Hootman Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 What a crock this steroids debate is becoming. Who cares who took what and when as long as they clean it up now. You can't go back and remove or asterix records because they may have taken something in 19canteen! Sport is full of it and MLB turned a blind eye to it for years. To amend records would be a disgrace. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and his start to the season shows he did it on talent, I hope he gets all the records and shoves it right back in these morally selective journos faces!! :2cents: PS I don't advocate the use of drugs, just think you can't go back and change things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 So what your saying is: If you did something that was wrong and you get caught.. You should not be responsible for it? I mean you are only doing something that was spelled out in the rules and you were only taking a designer drug that for a good while was undetectable but that shouldn't matter... Thats what I want, the American Past-time to overlook anything wrong just because he is still good this year? What? Could someone give me a good reason why ****IF**** it is proven that someone (say 7 people) broke the rules intentionally they shouldnt be removed/suspended and the period of time removed also? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hootman Posted April 20, 2004 Author Share Posted April 20, 2004 Fine, but he wasn't caught! He never tested positive to anything (not that I am aware of). I agree that if you test positive you deserve all you get but you can't take someones word or the cloud of suspicion as proof of anything. That, unfortunately, is the situation we are in. No positive test, no ban, no removal of records, unlucky darts for the moral brigade. If MLB now take a firm stance then drugs will slowly be erradicated althougth they are always gonna come up with new and improved formula to beat the testers. A hardline stance (which hasn't been taken before) should sort it out and deter their use. PS what about just legalising drugs and then everyone is on a level playing field? Always thought that would be an interesting approach (if a little tongue in cheek) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Legalizing would suck.... then you force people to damage their bodies to compete at that level. IF you remove the drugs, you allow people to work hard and honestly, and make a living with out doing damage to their testicles, liver and other organs. PS. Bonds MAY have tested positive but we don't know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hootman Posted April 20, 2004 Author Share Posted April 20, 2004 Agree, but then MLB take the rap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 I agree with that too... MLB has let the drug thing go on. They have been testing in the minors for a long time and they don't do anything when a player tests positive. They try to police themselves but don't do a very good job of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
du7st Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 MLB is a crock in so many ways. I don't need a drug test to know Bonds has done steroids - those guys have tried everything under the sun at least once. The records are all jokes now and if you think they somehow mean something then you are being conned by idiot ESPN personalities and sports writers. I stopped watching after the strike and I'm happier for it. Being a Redskins fan is a year round activity so why waste your time with pseudo sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Steroids doesn't help a 40 year old hit a Gagne pitch going 101 mph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
du7st Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Yeah but it helps it go 500 feet! Sounds like logic that Mike Lupica would use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Originally posted by du7st Yeah but it helps it go 500 feet! Sounds like logic that Mike Lupica would use. It only went 400 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endzone_dave Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 You'd have to be pretty naive to believe Bonds hasn't taken steroids. Bond's personal trainer, Greg Anderson, was involved with BALCO. They found steroids at Anderson's home. Here's a good article: http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/8469726.htm?1c In my mind, all those home runs that McGwire, Bonds, and Sosa hit are a crock. I'm a big Cubs fan and I firmly believe that Sosa was juiced up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Steroids can't make someone hit home runs, but if that person can already hit a baseball, then it can help that person to hit a baseball farther. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Originally posted by codeorama Steroids can't make someone hit home runs, but if that person can already hit a baseball, then it can help that person to hit a baseball farther. Exactly and that is about 50 feet, take that off of Bonds' balls then they still go out of the park. What is funny is everyone thinks he only recently has been all of his homers. Before the year he hit 73 he had like 10 ro 12 years of over 30 homers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 There's no doubt, Bonds was a HOFer before hitting 73 home runs. However, the fact that he hit 30 year in and out and then burst up to 73 is very suspicious, particularly since McGuire and Sosa did it in the same time period. Then the Balco thing and Bonds trainer... It all adds up against Bonds IMO. He didn't need to use steroids to get into the HOF, but I don't think he or McGuire or Sosa would have put up the numbers they did w/o them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endzone_dave Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Can you imagine how many home runs the Babe would have it if he trained hard and took steroids. I bet he could have hit 90. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 I am not going to allow this steroid talk take away from witnessing one of the great players of all times validate his Hall of Fame career. I didn't have the opportunity to witness Ruth, Williams, Dimaggio, Aaron, Mays etc. Bonds is simply the best player of his generation, as well as one of the greatest of all time. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashback Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Originally posted by Thiebear Could someone give me a good reason why ****IF**** it is proven that someone (say 7 people) broke the rules intentionally they shouldnt be removed/suspended and the period of time removed also? Well, here's the reason. It wouldn't be, say, 7 guys, it'd be about 40% of all players from rookie ball on up. Maybe more than that. We could just put the players ****tail next to the record they set. ie: "Ken Caminiti was the National League MVP in 1996. He hit .326 with 40 HR and 130 RBI in leading the Padres to their first Division Title in 12 years. Ken prefered a cylce of Deca Durabolin, followed by HGH and testosterone maintenance. Ken is from Hanford, CA and has 3 daughters." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Originally posted by codeorama There's no doubt, Bonds was a HOFer before hitting 73 home runs. However, the fact that he hit 30 year in and out and then burst up to 73 is very suspicious, particularly since McGuire and Sosa did it in the same time period. Then the Balco thing and Bonds trainer... It all adds up against Bonds IMO. He didn't need to use steroids to get into the HOF, but I don't think he or McGuire or Sosa would have put up the numbers they did w/o them. i don't think so, wasn't that the expansion year? Pitching was weak, heck Brady hit 50 one year :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Well unless Bonds is still on the juice he doesnt look smaller and the homers are still flying. 666 as of last night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 I hope Bonds hits 75 this year to shut everyone up once and for all. This year is different because his team stinks and they are finally pitching to him. He is going to hit a ton of homers and hit .400 this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hootman Posted April 20, 2004 Author Share Posted April 20, 2004 Being a football forum seems a bit hypocritical to be criticising baseball players when the NFL was probably far more steroid happpy for many years. At least the NFL has taken a stronger stance in recent years!! There are many highly regarded players of the 70's and 80's in the HOF who would have been jetting that stuff into them. Pot calling kettle balck me thinks!!! At the end of the day the NFL took a stronger line first but we can't really abuse baseball's stars when many of our hero's were no doubt full of it. :shot: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ax Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 I just wish ole Baroid Bonds would be a man and take off that elbow armour. He stands fearlessly over the plate because of it, and most pitchers won't throw at his head. Bob Gibson would've cracked his skull. (So to speak) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 No doubt, I have no respect for the players wearing the armor on their arms... Such a joke, then they get pissed if someone pitches them inside. Makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Originally posted by codeorama No doubt, I have no respect for the players wearing the armor on their arms... Such a joke, then they get pissed if someone pitches them inside. Makes no sense. why? as long as the mlb allows it there shouldn't be a problem isn't the reason why he is wearing it because he had surgery on the elbow before and one more hit on it he might have to retire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsNation Posted April 20, 2004 Share Posted April 20, 2004 Baseball made its own bed and now they can sleep in it.... They can control whats legal & illegal to take for God sake its THEIR league. They are so freakin scared to make strict rules. And by not toughening up the rules they allow so many loopholes. If there is anyone to blame it is the MLB itself. Without strict testing conducted regualary you have nothing, nada. Bonds or whoever can take steroids, horse muscle growth, elephant pills, androstene or whatever. The commish does not have any power in this joke of a league nada, squat. The players essentially run their own league, make their own rules etc.. So no more complaining about Bonds or anyone else. Baseball has allowed this to go on, sure its a negative thing and may be a unwritten rule that one should not take sterioids but the fact is that the league is weak and hasnt grown the ballz to step up and regulate. Has Bonds been tested - NO. Enough said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.