This is a different breed of cheater we're talking about. We ain't talking Cobb's penchant for spikes up, dirty ball, here. This is somethng that can't be dealt with on the field by a wary ump.
This is a different breed of cheater we're talking about. We ain't talking Cobb's penchant for spikes up, dirty ball, here. This is somethng that can't be dealt with on the field by a wary ump.
Some call me Mr.Biggles
cheating is cheating...Originally Posted by robinhoodnik
Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are .
o
There's little evidence that increased career home run totals have anything to do with steroids.
Throughout history, if you divide it into eras, home run totals are increased and there are always points where you can say "300 home runs isn't a common HR total and wasn't all that common until the X era."
Babe Ruth in 1920 hit more home runs by himself than all but one other team had in total. There's nothing fishy about that, but there is something fishy when the entire league starts hitting more home runs? There are tons of other reasons why home runs have increased - better natural physical conditioning of players, smaller ballparks, changes in the ball, expansion, etc.
Fine. Barry Bonds, you're eligible for the Hall.Everyone who tested positive should be permanently ineligible for Cooperstown.
Look, I'm all for instituting penalties for players that test positive for banned substances (as the MLB has done). The problem is going back in time and retroactively applying today's penalties to players that possibly used banned substances at some point when the MLB had no clear-cut rules on the issue, and likely knew what was going on and let it happen to reap the financial benefits.
This "steroid era" is part of baseball history. The players still played on the baseball field, and what they did still is part of the record of play and that cannot be removed.
And what about "greenies"? Everybody seems to ignore this. Do you know how widespread amphetamine use was in the 1960s and 1970s? Should we go back and remove all them from the Hall? How about players that used cocaine, like Tim Raines, should he be prevented from the Hall? These things aren't dealt with "on the field" like other cheating, but they qualify as cheating under the rules today, and after all, if we're going to go back through the steroid era and subject possible users to today's penalties, isn't it only fair to go back throughout all of history and apply today's penalties to players?
Where does the insanity end? Institute penalties now, punish the players that test positive, etc. Don't go on a witch hunt throughout history to prevent entry into the Hall of Fame based on today's rules.
Wow, hey, if you want to close your eyes, stuff your fingers in your ears, and scream LALALALA. Go ahead.
These guys are, or were, playing into the recent penalty phase of 'roids. If the secret's out, they shouldn't be in. McGwire's sorry arse isn't yet in, so no ones removing anyone from the HOF, and there's nothing wrong with keeping them out before they get in. The problem with the whole mess, is that there's some screwed up notion that these druggies shouldn't be punished because they got away with it for so long. It's called personal responsibility, it's a big part of what's missing in all aspects of today's life, and it shouldn't be promoted as all right. These guys did it, they got caught in various ways, and they shouldn't continue to prosper because of it. Joe Jackson was on a HOF path, he got himself into trouble, he got himself thrown out. Pete Rose, same deal. Some other players were arguably on a HOF path and tossed too. Why are today's cheats to be the exception?
There's plenty of evidence that there is a corelation between steroids and increased power and general hitting numbers. You choose to ignore it, is the reason you make statements like:. In the immortal words of the Cleveland GM, "That's ludicrous, get outta my face".There's little evidence that increased career home run totals have anything to do with steroids.
o
Show me the evidence that increased offensive levels are due to steroid use.
o
You aren't advocating punishing players that were caught. You're advocating punishing players that are suspected of use, or have some circumstantial evidence against them.
Yeah, it is called personal responsibility. And the MLB needs to take responsibility that they let it go on, and did little to nothing to stop it until after the fact. But, I guess they're allowed to go back on that and punish the players that they turned a blind eye to.
You don't think that baseball players have the same internal mechanism that the rest of us do? They don't know right from wrong without MLB telling them what right and wrong are? MLBPA? Who is it that should do the thinking for these guys? It seems that you feel they're incapable of independant thought, or at the least to be treated as if they're mentally incapable of determining right from wrong.
o
I'm not saying that what they did was right. I'm not saying that they didn't know that what they were doing is wrong. I'm saying that they shouldn't be punished by the very system that turned a blind eye to the issue.
Actually, to sum it up perfectly - Players that have never tested positive should not be punished as though they have.
No, I'm done playing that game with you. You're going to argue in a nearly infinite circle, eventually change the topic or your argument, tell me you're only a kid, and wind up the thread with a lock on it. Nope, not gonna do it.
o
Whatever you say. That made no sense, but okay. You're free to make a claim and not back it up with any evidence.
Okay then, they traffic in illicit drugs, import them, deal them, push them, while breaking god only knows how many national and international laws. Who would you rather see nail these scumbags? Yes scumbag is the right term for them. Just because they're rich and famous athletes, doesn't give them immunity from being nothing more than a drug dealing, junkie, low life, cretin.
Yes, as are you.
Back on topic, Barry's induction, if he has one, should be interesting. Maybe he'll be in prison for tax evasion by then and be unavailable for it?
E=I*R
I for one am going to completely ignore it. The HOF induction procedure is a joke now anyway. it's all basically meaningless. I'll admire the guys who have been in the hall for 5-10 years or longer, and basically ignore everyone else and everything else going on with it. It's just the same old BS that you two have been blathering about above, anyway.
Who cares, it's not baseball.
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote