What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

For those who think the steroid users should be excluded from the Hall (1 Viewer)

J

JuniorNB

Footballguy
Would this scenario change your mind......

Sometime this season, say early August, Bonds hit home run number 754, bringing him within one of tying Aaron's record.

Immediately after the game, Bonds calls a press conference and retires with the following statement: "I wanted to end my career without tarnishing the record that the great Hank Aaron has set. I want to apologize for my steroid abuse of the late ninties and early 2000's. I was simply trying to keep up with the widespread usage around the league. I hope I'll be remembered for my hitting, fielding, and baserunning ability, which were all natural talents and not drug enhanced."

Would this (albiet unbelievable) scenario change your opinion of him?

 
JuniorNB said:
Would this scenario change your mind......Sometime this season, say early August, Bonds hit home run number 754, bringing him within one of tying Aaron's record.Immediately after the game, Bonds calls a press conference and retires with the following statement: "I wanted to end my career without tarnishing the record that the great Hank Aaron has set. I want to apologize for my steroid abuse of the late ninties and early 2000's. I was simply trying to keep up with the widespread usage around the league. I hope I'll be remembered for my hitting, fielding, and baserunning ability, which were all natural talents and not drug enhanced."Would this (albiet unbelievable) scenario change your opinion of him?
Click to expand...
No... I already think he is one of the best players to ever play the game of baseball...
 
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book.

If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.

 
If he agreed to have 50% of his output over the last 10 years removed from the books because of his steroid abuse, I'd cut the guy a break and say a clean slate is in order.

My opinion of Bonds is that he was just a guy that wanted to be the best baseball player ever. He did everything in his power to make that happen. Even if it meant juicing up until his huevos looked like raisins (estimated) and his melon looked like a beachball.

If he had even an ounce of charisma, his cheating would be easier to overlook.

Finally, why doesn't that guy get hit by a pitch about 200 times a season?

 
bostonfred said:
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book.

If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.
Click to expand...
so you want gaylord perry pulled from the hall? just trying to understand if your position is categoric.
 
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book.

If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.
Click to expand...
so you want gaylord perry pulled from the hall? just trying to understand if your position is categoric.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think Perry should be removed from the Hall. I don't have a problem with someone cheating when there are rules against it. Perry didn't hide it, and when he got caught, he was ejected. That's how rules work. I think it was chicken#### to hide behind the fact that there wasn't a rule against steroids, and to hide behind the union making sure that designer steroids can't be detected.
 
Bonds in, McGwire out.

Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.

 
Statorama said:
If he agreed to have 50% of his output over the last 10 years removed from the books because of his steroid abuse, I'd cut the guy a break and say a clean slate is in order.My opinion of Bonds is that he was just a guy that wanted to be the best baseball player ever. He did everything in his power to make that happen. Even if it meant juicing up until his huevos looked like raisins (estimated) and his melon looked like a beachball. If he had even an ounce of charisma, his cheating would be easier to overlook.Finally, why doesn't that guy get hit by a pitch about 200 times a season?
Click to expand...
What about all the pitchers he faced that were doing steroids? :bowtie:
 
bostonfred said:
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book.

If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.
Click to expand...
so you want gaylord perry pulled from the hall? just trying to understand if your position is categoric.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think Perry should be removed from the Hall. I don't have a problem with someone cheating when there are rules against it. Perry didn't hide it, and when he got caught, he was ejected. That's how rules work. I think it was chicken#### to hide behind the fact that there wasn't a rule against steroids, and to hide behind the union making sure that designer steroids can't be detected.
Click to expand...
:bowtie: now there is a hot sports opinion...

intentionally breaking written rules viewed more favorably than circumventing an implied rule. maybe he should have just corked his bat

 
LHUCKS said:
Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.
Click to expand...
He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.
 
bostonfred said:
LHUCKS said:
Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.
Click to expand...
He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.
Click to expand...
Bonds' numbers were HOF worthy before he started bulking up...there is really no argument here.Bonds was going to the HOF regardless of how many 50HR seasons he had.
 
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book.

If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.
Click to expand...
so you want gaylord perry pulled from the hall? just trying to understand if your position is categoric.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think Perry should be removed from the Hall. I don't have a problem with someone cheating when there are rules against it. Perry didn't hide it, and when he got caught, he was ejected. That's how rules work. I think it was chicken#### to hide behind the fact that there wasn't a rule against steroids, and to hide behind the union making sure that designer steroids can't be detected.
Click to expand...
:thumbup: now there is a hot sports opinion...

intentionally breaking written rules viewed more favorably than circumventing an implied rule. maybe he should have just corked his bat
Click to expand...
Of course it's viewed more favorably. Are you saying you've never seen a holding penalty in the NFL? That some teams don't deliberately try to time the snap count because they're willing to trade a offsides penalties for sacks? In basketball, it's considered standard strategy to cheat at the end of the game by deliberately fouling the opponent. You're willing to accept the penalty for the chance to get the ball back. And in baseball, if you cork your bat and get caught, you get ejected. There's a rule for it. If you put tar on a bat and get caught, you get ejected. Period. It's not an honorable way to go, and it's rightly looked down on more than a foul or holding penalty (and the penalty of ejection is much higher as a result) but at least you put your money on the table knowing the risks.

Bonds "corked" every day for years. He cheated because he knew there wasn't a rule for it, and because he knew he couldn't get caught. He knew it was wrong. Everybody knew it was wrong. But the union fought to prevent baseball from testing for steroids because it made more money for the players.

Sorry, but I'm not interested in the business of baseball. I'm interested in the sport of baseball. Bonds cheated at that sport and flaunted baseball's inability to prove it or to penalize him for it. You don't go to the hall of fame for successfully hiding behind the union. You go for what you do on the field. And what Bonds did on the field was cheat.

 
LHUCKS said:
bostonfred said:
LHUCKS said:
Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.
Click to expand...
He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.
Click to expand...
Bonds' numbers were HOF worthy before he started bulking up...there is really no argument here.Bonds was going to the HOF regardless of how many 50HR seasons he had.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by "before he started bulking up". What does that have to do with when he was using performance enhancers? There are plenty of people who have been caught using illegal performance enhancers who are not "bulked up". Bonds could easily have been using performance enhancing drugs for his entire career and there's no way we could prove it. If he can hide behind the fact that there's no way we can prove he's cheating, then when he's dumb enough to get caught, he gets screwed by the fact that there's no way we can prove he wasn't cheating earlier in his career. He doesn't get to say, Haha, whoops, you caught me, the last couple years I was cheating and hiding behind the fact you couldn't test, but seriously, honestly, and I'm being totally serious here, I wasn't cheating back when I was younger. That was all natural. The unfortunate but necessary response to the specific kind of cheating Bonds did is to cast doubt on his entire career once he got caught. I can't believe that one catch, one hit, or one steal was done without performance enhancing drugs.
 
People have been cheating in baseball since the game was created. I'm not angry people have become more efficient cheaters, I'm upset the MLB has done nothing but encourage unfair play.

 
So cheating ones way to a goal that it could be presumed one may have attained anyway is not very significant. Lhucks is more or less in agreement with Richard Milhouse Nixon.

 
bostonfred said:
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book.

If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.
Click to expand...
so you want gaylord perry pulled from the hall? just trying to understand if your position is categoric.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think Perry should be removed from the Hall. I don't have a problem with someone cheating when there are rules against it. Perry didn't hide it, and when he got caught, he was ejected. That's how rules work. I think it was chicken#### to hide behind the fact that there wasn't a rule against steroids, and to hide behind the union making sure that designer steroids can't be detected.
Click to expand...
:X now there is a hot sports opinion...

intentionally breaking written rules viewed more favorably than circumventing an implied rule. maybe he should have just corked his bat
Click to expand...
Of course it's viewed more favorably. Are you saying you've never seen a holding penalty in the NFL? That some teams don't deliberately try to time the snap count because they're willing to trade a offsides penalties for sacks? In basketball, it's considered standard strategy to cheat at the end of the game by deliberately fouling the opponent. You're willing to accept the penalty for the chance to get the ball back. And in baseball, if you cork your bat and get caught, you get ejected. There's a rule for it. If you put tar on a bat and get caught, you get ejected. Period. It's not an honorable way to go, and it's rightly looked down on more than a foul or holding penalty (and the penalty of ejection is much higher as a result) but at least you put your money on the table knowing the risks.

Bonds "corked" every day for years. He cheated because he knew there wasn't a rule for it, and because he knew he couldn't get caught. He knew it was wrong. Everybody knew it was wrong. But the union fought to prevent baseball from testing for steroids because it made more money for the players.

Sorry, but I'm not interested in the business of baseball. I'm interested in the sport of baseball. Bonds cheated at that sport and flaunted baseball's inability to prove it or to penalize him for it. You don't go to the hall of fame for successfully hiding behind the union. You go for what you do on the field. And what Bonds did on the field was cheat.
Click to expand...
This is the best explanation I have seen yet on this subject.Well put!

 
bostonfred said:
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book.

