But it WASN'T monitored by baseball, so it'd fall under the second half of that "or" statement.
o
But it WASN'T monitored by baseball, so it'd fall under the second half of that "or" statement.
Master of Ale!
...and not be legal. Like I said.
o
Right, but nothing Jeffy said was wrong. He doesn't agree with holding things against players if what they did was either legal or unmonitored.Originally Posted by Arctic Blast
Registered User
To top it off, the federal steroid laws are kind of stupid, anyway, The motivation for passing them seemed largely to be to keep professional athletes from using them to enhance performance, which IMO isn't something that the government should be worried about anyway.
Im watching you
I still say Taco Bell is a horrible establishment.
o
By the way, an example of what I was talking about before in regards to andro, from Lord Haw-Haw:
Using a legal, unbanned substance = disqualified from the HoF.Disqualified List (own personal list*)
25. Mark McGwire. Admitted andro use made him into a home run hero before moving into pariah territory. Projected percentage: 28 percent.
Registered User
Yeah, disqualifying McGwire because of the andro would kind of be like disqualifying Hank Aaron because he ate chocolate or something.
Registered User
agree 100%. However, since its been pretty much engrained that HOF induction is NOT solely indicative of your statistical performance....i have no issue with voters taking umbrage with his performance in front of the Congress. Its no different than what voters have always done, which is play favorite.
o
I take umbrage with someone pleading the 5th in front of an unnecessary grandstanding Congressional hearing outweighing an otherwise obviously qualified record.
Of course, I don't think the Congressional performance is what most voters are using to vote against him. It's just simply that he has been connected to steroids.
o
Though I did just read this part, which suggests the Congressional hearing is at least part of what Heyman is using against McGwire...
though Heyman is really all over the map in his justifications, with regards to both McGwire and others, so who knows. I don't doubt that the Congress thing played a role with Heyman and other votes, but I don't think it mattered much to most of the "No" voters on McGwire. As I said above, I think it's mostly just the connection with steroids.Below is my ballot (the top six got my vote, the others I listed in my order of preference, with Mark McGwire and David Segui not being considered by me for drug issues -- McGwire for being an unrepentant alleged steroid user who stonewalled Congress, and Segui for being an admitted HGH user who's undeserving on merit, anyway.)
Also, apparently you're supposed to repent for stuff you've been alleged to have done?
Registered User
I don't have a problem with educated voters drawing their own conclusions and formulating their own opinions. By pleading the 5th and refusing to discuss it he left that door open. The HOF for quite awhile has been about more than just stats. I am not a fan of that, but it is what it is. Knowing that....I don't take umbrage with them making their own opinions regarding whether or not they believe anything McGwire has said. If they vote no because of Andro...then yes, that I do take umbrage. Hope that clarifies it for ya.
o
Educated? You give them too much credit.
BABBLE BABBLE BABBLE
I like Taco Bell. It's cheap and I get more food for my buck than McDonalds or other fast food establishments. All Taco Bell needs is to add a play area and a Happy Meal and my whole family would be happy....
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.
Abraham Lincoln
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote