cpaul1104 Posted December 9, 2004 Author Share Posted December 9, 2004 His talent is natural. His father was a good hitter, and his mentor, Willie Mays, was a good hitter. Yes, he did take in steriods, but did that help him hit 73 homeruns? Absolutely not. If that were the case, then Giambi would've hit the same during his steroid years. We can now stop arguing if he's good or not, we all know Bonds is naturally good as his stats throughout the years show. 585067571[/snapback] HE DOES NOT PLAY WITHIN THE RULES OF THE GAME! HE IS A CHEATER! The university of Michigan did not play by the rules of the NCAA during the fab five years. Nothing the school or the boosters did put a single point on the board, yet the accomplishments of those kids were forever stricken from college basketball history! If you cheat you should pay the price. Cheaters do not belong in the Hall of Fame! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 10, 2004 Cheaters do not belong in the Hall of Fame! 585071454[/snapback] So can we permanently ban MLB? Afterall, about half of them have consumed steroids... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpaul1104 Posted December 10, 2004 Author Share Posted December 10, 2004 So can we permanently ban MLB? Afterall, about half of them have consumed steroids... 585076242[/snapback] Do you agree that he cheated? Part of the criteria for being ELECTED into the HOF is a players integrity, sportsmanship, and character that he displays as a player. (not as a person, just in case someone tries to argue about all the alchoholics or unfaithful husbands who are already in the hall). How can you argue that a player who did not play by the rules, whether it helped him or not , deserves to be honored and glorified? It is not a known fact that anyone already in the hall did anything that was not within the rules of the game. It is a known fact that Bonds did, and even though he might deserve to be considered one of the best hitters ever, he does not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golazo Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 i think it was his natural talent that got him the home runs. jason giambi took steroids and he didn't hit near as much as bonds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 10, 2004 i think it was his natural talent that got him the home runs. jason giambi took steroids and he didn't hit near as much as bonds 585077548[/snapback] Well said, SeMz. People are quick to blame steroids for his homeruns, but other steroid users didn't even hit half of what he hit. He has talent, unlike Giambi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circaflex Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 but he cheated simple as that, he used the roids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mufdvr3669 Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 Really doesn't matter whether he gained much of an advantage or what kind of advantage he gained. He cheated. So can we permanently ban MLB? Afterall, about half of them have consumed steroids... :blink: Where did you pull that out of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 11, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 11, 2004 :blink: Where did you pull that out of 585080812[/snapback] Doesn't take a genious to figure out that many of baseball's stars use(d) steroids. I mean, people are even blaming Gagne for using steroids, that's how ridiculous it's getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circaflex Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 i hope your not referring to me about blaming gange i said i heard about it and it was speculation obviously your little hero got caught and now you dont have anyway to defend him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 11, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 11, 2004 obviously your little hero got caught and now you dont have anyway to defend him 585081763[/snapback] Am I his attorney? I think not, so there's nothing for me to defend. I just have my views and opinions just like you have yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroChaos Veteran Posted December 11, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 11, 2004 hey leave the Fab Five and all the personal attacks out of this :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerLG Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 When a homerun is hit a run is scored. Every run scored affects the outcome of a game, each individual run may not determine a winner, but it affects the outcome. A run is not scored when a pitcher is taken out!(or sent out to start another inning) or a stolen base is attempted. Sure it may potentially change the outcome, but it does not automatically put runs on the board like a homerun does! A batter can affect an outcome at any time in the game! Does a first pitch of the game homerun not affect the outcome in a 1-0 game? 585071188[/snapback] Ok, 2 on, 2 out, down by 4 Bonds hits a homerun. Next batter flies out. Game over, homerun has NO AFFECT ON THE OUTCOME. Similar situation, tying run on third, two out, very slow runner, manager calls for a squeeze and runner is easily tagged out. Manager's decision blew any chance for the batter to knock in the tying run. You think leaving a pitcher in too long does not have affect? Grady Little got fired in Boston because he left Pedro in too long against the Yankees. Cost them the game and the ALCS. Don't try to tell me that a manager cannot affect the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 11, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 11, 2004 Ok, 2 on, 2 out, down by 4 Bonds hits a homerun. Next batter flies out. Game over, homerun has NO AFFECT ON THE OUTCOME. Similar situation, tying run on third, two out, very slow runner, manager calls for a squeeze and runner is easily tagged out. Manager's decision blew any chance for the batter to knock in the tying run. You think leaving a pitcher in too long does not have affect? Grady Little got fired in Boston because he left Pedro in too long against the Yankees. Cost them the game and the ALCS. Don't try to tell me that a manager cannot affect the outcome. 585082019[/snapback] What a great post. About time someone makes complete sense and knows what they're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayepecks Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 If he didn't do the roids, yes. If he did the roids, no. And he's already said he has, pretty much, so guess what the answer is... If Pete Rose can be banned for life for something as stupid as betting on the game, why shouldn't all the dopers be banned for something far worse? I don't care when they started... they did it, and that's all that matters. You break the rules, you're gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 11, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 11, 2004 If Pete Rose can be banned for life for something as stupid as betting on the game, why shouldn't all the dopers be banned for something far worse? 585084072[/snapback] Pete Rose jeopardized the integrity of the game, therefore he was banned from joining the hall of fame. When you take steroids, you jeopardize yourself and your health, not the game of baseball. When a player starts betting on games he plays in, that is when you cross the line. Will Mark McGwire be banned from the hall of fame for taking steroids? I think not. Then why should Bonds? Bonds' success isn't all about steroids, though you can argue that it did help him hit a few extra during his record breaking year. The only reason why I'm defending Bonds is because he does have natural skill, unlike other steroid users like Giambi who take them and still perform average compared to others. If steroids were to give Bonds the numbers he has, then I'm sure others would also be on par with the same numbers, which no one is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayepecks Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Pete Rose jeopardized the integrity of the game, therefore he was banned from joining the hall of fame. When you take steroids, you jeopardize yourself and your health, not the game of baseball. When a player starts betting on games he plays in, that is when you cross the line. Will Mark McGwire be banned from the hall of fame for taking steroids? I think not. Then why should Bonds? Bonds' success isn't all about steroids, though you can argue that it did help him hit a few extra during his record breaking year. The only reason why I'm defending Bonds is because he does have natural skill, unlike other steroid users like Giambi who take them and still perform average compared to others. If steroids were to give Bonds the numbers he has, then I'm sure others would also be on par with the same numbers, which no one is. 585084353[/snapback] So you're telling me that betting on the game is jeopardizing the integrity of the game, but taking steroids is not? And then you go on to argue that taking steroids is only jeopardizing your own integrity? Give me a break. If betting is jeopardizing the integrity of the game, so is taking steroids. I have no clue how you can even argue against it... tell me exactly what it is that makes you feel that betting on your own team to win is jeopardizing the integrity a game, where taking steroids is only jeopardizing yourself... I'd really love to know that. Taking steroids absolutely ruins the "integrity" of the game. Everything that it stood for is being taken for granted. Taking steroids, without a doubt, is cheating. There is nothing more to it. Betting on the game is not cheating, nor does it harm anyone in the game. Perhaps if Pete Rose told his team to throw the games, but he never once did that -- no player has ever even gone so far as to give any indication that he even hinted at doing as such. No, Bonds' success is not all about steroids... but steroids is cheating, no matter how you look at it. Not only are you putting your own health at risk, but you're tainting your team, the game, and everyone you play with. Thus, by taking steroids, you are jeopardizing the integrity of the game and everything it stands for. Also, don't be so asinine... McGwire never took any actual steroid substance, from the information we've been given. There has been no credible information that he ever did. McGwire took a legally-sanctioned stimulant, and he stopped taking it once it was banned. I believe you need to look up what it is that andro actually does, because it is nowhere near the capabilities of actual steroids. Andro is more of a creatine-like substance. If you knew what you were talking about, you would know this. Andro is not a steroid, it's a natural enhancer... please get your facts straight before you make such lofty accusations. If you mean to say that Giambi didn't have natural skill, I would say you're crazy. Bonds, Giambi, Canseco and pretty much every doper in the MLB has natural skill... but there is a line between skill and cheating. Who's to say that most of it is skill or most of it is cheating? Either way, cheating is cheating. Tell me, if you got caught cheating taking the SAT -- but only for one question -- would it still be cheating? Yes, it would be. And according to Bonds himself, it wasn't like he just cheated once... he took the substances during the course of a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circaflex Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 Pete Rose jeopardized the integrity of the game, therefore he was banned from joining the hall of fame. When you take steroids, you jeopardize yourself and your health, not the game of baseball. When a player starts betting on games he plays in, that is when you cross the line. Will Mark McGwire be banned from the hall of fame for taking steroids? I think not. Then why should Bonds? Bonds' success isn't all about steroids, though you can argue that it did help him hit a few extra during his record breaking year. The only reason why I'm defending Bonds is because he does have natural skill, unlike other steroid users like Giambi who take them and still perform average compared to