Craig, I think you have a good balance of what was done and how baseball should handle it. I blame the majority of this on MLB who continues to tolerate this behavior. It was unclear back then in the 90's, however anyone who was playing in the mid/late 90's forward knew that if they took this crap, any of it, then they were possibly jeopardizing a career. Baseball did not enforce their rules and made the decision to actually protect some players while throwing the less prominent dues in the news. It amazes me how some players like Arod, didn't need this juice and that he was willing to have his career end like it did. It was pathetic too, he was the only one crying at his press event. No one else could care less about his tragic ending. I remember Big Mac, surprised, said he had bought this over the counter. It was not a banned drug or supplement at that time. Argue all you want guys, MLB didn't do anything at all for quite some time. Even when they did, they weren't sure of how to handle it, then weren't sure how they would enforce rules. The lists were made and changed, and changed again. These events have transpired over a 15+ year period. I think we can all agree that if one gets caught now, their playing days should be over, yet it continues and will as long as the reward out weighs the risks. We just love and apply thr three strike rule to this topic.
CURRENT PROJECTS IN WORK: To be honest, no direction, but... 1966-69 Topps EX+ 1975 minis NrMt Kelloggs PSA 9 All Topps Heritage-Master Sets
Hall of fame is old time baseball. Those days are gone . All the pro sports are 100% about money now. Some study will be done to decide if letting PED users in is cash flow positive or cash flow negative and that will determine what happens.
Originally posted by: Dave99B Nope. The HOF is meant for the Griffeys/Ruth's of the world, not the A-Rods/Bonds. Cheaters will need to pay to get in, just like me.
Hall of fame is old time baseball. Those days are gone . All the pro sports are 100% about money now. Some study will be done to decide if letting PED users in is cash flow positive or cash flow negative and that will determine what happens.
Don't fool yourself, baseball has been about money since 1869. Don't think for a second that all your hero's of yesterday were just playing for the love of the game. I'm pretty sure cobb negotiated for every last penny (as he should have) and remember that Drysdale and koufax threatened sitting out if their contract demands weren't met. Many have this romantic notion of old time players, but they were pretty much the same as those of today
What evidence do you have against griffey? There are no failed tests, rumors, anecdotal or statistical evidence. Tell me you are not just basing this on a feeling. Good grief.
Should we remove players previously inducted if they are proven users? There is the example of mickey mantle. Guilty of steroid use in the late summer/fall of 1961. Should he be removed from the hall?
Originally posted by: craig44There is the example of mickey mantle. Guilty of steroid use in the late summer/fall of 1961. Should he be removed from the hall?
You use the word "guilty" so I assume that this has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I missed where that happened, all I've seen is an allegation by a person who wasn't alive in 1961. Can you point me to the proof you've seen?
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Jane levey a well respected sports biographer wrote of the shot in her biography of mantle. The shot led to a severe abscess in the buttock that caused mick to miss quite a few games in 1961. Look at the resurgence of mantle from two down years in 59 and 60 to his year in 1961. The early 60's was the time when steroids became more common with bodybuilders as well, so a Dr would have had knowledge and access to the drugs at that time.
So Mantle used steroids but no way Griffey did? LOL..
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Grote, there is evidence against mantle, there is none that I am aware of against griffey. Are you aware of any? If so I would love to hear it. People are incredulous when faced with the idea that hero's of their past could be guilty of ped use. There is a common feeling that things and people from the past were better or more pure than those of today. Sometimes that is the case, but in many cases it is not.
Originally posted by: craig44 What evidence do you have against griffey? There are no failed tests, rumors, anecdotal or statistical evidence. Tell me you are not just basing this on a feeling. Good grief.
I'm not bashing the guy, I don't have any evidence nor do I care either way. It's my opinion nothing more nothing less
As I stated previously in this thread, the problem with the debate regrading PED users and the HOF is there is no way to know for sure who used or who didn't. Just because a player wasn't caught doesn't mean he was clean. And vice versa. There is a level of sanctimony within this debate that I find somewhat disingenuous. There is no question in my mind that MLB knew full well that players were using steroids and did absolutely nothing to stop it. In fact, I would argue, encouraged it. After the 1994 strike, McGwire and Sosa brought baseball back from the dead with their home run chase. You mean to tell me that MLB didn't know what was going on at that time? Of course, they did. And turned a blind eye to it~until Congress got involved and it became no longer in their best interest to do so. And now, you want those players to bear the brunt of the blame? What a farce. We can all sit self-righteously in our easy chairs and declare this player is clean or this player is dirty, but to tell you the truth, my outrage is directed towards MLB, and the culture of corruption they created, not the players who took advantage of the system in place at the time.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Your opinions are valid, baseball. I guess what I'm try to say here is that the witch hunt can become sanctimonious at times. Baseball used these players to their advantage just as the players used PEDs to cheat and game the system.
It's a muddy mess, and has been debated to exhaustion. Like politics, opinions about the use of steroids in baseball and what penalties should be meted out are not likely to change anytime soon on either side.
I would also agree that we can safely assume that players like Bonds and Clemens did use PEDs, but there are many others who either did use and were never exposed, or did not use and have been stigmatized or been deemed guilty by association or circumstance. That's what I meant by "and vice versa."
I don't condone cheating and never stated that cheaters should be rewarded. I'm just saying that baseball was just as much a part in the scandal of that era as the players by turning a blind eye to the problem until it was too late. Surely, you don't believe that MLB did everything in their power to keep the playing field level at that time. Quite the contrary, actually. I would also say that there are also many fans who simply don't share the same kind of outrage you do about steroid use in baseball, some of whom have posted in this thread. Your opinion is probably just as popular, but let's not pretend that the outrage over this issue is universal.
I have no problem keeping guys like Bonds and Clemens out of the HOF due to their use of PEDs. As a fan, I am also interested to see if either or both of these otherwise first ballot HOFers gain any support over the next couple of years in the HOF voting, especially considering the relatively weak ballot for those years. Time will tell how history looks back upon "the steroid era." We have a way to go to get to that point.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Grote, who cares what mlb did or didn't do to stop players from using. It seems you are shifting the blame from the players who used to the governing body who didn't do enough to stop them. As if because there weren't strict enough penalties in place, they just couldn't stop themselves and now it's bud seligs fault they used and now we just shouldn't care because mlb didn't do enough to stop them. I don't think so. Regardless the penalties or lack thereof, PEDs provide an uneven playing field an advantage to the user. Those users don't belong in Cooperstown whether it is sammy sosa or mickey mantle.