If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.
Click to expand...
so you want gaylord perry pulled from the hall? just trying to understand if your position is categoric.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think Perry should be removed from the Hall. I don't have a problem with someone cheating when there are rules against it. Perry didn't hide it, and when he got caught, he was ejected. That's how rules work. I think it was chicken#### to hide behind the fact that there wasn't a rule against steroids, and to hide behind the union making sure that designer steroids can't be detected.
Click to expand...
:thumbup: now there is a hot sports opinion...

intentionally breaking written rules viewed more favorably than circumventing an implied rule. maybe he should have just corked his bat
Click to expand...
Of course it's viewed more favorably. Are you saying you've never seen a holding penalty in the NFL? That some teams don't deliberately try to time the snap count because they're willing to trade a offsides penalties for sacks? In basketball, it's considered standard strategy to cheat at the end of the game by deliberately fouling the opponent. You're willing to accept the penalty for the chance to get the ball back. And in baseball, if you cork your bat and get caught, you get ejected. There's a rule for it. If you put tar on a bat and get caught, you get ejected. Period. It's not an honorable way to go, and it's rightly looked down on more than a foul or holding penalty (and the penalty of ejection is much higher as a result) but at least you put your money on the table knowing the risks.

Bonds "corked" every day for years. He cheated because he knew there wasn't a rule for it, and because he knew he couldn't get caught. He knew it was wrong. Everybody knew it was wrong. But the union fought to prevent baseball from testing for steroids because it made more money for the players.

Sorry, but I'm not interested in the business of baseball. I'm interested in the sport of baseball. Bonds cheated at that sport and flaunted baseball's inability to prove it or to penalize him for it. You don't go to the hall of fame for successfully hiding behind the union. You go for what you do on the field. And what Bonds did on the field was cheat.
Click to expand...
How could he have cheated if there wasn't a rule for it? How could he "get caught" if what he was doing wasn't against the rules of baseball?

 
IMO, those who used steriods during the period when they weren't banned by baseball shouldn't be penalized for such use.

It is MLB's fault, not the players.

 
AnonymousBob said:
You people are acting like cheating in baseball is a new phenomenon.
Click to expand...
Of course it isn't. Baseball has one of the most incredible traditions of cheating of any sport. There are rules against putting tar on your bat, drilling a hole in the bat, placing cork in it, and putting the cap back on, putting vaseline on a ball, and filing a ball down with a nail file. Those rules are so well known that there's a name for them. There's even a rule that most baseball fans don't understand called the infield fly rule. Do you think Abner Doubleday sat down and said, look, we'll need nine innings to decide this game, and there ought to be nine players on each team, and three bases, and oh by the way, if there are runners on first and second or first second and third, and a guy pops it up, we'll just call him out and be done with it? The infield fly rule would never have existed if we didn't have people "cheating" to maximize their advantage. The reason the rule was invented was because infielders would see a popup, and put the runners in an untenable situation. If they caught it, the runners would have to stay on their bags, which they naturally did. Then the infielder would deliberately drop it, and throw the runners out in a double or even triple play. At first, this seemed like clever gamesmanship, but people eventually agreed that it was best for the sport if it wasn't allowed, and so there's a rule in place. The third strike rule is another example. On a third strike past ball, the batter becomes a runner and can go to first. Unless, of course, there are fewer than two outs and there's a man on first. Why? Because catchers deliberately dropped the ball on strike three, then threw to second for the force out and went to first for the double play. Clever gamesmanship? Nope, we need a rule to stop this, too. People love to defend Bonds and the other steroid users by saying baseball has always had cheating. And that's true. Cheating is a huge part of baseball's history. The thing that differentiates steroid use from every other kind of cheating is that the players deliberately circumvented both the rules, and the creation of the rules. They lobbied to keep the rule from being made. They allowed the rule to be made, but refused to be tested. They allowed testing, but not for certain substances. And they used the substances that couldn't be tested for.There is no other kind of undetectable cheating in sports. If you put pine tar on your bat, someone can notice. If you put cork inside the bat, it can break open and people will see it. If you use "the clear and the cream", there's no way for anyone to notice. Or at least, not officially. Not enforcably. Hiding behind the rules like this is chicken####. Period. Bonds thought he could cheat and get away with it, and he abused every loophole possible to undetectably enhance his career. In fact, the fact that he got caught cheating when there wasn't even testing yet shows that he was doing something even worse than people who got caught using steroids when there WAS a rule, because at least they did it when they knew the penalty for getting caught. Bonds should receive no accolades for his accomplishments while cheating, and as a result, no Hall.
 
Case Ace said:
bostonfred said:
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
Dt said:
bostonfred said:
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book.

If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.
Click to expand...
so you want gaylord perry pulled from the hall? just trying to understand if your position is categoric.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think Perry should be removed from the Hall. I don't have a problem with someone cheating when there are rules against it. Perry didn't hide it, and when he got caught, he was ejected. That's how rules work. I think it was chicken#### to hide behind the fact that there wasn't a rule against steroids, and to hide behind the union making sure that designer steroids can't be detected.
Click to expand...
:thumbup: now there is a hot sports opinion...

intentionally breaking written rules viewed more favorably than circumventing an implied rule. maybe he should have just corked his bat
Click to expand...
Of course it's viewed more favorably. Are you saying you've never seen a holding penalty in the NFL? That some teams don't deliberately try to time the snap count because they're willing to trade a offsides penalties for sacks? In basketball, it's considered standard strategy to cheat at the end of the game by deliberately fouling the opponent. You're willing to accept the penalty for the chance to get the ball back. And in baseball, if you cork your bat and get caught, you get ejected. There's a rule for it. If you put tar on a bat and get caught, you get ejected. Period. It's not an honorable way to go, and it's rightly looked down on more than a foul or holding penalty (and the penalty of ejection is much higher as a result) but at least you put your money on the table knowing the risks.

Bonds "corked" every day for years. He cheated because he knew there wasn't a rule for it, and because he knew he couldn't get caught. He knew it was wrong. Everybody knew it was wrong. But the union fought to prevent baseball from testing for steroids because it made more money for the players.

Sorry, but I'm not interested in the business of baseball. I'm interested in the sport of baseball. Bonds cheated at that sport and flaunted baseball's inability to prove it or to penalize him for it. You don't go to the hall of fame for successfully hiding behind the union. You go for what you do on the field. And what Bonds did on the field was cheat.
Click to expand...
How could he have cheated if there wasn't a rule for it? How could he "get caught" if what he was doing wasn't against the rules of baseball?
Click to expand...
There's a couple different things at play here:First, it was well known that using steroids was wrong long before there was a rule. When it came up during labor negotiations, though, the union successfully negotiated to stop testing. While Bonds may not have broken the rules of the company known as Major League Baseball, he broke the rules of baseball. I'm not interested in how that company negotiated better business benefits or salaries or other collective bargaining. I'm interested in the sport of baseball.

This is an important distinction because the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, Inc., is a separate entity from Major League Baseball. They have a long standing cooperation with MLB as the premier baseball league in the world, but they are a separate entity. So the rules for whether Bonds should be in the Hall of Fame are not necessarily decided by the business workings of the baseball league they work with.

Second, once there was a rule against performance enhancing drugs, the union negotiated what tests could be used to find cheaters. Bonds deliberately used substances that could circumvent standard testing. So it's reasonable to believe that he broke rules once they existed, but used the loophole of testing to hide his cheating.

 
Jefferson the Caregiver said:
All this excluding steroid users from the Hall is well and good but its not going to be fair when guys like Roger Clemens get in first ballot.
Click to expand...
If someone can prove that Clemens used, then he shouldn't get in, either. People can prove that Bonds used. If someone can prove that Gaylord Perry threw a spitball, he should be ejected. And he was. If they can't, he gets away with it. And he did. That's how rules work. Bonds is one of the rare cases where, despite his best efforts to hid behind every available loophole in the rules of baseball, he got caught. It's unfortunate that we won't be able to catch all of the cheaters. But that doesn't mean it's unfair to appropriately punish the cheaters who get caught.
 
Gaylord Perry was caught and was ejected, so technically he "cheated." Yet he got voted into the HOF.

IMO, this is going to be a big problem, because voters will "look the other way" on some guys and vote them in anyway, will keep people out suspected of juicing, and worse will uniformly not vote for players from a certain era by suggesting that all the players from that timeframe deserve a black mark.

I actually thought with all the talk of players using steroids and inflating their numbers that Jim Rice would have made it this year, and I was surprised his total actually dropped.

 
bostonfred said:
AnonymousBob said:
You people are acting like cheating in baseball is a new phenomenon.
Click to expand...
Of course it isn't. Baseball has one of the most incredible traditions of cheating of any sport. There are rules against putting tar on your bat, drilling a hole in the bat, placing cork in it, and putting the cap back on, putting vaseline on a ball, and filing a ball down with a nail file. Those rules are so well known that there's a name for them. There's even a rule that most baseball fans don't understand called the infield fly rule. Do you think Abner Doubleday sat down and said, look, we'll need nine innings to decide this game, and there ought to be nine players on each team, and three bases, and oh by the way, if there are runners on first and second or first second and third, and a guy pops it up, we'll just call him out and be done with it? The infield fly rule would never have existed if we didn't have people "cheating" to maximize their advantage. The reason the rule was invented was because infielders would see a popup, and put the runners in an untenable situation. If they caught it, the runners would have to stay on their bags, which they naturally did. Then the infielder would deliberately drop it, and throw the runners out in a double or even triple play. At first, this seemed like clever gamesmanship, but people eventually agreed that it was best for the sport if it wasn't allowed, and so there's a rule in place. The third strike rule is another example. On a third strike past ball, the batter becomes a runner and can go to first. Unless, of course, there are fewer than two outs and there's a man on first. Why? Because catchers deliberately dropped the ball on strike three, then threw to second for the force out and went to first for the double play. Clever gamesmanship? Nope, we need a rule to stop this, too. People love to defend Bonds and the other steroid users by saying baseball has always had cheating. And that's true. Cheating is a huge part of baseball's history. The thing that differentiates steroid use from every other kind of cheating is that the players deliberately circumvented both the rules, and the creation of the rules. They lobbied to keep the rule from being made. They allowed the rule to be made, but refused to be tested. They allowed testing, but not for certain substances. And they used the substances that couldn't be tested for.There is no other kind of undetectable cheating in sports. If you put pine tar on your bat, someone can notice. If you put cork inside the bat, it can break open and people will see it. If you use "the clear and the cream", there's no way for anyone to notice. Or at least, not officially. Not enforcably. Hiding behind the rules like this is chicken####. Period. Bonds thought he could cheat and get away with it, and he abused every loophole possible to undetectably enhance his career. In fact, the fact that he got caught cheating when there wasn't even testing yet shows that he was doing something even worse than people who got caught using steroids when there WAS a rule, because at least they did it when they knew the penalty for getting caught. Bonds should receive no accolades for his accomplishments while cheating, and as a result, no Hall.
Click to expand...
What you lack in quality points you make up with long winded posts.I don't fault baseball players for:CheatingI DO blame the MLB itself, for this was a HUGE problem and they did NOTHING to combat it. Heck, if anything they enouraged steriod use.Pitchers have long used spitballs to aid their throws. Is this form of cheating ok? You're acting high and mighty, as though baseball has been permanently tarnished. What nonsense. So cheaters have improved the way they play unfairly. We're always going to have players in baseball circumventing the spirit of baseball-there's nothing wrong with that. The problem is when baseball does nothing to put an end to such loopholes.
 
bostonfred said:
Jefferson the Caregiver said:
All this excluding steroid users from the Hall is well and good but its not going to be fair when guys like Roger Clemens get in first ballot.
Click to expand...
If someone can prove that Clemens used, then he shouldn't get in, either. People can prove that Bonds used. If someone can prove that Gaylord Perry threw a spitball, he should be ejected. And he was. If they can't, he gets away with it. And he did. That's how rules work. Bonds is one of the rare cases where, despite his best efforts to hid behind every available loophole in the rules of baseball, he got caught. It's unfortunate that we won't be able to catch all of the cheaters. But that doesn't mean it's unfair to appropriately punish the cheaters who get caught.
Click to expand...
How about McGwire, Fred? He has not been "caught" with anything. In my opinion, McGwire is no less guitly or innocent than Clemens. I think they both cheated their way through, yet one will be first ballot and the other is constantly mocked and may never get in.
 
Jefferson the Caregiver said:
bostonfred said:
Jefferson the Caregiver said:
All this excluding steroid users from the Hall is well and good but its not going to be fair when guys like Roger Clemens get in first ballot.
Click to expand...
If someone can prove that Clemens used, then he shouldn't get in, either. People can prove that Bonds used. If someone can prove that Gaylord Perry threw a spitball, he should be ejected. And he was. If they can't, he gets away with it. And he did. That's how rules work. Bonds is one of the rare cases where, despite his best efforts to hid behind every available loophole in the rules of baseball, he got caught. It's unfortunate that we won't be able to catch all of the cheaters. But that doesn't mean it's unfair to appropriately punish the cheaters who get caught.
Click to expand...
How about McGwire, Fred? He has not been "caught" with anything. In my opinion, McGwire is no less guitly or innocent than Clemens. I think they both cheated their way through, yet one will be first ballot and the other is constantly mocked and may never get in.
Click to expand...
McGwire's a tough case because he hasn't technically been caught, but it's highly suspected. It's hard to say that he's guilty until proven innocent here, but it's also hard to put him in the hall and be consistent. For my vote, I think you have to draw the line at people who have been caught, although I wouldn't blame someone who chose not to vote for him because of his grand jury testimony. Good question.
 
