Another great article about the Cheaters in baseball who seem to get overlooked

[TxBroadcaster]

Since the very beginning of organized baseball, pitchers and hitters have waged a war for supremacy in their critical individual contest, and for control of the game itself. Most of that war is, of course, fought on the field, but the battle is also dictated by how the rules are written and whether they are strictly enforced.

 

In 1874, batters were first required to stand in a box rather than run toward the pitch and swing. The number of balls needed for a walk was nine. Pitchers threw from just 45 feet from the plate, but were allowed to release the ball only sidearm or underhand. During the 1880s, pitchers were also, at various times, required to pitch without a windup and from a "pitcher's box." And because the game back then centered on putting the ball in play, hurlers in the first decade of professional ball were mandated to ask batters what kind of pitch they would like and where they wanted it located -- high, low, or at the belt.

 

However, as players looked to gain advantages in what is now erroneously thought of as a gentleman's game, they began to cheat. Pitchers were dismayed by the ever-decreasing number of balls needed for a walk as the rules changed from eight to seven to six to the current number of four in just 20 years. Many early moundsmen skirted the rules by putting a "break" on the ball by flicking their wrists in order to make their offerings harder to hit. Pitchers also began changing their arm angles, seeing how much they could get away with by flinging the ball at increasingly high angles. In 1883, the National League responded to this illegitimate practice by passing a rule prohibiting any pitches being thrown from above the shoulder.

 

Soon, those restrictive rules -- which now seem hopelessly quaint -- were overhauled or eliminated. Pitchers were finally allowed to legally throw breaking balls, deliver with a long windup, and even throw straight overhand if they wanted to. As pitchers gained more freedom, they gained corresponding tactical advantages that tended to stifle the offense. The official response was to lengthen the distance between the pitcher and the hitter, which was finally set at the contemporary 60 feet, 6 inches in 1893 -- leading to a brief boom in scoring.

 

A succession of rules changes after 1893 chipped away at the batters' superiority, culminating with the adoption of the crucial rules change that counted foul balls as strikes by the NL in 1901 (and by the upstart AL in 1903). The foul-strike rule set the stage for what is now known as the low-scoring deadball era, which defined the game until the home run renaissance of the 1920s.

 

A constant theme throughout the 19th century evolution of the professional game was the search for what was viewed as the ideal balance between hitting and pitching, between offense and defense. While rules changes in the 20th century were not so dramatic as in the grand old game's early days, changes to the specifications for the size of the strike zone, for the distance of outfield fences, and the size of gloves -- among many other things -- had powerful effects on the way the game was played.

 

In recent years, many self-anointed "purists" and other old-timers have complained that baseball doesn't do enough to help the pitchers. But the debate about the proper balance between hitting and pitching has existed since the game's earliest days -- and with people on both sides of the fence opining that without some change, the game would go to hell.

 

Perhaps the pro-pitching purists, complaining about today's steroid-inflated and ballpark-induced home runs, would prefer a return to the greatest season for pitching in their lifetimes: 1968. During the 1960s -- the era of 3-1 games and seventh-place clubs that batted in the .220s -- baseball lost much of its popularity to pro football, considered at the time a more exciting sport.

 

In 1968, the year Bob Gibson posted his famous 1.12 ERA, the Oakland Athletics hit .240 -- the highest team average in the AL. Five starting pitchers in the junior league posted ERAs under 2.00. Only one AL hitter, Carl Yastrzemski, managed to eke out a .300 batting average. Fergie Jenkins of the Cubs lost five 1-0 games. More than 20 percent of all games in 1968 ended as shutouts.

 

Following the impotent 1968 season, many of the same experts who had cried out for the expansion of the strike zone in 1963 (to combat the supposedly deleterious effects of expansion pitching) completely reversed course. Now the sages wanted urgent, drastic action to help the beleaguered hitters, so the major-league rules committee lowered the height of the pitching mound from 15 to 10 inches and restored the strike zone to its pre-1963 dimensions.

 

But the solution to the historic imbalance was not so easy to implement. Many fans and pundits forget that, even after those changes were adopted for 1969, AL hitters continued to largely shoot blanks. A major reason for the AL's adoption of the DH four years later was a panic over low attendance that was viewed largely as a result of low scoring. The 1972 AL East champion Detroit Tigers, for example, hit a lusty .237, and the league's ERA was a stingy 3.06. Little-remembered Roger "Spider" Nelson of Kansas City posted a 2.08 ERA, good enough to rank only fifth.

