Barry Bonds: Take the Opposite View

[pewe]

OK: HOF voters should shun clean players. Laugh in their face for being so unwise to attempt historic performance without help. And berate them for how much better they could have been had they actually prioritized performance over personal health and ethics.

[pewe]

Originally Posted by daveyc1

Considering there was no collectively bargained ban on steroids until 2005 and on HGH until 2011, I have never felt any player who used before those dates were tainted at all.

Until a supplement/steroid is on the official "banned" list, they are fair game. Just ask Mike Piazza and Jeff Bagwell who both admitted using Andro during the 90s. it is currently on the banned list, but was not when those players used it. They are both, by the way, members of the MLB HOF.

are they "cheaters"

If MLBPA approves activity that is illegal and against MLB's rules, then it should be OK?

[hxcmilkshake]

Originally Posted by kevinandji

Bonds hit the roids and most likely HGH and whatever BALCO was giving athletes. So he’s a cheater but so was literally 100s of other players. So we take the top guys like Bonds hitting and Clemens pitching and say shame, shame, shame but I guess the other 100 players get a pass cause they performed just above their mean. Take all those players, remove steroids, and the best Bonds/Clemens will still be at top but with less dominant numbers and the mean pack of Roid users instead of a year they hit 25 bombs it’s now 15 or similar. Point is those “regular roided players” just have above average, not on the radar, seasons.



Athletes have always looked for a competitive edge from the dawn of competition. Whether popping amphetamines or roids they were doing what more than half their peers were doing. We will vilify Bonds due solely to his achievements but at some point the realization needs to be assimilated that he was definitely surrounded by other jacked up juicers and doing what he thought he needed to continue his dominance in the sport. Had he not slapped every pill within 3 foot of him into the Bay waters and broke records nobody would talk about him like nobody talks about the 7th hitter on most MLB teams lineup card using the same substances but they are just not as gifted, baseball wise, as Bonds or Clemens. With or without roids the cream will still rise to the top. No steroid or HGH can make you hit a 100 mph fastball 400 plus feet you either can or cannot, it’s NOT the steroids. They are meant to aid in recuperation and keep/build muscle mass, nothing more. Greenies makes one want to run all day and play a 3 hour game like a geeked Jack rabbit. You must still possess raw talent in your sport and no chemicals will make you but they can break you…ask Bonds and Clemens. Our whipping boys for a murky MLB era of 100s of users….

They're whipping boys because they were probably the most talented at what they do yet still cheated.

And yes muscle mass turns fly balls into home runs , that's the cheat.

Bonds would've hit 600 hr instead he hits 700.

Brady Anderson went from 16 to 50.

Its steroids. Nothing else. Don't over complicate it.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[discostu]

Originally Posted by pewe

If MLBPA approves activity that is illegal and against MLB's rules, then it should be OK?

When a rule has no punishment and no way of enforcing it...is it really a rule? Or is it merely a suggestion, in printed form? Vincent knew it wasn't much of a rule, and so did Selig.

Regardless, MLB (and later the MLBPA) condoned rampant, illegal amphetamine usage in baseball for decades. People still don't seem to comprehend that.

For whatever the reason, some selectively choose which rules and laws can and cannot be broken before one is dubbed a "cheater."

Some say that breaking any MLB rule is cheating.

Some say that some rules are less important.

Some say any state or federal law supercedes MLB rules, but seem to avoid that same logic when considering amphetamines.

Some seem oblivious to their own hypocrisy and focus on revionist history to cover up their own inefficiencies.

Alas, we're human. Just like the wide array of players (and supposed "cheaters") we're judging.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by daveyc1

Considering there was no collectively bargained ban on steroids until 2005 and on HGH until 2011, I have never felt any player who used before those dates were tainted at all.

Until a supplement/steroid is on the official "banned" list, they are fair game. Just ask Mike Piazza and Jeff Bagwell who both admitted using Andro during the 90s. it is currently on the banned list, but was not when those players used it. They are both, by the way, members of the MLB HOF.

are they "cheaters"

There was a collectively bargained policy on steroids in every labor contract from 1972 to current. When Congress made steroids illegal in 1990, they became illegal per the labor agreement. Fay Vincent sent out a memo in 1991 restating that fact. Anyone who used illegal steroids, after 1990 was tainted and that is why they have been excluded from the Hall of Fame.

[RiceBondsMT2Yng]

Originally Posted by rats60

There was a collectively bargained policy on steroids in every labor contract from 1972 to current. When Congress made steroids illegal in 1990, they became illegal per the labor agreement. Fay Vincent sent out a memo in 1991 restating that fact. Anyone who used illegal steroids, after 1990 was tainted and that is why they have been excluded from the Hall of Fame.

Steroids were banned for the first time in MLB in 2005. It's a myth that steroids were banned by Fay Vincent in 1991. Ask Fay Vincent himself: https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/...m177ty0665xd8u

However, thanks, Rats60, for your sincere reply earlier about the bright side of Bonds. I know you're a die hard Pirates fan and extremely knowledgeable.

As for steroids, I will say that cheating is cheating and Vincent felt steroids were cheating, and how someone feels is valid. Whether enforcing a one's personal standard of fair play after the fact is fair is probably a different question. But I respect that different people have different ideas as to what counts as cheating and how badly.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by discostu

When a rule has no punishment and no way of enforcing it...is it really a rule? Or is it merely a suggestion, in printed form? Vincent knew it wasn't much of a rule, and so did Selig.

Regardless, MLB (and later the MLBPA) condoned rampant, illegal amphetamine usage in baseball for decades. People still don't seem to comprehend that.

For whatever the reason, some selectively choose which rules and laws can and cannot be broken before one is dubbed a "cheater."

Some say that breaking any MLB rule is cheating.

Some say that some rules are less important.

Some say any state or federal law supercedes MLB rules, but seem to avoid that same logic when considering amphetamines.

Some seem oblivious to their own hypocrisy and focus on revionist history to cover up their own inefficiencies.

Alas, we're human. Just like the wide array of players (and supposed "cheaters") we're judging.

There was a MLB drug policy that included steroids. Players were suspended when caught breaking that rule for other drugs covered. Steve Howe even received a lifetime ban for using illegal drugs. Bud Selig wanted to start testing for steroids in 1995, but was blocked by the player's association until 2003. The problem with enforcing the rule was that without testing, government enforcement is about the only way MLB could catch cheaters. That doesn't mean that anyone was looking the other way. It means that any suspension would probably be over turned for lack of evidence.

Amphetamines were banned by MLB in 2005. Who has been able to get away with using amphetamines since they were banned?

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by rats60

There was a collectively bargained policy on steroids in every labor contract from 1972 to current. When Congress made steroids illegal in 1990, they became illegal per the labor agreement. Fay Vincent sent out a memo in 1991 restating that fact. Anyone who used illegal steroids, after 1990 was tainted and that is why they have been excluded from the Hall of Fame.

Alan beat me to it. Steroids and HGH were never on the banned list until 2005 and 2011 respectively. Vincents memo was in no way a rule or added any substance to that list.

by the way, Steroids are absolutely legal when prescribed by a physician

[daveyc1]

no one has responded to the question as to whether Piazza and Bagwell are cheaters yet.

anyone?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by RiceBondsMT2Yng

Steroids were banned for the first time in MLB in 2005. It's a myth that steroids were banned by Fay Vincent in 1991. Ask Fay Vincent himself: https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/...m177ty0665xd8u

However, thanks, Rats60, for your sincere reply earlier about the bright side of Bonds. I know you're a die hard Pirates fan and extremely knowledgeable.

As for steroids, I will say that cheating is cheating and Vincent felt steroids were cheating, and how someone feels is valid. Whether enforcing a one's personal standard of fair play after the fact is fair is probably a different question. But I respect that different people have different ideas as to what counts as cheating and how badly.

Thanks for posting this. It supports the fact that steroids were banned in baseball after 1990. Quoting your article

Well, you have it wrong. I didn’t ban steroids. The Congress of the United States said steroids were on the prohibited substance list. It’s a common misunderstanding that steroids were not banned in baseball until much later. They were banned by Congress. What I did was say, ‘Because they’re banned by Congress, we are gonna be bound by those restrictions, and steroids are gonna be a problem.’

MLB and the players collectively bargained a drug policy in 1972 that banned all illegal drugs. It was included in every labor contract after that. When Congress made steroids illegal in 1990, they were added to the banned substances list for players. Any player using them after that was cheating.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by daveyc1

Alan beat me to it. Steroids and HGH were never on the banned list until 2005 and 2011 respectively. Vincents memo was in no way a rule or added any substance to that list.

by the way, Steroids are absolutely legal when prescribed by a physician

False, Vincent states plainly that they were added to the banned list in 1990.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by daveyc1

no one has responded to the question as to whether Piazza and Bagwell are cheaters yet.

anyone?

Did they use illegal drugs? If so, which ones?

[johnlocke36]

Originally Posted by hxcmilkshake

They're whipping boys because they were probably the most talented at what they do yet still cheated.

And yes muscle mass turns fly balls into home runs , that's the cheat.

Bonds would've hit 600 hr instead he hits 700.

Brady Anderson went from 16 to 50.

Its steroids. Nothing else. Don't over complicate it.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

maybee he hits 800 HR with .340 career AVG if all the pitchers weren't throwing that much harder/deeper into games from taking steroids

[johnlocke36]

Originally Posted by rats60

Amphetamines were banned by MLB in 2005. Who has been able to get away with using amphetamines since they were banned?

Any professional athlete that wanted to?

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by rats60

Did they use illegal drugs? If so, which ones?

Androstenedione is currently on the banned list and is considered an anabolic steroid. both players admittedly used in the 90s when it was NOT on the banned list.

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by rats60

Thanks for posting this. It supports the fact that steroids were banned in baseball after 1990. Quoting your article

Well, you have it wrong. I didn’t ban steroids. The Congress of the United States said steroids were on the prohibited substance list. It’s a common misunderstanding that steroids were not banned in baseball until much later. They were banned by Congress. What I did was say, ‘Because they’re banned by Congress, we are gonna be bound by those restrictions, and steroids are gonna be a problem.’

MLB and the players collectively bargained a drug policy in 1972 that banned all illegal drugs. It was included in every labor contract after that. When Congress made steroids illegal in 1990, they were added to the banned substances list for players. Any player using them after that was cheating.

this is Fay Vincents quote: "the only way change could be made was through collective bargaining, when I left baseball there was no written policy on drug activity in baseball."

also the memo was intended as a "moral statement" to the players, not a "legal one."

Keep in mind, steroids are completely legal with a physician's prescription. always have been.

In addition, Amphetamines were made federally illegal without a prescription in 1965. An awful lot of players have used Amphetamines over the years...

Amphetamines are considered a schedule II drug by the Fed, just like Fentanyl and Vicodin.

[Handsome Wes]

Originally Posted by RiceBondsMT2Yng

How about this: take the opposite position you usually take. It’s hard to do but it also makes you think a bit more about how you arrived at your usual opinion.

Let's see, the opposite position I usually take...

Barry Bonds was NOT jealous at the attention heaped on McGwire and Sosa during the 1998 home run chase, and as such he DID NOT take steroids...

[RiceBondsMT2Yng]

Originally Posted by Handsome Wes

Let's see, the opposite position I usually take...

Barry Bonds was NOT jealous at the attention heaped on McGwire and Sosa during the 1998 home run chase, and as such he DID NOT take steroids...

Fair enough, but not even the devil's advocate takes that tack. I wasn't saying that you should take the opposite facts. Maybe instead look at facts that support - rather than undercut - the player, or vice versa. Or look at a conclusion that is different than the one you normally draw. That was what I was going for.

[BOOMER7]

… best dang hitter I’ve ever seen

[discostu]

Originally Posted by rats60

There was a collectively bargained policy on steroids in every labor contract from 1972 to current. When Congress made steroids illegal in 1990, they became illegal per the labor agreement. Fay Vincent sent out a memo in 1991 restating that fact. Anyone who used illegal steroids, after 1990 was tainted and that is why they have been excluded from the Hall of Fame.

Originally Posted by rats60

There was a MLB drug policy that included steroids. Players were suspended when caught breaking that rule for other drugs covered. Steve Howe even received a lifetime ban for using illegal drugs. Bud Selig wanted to start testing for steroids in 1995, but was blocked by the player's association until 2003. The problem with enforcing the rule was that without testing, government enforcement is about the only way MLB could catch cheaters. That doesn't mean that anyone was looking the other way. It means that any suspension would probably be over turned for lack of evidence.

Amphetamines were banned by MLB in 2005. Who has been able to get away with using amphetamines since they were banned?

Again, the same collectively bargained "illegal drug" policy (please cite this text if possible), that you lean on as some sort of proof that MLB had an actionable steroid policy, was the same "illegal drug" policy that MLB and MLBPA completely turned a blind eye to in regards to decades of amphetamine usage.

I'm well aware that amphetamines were banned by MLB in 2005, they were however made illegal in (starting in 1965) 1971 by the federal government. Amphetamine usage was hardly in the shadows, instead it was (by almost all accounts) clearly in the open, and supplied in some cases by teams.

Why do you lean on hollow rules (that were merely words without teeth) to ostracize steroid users yet not apply the same interpretation to amphetamine usage?

To me, it's incredibly hypocritical.

[johnlocke36]

while everyone is focused on players in the 70s and 80s using amphetamines (which they clearly were) steroid use was just as. Rampant on all accounts. The difference is guys in the 90s took roids then spent 4 hours in the gym while the guys in the 70s weren’t

[discostu]

Originally Posted by johnlocke36

while everyone is focused on players in the 70s and 80s using amphetamines (which they clearly were) steroid use was just as. Rampant on all accounts. The difference is guys in the 90s took roids then spent 4 hours in the gym while the guys in the 70s weren’t

For me, I don't care about who used steroids or amphetamines, however, my focus on the rampant illegal amphetamine usage is merely to highlight the hypocrisy of selective application to the word "cheater."

[Noles939913]

He was a class act.

Which leads me to this incredible Bonds story. When he tested positive for Amphetamines he blamed it on some pills he stole from Mark Sweeney’s locker and then decided to take them even though he had no idea what they were.

This is what you get with Bonds. He was so intent on keeping up the charade that he was clean he intentionally paints himself as a thief (while also throwing a teammate under the bus.) But then his entire story backfires when you realize that if you believe this he’s willing to swallow a bunch of pills without having any clue what they were.

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by discostu

Again, the same collectively bargained "illegal drug" policy (please cite this text if possible), that you lean on as some sort of proof that MLB had an actionable steroid policy, was the same "illegal drug" policy that MLB and MLBPA completely turned a blind eye to in regards to decades of amphetamine usage.

I'm well aware that amphetamines were banned by MLB in 2005, they were however made illegal in (starting in 1965) 1971 by the federal government. Amphetamine usage was hardly in the shadows, instead it was (by almost all accounts) clearly in the open, and supplied in some cases by teams.

Why do you lean on hollow rules (that were merely words without teeth) to ostracize steroid users yet not apply the same interpretation to amphetamine usage?

To me, it's incredibly hypocritical.

THIS!!!! no one wants to address amphetamines. or, they want to blow it off like "it was no big deal" or "it was nothing compared to steroids"

lets face it. Players have ALWAYS tried to get an edge. and they ALWAYS will. anyone who doesnt think current players are doping with some modern PED that none of us have ever heard of and is currently undetectable is just fooling themselves.

[dbackschamp2001]

All professional athletes need to be "good guys". Kids should be able to look up to athletes as role models, since they often don't have role models in their own lives. Leave the "heel" stuff to pro wrestling.