The League of Extraordinary Gentlemanliness
by Stephen M. Klugewicz
The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. This field, this game, is a part of our past, Ray. It reminds us of all that once was good, and it could be again.— Terrence Mann, in “Field of Dreams”
The National Football League recently
announced that it would be more strictly enforcing rules against
excessive celebrations during games in the coming season. Specifically,
league officials are emphasizing the rulebook’s prohibitions against the
following demonstrations: “sack dances; home run swing; incredible
hulk; spiking the ball; spinning the ball; throwing or shoving the ball;
pointing; pointing the ball; verbal taunting; military salute; standing
over an opponent (prolonged and with provocation); or dancing.” The
NFL’s enactment of this addition to its policy a few years back elicited
a not inconsiderable degree of protest among fans who presumably enjoy
such self-glorification and who mocked the league acronym as standing
for the “No Fun League.”
Instead of mockery, however, the
league’s authorities deserve praise for their efforts to enforce good
sportsmanship in football, a game which over the years has devolved,
perhaps more than any other American sport, into an egotistical series
of self-congratulatory displays. I am old enough to recall the days when
only touchdowns were openly celebrated, and then only modestly by the
player who scored them. (The typical act was to spike the ball in the
end zone.) This tradition began to change in the 1980s when the
Washington Redskins routinely began conducting a silly, orchestrated
group dance in the end zone after scoring touchdowns. These “Fun Bunch”
dances led to the first NFL policy against excessive celebrations.
Despite this rule change, the trend of conducting self-congratulatory
routines only grew, extending now to the most routine of plays: sacking
the quarterback, swatting a pass away, even making the common tackle all
became opportunities for narcissistic strutting.
The fact that the NFL continues to
battle the problem of poor manners serves to highlight the innate
gentlemanliness that characterizes football’s main rival as “THE
American sport”: baseball. In baseball there is both a respect for other
players and for the game itself that is missing in football and indeed
in any other major sport. Baseball singularly entails an unwritten code,
which consists of three elements: (1) Do not show anyone up; (2) Do not
cause serious physical injury to another player; (3) Try your best (4)
Do not cheat. A general adherence to this code means that baseball
requires less legalistic regulation than football and other sports.
Though the baseball rulebook seeks to
address all possible rule infractions, penalties are so rare in baseball
as to be shown on the nightly highlight reels when they occur. A fan
will likely have to watch his team play a dozen or more games before he
witnesses a pitcher cited for committing a balk,
and he will likely have to take in many more games before he sees, say,
catcher’s interference called or a an umpire call a runner out for
running outside the baseline. The ultimate penalty, ejection, is even
rarer, and occurs almost exclusively when a player “shows up” an umpire
by questioning a call or when a manager uses overly colorful language in
arguing an umpire’s decision. This is in marked contrast with any
football game, in which it seems that a penalty is called every other
play, with much time wasted marking off penalty yardage and repeating a
down, both utterly boring delays of the game.
When it comes to celebrating, baseball
has no written rule. The first rule of the code of conduct is enforced
by the players themselves. And there is no more accepted rule than that a
batter should not celebrate a home run excessively. Yes, a game-winning
homer may appropriately involve one’s entire team emerging from the
dugout to mob the hero at home plate. But in the case of the in-game
home run, the batter cannot stand and observe his work for more than a
second or two before running the bases, and he must run the bases at a
fair clip—no slow savoring of a “home run trot” and certainly no dancing
or gestures to the crowds. Once safely back in his dugout, he may
high-five his teammates and celebrate a little more. Only in very
special circumstances, such as in the case of a multiple home run game
or a grand slam that gives the home team the lead, may the player emerge
again from the dugout to take a “curtain call” from the adoring home
crowd, and that gesture itself must be brief and not overdone.
A batter who does showboat after hitting
a home run can rightfully expect to have the opposing pitcher on the
offended team throw at him, likely during his very next at-bat. Now, to
meet the second rule of the code, the pitcher must not throw behind the
batter or above his shoulders. Both locations could endanger the health
of the batter (the ball could hit him on the head in the latter case; in
the former, a natural instinct to jump backwards when a ball is coming
at you could also put the noggin in the way of harm.)
It is not simply the offended team that
respects this code. Teammates of the batter fully expect and often
support the opposing pitcher’s “plunking” their showboating teammate. A
case in point occurred this season on the New York Mets when rookie
Jordany Valdespin showboated a meaningless home run he hit against the
Pittsburgh Pirates. The Pirates’ pitcher proceeded to hit Valdespin his
next time at the plate. Some of his teammates literally applauded from
the dugout the meting out of this rightful retribution. Mets pitcher
LaTroy Hawkins said of Valdespin’s antics: “It was a bonehead thing to
do. And to do that against [Pirate pitcher] Jose Contreras? He’s old
enough to be his father, and one of the nicest guys in the world.” Mets
outfielder Marlon Byrd summed it up: “The Pirates did what you were
supposed to do.”