AnonymousBob said:
bostonfred said:
AnonymousBob said:
You people are acting like cheating in baseball is a new phenomenon.
Click to expand...
Of course it isn't. Baseball has one of the most incredible traditions of cheating of any sport. There are rules against putting tar on your bat, drilling a hole in the bat, placing cork in it, and putting the cap back on, putting vaseline on a ball, and filing a ball down with a nail file. Those rules are so well known that there's a name for them. There's even a rule that most baseball fans don't understand called the infield fly rule. Do you think Abner Doubleday sat down and said, look, we'll need nine innings to decide this game, and there ought to be nine players on each team, and three bases, and oh by the way, if there are runners on first and second or first second and third, and a guy pops it up, we'll just call him out and be done with it? The infield fly rule would never have existed if we didn't have people "cheating" to maximize their advantage. The reason the rule was invented was because infielders would see a popup, and put the runners in an untenable situation. If they caught it, the runners would have to stay on their bags, which they naturally did. Then the infielder would deliberately drop it, and throw the runners out in a double or even triple play. At first, this seemed like clever gamesmanship, but people eventually agreed that it was best for the sport if it wasn't allowed, and so there's a rule in place. The third strike rule is another example. On a third strike past ball, the batter becomes a runner and can go to first. Unless, of course, there are fewer than two outs and there's a man on first. Why? Because catchers deliberately dropped the ball on strike three, then threw to second for the force out and went to first for the double play. Clever gamesmanship? Nope, we need a rule to stop this, too. People love to defend Bonds and the other steroid users by saying baseball has always had cheating. And that's true. Cheating is a huge part of baseball's history. The thing that differentiates steroid use from every other kind of cheating is that the players deliberately circumvented both the rules, and the creation of the rules. They lobbied to keep the rule from being made. They allowed the rule to be made, but refused to be tested. They allowed testing, but not for certain substances. And they used the substances that couldn't be tested for.There is no other kind of undetectable cheating in sports. If you put pine tar on your bat, someone can notice. If you put cork inside the bat, it can break open and people will see it. If you use "the clear and the cream", there's no way for anyone to notice. Or at least, not officially. Not enforcably. Hiding behind the rules like this is chicken####. Period. Bonds thought he could cheat and get away with it, and he abused every loophole possible to undetectably enhance his career. In fact, the fact that he got caught cheating when there wasn't even testing yet shows that he was doing something even worse than people who got caught using steroids when there WAS a rule, because at least they did it when they knew the penalty for getting caught. Bonds should receive no accolades for his accomplishments while cheating, and as a result, no Hall.
Click to expand...
What you lack in quality points you make up with long winded posts.I don't fault baseball players for:CheatingI DO blame the MLB itself, for this was a HUGE problem and they did NOTHING to combat it. Heck, if anything they enouraged steriod use.Pitchers have long used spitballs to aid their throws. Is this form of cheating ok? You're acting high and mighty, as though baseball has been permanently tarnished. What nonsense. So cheaters have improved the way they play unfairly. We're always going to have players in baseball circumventing the spirit of baseball-there's nothing wrong with that. The problem is when baseball does nothing to put an end to such loopholes.
Click to expand...
I think we agree that baseball failed to stop players from using steroids. I think we disagree on whether players who used steroids while this happened were cheating. You look at it and say, they were circumventing the rules, it's no different from a spitball. I look at it and say, the difference is that steroid users cheated in a way that couldn't physically be detected, and they cheated on every single play of every single game that they had steroids in their body, which is thousands of times worse than a guy who throws a single spitball. I think we agree that "what you lack in quality posts..." was funny. Thanks for the sig.
 
Seems to me that if they can in fact prove he cheated, all the records for the games he played while cheating should be removed from record books, then if people can vote him into the hall of fame based on what's left, so be it. :ph34r: It won't happen, but that's what would have to happen if you guys keep comparing his situation to that of those who cork a bat or spit on a ball.

 
The Commish said:
Seems to me that if they can in fact prove he cheated, all the records for the games he played while cheating should be removed from record books, then if people can vote him into the hall of fame based on what's left, so be it. :X It won't happen, but that's what would have to happen if you guys keep comparing his situation to that of those who cork a bat or spit on a ball.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree, except the problem with this approach is we can't prove which date he started cheating. If we know that he was cheating in 2000, for example, how do we know he wasn't cheating in 1999? The same thing that made it virtually impossible for him to get caught cheating at the time casts a doubt on his whole career. It's similar to, but a lot less harsh than, the chain of logic that makes gambling on one game on a team you weren't playing a lifetime ban.
 
