Southern California city.

Here’s how Abacus recalls that Independence Day weekend.

Lazy, hazy, crazy Sunday afternoon, Harry Nilsson (noted mixologist) crooning standards on the stereo—“Makin’ Whoopie”!  Manny Ramirez is back playing for the Los Angeles Dodgers after his 50-game suspension for having a prescription for some stuff known/believed to be used by someone coming off a round of steroid “treatments.”  Large numbers of Dodger fans turned out to cheer his return—in San Diego, no less.  ManRam offered some sort of apology upon his return and has rebuffed questions on the issue since—and, you know, he might be right to do so.

Here’s the Abacus Theory: The advances we’ve seen in the physical capabilities of athletes, and consequently in their competitive performance, are inevitable—were going to happen anyway—indeed are part of a logical progression.  Bigger, faster, stronger is what it’s all about.  We’re shocked and appalled when Manny “dogs it” (exerts less than maximum effort); that’s what our values regarding competition deem unforgivable.

(Isn’t that the knock against Randy Moss?)

Thus, Manny—as well as all these other guys and gals who are believed to have crossed some perhaps arbitrary line of propriety—is deserving of praise for attempting to enhance his performance.  Does not a more productive Manny give the Dodgers a better chance to win, and if all participants are striving to their utmost, does not the level of play (the achievements of the participants) increase/improve?

Maybe the question to consider here is: At what point or under what conditions does the attempt to compete more effectively become an unfair advantage deserving of penalty?  Tampering (but when does tinkering become tampering?) with equipment; violating the playing rules; deliberately attempting to injure another participant—these actions clearly go beyond.

But can’t a guy work harder, attain the utmost level of conditioning and skill, in order to maximize his performance?  Why is the increased acuity of one’s vision through Lasik surgery OK—i.e. a fair advantage—while the means to recover from strenuous exertion and/or injury through the use of what are essentially anti-aging drugs illegal, verboten, dang near a crime against the game?  (Hey, how did current Dodger ownership get into this discussion?)  After all, wouldn’t you think the Lasik would be more beneficial when it comes to hitting a baseball?  Just askin’.

Anyway, amidst all the hoopla, ManRam didn't fare as well as the Padres' first baseman had a quarter-century earlier.  He went 0-for-3 with a walk.

So don’t forget, folks, that’s what you get, folks, for makin’ whoopee.

And that’s how the McCourts fit in.

The Great American Songbook really is timeless, don’t you know?

Twenty-five days ago, San Diego rested, but not the Padres, who lost a 1-0 heartbreaker to, you guessed it, the Dodgers.

Tomorrow's gonna be another day.