Tommy Craggs

Hindsight May Be 20/20 But It Can Still Be Short-Sighted

Before I start this post, I’d like to add a very, very strong caveat. It’s something I believe deeply in and have tried very, very hard to avoid doing anywhere: talking about someone else’s writing in the negative. I think it’s one-sided, I think it’s generally unfair, and I think it rarely allows any sort of positive discussion to really take place. At best it looks like bickering and at worst it looks like a cheap shot.

Sometimes, though, it needs to be said.

Deadspin’s Tommy Craggs has a very interesting post up today, and it deserves your attention; not because it’s beautifully written, though Tommy is in fine form—funny, and to the point; not because it’s excellently researched, though clearly Tommy has proven, many times, that he’s a quality journalist who does his homework.

No, it deserves your attention because it’s wrong, though not in the sense that it’s really factually off, is home to a misplaced a comma or ended a sentence with the grave finality of a preposition. (Anyway, where did that rule come from?)

No, it’s wrong because it’s an attempt to re-write history. The post is about the Hall of Fame nomination of former AP reporter Steve Wilstein, who first wrote this piece about Mark McGwire’s use of the testosterone-boosting drug Androstenedione.

This is the story that birthed a decade of questions, a decade of hearings and a decade of mistrust, for sure.