20+ MLB players to be suspended? Braun, A-Rod? (1 Viewer)

[Abraham]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

A guy that MIGHT deserve the benefit of the doubt is Tyson Gay, who basically withdrew from every competition, immediately called the press crying to say he had trusted the wrong people, and that he was sorry and would cooperate fully.

Braun behaving as if he is the victim, ruining lives, telling reporters juice questions are "irrelevant" and then when caught saying "As I've said before, I'm not perfect..." before moving right along and not apologizing or admitting anything is about as bad as it gets. How you - or anyone - can defend this POS is past the point of being sad. Now it's plain hilarious.

 

[Pipes]

I'm cool with agreeing that the only facts against Braun were a positive test and, you know, the fact that he has basically admitted he was juicing. Other than the positive test and admission of guilt, dude was 100% clean.

Due was juicing, but to say he got off on a technicality is incorrect. He got off the first time because the defense was unable to show that the test was unreliable.

technicality

the test was right, he was juicing

he beat the system...

till now

it is not hard to grasp

The test was invalid. It may or may not have been correct. He may or may not have been juicing then. And he's only admitted to making mistakes.

Fill in with whatever assumptions you want, but just recognize they're assumptions and not facts.

True they are not facts but pretty good assumptions since Braun just took a 65 game suspension and 3.4 million dollar salary hit. Braun doesn't do that if MLB doesn't have factual evidence against him.

 

[B-Deep]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

that's right, you prolly believe he took a 65 game suspension because he wanted an unpaid vacation

and he was just going to PED dealers because they made the best cup of coffee he had ever tasted

and the cllector guy on the first test rigged the test

Braun is clean! He is the vicitm!

 

[B-Deep]

I'm cool with agreeing that the only facts against Braun were a positive test and, you know, the fact that he has basically admitted he was juicing. Other than the positive test and admission of guilt, dude was 100% clean.

Due was juicing, but to say he got off on a technicality is incorrect. He got off the first time because the defense was unable to show that the test was unreliable.

technicality

the test was right, he was juicing

he beat the system...

till now

it is not hard to grasp

The test was invalid. It may or may not have been correct. He may or may not have been juicing then. And he's only admitted to making mistakes.

Fill in with whatever assumptions you want, but just recognize they're assumptions and not facts.

True they are not facts but pretty good assumptions since Braun just took a 65 game suspension and 3.4 million dollar salary hit. Braun doesn't do that if MLB doesn't have factual evidence against him.

sure he does

he wanted more time to hang out with Aaron Rodgers!

 

[B-Deep]

and he agreed to let this count as a drug infraction because he is THAT sure he will never get busted on a second one, because he is clean!!!!

 

[dparker713]

So, we taking bets on A-Rod? I'd love to see MLB just go for the death penalty to finally get there. It's the only way this ridiculous topic ever really gets anywhere, and I'm fine making Alex the test case. Let's do this.

I think the only way ARod gets the death penalty is if there's proof he was, on top of doping himself, out soliciting / drumming up business for BG.

Again, I'm only working off of ESPN radio in the morning on the way to work, but they also said that there is rumblings of proof that he was paying people off to hide him from trouble and lie in the MLB investigation. If that is true and MLB can prove that, I'm thinking to them that would be the same thing as your post.

I'm fine with them killing his career. Never have been a huge fan, and I don't want the Yankees history burdened with him anymore. He is a relic of what appears to be a past era, at least for now. And I really think that if they want to make the penalties work in these cases, then killing a contract is the only way, and they might as well use him as the test case.

There are a lot of perverse incentives created if a failed drug test voids a contract. Arb and pre-arb players immediately become free agents? Evan Longoria get his team options voided? Wouldn't it make sense for the Angels to introduce steroids into Hamilton and Pujols? Unless you hear something coming from the union, voiding contracts is NEVER going to happen.

 

[dparker713]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

A guy that MIGHT deserve the benefit of the doubt is Tyson Gay, who basically withdrew from every competition, immediately called the press crying to say he had trusted the wrong people, and that he was sorry and would cooperate fully.