Again, you insinuated griffey used PEDs. What is your evidence?
Grote, there is evidence against mantle, there is none that I am aware of against griffey. Are you aware of any? If so I would love to hear it. People are incredulous when faced with the idea that hero's of their past could be guilty of ped use. There is a common feeling that things and people from the past were better or more pure than those of today. Sometimes that is the case, but in many cases it is not.
What you've cited hardly qualifies as "evidence". That's like saying Griffey obviously used because of the known users that he was teammates with or something that tenuous. Also, there are two things to be said from that era's list of players. One, the understanding of what PEDs were, let alone how they affect a person was tenuous to say the least. Secondly, that era was decades prior to it being explicitly outlawed in baseball.
What evidence do we have against Clemens? No failed test, no admission, just one lone witness who really isn't very credible. Mantle was coming off two down years and used "Dr Feelgood" max Jacobson who also "treated" JFK. A result of mantles "treatment" was an abscess on the buttock that forced him to miss time. The concoction was reportedly a mixture of testosterone and amphetamines. Which player has stronger evidence against him? Clemens is widely considered a user, why not mantle? Oh, I forgot. He is a national hero.
Originally posted by: craig44 Jane levey a well respected sports biographer wrote of the shot in her biography of mantle. The shot led to a severe abscess in the buttock that caused mick to miss quite a few games in 1961. Look at the resurgence of mantle from two down years in 59 and 60 to his year in 1961. The early 60's was the time when steroids became more common with bodybuilders as well, so a Dr would have had knowledge and access to the drugs at that time.
Yes, I know about the allegation by the person who wasn't alive in 1961. What I was asking for was the proof.
With regard to the "quite a few" games Mantle missed in 1961 - a season in which he played more games than in any other season (tied with 1960) - I'd be interested to know more specifics. He never missed more than one game consecutively, and he hit remarkably consistently in each month of the season. I'll accept that his butt hurt at some point, but the evidence that it affected his play is nowhere to be seen. The evidence that he got treatment that improved his play is similarly missing. If Mantle had a resurgence in 1961 due to steroids, then the steroids must have been administered from the beginning of the season. In other words, you've got a 1961 resurgence, a butt injury, missing games due the injury, and treatment for the injury, but they can't all be related - the math doesn't work. When did this alleged steroid treatment occur (on what day)? What were his stats before and after that day? Inquiring minds want to know.
Mantle, by the way, was the best player in the AL in both 1959 and 1960. To refer to 1961 as a "resurgence" is misleading. It was his best season, but "resurgence" implies that he wasn't great before that.
This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
Grote, there is evidence against mantle, there is none that I am aware of against griffey. Are you aware of any? If so I would love to hear it. People are incredulous when faced with the idea that hero's of their past could be guilty of ped use. There is a common feeling that things and people from the past were better or more pure than those of today. Sometimes that is the case, but in many cases it is not.
What you've cited hardly qualifies as "evidence". That's like saying Griffey obviously used because of the known users that he was teammates with or something that tenuous. Also, there are two things to be said from that era's list of players. One, the understanding of what PEDs were, let alone how they affect a person was tenuous to say the least. Secondly, that era was decades prior to it being explicitly outlawed in baseball.
What evidence do we have against Clemens? No failed test, no admission, just one lone witness who really isn't very credible. Mantle was coming off two down years and used "Dr Feelgood" max Jacobson who also "treated" JFK. A result of mantles "treatment" was an abscess on the buttock that forced him to miss time. The concoction was reportedly a mixture of testosterone and amphetamines. Which player has stronger evidence against him? Clemens is widely considered a user, why not mantle? Oh, I forgot. He is a national hero.
This is just silly and one of the reasons why I have an issue with fans determining who is clean and who isn't. You, yourself, started off in this thread as a supporter of Piazza's induction into the HOF, and two pages later changed your mind and determined that he was a PED user, instead.
It is also completely naive to believe that any player who played during this era is 100% clean. The reality is that the use of steroids was pervasive during that era and that for every player that was exposed or caught using, there was likely two others who used or dabbled with PEDs who wasn't caught. No one is above scrutiny.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Originally posted by: craig44 What evidence do you have against griffey? There are no failed tests, rumors, anecdotal or statistical evidence. Tell me you are not just basing this on a feeling. Good grief.
I'm not bashing the guy, I don't have any evidence nor do I care either way. It's my opinion nothing more nothing less
Of course you're bashing the guy. By your own admission, you have no evidence, or any support whatsoever yet you accuse the guy of cheating. This isn't just any ballplayer mind you. This was the most overhyped teenager in the draft era of baseball so none of his accomplishments should come as a surprise. If you don't care either way, then perhaps you should refrain from making such reckless accusations.
In my mind I'm not bashing the guy because I couldn't care less if he used or not, I'm not an analyst or a investigator but I'm a fan of MLB and have a right to my opinion wether you like it or not.
In my mind I'm not bashing the guy because I couldn't care less if he used or not, I'm not an analyst or a investigator but I'm a fan of MLB and have a right to my opinion wether you like it or not.
Fine, I think you are a rapist and a pedophile. I'm not bashing you because I don't know you personally and could care care less about you even though I have zero evidence, it's still my opinion and I have a right to it whether you like it or not.
Ok now your just being ignorant as well as childish and moronic. If you sincerely think that there is zero chance Griff might have used your not living in reality, take your blinders off and realize that it is possible and not that absurd to think that anyone in that era could have dabbled in some type of PED use. His 58 HR's in '98 was all about him having a career year and not a chance of any other scenario? Ok keep hoarding Griff JR rookie cards and worshiping your childhood hero lol
Grote, I agree with everything you said. But all systematic problems take a long time to ferret out as well as to address. Users didn't start using all at once and MLB, the media and fans didn't all catch on at the same time. I could cite numerous examples in all walks of life but I will use Nazi Germany because if ever there was a time to "stop" something, that certainly should have been it.
It's not like Hitler and Germany woke up one day in 1939 with arguably the world's greatest military at that time with seemingly an endless array of impressive war machinery and military might. It was built up over years, with not only the Allies knowing about them, but if fact selling plenty of goods and services to them in support of their aspirations. If we used that same logic, we should be disgusted at ourselves for not nipping it in the bud and saving MILLIONS of lives in the process. The same could be said for Iraq, and in the future, possibly China.
But let's even assume that MLB was 99% at fault, which I obviously don't buy. What should we do against them exactly? I don't support, nor is it remotely a possibility, that the sport just fold up and stop playing. But for the players who cheated, we certainly can't award them with yet another honor when they didn't play honestly and were more than well rewarded with millions upon millions, and MVP and Cy Young awards, and the adulation of fans, etc.
Agreed. I don't really have an answer. I will certainly agree that it was a slippery slope with regard to the PEDs in the steroid era, and that MLB was not really interesting in rooting out the problem until Congress got involved and public sentiment turned against them. The next couple of years will be telling as to whether any of these stigmatized players have a realistic shot at the HOF. If Bonds and/or Clemens do not gain enough support, I can't see any players getting in against whom the evidence is fairly certain or clear. Other players, against whom the evidence is based more on rumor and innuendo than fact, like Mike Piazza, will pose a murkier, more complicated discussion. There is no doubt in my mind that if Piazza had not been dogged by steroid rumors, that he'd have been a first ballot HOFer. So for those players in that category, is a waiting period, or HOF purgatory, the more likely scenario?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
The fact that congress even got involved in the first place was an absurd waste of time and money, MLB is a billion dollar corporation that should have been forced to deal with the problem that they turned a blind eye on and helped create themselves. The HOF is forever ruined going forward because guilty players will get in and others will not, there is no answer other than accept the steroid era just like the dead ball era.
Baseball, you completely misunderstood my post. I in no way am trying to assert that Clemens was clean. I was making a comparison between two situations one of which is very clear (that Clemens used peds) even though they there is no hard evidence. And another situation where there is some evidence but people are incredulous at the notion that a hero like mantle could have used. mcnamee was a horrible witness with no credibility. Petitte remembered and then misremembered, not exactly credible either. Yet we all believe Clemens used. Mantle used a known drug pusher who "treated" other high profile clients. I would be shocked if the one injection that caused the abscess was the first and only but it is the only one we know about. Like when the drunk says honest officer this is my first time drinking and driving.
If you feel the mantle assertion is speculative, do you also believe the Clemens accusations are also speculative? And why the difference?
Grote, there is evidence against mantle, there is none that I am aware of against griffey. Are you aware of any? If so I would love to hear it. People are incredulous when faced with the idea that hero's of their past could be guilty of ped use. There is a common feeling that things and people from the past were better or more pure than those of today. Sometimes that is the case, but in many cases it is not.
What you've cited hardly qualifies as "evidence". That's like saying Griffey obviously used because of the known users that he was teammates with or something that tenuous. Also, there are two things to be said from that era's list of players. One, the understanding of what PEDs were, let alone how they affect a person was tenuous to say the least. Secondly, that era was decades prior to it being explicitly outlawed in baseball.
What evidence do we have against Clemens? No failed test, no admission, just one lone witness who really isn't very credible. Mantle was coming off two down years and used "Dr Feelgood" max Jacobson who also "treated" JFK. A result of mantles "treatment" was an abscess on the buttock that forced him to miss time. The concoction was reportedly a mixture of testosterone and amphetamines. Which player has stronger evidence against him? Clemens is widely considered a user, why not mantle? Oh, I forgot. He is a national hero.
This is just silly and one of the reasons why I have an issue with fans determining who is clean and who isn't. You, yourself, started off in this thread as a supporter of Piazza's induction into the HOF, and two pages later changed your mind and determined that he was a PED user, instead.
It is also completely naive to believe that any player who played during this era is 100% clean. The reality is that the use of steroids was pervasive during that era and that for every player that was exposed or caught using, there was likely two others who used or dabbled with PEDs who wasn't caught. No one is above scrutiny.[/
Grote, what in the world is so silly? When information comes to light that a person was unaware of, should that person then not change his opinion on a subject? Or should he hang on, white knuckled, to long held beliefs like it seems you do?
You also seem to want to throw a blanket over the whole era instead of researching and thinking for yourself about it first. I guess it is easier to just say "well, everyone is probably guilty". Except players from the golden age as they are above reproach. That is silly friend.
It is silly, in my opinion, to make blanket statements in general. It's crazy to believe every modern player used and every older player was clean. Good grief, pud galvin used in the 19th century.
And we have our Nazi analogy, way to make an appearance Godwin's law.
It is laughable that folks believe the 50s & 60s were some how clean and that players weren't doing everything and anything to boost their performance during that time period. There are plenty of PED users already in the baseball HOF. There will always be a proportion of people that cheat, always. Some get caught but most do not. To believe otherwise is simply naive. Since rigorous testing was not in place you can not reliably ferret out who received an unfair advantage from using PEDs. So if a player was unlucky enough to have been tested and failed he automatically gets blacklisted? If his teammate didn't get tested but was also juicing then that teammate is being rewarded even though he engaged in the exact same behavior? Or even better no testing at all so players (and their fans) can sanctimoniously claim they were clean.
As for the argument that Mantle wouldn't have used because he was arguably the best player in the AL in 59 & 60, why did Bonds start using when he did? It is claimed that he started after the 1998 season when he hit 37 home runs, drove in 122, scored 120 runs, stole 28 bases and batted .303. If Mantle used perhaps it was because his knee was bothering him, or he didn't feel as strong in the off season than the year before, or he heard one of his rivals was juicing, or he wanted to be the best again, or whatever. Acting like 61 wasn't a "resurgence" for Mantle seems to be ignoring the trajectory of his stats from 57-60, compared to the 1960 his batting average went up 40 points, his slugging over 100 points, his OBP by 50 points. Star athletes are hyper competitive people, they can make decisions that are unfathomable to those of us that don't walk in their shoes. He could have also decided to stop using after having used for a while thus following a "normal" career trajectory stat-wise. You simply can't know. What is universally true is that anyone that comes out as an accuser of a famous athlete is always vilified, their credibility trashed, etc.
From the Mitchell report : In 1973, a Congressional subcommittee announced that its staff had completed an “in depth study into the use of illegal and dangerous drugs in sports” including professional baseball. The subcommittee concluded that “the degree of improper drug use – primarily amphetamines and anabolic steroids – can only be described as alarming.
Acting like PED use was a 80s, 90s and 00s phenomenon is wishful thinking.
No baseball, the injection was testosterone and amphetamines. I agree, I don't really consider amphetamines to the same level as steroids high testosterone or other peds. The doctor he visited was a known drug pusher who also treated JFK. We all know how well he "treated" JFK.
Now, are you saying here that if a player being treated by a doctor receives peds as treatment and doesn't know that treatment was in the form of peds that the player is innocent? The old I didn't know what I was taking scenario? That is the same tactic Sheffield and bonds have taken. That they both used, but unknowingly. Are you saying we should give bonds a free pass because he didn't understand what he was taking?
As a professional athlete, the responsibility ultimately rests on your shoulders to make sure everything put in your body is legal and not against the rules. Not the doctors responsibility.
As far as Clemens goes, he was found not guilty in a court of law for purgory when it came to speaking to congress about ped use. That seems pretty black and white. It seems that ped use in general is pretty black and white. You either used or you didn't. I don't think there is much of a spectrum there. Are we to believe Clemens to have never used because he was found not guilty by a court?
So your saying it doesn't matter to you that players used, just that they broke a rule? So if it could be proven beyond a shadow that mantle used, you would be ok with it because it break a rule?
Now, are you saying here that if a player being treated by a doctor receives peds as treatment and doesn't know that treatment was in the form of peds that the player is innocent? The old I didn't know what I was taking scenario? That is the same tactic Sheffield and bonds have taken. That they both used, but unknowingly. Are you saying we should give bonds a free pass because he didn't understand what he was taking?
Regarding this scenario, I certainly have room in my heart for some understanding if I believed that a player honestly didn't know he was using a banned substance. That is NOT the case with Bonds. And I highly doubt it is with Sheffield. At that point, as with much of this situation, you'd have to decide for yourself if you believe them or not.
No sir, when questioned in court, bonds testified that he never knowingly used steroids. He thought it was flaxseed oil and arthritis cream. Are we to consider his numbers legit now that he never knowingly used? He testified he was misled into using. So the homerun record is legit now? What say you baseball?
Your wasting your time with " Baseball" unless he actually saw it happen he refuses to believe in the realm of possibility that some things are true that don't fit his agenda.
Your wasting your time with " Baseball" unless he actually saw it happen he refuses to believe in the realm of possibility that some things are true that don't fit his agenda.
Quite the opposite. It sounds like YOU are doing just that in assuming that EVERYONE used as being "true" even though you have ZERO knowledge of it. I on the other hand am actually interpreting what data and evidence is available and deciding for myself. Thinking...you should try it sometime.
I have no agenda other than a belief that CHEATERS shouldn't be rewarded. Crazy, I know. It sounds all to obvious that YOU are the one with the agenda of trying to shove down everyone's throats that every MLB over the past 20+ years has been using.
Wait a minute here. You don't think cheaters should be rewarded. Do you not consider ped use cheating? Or is it only cheating if there is an official mlb rule in place that bans it? This is nonsensical. Is not getting an unfair advantage considered cheating? That is the whole point of using peds, to gain an unfair advantage. Therefore it is cheating whether there is an official rule in place or not. Your reasoning states that a ped user is fine one year, and the next year, after a ped ban if put in place is now a cheater. Same crime, yet different conclusions from you. Nonsense. If ped use was not cheating, players wouldn't try so hard to hide it.
Originally posted by: perkdog Your wasting your time with " Baseball" unless he actually saw it happen he refuses to believe in the realm of possibility that some things are true that don't fit his agenda.
Quite the opposite. It sounds like YOU are doing just that in assuming that EVERYONE used as being "true" even though you have ZERO knowledge of it. I on the other hand am actually interpreting what data and evidence is available and deciding for myself. Thinking...you should try it sometime.
I have no agenda other than a belief that CHEATERS shouldn't be rewarded. Crazy, I know. It sounds all to obvious that YOU are the one with the agenda of trying to shove down everyone's throats that every MLB over the past 20+ years has been using.
spin it anyway you want, your HOF and all your boyhood heroes might not be clean. Try and wrap your thick head around that and deal with it. Or not and give us the answer on how to cherry pick players from the last 20 years and decide if they are worthy of HOF talk
So, let me get this clear. Ped use is only cheating/wrong if there is an mlb rule in place outlawing it? Otherwise it's ok? You have some strange ideas.
spin it anyway you want, your HOF and all your boyhood heroes might not be clean. Try and wrap your thick head around that and deal with it. Or not and give us the answer on how to cherry pick players from the last 20 years and decide if they are worthy of HOF talk
It's real simple, you do what you can with what you know. Just as human beings have always done.
Yea Human Beings also think outside the box and long aga realized that speculation is a fair and rational thing. And realized by people way smarter than you.
spin it anyway you want, your HOF and all your boyhood heroes might not be clean. Try and wrap your thick head around that and deal with it. Or not and give us the answer on how to cherry pick players from the last 20 years and decide if they are worthy of HOF talk
It's real simple, you do what you can with what you know. Just as human beings have always done.
Yea Human Beings also think outside the box and long aga realized that speculation is a fair and rational thing. And realized by people way smarter than you.
+ 1000. Is baseball always this nonsensical? I have a hard time making heads or tails with what he is saying
Yes, totally logical. Can you sense the sarcasm? I hope so, because it's there.
You have a tendency to make all sorts of claims and comments without providing any support for them, even a detail of your own opinion. I find that strange and completely illogical.
Your reading comprehension skills must be very suspect. I have said ALL along that PED users statistics are fraudulent and meaningless. They do not belong in the hof and any who are already in that are proven to have been users should be booted out on their cheating rear ends. How that for detailed and clear.
spin it anyway you want, your HOF and all your boyhood heroes might not be clean. Try and wrap your thick head around that and deal with it. Or not and give us the answer on how to cherry pick players from the last 20 years and decide if they are worthy of HOF talk
It's real simple, you do what you can with what you know. Just as human beings have always done.
