My dad doesn't care much for Father's Day. To him, it's just another day, but for me it has become a day to reflect on just how blessed I am to have a father as wonderful and as loving as my own.
Without getting into too much detail in fears of divulging family secrets; my dad wasn't required to be the amazing father he is to me, but he was, and to this day, he is still the person I call when faced with both obstacles in life and the joys of accomplishments.
Today presents a perfect opportunity to share with you what my father shared with me; the love of reading and a deep understanding of baseball literature. Atop the list of books my father has either given me or loaned permanently never to be returned is Joy In Mudville: The Big Book of Baseball Humour.
The collection of essays, drawings and articles features many of the sport's heavy hitters, including Ring and John Lardner, Roger Angell and Garrison Keillor. There are contributions from ex-players (Yogi Berra), cartoonists (Charles Schulz and Bill Watterson) and that special brand of sports writer that waxes nostalgic while making many a reader cringe (Mitch Albom.)
An excerpt from the book's sleeve says it best; "Who's funnier? Casey Stengel or Yogi Berra? Ring Lardner or John Lardner? Alibi Ike or Babe Herman? Garrison Keillor or Russell Baker? The Dodgers or The Mets? Calvin Trillin or Marv Throneberry? They're all here, and so are such literary sluggers as Philip Roth, Robert Coover or George Plimpton; such poets of Broadway as Damon Runyon and Jimmy Breslin; such playwrights as Herb Gardner and Neil SImon; such sports columnists as Mitch ALbom, Ira Berkow, Mike Downey and Tony Kornheiser."
If you love baseball, or any of the aforementioned writers and artists, this is a must-read collection.
Every time I pick-it up for a read, it reminds me of playing catch with my father in the backyard, Jays game blaring on the radio with me struggling with my two-seamer, all ears, absorbing all of the knowledge my father has to bestow.
Call your dad, or even better yet, find the man and give him a giant hug will you?
Whether or not you caught tonight's episode of 60 Minutes, if you're a sports fan you've likely heard of American professional cyclist Tyler Hamilton's admission that he used performance enhancing drugs while competing both internationally as a member of the United States national team and as a rider for various teams.
During tonight's episode, which features the aforementioned admissions which were leaked earlier last week, Hamilton not only admits his faults, but also points the finger at one of the most influential athletes of this generation; Lance Armstrong.
Lance's 7 Tour De France victories are as great of an accomplishment as was his fight with cancer and the millions of people worldwide inspired by his battle, and subsequently the 'Livestrong' campaign responsible for the widespread popularity of yellow armbands.
Hamilton and Armstrong were teammates for the United States Postal team during Armstrong's victories in 1999, 2000 and 2001. He claims that he witnessed Armstrong using EPO, a controversial and popular enhancement drug used by cyclists.
While many would consider Hamilton's admissions to be a testament of his integrity, I question the purpose of pointing the finger at Armstrong, a man whose struggle transcended the very sport he competed in, a sport ripe with positive drug tests and even more allegations, a sport whose profile grew exponentially in the U.S. because of his conquests and a man whose suffering motivated countless of people worldwide to fight the symptoms of cancer and overcome whatever obstacles may present themselves as a result of the illness.
I commend Hamilton for returning the Gold Medal he won at the 2004 Olympics, but the initial test was found to have traces, and were it not for the fact the second test sample was accidentally frozen, he would have lost his medals then, 7 years before tonight's admission of guilt.
Acclaimed author and Detroit Free Press columnist Mitch Albom (Tuesdays With Morrie), echoes many of the sentiments I've expressed above with this short clip courtesy of ESPN. A man so well versed in humanizing professional sports once again conveys the importance of turning a blind eye to certain violations for the greater good.
Last week, another former teammate of Armstrong's and fellow professional American rider George Hincapie came-out and announced that he too had seen Lance inject himself with something thought to have been EPO. As in with the Hamilton case, though Hincapie's statement is not a self-serving as the brash Hamilton's, it brings to mind the same question.
Even if Lance Armstrong had taken drugs like many of the world's greatest riders, including my favourite Ivan Basso from CSC, who was suspended for his usage, does his accomplishments both on and off the roads perform a greater good than that of any other athlete of our time.
More so, the prevalence of performance enhancing drugs in cycling should come as little surprise to those that follow the sport like yours truly. A grueling and debilitating exhibition that often requires consecutive day's worth of 200km+ rides through mountainous terrain, dangerously breaching the limits of physical constraints and VO2 Max. Because of such conditions, riders and their coaches and managers are in a constant search of new means of improving their performances. Blood doping sounds like a terrible procedure, but really it's only allowing the riders blood to become more oxygenated, thus improving stamina, and as a result, performance.
It can be considered a double standard of sorts to fault one person, yet not another, but is it that wrong to turn a blind eye when the accused has been both an idol and a role model to countless people and the face of American cycling?
Perhaps so more reasoning on the parts of Mr. Hincapie and Hamilton would have been more beneficial than the lack of foresight they displayed with their admissions and allegations.