The third rule of the code—try your best—is also enforced, usually by a manager who will bench a player for failing to run out a routine groundball. In one extraordinary instance, a player enforced this code against a member of the opposition.
The year was 1990, and the detestable Deion Sanders of the Yankees hit a routine popup. Instead of running hard to first base, he turned and headed to the Yankees dugout. Behind the plate for the opposing White Sox was veteran catcher Carlton Fisk, who objected to Sanders’ outright disrespect for the game. Fisk shouted to Sanders to run the ball out. The next time the Yankee came to the plate (and went through his usual routine of drawing a dollar sign in the dirt with his bat—I am not making this up), Fisk confronted the younger man. “If you don’t start playing this game right, I’m going to kick your butt right here.”
In light of the recent developments in
baseball’s ongoing Performance-Enhancing Drug (PED) scandal, readers
might balk at my claim that baseball is the realm of gentlemanly codes.
Rule four of the code has obviously been ignored by an unknown, but
certainly significant, number of players going back decades and
including some of the game’s brightest stars. Admittedly, the PED
scandal has given baseball a huge black eye and has presented the
greatest challenge to the game’s integrity since the 1919 Black Sox
scandal.
It is also true that as the PED scandal
developed over the last decade, players were generally silent about the
transgressions of their peers, reluctant to expose fellow players with
whom they felt solidarity, not least because they all belonged to the
same labor union. Owners too had long turned a blind eye toward the use
of banned substances, relishing the revenues generated by the excitement
of unprecedented offensive output and home-run-record shattering drama.
But attitudes began changing during the
season of 2007, when Barry Bonds was chasing Hank Aaron’s career home
run record, a record that Bonds went on to break. As evidence came to
light that Bonds had used, and was likely continuing to use, PEDs, the
historic nature of his nightly exploits was severely tainted, and many
fans immediately rejected the validity of the new “record.” This
reaction stood in marked contrast to the hoopla that surrounded Mark
McGwire’s and Sammy Sosa’s chase of Maris’ single-season record almost a
decade before, when there were only whispers of the use of questionable
substances by players.
Though it took time, today baseball has
at last come to grips with the PED scandal, and the baseball code. The
magnitude of the PED scandal is itself a testament to the special
sanctity of the game in the eyes of those who play and follow it. And
nothing is more sacred in baseball than statistics and records. There is
now discussion among baseball writers and fans as to whether asterisks
should be placed—either figuratively or literally— next to the records
and statistics of proven PED users. This season we have seen slugger
Chris Davis of the Baltimore Orioles refer to Roger Maris’ 61 home runs
in a season as “the natural record.” Davis, who as of this writing is on
a pace to break Maris’ mark, clearly considers invalid the higher
single-season home run totals achieved by PED users Mark McGwire, Sammy
Sosa, and Barry Bonds. On this he is joined by many, perhaps most, fans.
Witness also the prevailing nature of
the commentary about Alex Rodriguez’s current refusal to accept Major
League Baseball’s penalty of suspending him through the 2014 season for
his use of PEDs and his continued lying about this use. Never has there
been such vitriol directed at a player by major sports writers. Scott
Miller of CBS Sports recently called Rodriguez “a delusional, deranged
dope who long ago should have forfeited the privilege to play major
league baseball.” Miller is typical of countless baseball
people—players, owners, writers, fans—who have used the word “privilege”
in regard to playing baseball; about what other sport is this ever
said?
Baseball’s gentlemen’s code, which
extends down from the major leagues all the way to Little League, tends
to engender good behavior in those who play the game. Narcissistic,
non-conforming players who flaunt the code—Deion Sanders, Albert Belle,
Milton Bradley, Bryce Harper—are the exceptions, and their careers tend
to be brief and disappointing ones (let the young Harper be warned).
It must be wondered whether long
allegiance to the baseball code was partly responsible for one of the
most astounding, yet almost unnoticed, acts of virtue ever committed by a
sports figure. In the winter of 2011, Kansas City Royals pitcher Gil
Meche voluntarily retired from the game, foregoing the final $12 million
on his multi-year contract. Meche was injured and would have sat out
the 2012 season while receiving paychecks. “When I signed my contract,
Meche explained, “my main goal was to earn it. Making that amount of
money from a team that’s already given me over $40 million for my life
and for my kids, it just wasn’t the right thing to do.”
Of course, this was a singular act, even
for baseball, as there are countless cases of injured baseball players
gleefully taking paychecks while they spend entire seasons on the
disabled list or are released by a team. Nevertheless, it seems that
only in baseball, the last refuge of gentlemanliness, could such an act
of heroism take place.
Comments
Post a Comment