Yea Human Beings also think outside the box and long aga realized that speculation is a fair and rational thing. And realized by people way smarter than you.
+ 1000. Is baseball always this nonsensical? I have a hard time making heads or tails with what he is saying
He is a combination of someone who thinks he is way smarter than he really is, ignorant, irrational, and someone who was the last guy picked in gym class and harbors a lot of anger from that as an adult lol
spin it anyway you want, your HOF and all your boyhood heroes might not be clean. Try and wrap your thick head around that and deal with it. Or not and give us the answer on how to cherry pick players from the last 20 years and decide if they are worthy of HOF talk
It's real simple, you do what you can with what you know. Just as human beings have always done.
Yea Human Beings also think outside the box and long aga realized that speculation is a fair and rational thing. And realized by people way smarter than you.
+ 1000. Is baseball always this nonsensical? I have a hard time making heads or tails with what he is saying
He is a combination of someone who thinks he is way smarter than he really is, ignorant, irrational, and
I understand that type all too well. It is just so much fun to discuss this topic. I can't help myself.
I am not speaking in any way about society at large. Don't know where you got that. Again, reading comprehension
And I am, so what? You created this thread as a comment on morality on some level or another. The things people do in one thing, like baseball and the various issues throughout history, are analogous to many things that occur in society at large. I'm framing my perspective on how I see fit. My position is and always has been EXPLICITLY clear. Whether in talking baseball or racism or gender equality or whatever. You can't apply today's morals to the past. We can be ashamed and reflect on the ways of yesteryear but all you can do is learn from it and hope to be better today and in the future. That is ENTIRELY different than what we're talking about with the CHEATERS of today.
I did NOT create this thread to comment on morality on some level of another. I created it to SPECIFICALLY discuss the BASEBALL topic at hand as this is a SPORTS forum. I thought maybe if I yelled you would understand.
What EXACTLY have I said that is inaccurate about Clemens or bonds? Come on, back it up.
Reread the thread. I've refuted your inaccuracies already. No need to be redundant on my part. It appears all to clear that you are the one with a serious reading comprehension problem.
I addressed all of your refutations. Back it up or it doesn't count.
I did NOT create this thread to comment on morality on some level of another. I created it to SPECIFICALLY discuss the BASEBALL topic at hand as this is a SPORTS forum. I thought maybe if I yelled you would understand.
You can yell all you want or not, I certainly understand the simple things that you're saying. I would suggest you reread you own first post and explain how you think it doesn't speak to the morals of those who played the game. Geez, you not only have a reading comprehension problem, but a problem comprehending your own thoughts and words.
Sorry, wasn't clear. You are extrapolating on morality to realms outside of baseball such as race and socio economic status. I am speaking very specifically about baseball
Do I believe bonds knowingly took steroids? Of course. I was making a point about him spinning the tail of not knowingly using. You know, like an example.
Yup, forgot about Pettitte, but I addressed it later in the thread. He was not a credible witness.
And there was a shot administered to mantle by a drug pushing celeb doctor. That shot caused an injury and is widely known to have contained testosterone and amphetamines. Peds. But, it wasn't against the rules then, so it doesn't count. Right baseball?
Comments
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
I remember Big Mac, surprised, said he had bought this over the counter. It was not a banned drug or supplement at that time. Argue all you want guys, MLB didn't do anything at all for quite some time. Even when they did, they weren't sure of how to handle it, then weren't sure how they would enforce rules. The lists were made and changed, and changed again.
These events have transpired over a 15+ year period. I think we can all agree that if one gets caught now, their playing days should be over, yet it continues and will as long as the reward out weighs the risks. We just love and apply thr three strike rule to this topic.
To be honest, no direction, but...
1966-69 Topps EX+
1975 minis NrMt Kelloggs PSA 9
All Topps Heritage-Master Sets
Dave
Hall of fame is old time baseball. Those days are gone . All the pro sports are 100% about money now. Some study will be done to decide if letting PED users in is cash flow positive or cash flow negative and that will determine what happens.
Nope. The HOF is meant for the Griffeys/Ruth's of the world, not the A-Rods/Bonds. Cheaters will need to pay to get in, just like me.
Dave
I would bet money Griff used
Hall of fame is old time baseball. Those days are gone . All the pro sports are 100% about money now. Some study will be done to decide if letting PED users in is cash flow positive or cash flow negative and that will determine what happens.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
And I would bet you would lose your money!
Dave
You use the word "guilty" so I assume that this has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I missed where that happened, all I've seen is an allegation by a person who wasn't alive in 1961. Can you point me to the proof you've seen?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
What evidence do you have against griffey? There are no failed tests, rumors, anecdotal or statistical evidence. Tell me you are not just basing this on a feeling. Good grief.
I'm not bashing the guy, I don't have any evidence nor do I care either way. It's my opinion nothing more nothing less
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
It's a muddy mess, and has been debated to exhaustion. Like politics, opinions about the use of steroids in baseball and what penalties should be meted out are not likely to change anytime soon on either side.
I would also agree that we can safely assume that players like Bonds and Clemens did use PEDs, but there are many others who either did use and were never exposed, or did not use and have been stigmatized or been deemed guilty by association or circumstance. That's what I meant by "and vice versa."
I don't condone cheating and never stated that cheaters should be rewarded. I'm just saying that baseball was just as much a part in the scandal of that era as the players by turning a blind eye to the problem until it was too late. Surely, you don't believe that MLB did everything in their power to keep the playing field level at that time. Quite the contrary, actually. I would also say that there are also many fans who simply don't share the same kind of outrage you do about steroid use in baseball, some of whom have posted in this thread. Your opinion is probably just as popular, but let's not pretend that the outrage over this issue is universal.
I have no problem keeping guys like Bonds and Clemens out of the HOF due to their use of PEDs. As a fan, I am also interested to see if either or both of these otherwise first ballot HOFers gain any support over the next couple of years in the HOF voting, especially considering the relatively weak ballot for those years. Time will tell how history looks back upon "the steroid era." We have a way to go to get to that point.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Again, you insinuated griffey used PEDs. What is your evidence?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Grote, there is evidence against mantle, there is none that I am aware of against griffey. Are you aware of any? If so I would love to hear it. People are incredulous when faced with the idea that hero's of their past could be guilty of ped use. There is a common feeling that things and people from the past were better or more pure than those of today. Sometimes that is the case, but in many cases it is not.