 

A dose of historical perspective is clearly in order. Before 1920, pitchers were legally allowed to spit on the ball, rub it with dirt or other substances, and even cut its cover. Such was the ethos of the deadball era when pitching, defense, speed and one-run tactics were judged morally superior to batting in general and slugging in particular. Allowing pitchers to coat baseballs with all kinds of wet, sticky substances was bad enough. But when combined with a penurious attitude that kept balls in play for the whole game, it became a parody of an athletic contest.

 

So the lords of the national pastime finally, hesitatingly took action, banning most pitchers from using artificial substances or defacing the ball, although a small group of hurlers were exempted from the ban. (It was believed that banning the spitter from the repertoires of those that relied on the pitch would ruin their livelihood -- somehow the hitters whose paychecks were taken away by their inability to hit loaded pitches didn't matter.)

 

Then the roof caved in on the dirty (literally) practices of the first two decades of the century. In August 1920, star Cleveland shortstop Ray Chapman died when his skull was fractured by a high, inside pitch from pitcher Carl Mays. While it is not clear that Chapman's death was caused by a hard-to-see pitch, something had to be done in response to the tragedy since Chapman was as popular in his day as Nomar Garciaparra is today. The major leagues quickly adopted a policy under which scuffed or dirty baseballs were removed from play and replaced with clean ones. This decision -- combined with the end of the spitter, emery and shine balls; and the strategic revolution wrought by the power hitting of the great Babe Ruth -- tremendously increased offense and changed the game forever.

 

When grandfathered Burleigh Grimes (what a perfect name for a spitballer) pitched his last big-league game in 1934, the legal spitter breathed its last gasp. That's not to say, though, that the spit ball or its outside-the-rules cousins disappeared from the game.

 

Ballplayers are, above all else, competitors, and many will do anything to win -- including cheating, lying and taking performance-enhancing drugs. Plenty of pitchers, especially those with fading stuff and those who made it to the majors mostly by their cunning and guile, have been willing to try anything legal or outlawed to help give their pitches an extra break.

 

The list of Hall of Fame hurlers who either have admitted to cheating (Gaylord Perry, Whitey Ford, Don Drysdale, even Gibson) or have been accused (Jenkins, Don Sutton, Jim Bunning, Don Newcombe, Phil Niekro, Early Wynn, Dizzy Dean) is as long as your cheatin' throwin' arm. If one protests that being accused is not the same as having probative evidence, what does that say about the current anti-steroid hysteria?

 

Lew Burdette became famous for throwing the spitter in the 1950s, and even when he didn't throw it, hitters were worried that he could. That's the point, isn't it? Ford and his batterymates behind the dish cut baseballs with their belt buckles and shin guards to give the great southpaw extra break on his pitches. Perry began using everything he could on the ball to increase his effectiveness; as a result, his mediocre career suddenly blossomed into a Cy Young-caliber one. Second-line pitchers like Jack Hamilton, Thad Tillotson and Bob Shaw were famous in the 1960s for relying on spitters and scuffballs.

 

On Aug. 18, 1968, Chicago Cubs reliever Phil Regan -- believed by everyone in the game to frequently use Vaseline on the ball -- crossed plate umpire Chris Pelekoudas once too often. Twice during the game, Pelekoudas and the other umpires nearly strip-searched Regan. Nonetheless, the men in blue could find no foreign substances on his cap or uniform. Yet Pelekoudas had the nerve to overturn several of Regan's pitches anyway, twice even nullifying outs and letting batters hit again.

 

Later that week, NL President Warren Giles reprimanded Pelekoudas for acting without physical evidence, thereby telling all umpires that their professional judgment alone was not sufficient to enforce the rules. Umpires understandably stopped trying to catch Regan doing something illegal, so the veteran reliever kept throwing his Vaseline ball, unmolested for the rest of his career.

 

In July 1978, umpire Doug Harvey (known in the game as "God") kicked Sutton out of a game for throwing illegal pitches. The NL suspended Sutton, who promptly threatened to sue the league. Gutlessly, the league caved in and rescinded the suspension, a move that sent another unmistakable message to all umpires about the perils of enforcing the rules about illicit pitches.

