Tuesday, April 13, 2004

On Thursday, baseball again will honor the memory of Jackie Robinson.

In 1997, baseball commemorated the 50th anniversary of the day — April15, 1947 — Robinson broke the color barrier in major league baseball by playing his first game for the Brooklyn Dodgers. His No.42 was retired by every club.

Now baseball has taken it a step further, declaring every April15 Jackie Robinson Day.

How about that — having to share your day with the deadline Americans fear the most — income tax day? Poor Jackie still doesn’t have it made.

It is a good idea, though it may take on a different meaning years from now if the number of black players continues to dwindle. Before 1947, it wasn’t quite major league baseball, because some of the major league talent weren’t allowed to compete.

When the debate starts about the best player in the history of the game, it won’t hurt to have an annual day to remind everyone that someone who belongs in that debate — Josh Gibson — wasn’t allowed to play major league baseball, instead forced, along with other black players, to create his legacy in the Negro Leagues.

“We are further ensuring that the incredible contributions and sacrifices he made — for baseball and society — will not be forgotten,” baseball commissioner Bud Selig said.

Cadillac Bud might want to consider making another day in April an annual event worth recognizing — April8. That’s the day Hank Aaron hit home run No.715 in 1974, breaking Babe Ruth’s record.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Last week in Atlanta, they celebrated the 30th anniversary of the home run Aaron hit off Los Angeles Dodgers pitcher Al Downing to break Ruth’s record. That broke a barrier of sorts as well — a black man who started out in the Negro Leagues broke the most cherished record in the game set in a time before black players were allowed in.

But that’s not why baseball should make Hank Aaron Day an annual event. The reason: Baseball should ensure fans won’t forget there was a time when ballplayers set records without the help of performance-enhancing substances.

Hank Aaron Day would honor the memory of the game before steroids became as important a component as a ball, a bat or a glove.

Barry Bonds hit his 660th career home run — tying his godfather, Willie Mays — in yesterday’s home opener in San Francisco. If he does pass Aaron’s career record of 755 — and it is proved Bonds used steroids — there likely will be no asterisk alongside his mark, because baseball didn’t begin testing until last year. The notion opens up all sorts of problems for the statistics compiled by this generation of ballplayers.

But a day honoring Hank Aaron will be the next best thing — an annual asterisk, if you will, to remind everyone some numbers forever will be tainted, but this is one that is not.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The debate rages over the steroid controversy, with some Clarence Darrows arguing complainers simply should shut up unless they have proof about a ballplayer using steroids, based on the premise you are innocent until proven guilty.

Not always, though.

Anyone who fears April15 knows that as far as the Internal Revenue Service is concerned, you are guilty until proven innocent because the IRS operates under the premise that most people, given the chance, will cheat on their taxes.

The same could be said for ballplayers and drug testing. Given the chance, they will do whatever they can to get away with using a substance that will make them stronger because that probably will make them richer. So stronger testing methods are needed to make it more difficult to cheat, and that won’t happen until players tire of being stigmatized by the accusations. It is not a witch hunt. Let’s face it, there were no witches in Salem. In this case, we already know 5percent of the players tested positive for steroids under baseball’s weak testing methods. This time, there are witches to be found.

Advertisement
Advertisement

As far as a day for Barry Bonds, maybe that could be the day he walks up the steps of a San Francisco courthouse, called to testify under oath whether the contributions he made to the game were incredible or incredulous.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Copyright © 2026 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.