What you've cited hardly qualifies as "evidence". That's like saying Griffey obviously used because of the known users that he was teammates with or something that tenuous. Also, there are two things to be said from that era's list of players. One, the understanding of what PEDs were, let alone how they affect a person was tenuous to say the least. Secondly, that era was decades prior to it being explicitly outlawed in baseball.
What evidence do we have against Clemens? No failed test, no admission, just one lone witness who really isn't very credible. Mantle was coming off two down years and used "Dr Feelgood" max Jacobson who also "treated" JFK. A result of mantles "treatment" was an abscess on the buttock that forced him to miss time. The concoction was reportedly a mixture of testosterone and amphetamines. Which player has stronger evidence against him? Clemens is widely considered a user, why not mantle? Oh, I forgot. He is a national hero.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Jane levey a well respected sports biographer wrote of the shot in her biography of mantle. The shot led to a severe abscess in the buttock that caused mick to miss quite a few games in 1961. Look at the resurgence of mantle from two down years in 59 and 60 to his year in 1961. The early 60's was the time when steroids became more common with bodybuilders as well, so a Dr would have had knowledge and access to the drugs at that time.
Yes, I know about the allegation by the person who wasn't alive in 1961. What I was asking for was the proof.
With regard to the "quite a few" games Mantle missed in 1961 - a season in which he played more games than in any other season (tied with 1960) - I'd be interested to know more specifics. He never missed more than one game consecutively, and he hit remarkably consistently in each month of the season. I'll accept that his butt hurt at some point, but the evidence that it affected his play is nowhere to be seen. The evidence that he got treatment that improved his play is similarly missing. If Mantle had a resurgence in 1961 due to steroids, then the steroids must have been administered from the beginning of the season. In other words, you've got a 1961 resurgence, a butt injury, missing games due the injury, and treatment for the injury, but they can't all be related - the math doesn't work. When did this alleged steroid treatment occur (on what day)? What were his stats before and after that day? Inquiring minds want to know.
Mantle, by the way, was the best player in the AL in both 1959 and 1960. To refer to 1961 as a "resurgence" is misleading. It was his best season, but "resurgence" implies that he wasn't great before that.
Grote, there is evidence against mantle, there is none that I am aware of against griffey. Are you aware of any? If so I would love to hear it. People are incredulous when faced with the idea that hero's of their past could be guilty of ped use. There is a common feeling that things and people from the past were better or more pure than those of today. Sometimes that is the case, but in many cases it is not.
What you've cited hardly qualifies as "evidence". That's like saying Griffey obviously used because of the known users that he was teammates with or something that tenuous. Also, there are two things to be said from that era's list of players. One, the understanding of what PEDs were, let alone how they affect a person was tenuous to say the least. Secondly, that era was decades prior to it being explicitly outlawed in baseball.
What evidence do we have against Clemens? No failed test, no admission, just one lone witness who really isn't very credible. Mantle was coming off two down years and used "Dr Feelgood" max Jacobson who also "treated" JFK. A result of mantles "treatment" was an abscess on the buttock that forced him to miss time. The concoction was reportedly a mixture of testosterone and amphetamines. Which player has stronger evidence against him? Clemens is widely considered a user, why not mantle? Oh, I forgot. He is a national hero.
This is just silly and one of the reasons why I have an issue with fans determining who is clean and who isn't. You, yourself, started off in this thread as a supporter of Piazza's induction into the HOF, and two pages later changed your mind and determined that he was a PED user, instead.
It is also completely naive to believe that any player who played during this era is 100% clean. The reality is that the use of steroids was pervasive during that era and that for every player that was exposed or caught using, there was likely two others who used or dabbled with PEDs who wasn't caught. No one is above scrutiny.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
What evidence do you have against griffey? There are no failed tests, rumors, anecdotal or statistical evidence. Tell me you are not just basing this on a feeling. Good grief.
I'm not bashing the guy, I don't have any evidence nor do I care either way. It's my opinion nothing more nothing less
Of course you're bashing the guy. By your own admission, you have no evidence, or any support whatsoever yet you accuse the guy of cheating. This isn't just any ballplayer mind you. This was the most overhyped teenager in the draft era of baseball so none of his accomplishments should come as a surprise. If you don't care either way, then perhaps you should refrain from making such reckless accusations.
In my mind I'm not bashing the guy because I couldn't care less if he used or not, I'm not an analyst or a investigator but I'm a fan of MLB and have a right to my opinion wether you like it or not.
In my mind I'm not bashing the guy because I couldn't care less if he used or not, I'm not an analyst or a investigator but I'm a fan of MLB and have a right to my opinion wether you like it or not.
Fine, I think you are a rapist and a pedophile. I'm not bashing you because I don't know you personally and could care care less about you even though I have zero evidence, it's still my opinion and I have a right to it whether you like it or not.
Ok now your just being ignorant as well as childish and moronic. If you sincerely think that there is zero chance Griff might have used your not living in reality, take your blinders off and realize that it is possible and not that absurd to think that anyone in that era could have dabbled in some type of PED use. His 58 HR's in '98 was all about him having a career year and not a chance of any other scenario? Ok keep hoarding Griff JR rookie cards and worshiping your childhood hero lol
Grote, I agree with everything you said. But all systematic problems take a long time to ferret out as well as to address. Users didn't start using all at once and MLB, the media and fans didn't all catch on at the same time. I could cite numerous examples in all walks of life but I will use Nazi Germany because if ever there was a time to "stop" something, that certainly should have been it.
It's not like Hitler and Germany woke up one day in 1939 with arguably the world's greatest military at that time with seemingly an endless array of impressive war machinery and military might. It was built up over years, with not only the Allies knowing about them, but if fact selling plenty of goods and services to them in support of their aspirations. If we used that same logic, we should be disgusted at ourselves for not nipping it in the bud and saving MILLIONS of lives in the process. The same could be said for Iraq, and in the future, possibly China.