 

Everyone in baseball knew Perry threw spitters, but the crafty veteran was able to hide it well enough that it became a running joke. Perry's outlandish flouting of the rules was somehow seen as cute and funny instead of dastardly underhanded.

 

Umpires are the primary arbiters of on-field integrity. As such, they care as much about the rules of baseball as anyone alive, and it's safe to say most would love to call the spitball more often. The reality is they can't, as they are unsupported by baseball's hierarchy when they nail pitchers for illegal deliveries unless there is incontrovertible, tangible evidence. Mike Scott, Orel Hershiser, Steve Rogers and other 1980s-era stars continued the tradition, and Perry wasn't disciplined for throwing spitballs until he was with his seventh team in his final season in 1983, when he was in his mid-40s and had probably thrown tens of thousands of illegal pitches.

 

Regan, Perry and Sutton's defiance set the pattern for the decades since -- making attempts to enforce the rules primarily the province of angry opposing managers. Needless to say, many managers won't press for searches of opposing pitchers because that would expose their own pitchers to the same tactic. Therefore, most umpires now take the attitude that it's safer to be nonconfrontational: "Don't make waves in a calm sea" is the way it's often expressed.

 

To quote a very popular book title on the subject, "It ain't cheatin' if you don't get caught." That attitude is nonsense. It's cheating by definition if it's against the rules. Not getting caught doesn't make it right, and it doesn't make those who cheat noble nor excuse their behavior.

 

Some pitchers, mostly not of star caliber, cheated so obviously, umpires had to discipline them. Rick Honeycutt was caught with a thumbtack taped to his finger when he wiped his forehead on a sweaty day and cut himself bloody to the amazement of the umps and others in attendance. Kevin Gross had sandpaper in his glove. Late-blooming "knuckleballer" Joe Niekro was nailed on camera with an emery board in his pocket. Dale Mohorcic had to be hospitalized with internal bleeding after he actually swallowed a piece of sandpaper on the mound rather than let the evidence be found.

 

Though they can't be counted exactly, plenty of pitchers continue to employ illegal pitches today. A mini-tempest erupted this year when 300-game winner and surefire Hall of Famer Greg Maddux was accused of doctoring the ball. Mark Buehrle of the White Sox admitted in June that he has used pine tar. Brian Moehler, suspended for scuffing the ball in 1999, has re emerged in 2005 as a rotation starter in the majors.

 

When Washington manager Frank Robinson asked the umpires to check out Angels reliever Brendan Donnelly in June, the righty reliever was found with pine tar on his glove and later suspended. Even though he was caught red-handed, Donnelly professed loudly that he wasn't cheating. Emotions ran so high, Angels manager Mike Scioscia behaved as if he had been stabbed in the back; rather than taking the ejection of his pitcher calmly, he nearly attacked the 69-year-old Robinson. The Cardinals' temperamental reliever Julian Tavarez had the same child-with-hand-in-the-cookie-jar reaction when he was suspended in 2004 for having pine tar on his cap.

 

That's the cultural norm in baseball. To quote a very popular book title on the subject, "It ain't cheatin' if you don't get caught." That attitude is nonsense. It's cheating by definition if it's against the rules. Not getting caught doesn't make it right, and it doesn't make those who cheat noble nor excuse their behavior.

 

Just wait until we begin to see the fallout from pitchers' using steroids. Several hurlers have already been suspended for the practice, and given that one major benefit of steroids is that they help injured players recuperate much quicker, we may well hear a lot more about star pitchers and steroids in the next year.

 

For more than 75 years, big-league pitchers have gotten away with cheating with the ultimate Calvinistic defense:

 

"I didn't do it."

 

"Nobody saw me do it."

 

Finally, "You can't prove anything."

 

With the anti-steroid crusade in full swing today, we're sure to see even more of the "wink, wink; nudge, nudge" attitude about pitcher cheating while out-of-bounds sluggers are pilloried.

 

'Twas ever thus in baseball.

 

Gary Gillette is the editor of the 2005 ESPN Baseball Encyclopedia, which was published in March by Sterling. Click here to order a copy. Gary can be reached via e-mail at [email protected].

 

Stuart Shea also contributed to this article. Shea is an associate editor of the 2005 ESPN Baseball Encyclopedia and author of "Wrigley Field: The Unauthorized Biography." Click here to order a copy or to contact Stu.

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/sto...30208&num=0

[cheaptrick77]

TxEaglecaller -- these articles you have posted all make great points, but aren’t these more of a desperate alternative for Bonds apologists ??

 

No one has ever stated that Bonds is the ONLY player in MLB history that “cheated” or that the entire history of Baseball has been played in proverbial vacuum.

 

YES, Gaylord Perry cheated.

 

So did Bonds.

 

These are separate issues, aren’t they ???

[Immortal13]

All cheaters should be dealt with appropriately, according to the offense. Bonds ranks at the top of the list along with other known steroid users.....McGuire, Sosa, Giambi ect.

 

Just because others have cheated in the past, does not justify what Bonds and the like have done.

 

 

 

Dang I hate apologists:banging:

[TxBroadcaster]

I am in NO way a Barry apologist...I find it funny Cheapy that u give people a hard time on the political forum for labeling people, and then u turn around and do that to me.

 

I am simply pointing out that cheaters have been around since the beginning of the game, yet we want to crucify Bonds, and other Roids user, but we look at what pitchers do and did, and we say oh that is just baseball.

 

 

Immortal I agree with first part about cheaters being delt with..But I have to ask...How is a Roids user higher on the cheating list than someone who doctors the ball?...Doctoring the ball DIRECTLY effects the game. Your not using something on yourself to be better, your messing with the actual game equipment. To me that is as bad as Roids.

[Guest]

I agree, it's all wrong and they should be punished. However, I can't hardly complain about what happened before I was born, but I sure can raise cain over what happens today. I agree that Sosa, McGwire, Giambi, etc. all are probably cheaters, too. But the fact remains, Bonds is the one breaking records right now! Just because we've let other slide in the past, does that mean every other cheater from now on gets a pass?

[TxBroadcaster]

Originally posted by Living4Christ

Just because we've let other slide in the past, does that mean every other cheater from now on gets a pass?

 

 

NO...But if your going to demonize Bonds and claim his records ( not you personally) should either have an asterik, or be wiped from the record books, Then at least say the same about cheaters in the HOF.

[Guest]

I agree, but you have to start somewhere. It's just like the immigration deal....We'll worry about the 12 million here later, for now secure the borders from more illegals coming in. The buck stops here. Bonds has more evidence against him than anybody else, so if we can't nail him, we'll never get anybody.

[TxBroadcaster]

Originally posted by Living4Christ

Bonds has more evidence against him than anybody else, so if we can't nail him, we'll never get anybody.

 

so a pitcher such as Gaylord Perry ADMITTING he loaded the ball with substance is less evidence than Bonds? To me they are the same

[Guest]

I was speaking of hitters and other steroids allegations...but I agree with you.

[cheaptrick77]

Originally posted by TxEaglecaller

I find it funny Cheapy that u give people a hard time on the political forum for labeling people, and then u turn around and do that to me.

Nope -- you are not going to catch me in a discrepancy this time !! :D

 

Unless your name is Gary Gillette or Stuart Shea, I was not referring to you !! :whome:

 

Read what I said again:

 

these articles you have posted all make great points, but aren’t these [points] more of a desperate alternative for Bonds apologists ??

 

You were just passing along an article you found interesting -- I was not labeling you :)

[TxBroadcaster]

Originally posted by cheaptrick77

I was not labeling you :)

I know, I was just taking the chance to disagree with you LOL

[shoelessjoelives]

Well then, when we are in the "Talking About Cheater's" mode, do we include or should we include every hitter that comes to the plate and the first thing they do, in front of the ump and everybody, is rub out the back line in the back of the batter's box...........should we include them in the list or put them in the That's just part of the game category.

 

:thumbsup:

[Guest]

Excellent point, Shoeless.....what about the pitchers who cover up the rubber with dirt to get closer to the plate? What about pine tar on the bat? How come batters can use it and pitchers can't? What about Scott Podsednik altering his shoes, so he can run faster? What about Arthur Rhodes' earring that kept poor Omar Vizquel from seeing the ball? I guess all these should be lumped in the huge cheater's bucket?

[Straw]

Originally posted by Living4Christ

I guess all these should be lumped in the huge cheater's bucket?

Or yall can quit complaining about Barry Bonds!:whistle:

[shoelessjoelives]

Never happen, my friend !!