Saturday, January 18, 2020

Competitive edge versus cheating is a fine line

“If you ain’t cheating, you ain’t trying.”


So goes the often heard moniker as it pertains to sports at all levels.
Within the past week, the Houston Astros’ cheating scandal surrounding
technology usage to steal signs from opponents has drawn everything
from justification to outrage but mostly the latter. 


So how did the Astros cheat? The team had a camera in centerfield at
Minute Maid Park, which the home venue of the Astros, to ascertain signs
from the opposing catcher to pitcher. These signs are to relay what pitch is
on the way toward the batter. The cameras were reportedly meant to help
manager A.J. Hinch on whether or not to challenge an umpire’s call.
However, the technology usage escalated. Alex Cora, who at the time was
an Astros bench coach, reportedly instructed those in the replay room to
relay the signs to a player who subsequently shared them with teammates.
Astro players also had electronic devices under their uniforms so as to relay
which pitches were coming. 


Yours truly sounded off about that issue in this space that included a link
with extensive details from cbssports.com: 




Traditional and social media have been full of spirited expression over the
past week. Having soaked in the various responses, the question begs, what
is cheating? What is gaining a competitive edge? In dictionary terms,
cheating means, “act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage,
especially in a game or examination.” Competitive edge is reflective of
developing attributes to allow yourself (on an individual or team level) to
outperform your competitors. The attributes can be physical or mental. 


Several people have drawn parallels to the Astros cheating scandal being
worse than the Performance Enhancing Drug (PED) era. Others have said
that both are on equal levels of bad. While I accept that everyone is entitled
to their opinion, I fail to see the logic behind the latter. 


I don’t condemn or condone PED usage but what bothers me most is the
hypocrisy of those who scorn such behavior. For openers, these PEDs were
not against the rules at the time players of this era used them so where does
the cheating part come into the equation? The time frame in which the use
began and ended is far from definitive.


Who are we to say that some players used but never got caught? If such a
player earns a Hall of Fame plaque, it hardly seems fair to deny the honor
to players who confessed their guilt. Even if they did not confess any guilt,
who gives a damn.

PED use did not make the playing field unlevel because pitchers as well as
hitters were using them. I can stick a needle in my ass today and it’s not
going to make me a better hitter. Hitting a baseball is not about strength,
it’s about hand-eye coordination. PED use might be the difference between
a warning track out versus a ball clearing the fence by say 8-10 feet but
when I look at those linked to PED use such as Barry Bonds, Mark
McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Jose Canseco, Jason Giambi, etc., I don’t remember
many of their home runs barely clearing the fence.


In addition, there were several marginal players that used PEDs did not
benefit them. More than half the players listed on the Mitchell Report were
scrubs.


The biggest advantage in a pitcher versus batter matchup is the former
knows what is coming while the latter does not. The essence of pitching is
the chess match between pitcher and batter. The batter thinks curveball,
pitcher throws fastball. 


If a pitcher is facing a hitter on PEDs, he still has the advantage of fooling
the hitter or giving him a pitch he can do little to minimal damage. However,
once the batter knows what’s coming, the chances of making solid contact
go up enormously. If a batter knows that a fastball is coming, he knows to
start his swing earlier. If he knows an offspeed pitch is coming , he knows
to wait on the pitch. 


Some would argue that, “you still have to hit the ball.” True but these are
professionals, what makes you think they won’t take advantage? That idea
is no different than if a student is given a copy of a test with the answers on
it before taking it, of course they are going to ace it. Granted, they may ace
it without that advantage but with it ensures such will happen. 


There is a fine line between doing things to gain a competitive edge and
flat out cheating. Picking up a third base coach signs, noticing pictures
tipping pitches or in football watching individuals tip plays is fair game
because they are doing it out in the open for everyone to see. Why wouldn’t
you take advantage of information not being screened? But when you have
signals that are only meant for pitcher and catcher to decode and you have
an entire organization using technology to decode them is flat out wrong.
It is an advantage that cannot be countered and goes far beyond the human
element. 

Therein lies the fine line and in some cases big difference between gaining
a competitive edge and cheating. 

No comments:

Post a Comment