Braun behaving as if he is the victim, ruining lives, telling reporters juice questions are "irrelevant" and then when caught saying "As I've said before, I'm not perfect..." before moving right along and not apologizing or admitting anything is about as bad as it gets. How you - or anyone - can defend this POS is past the point of being sad. Now it's plain hilarious.

I'm not defending him. I'm pointing out the numerous flaws in the posts in this thread. Braun did not state he took PEDs. Read his statement. Its not there. This has nothing to do with the benefit of the doubt and everything to do with reading comprehension.

 

[dparker713]

Don't care about the cheating (I think most do) as much as making his teammates, media, and fans who backed him look like fools from his lies. Fess up and deal with it cheater.

I find this statement absurd. We accept lying as a part of our daily dialog, especially about sports. Whether its in the form of clichés the athletes don't mean, coach speak meant to motivate a player/get a call later in a series, GMs using misinformation on negotiations, trade talks and draft picks, or coaches outright lying to reporters' faces about considering leaving for another position. People take the public stance that benefits them the most until they are forced to change that stance.

It's childish to expect people involved in secret actions to be entirely forthcoming.

That point for Braun was when the positive test was leaked. At that point for him to get pissed with everyone who questioned him is what has people up in arms. Noone expects the cheaters to come out and announce it but also noone expects them to continue to lie once they are initially caught.

He wasn't caught, he was accused. And he successfully defended himself at that time. Again, its just plain naïve to expect people to roll over when they're accused.

He was caught. He got off on a technicality. He then went about blaming everyone else for it when he knew he was dirty. Including throwing some poor schmuck under the bus for his cheating. I don't really care about the PEDs so much personally. Heck I don't even like baseball. But this guy went further than that. He made it about other people and lied his ### off when he didn't have to all in a vain attempt to take the heat off himself. He is pretty low for that and I personally would take a breath and think about if I want to defend the lying ####### if I were you.

He didn't get off on a technicality. The test was invalidated because testing protocols were broken. You should know as well as anyone that you can't divorce test results from test protocols.

If you know you're guilty of doping, and you successfully challenge positive test results based upon protocols, you've gotten off on a technicality.

The only evidence against Braun in that case was his positive test. His team proved the test was unreliable. He invalidated the entire substance of the case against him. That's not a technicality.

From what I know of the case, the test was indeed still absolutely reliable. There was nothing at all to show tampering, disintegration of the contents, nothing.

that said, the specific PROTOCOL was not followed, and therefore, even though they had a viable sample, because of protocol being broken, he was let off.

Pretty clear that if not for breaking the protocol (which everyone seems to agree had no effect on the sample but did break the TECHNICAL rules of handling) he'd be cooked. Ergo: Technicality.

Protocols are set in place to ensure the veracity of the results of a test. A test that fails to comply with the protocols is automatically unreliable. You cannot divorce the protocols from the test results.

 

[dparker713]

I'm cool with agreeing that the only facts against Braun were a positive test and, you know, the fact that he has basically admitted he was juicing. Other than the positive test and admission of guilt, dude was 100% clean.

Due was juicing, but to say he got off on a technicality is incorrect. He got off the first time because the defense was unable to show that the test was unreliable.

technicality

the test was right, he was juicing

he beat the system...

till now

it is not hard to grasp

The test was invalid. It may or may not have been correct. He may or may not have been juicing then. And he's only admitted to making mistakes.

Fill in with whatever assumptions you want, but just recognize they're assumptions and not facts.

True they are not facts but pretty good assumptions since Braun just took a 65 game suspension and 3.4 million dollar salary hit. Braun doesn't do that if MLB doesn't have factual evidence against him.

Plenty of innocent people take plea deals in our legal system. I'm not saying he's innocent, just that his action in taking the plea deal doesn't automatically mean he's actually guilty.

 

[dparker713]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

that's right, you prolly believe he took a 65 game suspension because he wanted an unpaid vacation

and he was just going to PED dealers because they made the best cup of coffee he had ever tasted

and the cllector guy on the first test rigged the test

Braun is clean! He is the vicitm!

What I believe and what is actually written in his press release are not the same thing. HTH.

 

[Koya]

Don't care about the cheating (I think most do) as much as making his teammates, media, and fans who backed him look like fools from his lies. Fess up and deal with it cheater.

I find this statement absurd. We accept lying as a part of our daily dialog, especially about sports. Whether its in the form of clichés the athletes don't mean, coach speak meant to motivate a player/get a call later in a series, GMs using misinformation on negotiations, trade talks and draft picks, or coaches outright lying to reporters' faces about considering leaving for another position. People take the public stance that benefits them the most until they are forced to change that stance.

It's childish to expect people involved in secret actions to be entirely forthcoming.

That point for Braun was when the positive test was leaked. At that point for him to get pissed with everyone who questioned him is what has people up in arms. Noone expects the cheaters to come out and announce it but also noone expects them to continue to lie once they are initially caught.

He wasn't caught, he was accused. And he successfully defended himself at that time. Again, its just plain naïve to expect people to roll over when they're accused.

He was caught. He got off on a technicality. He then went about blaming everyone else for it when he knew he was dirty. Including throwing some poor schmuck under the bus for his cheating. I don't really care about the PEDs so much personally. Heck I don't even like baseball. But this guy went further than that. He made it about other people and lied his ### off when he didn't have to all in a vain attempt to take the heat off himself. He is pretty low for that and I personally would take a breath and think about if I want to defend the lying ####### if I were you.

He didn't get off on a technicality. The test was invalidated because testing protocols were broken. You should know as well as anyone that you can't divorce test results from test protocols.

If you know you're guilty of doping, and you successfully challenge positive test results based upon protocols, you've gotten off on a technicality.

The only evidence against Braun in that case was his positive test. His team proved the test was unreliable. He invalidated the entire substance of the case against him. That's not a technicality.

From what I know of the case, the test was indeed still absolutely reliable. There was nothing at all to show tampering, disintegration of the contents, nothing.

that said, the specific PROTOCOL was not followed, and therefore, even though they had a viable sample, because of protocol being broken, he was let off.

Pretty clear that if not for breaking the protocol (which everyone seems to agree had no effect on the sample but did break the TECHNICAL rules of handling) he'd be cooked. Ergo: Technicality.

Protocols are set in place to ensure the veracity of the results of a test. A test that fails to comply with the protocols is automatically unreliable. You cannot divorce the protocols from the test results.

Not arguing any of this. Which is why he was (rightfully) let off the hook.

But from everything I heard, the test was reliable, it was not tampered with - it simply was not handled according to protocol.

That, to me, is a technicality. Namely, he tested positive, but even though it was positive (and reliable according to every expert I heard), those results / that sample no longer counted due to the lack of protocol. Once again, that's not being innocent but rather not being found guilty due to a technicality regarding the protocol.

 

[Koya]

I'm cool with agreeing that the only facts against Braun were a positive test and, you know, the fact that he has basically admitted he was juicing. Other than the positive test and admission of guilt, dude was 100% clean.

Due was juicing, but to say he got off on a technicality is incorrect. He got off the first time because the defense was unable to show that the test was unreliable.

technicality

the test was right, he was juicing

he beat the system...

till now

it is not hard to grasp

The test was invalid. It may or may not have been correct. He may or may not have been juicing then. And he's only admitted to making mistakes.

Fill in with whatever assumptions you want, but just recognize they're assumptions and not facts.

True they are not facts but pretty good assumptions since Braun just took a 65 game suspension and 3.4 million dollar salary hit. Braun doesn't do that if MLB doesn't have factual evidence against him.

Plenty of innocent people take plea deals in our legal system. I'm not saying he's innocent, just that his action in taking the plea deal doesn't automatically mean he's actually guilty.

You are correct. It doesn't mean he is actually guilty.

But, he is actually guilty. And you'd be an absolute fool at this point to think otherwise.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I'm cool with agreeing that the only facts against Braun were a positive test and, you know, the fact that he has basically admitted he was juicing. Other than the positive test and admission of guilt, dude was 100% clean.

Due was juicing, but to say he got off on a technicality is incorrect. He got off the first time because the defense was unable to show that the test was unreliable.

technicality

the test was right, he was juicing

he beat the system...

till now

it is not hard to grasp

The test was invalid. It may or may not have been correct. He may or may not have been juicing then. And he's only admitted to making mistakes.

Fill in with whatever assumptions you want, but just recognize they're assumptions and not facts.

True they are not facts but pretty good assumptions since Braun just took a 65 game suspension and 3.4 million dollar salary hit. Braun doesn't do that if MLB doesn't have factual evidence against him.

Plenty of innocent people take plea deals in our legal system. I'm not saying he's innocent, just that his action in taking the plea deal doesn't automatically mean he's actually guilty.

 

[Disco Stu]

Thread was getting boring, good to see dparker picking up the role of Mr Pack.

 

[B-Deep]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

A guy that MIGHT deserve the benefit of the doubt is Tyson Gay, who basically withdrew from every competition, immediately called the press crying to say he had trusted the wrong people, and that he was sorry and would cooperate fully.

Braun behaving as if he is the victim, ruining lives, telling reporters juice questions are "irrelevant" and then when caught saying "As I've said before, I'm not perfect..." before moving right along and not apologizing or admitting anything is about as bad as it gets. How you - or anyone - can defend this POS is past the point of being sad. Now it's plain hilarious.

I'm not defending him. I'm pointing out the numerous flaws in the posts in this thread. Braun did not state he took PEDs. Read his statement. Its not there. This has nothing to do with the benefit of the doubt and everything to do with reading comprehension.

he did agree to a suspension for violating the drug policy

 

[culdeus]

holy crap dparker is a piece of work. Worse than jojo in the zim thread.

 

[dparker713]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

 

[sho nuff]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

Dude...he accepted a 65 game suspension.

He has...even by the tiniest measures...admitted to juicing.

 

[B-Deep]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

that's right, you prolly believe he took a 65 game suspension because he wanted an unpaid vacation

and he was just going to PED dealers because they made the best cup of coffee he had ever tasted

and the cllector guy on the first test rigged the test

Braun is clean! He is the vicitm!

What I believe and what is actually written in his press release are not the same thing. HTH.

lol

fight the good fight man

 

[B-Deep]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

yes

that is exactly what this is

i am tired of people persecuting Ryan Braun

all he has ever done is play baseball and maybe or maybe not juice to a ridiculous degree

who could care about him when there are murderers running free! suspend THEM instead!

lolol

 

[B-Deep]

i think they should suspend that dodger player who said he took down Braun's autographed jersey. Why take it down, for all we know Braun is 100% clean! #FreeRyanBraun

 

[sho nuff]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Not really...while I don't go in line with those just calling him a POS...he lied...he cheated...he is getting the games he deserves for that (in a way).

Not defending him...but going for 100 games when that is the punishment for the 2nd infraction seems odd...since the first infraction "legally" never happened.

 

[rodg12]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Wholeheartedly agree.

 

[dparker713]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

A guy that MIGHT deserve the benefit of the doubt is Tyson Gay, who basically withdrew from every competition, immediately called the press crying to say he had trusted the wrong people, and that he was sorry and would cooperate fully.

Braun behaving as if he is the victim, ruining lives, telling reporters juice questions are "irrelevant" and then when caught saying "As I've said before, I'm not perfect..." before moving right along and not apologizing or admitting anything is about as bad as it gets. How you - or anyone - can defend this POS is past the point of being sad. Now it's plain hilarious.

I'm not defending him. I'm pointing out the numerous flaws in the posts in this thread. Braun did not state he took PEDs. Read his statement. Its not there. This has nothing to do with the benefit of the doubt and everything to do with reading comprehension.

he did agree to a suspension for violating the drug policy

He was suspended for "violations of the Basic Agreement and its Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program" When MLB was asked to clarify what specific provisions he violated, they did not respond. There are many ways to violate both of those agreements, many of which do not include taking PEDs.

 

[Koya]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

 

[dparker713]

Not arguing any of this. Which is why he was (rightfully) let off the hook.

But from everything I heard, the test was reliable, it was not tampered with - it simply was not handled according to protocol.

That, to me, is a technicality. Namely, he tested positive, but even though it was positive (and reliable according to every expert I heard), those results / that sample no longer counted due to the lack of protocol. Once again, that's not being innocent but rather not being found guilty due to a technicality regarding the protocol.

Whatever you believe about the reliability of the test, an independent arbitrator with a lot more information on the subject than any of us has access to disagreed with you.

 

[pantagrapher]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Off-the-field stuff is different. Yeah, killing dogs and whatnot is horrible, but it does not affect the integrity of the game. When you cheat at the game you are playing, the league's punishment has to be severe.

 

[randall146]

The only fair punishment is for the yanks to have to pay and play Arod every game for the rest of his contract.

 

[pantagrapher]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

good posting

 

[dparker713]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

Players taking drugs to play better are trying to win, all the time. Gambling, on the other hand, creates incentives to try to lose or not try as hard in other contests. Gambling is a much different and worse infraction which actually threatens the integrity of the game.

 

[pantagrapher]

Didn't this same dparker deny for years that PEDs even had any beneficial effect on a baseball player's ability?

 

[Godsbrother]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

Players taking drugs to play better are trying to win, all the time. Gambling, on the other hand, creates incentives to try to lose or not try as hard in other contests. Gambling is a much different and worse infraction which actually threatens the integrity of the game.

What Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, ARod and Braun did is much worse than Pete Rose as far as I am concerned. Rose was a competitor, these guys are cheaters.

 

[rodg12]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

Players taking drugs to play better are trying to win, all the time. Gambling, on the other hand, creates incentives to try to lose or not try as hard in other contests. Gambling is a much different and worse infraction which actually threatens the integrity of the game.

What Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, ARod and Braun did is much worse than Pete Rose as far as I am concerned. Rose was a competitor, these guys are cheaters.

LOL

 

[Limp Ditka]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

Players taking drugs to play better are trying to win, all the time. Gambling, on the other hand, creates incentives to try to lose or not try as hard in other contests. Gambling is a much different and worse infraction which actually threatens the integrity of the game.

What Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, ARod and Braun did is much worse than Pete Rose as far as I am concerned. Rose was a competitor, these guys are cheaters.

oof.

 

[Limp Ditka]

Didn't this same dparker deny for years that PEDs even had any beneficial effect on a baseball player's ability?

But of course it is.

 

[dparker713]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

Players taking drugs to play better are trying to win, all the time. Gambling, on the other hand, creates incentives to try to lose or not try as hard in other contests. Gambling is a much different and worse infraction which actually threatens the integrity of the game.

What Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, ARod and Braun did is much worse than Pete Rose as far as I am concerned. Rose was a competitor, these guys are cheaters.

Amphetamine use in baseball. Look it up. Leaded and unleaded coffee specifically. Get back to me after that.

 

[T Bell]

So, we taking bets on A-Rod? I'd love to see MLB just go for the death penalty to finally get there. It's the only way this ridiculous topic ever really gets anywhere, and I'm fine making Alex the test case. Let's do this.

I don't think A-Rod ever plays again. I think he'll drag it out due to the injury this year and then retire. I think that will be his plea deal with MLB.

He has supposedly said he won't accept a deal and will appeal whatever they hand out. I think the time has passed for using his injury to get out of this. He's on MLB's timeline now.

On Mike and Mike this morning some reporter said that he is hearing from ARod's people that they are going to fight anything at all to the bitter end. Obviously, could just be posturing, but it doesn't sound like never playing again is an option right now. They are also accusing the Yankees of working with MLB to get him death penaltyed.

wow

he wasn't always seen as the dooshiest man in baseball right?

when did that start?

When he went to the Yankees.

 

[dparker713]

Didn't this same dparker deny for years that PEDs even had any beneficial effect on a baseball player's ability?

I've stated repeatedly there is no science on how or how much steroids enhance baseball players performance. And especially no science that hitters gain more benefit than pitchers. And any claims to be able to spot steroid users based upon their statistics are absurd.

 

[pantagrapher]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

Players taking drugs to play better are trying to win, all the time. Gambling, on the other hand, creates incentives to try to lose or not try as hard in other contests. Gambling is a much different and worse infraction which actually threatens the integrity of the game.

Either way, a team loses.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

Didn't this same dparker deny for years that PEDs even had any beneficial effect on a baseball player's ability?

