Be well.

Dave Kindred smooths any ruffled feathers from the "Steroid Era," long after the accused players have retired.

I hope I am alive to see that one.

If I could take back anything I've ever written, it would be those three or four paragraphs at the end of the Johnson-comeback column. Not that they were a lie. Not that they were fiction. Not that they were incorrect in their use of the day's data. Not that I didn't believe what I wrote. But they had no place in a basketball column. More important, they were insensitive to Johnson's circumstances. They also offended colleagues I respected, among them some who had friends dead of AIDS.

http://sportsjournalism.org/sports-media-news/a-look-back-at-a-careers-worth-of-hatpins-in-the-eyeballs/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TylvUGJIi_w

Peace,

Clay

“Oh, the cliche about “thanks for playing” drenched as it always is in sarcasm before a triumphant storm-off? Never, ever gets old!”

That was awesome, BTW. I refer to the “thanks for playing” statements as Internet victory laps. They’re pretty common these days. Here, the Kindred supporters are running them, even though they haven’t really won anything. Albom still has the award. Nothing has changed.

In today’s sports journalism world, we have too many lap-runners and too few meet-winners. The lap-runners sit on the warm bus and wait for the meet-winners to do the work. Then, long after the victorious teams have left, the lap-runners come out and stumble around the track. It makes them feel better, but it changes nothing.

Finally, the “see you in hell” cliche is tired and needs to rest. I prefer: “See you on the other side, Ray.”

Oh, the cliche about "thanks for playing" drenched as it always is in sarcasm before a triumphant storm-off? Never, ever gets old! But if you don't mind, I'd like to play a little more.

Here's Kindred, from Thomas Bonk via LA Times: "He said unprotected heterosexual sex did it," Kindred wrote. "Numbers say that's unlikely. One study says the odds are one in 500 even if a man uses no condom and his partner already has the virus. . . . A man is hundreds of times more likely to acquire HIV by homosexual contact or by using dirty hypodermic needles.

(Dave? If you're out there, I'd love to know your source for the above information which every doctor with a brain might just take issue with.)

And more: "It is forgivable for a man to hide such activity–if no one else is hurt by his behavior. But it is reprehensible if a man serving his self-interest helps create a frightening lie that causes research money to be diverted from more critical fields."

Yes, Charles, Kindred was "incorrect". He assumed something that wasn't true which led to his being "incorrect." His assumption was based on (ahem) bovine scatology which led to him being "incorrect." Which makes him "incorrect" morally and "incorrect" professionally.  But at least he didn't lie.

And Knilands? Not for nothing but *if* you think my praise for Pierce constitutes knee-pad wearing than I don't want to be anywhere near your perverted imagination and would add that you can go straight to the home of Hades, do not pass Go.

And if this were a case of professional jealousy at work, as you've so wrongly suggested, you'd see the knives come out every time someone won the Red Smith. You don't see that — you've never seen that before, in fact — because no one has a bad thing to say about Jim Murray or Mary Garber or W.C. Heinz. This award, until this year, was reserved for the giants of our profession. That's why you (nor I) won't ever have to worry about being so honored, and that's why we're upset.

And Zach, get out now. Good journalists care. That you already don't tells me exactly how far you're going to go.