General: It's irrelevant

"That explains it."

I despise this phrase.

As innocent as it looks, it holds a malicious connotation behind it. We have all said it, but I have chosen to minimize its usage.

Think about it. How often in our lifetimes have we made an initial inference about a person based on a few interactions, and then, someone lets us know a little more about their lives, and we feel as though we've gained a much more complete perspective on the person and evidence to associate with our inference.

Thus the inevitable words, "That explains it."

It seems that human nature leads us to be inquisitive and seek "explanation," particularly when it involves people we hold in high regard.

It's very easy for people in Cleveland to explain lefty starter Chuck Finley's bad start to the 2002 season on his marital dilemma, which gained national news over a month ago.

"That explains it."

Whenever a player doesn't perform up to their usual standard, isn't as "friendly" as we would hope they would be, or provides an outburst more akin to a violent convulsion, we desire explanation.

Whenever our "heroes" do not perform up to their levels, thus directly influencing the success of "our" teams, we want to know why.

It is not even unusual or unreasonable, and when an "expert" provides us with a plausible explanation -- "that explains it."

In this day in age, post-Watergate, where media infiltration is understood, the internet and its various message boards makes "experts" out of all of us.

There is no greater example of infiltration then in professional sports and politics.

There is no greater microcosm of this ever-increasing need to "explain it" then Neil Travis' column in the New York Post that suggested New York Met catcher, Mike Piazza will be "outing" himself as a homosexual.

But here's the rub.

What does Piazza's sexual orientation explain?

Does it provide us some context as to why he will eventually go down as the greatest hitting catcher in Major League Baseball history?

Does it explain why Piazza can't seem to throw out any runners?

Does it explain his overwhelming charming personality, which allows him to be the day-to-day spokesman for the New York Mets baseball club?

No, not at all. In fact, there is absolutely no correlation at all either scientifically or psychologically or logically.

So what's the deal? Why should we care? Why should anyone care?

As this flap has continued to fester, I am reminded of the great Charles Barkley commercial nearly a decade ago where he stated, "I am not a role model," and the past decade has given us more credence to suggest that Sir Charles was right.

From Steve Howe to Rae Caruth to Mike Tyson to Carl Everett to John Rocker to Darryl Strawberry, and so forth, it is growing far more difficult to look at sports stars in the "role model" light.

Take a look at the list above. The scandalous cads above have committed acts which by all social accounts are considered immoral, heinous or criminal.

So to what level does sexual orientation in sports arise?

It is certainly not criminal to prefer a particular gender and with all due to deference to religious orders, not heinous nor immoral.

Sexual orientation alone, in no way impacts a player's ability to play the game, nor is it a violation of the rules set out by their respective sport.

So what is our fascination, or better what is it that we fear so much as to have to such a public inquiry into professional baseball player's sex life?

Various references in the last few days have encompassed Jackie Robinson's struggles against the color barrier in baseball, and a correlation has been drawn between his plight and that of the player who finally determines that it is his duty to come public with his sexual orientation.

Speculation is that this particular person may suffer the same ill wills as Robinson from fan, peer and teammate alike.

But Robinson was black, and there was no getting around it, no way to hide his color or race.

As much as we may not like to admit this today, it was even considered socially acceptable to mistreat and shout derogatory terms at black people, let alone ballplayers.

In that context, Robinson had the fortitude, patience, baseball skill, savvy, and even temperament that allowed him to succeed above all the racism and misguided hatred, and he did so with a class that we could only hope to attain in our own lives.

What a difference 50 years makes.

Today, for the most part, we look color-blindly at all athletes, appreciating them for their talents only.

Major League Baseball is even talking about an international draft to acquire players from a global stage!

Sexual orientation, however, is different, it's hidden from the human eye.

Despite the very opinionated among us, you have no clue who is homosexual or heterosexual.

It is not a factor that is required for us to determine the strength, physical attribute or mental skill of a person.

In fact, in the words of Piazza, "it's irrelevant."

If we as a society have moved on to the point where we disregard the color and race of an athlete, why should we care about a characteristic we can't even see or has no bearing on the nature of how they play the game?

It is a characteristic that is a part of who the person or player is, nothing more. It assists in defining the "third dimension."

I am not naive to suggest this piece will change human nature.

There will still be the need to search out that player who will finally and confidently stand in from the masses and unabashedly express their homosexuality.

They will struggle with many of the same issues that Robinson did, but there is a difference.

It is no longer socially acceptable to shout slurs at anyone -- regardless of their gender, race or sexual orientation.

This brave person, whomever they are, will suffer latent homophobic aggression from teammates, peers, and fans alike.

Here's a hope that that player, whomever they are, will be as strong in mind and body as he was, and as successful as he was on the field.

People say that their teammates may not want to play with them or shower with them -- funny, many wanted nothing to do with Jackie Robinson either.

Peers from other teams may not be comfortable playing with them -- Jackie knew the feeling.

Fans may not be pleased by the prospect of such a player succeeding -- see Jackie Robinson.

The player who finally comes "out" can take solace that this path has been well-tread before them.

With all due deference to Sir Charles, there is no better role model on the field than Jackie Robinson.

When that player's playing days are done, and we reflect on why their careers went a certain way, why it is that they showed such great savvy in rising above the fray, an expert will note the characteristics that influenced the fate of that player and we will all sit around and sigh, "that explains it."