I've stated repeatedly there is no science on how or how much steroids enhance baseball players performance. And especially no science that hitters gain more benefit than pitchers. And any claims to be able to spot steroid users based upon their statistics are absurd.

 

[Michael Brown]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

A guy that MIGHT deserve the benefit of the doubt is Tyson Gay, who basically withdrew from every competition, immediately called the press crying to say he had trusted the wrong people, and that he was sorry and would cooperate fully.

Braun behaving as if he is the victim, ruining lives, telling reporters juice questions are "irrelevant" and then when caught saying "As I've said before, I'm not perfect..." before moving right along and not apologizing or admitting anything is about as bad as it gets. How you - or anyone - can defend this POS is past the point of being sad. Now it's plain hilarious.

I'm not defending him. I'm pointing out the numerous flaws in the posts in this thread. Braun did not state he took PEDs. Read his statement. Its not there. This has nothing to do with the benefit of the doubt and everything to do with reading comprehension.

he did agree to a suspension for violating the drug policy

He was suspended for "violations of the Basic Agreement and its Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program" When MLB was asked to clarify what specific provisions he violated, they did not respond. There are many ways to violate both of those agreements, many of which do not include taking PEDs.

Exactly. Even if he called a press conference tomorrow and said "I juiced for years", that could just mean he loves banana smoothies. WE JUST DON'T KNOW

 

[Abraham]

Didn't this same dparker deny for years that PEDs even had any beneficial effect on a baseball player's ability?

I've stated repeatedly there is no science on how or how much steroids enhance baseball players performance. And especially no science that hitters gain more benefit than pitchers. And any claims to be able to spot steroid users based upon their statistics are absurd.

Holy hell. Going to need a backhoe to dig his head out of the sand...

 

[B-Deep]

Legally speaking, it may be fair not to consider it a technicality, if that was the only point of evidence in the initial appeal. Which I would assume it was, unless there was any other cause for his initial suspension. So there was one piece of evidence, it was invalid, thus the suspension was overturned. That does not seem like a technicality.

Generally speaking and in the court of public opinion, though, there is so much other circumstantial evidence at this point, that the invalid test results do seem a minor point now, so I can see how people would view that as a technicality.

and, ya know

now he has copped to being a juicer

Has he? I'd love to see that statement.

A guy that MIGHT deserve the benefit of the doubt is Tyson Gay, who basically withdrew from every competition, immediately called the press crying to say he had trusted the wrong people, and that he was sorry and would cooperate fully.

Braun behaving as if he is the victim, ruining lives, telling reporters juice questions are "irrelevant" and then when caught saying "As I've said before, I'm not perfect..." before moving right along and not apologizing or admitting anything is about as bad as it gets. How you - or anyone - can defend this POS is past the point of being sad. Now it's plain hilarious.

I'm not defending him. I'm pointing out the numerous flaws in the posts in this thread. Braun did not state he took PEDs. Read his statement. Its not there. This has nothing to do with the benefit of the doubt and everything to do with reading comprehension.

he did agree to a suspension for violating the drug policy

He was suspended for "violations of the Basic Agreement and its Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program" When MLB was asked to clarify what specific provisions he violated, they did not respond. There are many ways to violate both of those agreements, many of which do not include taking PEDs.

Exactly. Even if he called a press conference tomorrow and said "I juiced for years", that could just mean he loves banana smoothies. WE JUST DON'T KNOW

lololol

 

[sho nuff]

Didn't this same dparker deny for years that PEDs even had any beneficial effect on a baseball player's ability?

I've stated repeatedly there is no science on how or how much steroids enhance baseball players performance. And especially no science that hitters gain more benefit than pitchers. And any claims to be able to spot steroid users based upon their statistics are absurd.

Holy hell. Going to need a backhoe to dig his head out of the sand...

His point on not knowing for sure how it affects them or how much more batters over pitchers is not that out there.

Its obviously a benefit...to what extent seems to be ore of the question.

He still seems quite misguided in all of this.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

i think they should suspend that dodger player who said he took down Braun's autographed jersey. Why take it down, for all we know Braun is 100% clean! #FreeRyanBraun

I love Skip Schumaker. I wonder what the coaching sessions between he and McGwire will be like going forward.

"So, yeah, about that whole juicers should be kicked out of the game thing..."

Or how he'll take it when he finds out Albert was using.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

So, we taking bets on A-Rod? I'd love to see MLB just go for the death penalty to finally get there. It's the only way this ridiculous topic ever really gets anywhere, and I'm fine making Alex the test case. Let's do this.

Melky lied to investigators and set up a fake website. Plus he actually failed a test. He got 50 games. How exactly does the league justify a lifetime ban given that precedent?

Because ARod is a class A ##### and there isn't a single person that will weep when the do hammer him?

 

[Witz]

This whole thing feels an awful lot like the Vick case. People losing their minds and demanding more punishment than is meted out to players that beat their wives, drive drunk or kill someone with their car.

Completely different. For me, there are two types of "crimes" when it comes to sports, and they are not just apples and oranges, but apples and elephants. There are crimes "against the game" - namely, those which call into account the very integrity of the sport. Cheating is among the worst of these, along with fixing games, betting on your own games, etc.

The second are crimes "outside of the sport" - anything from DUI to murder.

Now, usually, or dare I say, almost always, the crimes against the game do FAR less harm to SOCIETY than crimes within/against the game. However, crimes within the game are far more dangerous to the future of the sport itself than even the worst of crimes outside the lines.

So, while it's far worse to have dog fights, DUIs, beat your wife, murder people, those don't strike to the integrity of the game itself. So, if within the lines some of those crimes do not have "in game" repercussions, I can live with that.

Braun's saga is much more aligned with Pete Rose, who's actions called into the very basis of what sport is - a free and unfettered competition. When you mess with that, the existence and propogation of the game itself is called into question.

With that in mind, while Braun's crimes were nothing compared to most that occur outside the lines, within the context of the game they must be treated more harshly, lest the game no longer be valid in the mind of the spectator.

Players taking drugs to play better are trying to win, all the time. Gambling, on the other hand, creates incentives to try to lose or not try as hard in other contests. Gambling is a much different and worse infraction which actually threatens the integrity of the game.

What Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGuire, ARod and Braun did is much worse than Pete Rose as far as I am concerned. Rose was a competitor, these guys are cheaters.

According to the Dowd Report, Rose may have bet against the Reds while he was managing them. THAT would be far worse than anything those other guys could have done.

 

[ncc2]

I'm cool with agreeing that the only facts against Braun were a positive test and, you know, the fact that he has basically admitted he was juicing. Other than the positive test and admission of guilt, dude was 100% clean.

Due was juicing, but to say he got off on a technicality is incorrect. He got off the first time because the defense was unable to show that the test was unreliable.

technicality

the test was right, he was juicing

he beat the system...

till now

it is not hard to grasp

The test was invalid. It may or may not have been correct. He may or may not have been juicing then. And he's only admitted to making mistakes.

Fill in with whatever assumptions you want, but just recognize they're assumptions and not facts.

True they are not facts but pretty good assumptions since Braun just took a 65 game suspension and 3.4 million dollar salary hit. Braun doesn't do that if MLB doesn't have factual evidence against him.

Plenty of innocent people take plea deals in our legal system. I'm not saying he's innocent, just that his action in taking the plea deal doesn't automatically mean he's actually guilty.

Are you his agent? Are you sleeping with him? Even the players on his own team are pissed and are glad he got suspended.

 

[B-Deep]

Didn't this same dparker deny for years that PEDs even had any beneficial effect on a baseball player's ability?

I've stated repeatedly there is no science on how or how much steroids enhance baseball players performance. And especially no science that hitters gain more benefit than pitchers. And any claims to be able to spot steroid users based upon their statistics or based upon their urine tests, or their connection to PED labs, or their copping to violating the drug policy, or common sense are absurd.

fixed!

 

[Witz]

Didn't this same dparker deny for years that PEDs even had any beneficial effect on a baseball player's ability?

I've stated repeatedly there is no science on how or how much steroids enhance baseball players performance. And especially no science that hitters gain more benefit than pitchers. And any claims to be able to spot steroid users based upon their statistics are absurd.

Nope. None.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/70898289@N00/1050762112/