bostonfred said:
Jefferson the Caregiver said:
All this excluding steroid users from the Hall is well and good but its not going to be fair when guys like Roger Clemens get in first ballot.
Click to expand...
If someone can prove that Clemens used, then he shouldn't get in, either. People can prove that Bonds used. If someone can prove that Gaylord Perry threw a spitball, he should be ejected. And he was. If they can't, he gets away with it. And he did. That's how rules work. Bonds is one of the rare cases where, despite his best efforts to hid behind every available loophole in the rules of baseball, he got caught. It's unfortunate that we won't be able to catch all of the cheaters. But that doesn't mean it's unfair to appropriately punish the cheaters who get caught.
Click to expand...
Bonds didn't break a baseball rule, he broke a U.S. law. Are you going to not allow anyone into the HOF that has broken a law?
 
cstu said:
bostonfred said:
Jefferson the Caregiver said:
All this excluding steroid users from the Hall is well and good but its not going to be fair when guys like Roger Clemens get in first ballot.
Click to expand...
If someone can prove that Clemens used, then he shouldn't get in, either. People can prove that Bonds used. If someone can prove that Gaylord Perry threw a spitball, he should be ejected. And he was. If they can't, he gets away with it. And he did. That's how rules work.

Bonds is one of the rare cases where, despite his best efforts to hid behind every available loophole in the rules of baseball, he got caught. It's unfortunate that we won't be able to catch all of the cheaters. But that doesn't mean it's unfair to appropriately punish the cheaters who get caught.
Click to expand...
Bonds didn't break a baseball rule, he broke a U.S. law. Are you going to not allow anyone into the HOF that has broken a law?
Click to expand...
I don't think you are correct about this. I am pretty sure it was against the rules in baseball, it was just never enforced.Link to Drug Policy as early as 1991

Steroids are not explicity mentioned but they would fall under the umbrella of "illegal" drugs. I know MLB looked the other way at it but technically what the players were doing was going against baseball rules.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jefferson the Caregiver said:
cstu said:
bostonfred said:
Jefferson the Caregiver said:
All this excluding steroid users from the Hall is well and good but its not going to be fair when guys like Roger Clemens get in first ballot.
Click to expand...
If someone can prove that Clemens used, then he shouldn't get in, either. People can prove that Bonds used. If someone can prove that Gaylord Perry threw a spitball, he should be ejected. And he was. If they can't, he gets away with it. And he did. That's how rules work.

Bonds is one of the rare cases where, despite his best efforts to hid behind every available loophole in the rules of baseball, he got caught. It's unfortunate that we won't be able to catch all of the cheaters. But that doesn't mean it's unfair to appropriately punish the cheaters who get caught.
Click to expand...
Bonds didn't break a baseball rule, he broke a U.S. law. Are you going to not allow anyone into the HOF that has broken a law?
Click to expand...
I don't think you are correct about this. I am pretty sure it was against the rules in baseball, it was just never enforced.Link to Drug Policy as early as 1991

Steroids are not explicity mentioned but they would fall under the umbrella of "illegal" drugs. I know MLB looked the other way at it but technically what the players were doing was going against baseball rules.
Click to expand...
Very good point. And if you read it, the rules do say that you can be banned from baseball for this. The major difference is that Bonds - and countless other athlets - knew they could get away with it because there was no testing. It's the testing that the union caved on recently, and the penalty.

 
BostonFred and I agree on almost everything. But I think he's way wrong here.

For starters, do you think pitchers who had low ERAs in the days before the infield fly rule should have their records erased? According to you, what they told their infielders to do was against the implied baseball rules, but not the letter of the rules.

As for Bonds, we have no idea what he did. We don't know how risky what he took was to his overall health. If what he did wasn't very risky (think Lyle Alzado), then I don't believe he should draw anyone's ire, much less be ruled ineligible for the Hall. Steroids and other performance enhancers do what they say: they make you into a better, healthier and more physically fit athlete. That's good. Some also come with bad long-term side effects, and that's bad. But not all of them do. Look at Arnold, who looks perfectly fine from his years of steroid usage.

Anyway, I think the talk of removing Bonds' numbers from the record books is even more absurd than not voting him into the HOF. The point of record-keeping is to preserve what actually happened. What's next, deflate the numbers of Coors Field hitters? Put an asterisk next to his mark if you really want, but striking his record from the record books is absolutely asinine. Not even Nykesha Sales' record was erased.

Bonds is the greatest player most of us have ever seen. He's probably the second greatest hitter/offensive player of all time.

And full disclaimer, I think steroids should be made legal in the U.S.. I'm well aware that this won't happen and it's not a popular decision, but I think it's about as stupid as seatbelt laws, prostitution laws, gambling laws and marijuana laws.

 
If he followed that grand gesture and speech by lighting himself and his fat head on fire, I would consider peeing on him to help put it out.

 
bostonfred said:
LHUCKS said:
bostonfred said:
LHUCKS said:
Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.
Click to expand...
He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.
Click to expand...
Bonds' numbers were HOF worthy before he started bulking up...there is really no argument here.Bonds was going to the HOF regardless of how many 50HR seasons he had.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean by "before he started bulking up". What does that have to do with when he was using performance enhancers? There are plenty of people who have been caught using illegal performance enhancers who are not "bulked up". Bonds could easily have been using performance enhancing drugs for his entire career and there's no way we could prove it. If he can hide behind the fact that there's no way we can prove he's cheating, then when he's dumb enough to get caught, he gets screwed by the fact that there's no way we can prove he wasn't cheating earlier in his career. He doesn't get to say, Haha, whoops, you caught me, the last couple years I was cheating and hiding behind the fact you couldn't test, but seriously, honestly, and I'm being totally serious here, I wasn't cheating back when I was younger. That was all natural. The unfortunate but necessary response to the specific kind of cheating Bonds did is to cast doubt on his entire career once he got caught. I can't believe that one catch, one hit, or one steal was done without performance enhancing drugs.
Click to expand...
Well, I think I could be convinced of one...c'mon now.
 
' said:
JuniorNB said:
Would this scenario change your mind......Sometime this season, say early August, Bonds hit home run number 754, bringing him within one of tying Aaron's record.Immediately after the game, Bonds calls a press conference and retires with the following statement: "I wanted to end my career without tarnishing the record that the great Hank Aaron has set. I want to apologize for my steroid abuse of the late ninties and early 2000's. I was simply trying to keep up with the widespread usage around the league. I hope I'll be remembered for my hitting, fielding, and baserunning ability, which were all natural talents and not drug enhanced."Would this (albiet unbelievable) scenario change your opinion of him?
Click to expand...
No... I already think he is one of the best players to ever play the game of baseball...
Click to expand...
:goodposting:
 
Chase Stuart said:
And full disclaimer, I think steroids should be made legal in the U.S.. I'm well aware that this won't happen and it's not a popular decision, but I think it's about as stupid as seatbelt laws, prostitution laws, gambling laws and marijuana laws.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with steroids being legal for everyday people. I have a huge proglem with steroids being legal in sports, at least and especially while there are health risks. A player should not have to artificially enhance their body to be able to compete at the top levels. I understand that there are health risks associated with lifting weights or running on a treadmill. When you put chemicals in your body, you're taking a different kind of risk. I understand that these players are making millions of dollars to play a game. But the kids in the minors aren't all making millions. Neither are the kids who look up to them. And as far as I'm concerned, as a fan, the point of competition is not to see whose body is most susceptible to (and least harmed by) chemical enhancement. And even though there have been allegations that the majority of players already use steroids, the amount by which they use them would go up as would the number of players who are forced to use them to compete if they were legal. As far as I'm concerned, nothing good comes from legalizing steroids in sports.
 
bostonfred said:
The one thing that would help is if he admitted his deliberate steroid use, and asked for his name to be taken out of the record book for the home run record. It would also take McGwire and Sosa doing the same so MLB could scratch their names from the record book. If Bonds doesn't admit what he did while still playing and before he reaches the record, I don't think he should make the hall no matter what he admits or doesn't admit. Continuing to chase the record, trying to enjoy the accolades that go with it, and making a mockery of baseball's rules during your career is damaging for baseball, so his window for such an admission is pretty much this year.
Click to expand...
How do you make a mockery of rules that didn't exist?Further, even if a player like, say Rapheal Palmiero, was found guilty in a test and suspended appropriately and then came back, why does he need to be punished further? It was against the rules to scuff the ball when the Niekro's pitched. Did they lose anything to history? It a violation of the rules of baseball to put pine tar on your bat past a certain point. Does George Brett lose his stature to history and get taken out of any Hall of Fame discussion?
 
bostonfred said:
LHUCKS said:
Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.
Click to expand...
He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.
Click to expand...
Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.
 
Yankee23Fan said:
bostonfred said:
LHUCKS said:
Bonds in, McGwire out.Bonds was going to the Hall regardless of the performance enhancements.
Click to expand...
He was? When did Bonds start using performance enhancers? Even if he comes clean and says he started at the same time his home run production started to pick back up, how can you trust him? There are plenty of guys who have been caught using performance enhancers who are not jacked up, so you can't just look at a picture and figure it out. That's why his deliberate cheating has made his whole career suspect.
Click to expand...
Bonds didn't deliberately cheat.
Click to expand...
Oh, stop it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top