But let's even assume that MLB was 99% at fault, which I obviously don't buy. What should we do against them exactly? I don't support, nor is it remotely a possibility, that the sport just fold up and stop playing. But for the players who cheated, we certainly can't award them with yet another honor when they didn't play honestly and were more than well rewarded with millions upon millions, and MVP and Cy Young awards, and the adulation of fans, etc.
Agreed. I don't really have an answer. I will certainly agree that it was a slippery slope with regard to the PEDs in the steroid era, and that MLB was not really interesting in rooting out the problem until Congress got involved and public sentiment turned against them. The next couple of years will be telling as to whether any of these stigmatized players have a realistic shot at the HOF. If Bonds and/or Clemens do not gain enough support, I can't see any players getting in against whom the evidence is fairly certain or clear. Other players, against whom the evidence is based more on rumor and innuendo than fact, like Mike Piazza, will pose a murkier, more complicated discussion. There is no doubt in my mind that if Piazza had not been dogged by steroid rumors, that he'd have been a first ballot HOFer. So for those players in that category, is a waiting period, or HOF purgatory, the more likely scenario?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
If you feel the mantle assertion is speculative, do you also believe the Clemens accusations are also speculative? And why the difference?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Grote, there is evidence against mantle, there is none that I am aware of against griffey. Are you aware of any? If so I would love to hear it. People are incredulous when faced with the idea that hero's of their past could be guilty of ped use. There is a common feeling that things and people from the past were better or more pure than those of today. Sometimes that is the case, but in many cases it is not.
What you've cited hardly qualifies as "evidence". That's like saying Griffey obviously used because of the known users that he was teammates with or something that tenuous. Also, there are two things to be said from that era's list of players. One, the understanding of what PEDs were, let alone how they affect a person was tenuous to say the least. Secondly, that era was decades prior to it being explicitly outlawed in baseball.
What evidence do we have against Clemens? No failed test, no admission, just one lone witness who really isn't very credible. Mantle was coming off two down years and used "Dr Feelgood" max Jacobson who also "treated" JFK. A result of mantles "treatment" was an abscess on the buttock that forced him to miss time. The concoction was reportedly a mixture of testosterone and amphetamines. Which player has stronger evidence against him? Clemens is widely considered a user, why not mantle? Oh, I forgot. He is a national hero.
This is just silly and one of the reasons why I have an issue with fans determining who is clean and who isn't. You, yourself, started off in this thread as a supporter of Piazza's induction into the HOF, and two pages later changed your mind and determined that he was a PED user, instead.
It is also completely naive to believe that any player who played during this era is 100% clean. The reality is that the use of steroids was pervasive during that era and that for every player that was exposed or caught using, there was likely two others who used or dabbled with PEDs who wasn't caught. No one is above scrutiny.[/
Grote, what in the world is so silly? When information comes to light that a person was unaware of, should that person then not change his opinion on a subject? Or should he hang on, white knuckled, to long held beliefs like it seems you do?
You also seem to want to throw a blanket over the whole era instead of researching and thinking for yourself about it first. I guess it is easier to just say "well, everyone is probably guilty". Except players from the golden age as they are above reproach. That is silly friend.
It is silly, in my opinion, to make blanket statements in general. It's crazy to believe every modern player used and every older player was clean. Good grief, pud galvin used in the 19th century.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
It is laughable that folks believe the 50s & 60s were some how clean and that players weren't doing everything and anything to boost their performance during that time period. There are plenty of PED users already in the baseball HOF. There will always be a proportion of people that cheat, always. Some get caught but most do not. To believe otherwise is simply naive. Since rigorous testing was not in place you can not reliably ferret out who received an unfair advantage from using PEDs. So if a player was unlucky enough to have been tested and failed he automatically gets blacklisted? If his teammate didn't get tested but was also juicing then that teammate is being rewarded even though he engaged in the exact same behavior? Or even better no testing at all so players (and their fans) can sanctimoniously claim they were clean.
As for the argument that Mantle wouldn't have used because he was arguably the best player in the AL in 59 & 60, why did Bonds start using when he did? It is claimed that he started after the 1998 season when he hit 37 home runs, drove in 122, scored 120 runs, stole 28 bases and batted .303. If Mantle used perhaps it was because his knee was bothering him, or he didn't feel as strong in the off season than the year before, or he heard one of his rivals was juicing, or he wanted to be the best again, or whatever. Acting like 61 wasn't a "resurgence" for Mantle seems to be ignoring the trajectory of his stats from 57-60, compared to the 1960 his batting average went up 40 points, his slugging over 100 points, his OBP by 50 points. Star athletes are hyper competitive people, they can make decisions that are unfathomable to those of us that don't walk in their shoes. He could have also decided to stop using after having used for a while thus following a "normal" career trajectory stat-wise. You simply can't know. What is universally true is that anyone that comes out as an accuser of a famous athlete is always vilified, their credibility trashed, etc.
From the Mitchell report : In 1973, a Congressional subcommittee announced that its staff had completed an “in depth study into the use of illegal and dangerous drugs in sports” including professional baseball. The subcommittee concluded that “the degree of improper drug use – primarily amphetamines and anabolic steroids – can only be described as alarming.
Acting like PED use was a 80s, 90s and 00s phenomenon is wishful thinking.
Robb
Now, are you saying here that if a player being treated by a doctor receives peds as treatment and doesn't know that treatment was in the form of peds that the player is innocent? The old I didn't know what I was taking scenario? That is the same tactic Sheffield and bonds have taken. That they both used, but unknowingly. Are you saying we should give bonds a free pass because he didn't understand what he was taking?
As a professional athlete, the responsibility ultimately rests on your shoulders to make sure everything put in your body is legal and not against the rules. Not the doctors responsibility.
As far as Clemens goes, he was found not guilty in a court of law for purgory when it came to speaking to congress about ped use. That seems pretty black and white. It seems that ped use in general is pretty black and white. You either used or you didn't. I don't think there is much of a spectrum there. Are we to believe Clemens to have never used because he was found not guilty by a court?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Now, are you saying here that if a player being treated by a doctor receives peds as treatment and doesn't know that treatment was in the form of peds that the player is innocent? The old I didn't know what I was taking scenario? That is the same tactic Sheffield and bonds have taken. That they both used, but unknowingly. Are you saying we should give bonds a free pass because he didn't understand what he was taking?
Regarding this scenario, I certainly have room in my heart for some understanding if I believed that a player honestly didn't know he was using a banned substance. That is NOT the case with Bonds. And I highly doubt it is with Sheffield. At that point, as with much of this situation, you'd have to decide for yourself if you believe them or not.
No sir, when questioned in court, bonds testified that he never knowingly used steroids. He thought it was flaxseed oil and arthritis cream. Are we to consider his numbers legit now that he never knowingly used? He testified he was misled into using. So the homerun record is legit now? What say you baseball?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Your wasting your time with " Baseball" unless he actually saw it happen he refuses to believe in the realm of possibility that some things are true that don't fit his agenda.
Quite the opposite. It sounds like YOU are doing just that in assuming that EVERYONE used as being "true" even though you have ZERO knowledge of it. I on the other hand am actually interpreting what data and evidence is available and deciding for myself. Thinking...you should try it sometime.
I have no agenda other than a belief that CHEATERS shouldn't be rewarded. Crazy, I know. It sounds all to obvious that YOU are the one with the agenda of trying to shove down everyone's throats that every MLB over the past 20+ years has been using.
Wait a minute here. You don't think cheaters should be rewarded. Do you not consider ped use cheating? Or is it only cheating if there is an official mlb rule in place that bans it? This is nonsensical. Is not getting an unfair advantage considered cheating? That is the whole point of using peds, to gain an unfair advantage. Therefore it is cheating whether there is an official rule in place or not. Your reasoning states that a ped user is fine one year, and the next year, after a ped ban if put in place is now a cheater. Same crime, yet different conclusions from you. Nonsense. If ped use was not cheating, players wouldn't try so hard to hide it.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Your wasting your time with " Baseball" unless he actually saw it happen he refuses to believe in the realm of possibility that some things are true that don't fit his agenda.
Quite the opposite. It sounds like YOU are doing just that in assuming that EVERYONE used as being "true" even though you have ZERO knowledge of it. I on the other hand am actually interpreting what data and evidence is available and deciding for myself. Thinking...you should try it sometime.
I have no agenda other than a belief that CHEATERS shouldn't be rewarded. Crazy, I know. It sounds all to obvious that YOU are the one with the agenda of trying to shove down everyone's throats that every MLB over the past 20+ years has been using.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
It's real simple, you do what you can with what you know. Just as human beings have always done.
Yea Human Beings also think outside the box and long aga realized that speculation is a fair and rational thing. And realized by people way smarter than you.
It's real simple, you do what you can with what you know. Just as human beings have always done.
Yea Human Beings also think outside the box and long aga realized that speculation is a fair and rational thing. And realized by people way smarter than you.
+ 1000. Is baseball always this nonsensical? I have a hard time making heads or tails with what he is saying
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Yes, totally logical. Can you sense the sarcasm? I hope so, because it's there.
You have a tendency to make all sorts of claims and comments without providing any support for them, even a detail of your own opinion. I find that strange and completely illogical.
Your reading comprehension skills must be very suspect. I have said ALL along that PED users statistics are fraudulent and meaningless. They do not belong in the hof and any who are already in that are proven to have been users should be booted out on their cheating rear ends. How that for detailed and clear.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
It's real simple, you do what you can with what you know. Just as human beings have always done.
Yea Human Beings also think outside the box and long aga realized that speculation is a fair and rational thing. And realized by people way smarter than you.
+ 1000. Is baseball always this nonsensical? I have a hard time making heads or tails with what he is saying
He is a combination of someone who thinks he is way smarter than he really is, ignorant, irrational, and someone who was the last guy picked in gym class and harbors a lot of anger from that as an adult lol
It's real simple, you do what you can with what you know. Just as human beings have always done.
Yea Human Beings also think outside the box and long aga realized that speculation is a fair and rational thing. And realized by people way smarter than you.
+ 1000. Is baseball always this nonsensical? I have a hard time making heads or tails with what he is saying
He is a combination of someone who thinks he is way smarter than he really is, ignorant, irrational, and
I understand that type all too well. It is just so much fun to discuss this topic. I can't help myself.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I am not speaking in any way about society at large. Don't know where you got that. Again, reading comprehension
And I am, so what? You created this thread as a comment on morality on some level or another. The things people do in one thing, like baseball and the various issues throughout history, are analogous to many things that occur in society at large. I'm framing my perspective on how I see fit. My position is and always has been EXPLICITLY clear. Whether in talking baseball or racism or gender equality or whatever. You can't apply today's morals to the past. We can be ashamed and reflect on the ways of yesteryear but all you can do is learn from it and hope to be better today and in the future. That is ENTIRELY different than what we're talking about with the CHEATERS of today.
I did NOT create this thread to comment on morality on some level of another. I created it to SPECIFICALLY discuss the BASEBALL topic at hand as this is a SPORTS forum. I thought maybe if I yelled you would understand.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
What EXACTLY have I said that is inaccurate about Clemens or bonds? Come on, back it up.
Reread the thread. I've refuted your inaccuracies already. No need to be redundant on my part. It appears all to clear that you are the one with a serious reading comprehension problem.
I addressed all of your refutations. Back it up or it doesn't count.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I did NOT create this thread to comment on morality on some level of another. I created it to SPECIFICALLY discuss the BASEBALL topic at hand as this is a SPORTS forum. I thought maybe if I yelled you would understand.
You can yell all you want or not, I certainly understand the simple things that you're saying. I would suggest you reread you own first post and explain how you think it doesn't speak to the morals of those who played the game. Geez, you not only have a reading comprehension problem, but a problem comprehending your own thoughts and words.
Sorry, wasn't clear. You are extrapolating on morality to realms outside of baseball such as race and socio economic status. I am speaking very specifically about baseball
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Yup, forgot about Pettitte, but I addressed it later in the thread. He was not a credible witness.
And there was a shot administered to mantle by a drug pushing celeb doctor. That shot caused an injury and is widely known to have contained testosterone and amphetamines. Peds. But, it wasn't against the rules then, so it doesn't count. Right baseball?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.