others. If steroids were to give Bonds the numbers he has, then I'm sure others would also be on par with the same numbers, which no one is. 585084353[/snapback] So Bonds taking roids isnt jeopardizing the integrity of the game? Juiced up players in a league and slipping past the mlb? Your telling me bettering is worse than taking roids and cheating, remember steriods are considered a cheat, because you arent on the same level as everyone else. But i agree Bonds success isnt all about the juice, he has one of the best baseball swings ever i totally agree there, The juice helped, those balls that barely wouldve gone out were muscled out with the assistance of the juice. Ive kinda changed my view on the who subject but he still cheated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowMeNeo Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 he is a fake.no. he cheated just like rose. 585062247[/snapback] Big difference between Rose and Bonds. Rose broke the record before any wrong doings happened. Actually, when he bet on baseball, he was at the end of his playing career anyways (he was a player/manager). Remember Bonds when he played for Pitt.? Skinniest kid on the team. Now, he is like 240 or so. All of us have to take a **** test at work every so often. If we fail, we get fired. Should be the same in pro sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 12, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 12, 2004 So Bonds taking roids isnt jeopardizing the integrity of the game? Juiced up players in a league and slipping past the mlb? Your telling me bettering is worse than taking roids and cheating, remember steriods are considered a cheat, because you arent on the same level as everyone else.But i agree Bonds success isnt all about the juice, he has one of the best baseball swings ever i totally agree there, The juice helped, those balls that barely wouldve gone out were muscled out with the assistance of the juice. Ive kinda changed my view on the who subject but he still cheated. 585086705[/snapback] Betting is illegal outside Las Vegas according to the Supreme Court, therefore, Rose violated a federal law, in which MLB stepped in and banned him forever (or so it seems, he may get unbanned, but who knows). Bonds took the now renown steroids, even though back when BALCO was in business, they weren't thought of as a steroid company, therefore, Bonds is techincally on the same boat McGwire was in. They took the stuff before the federal government came in and told them it was illegal. and he stopped taking it once it was banned. And where is your proof of this? His word of mouth? Interesting... If you mean to say that Giambi didn't have natural skill, I would say you're crazy. I never said he didn't have natural skill, I just mentioned that Bonds is far superior to them when it comes to skill. I believe you need to look up what it is that andro actually does, because it is nowhere near the capabilities of actual steroids. Yes, it may not be at par with steroids, but others tend to argue the opposite. He did confess that he used that substance, and even though some say it is not a steroid, others argue the very opposite. Bonds' success is not all about steroids... Thank you. You proved my point in that line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayepecks Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 OK, let's just say I take his word for it. And by taking Barry's word for it, he took actual steroids for more than a year. Tell me, which is worse, taking a performance enhanching "anabolic steroid" (the name is misleading, as it's not an actual steroid... yet again, I'm challenging you to look it up), or taking an actual steroid, then using things to mask it so that you don't fail a drug test? Myself, I'd say that the latter is far more serious and taints the game, thus jeopardizing the player's integrity and the game's integrity. But if you want to think that Mark McGwire taking andro is a horrible thing, that's your choice. But tell me -- how many guys do you know that take substances such as creatine, celtec, etc? I know a ton of people that do, and though I wouldn't take it, they're not taking steroids, and it certainly doesn't make them a better athlete. Believe what you want, though... I'm not going to force my beliefs on you, it's up to you to make your own decisions. Also, Bonds is not in the same "boat" that McGwire was in. Andro has never been illegal, and probably never will be. MLB simply banned it... THG, however, and "the clear", are illegal. And Bonds took those. They were illegal during the time that he took them, though they were banned by the game. But them being illegal means that he shouldn't have done it to begin with -- the exact same thing you're arguing of Pete Rose. I proved no point of your's. Bonds' success isn't all about steroids, no... but a great deal of his fame is. He took it during his record-setting season, and if he breaks the record for all-time homeruns, the game will be forever tainted. Tell me, what point is it that I proved for you? That not all of his accomplishments came from steroids? No crap! You have to have skill to play in the MLB, and everyone who has taken steroids and publically admitted it does have skill. I already said that in my previous post... maybe you missed it ;) Once again: I challenge you to look up what it is andro does, compared to what it is steroids do. I believe that you know absolutely nothing about what you're talking about, as steroids are far, far more severe a substance, and andro is simply a performance enhancer that isn't illegal, that you can buy over the counter (don't tell me steroids are "over the counter", either... they're not), and it was not illegal when he took them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 12, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 12, 2004 and it was not illegal when he took them. 585089015[/snapback] But now it is illegal according to MLB... and if he breaks the record for all-time homeruns, the game will be forever tainted. Who are you to say it will be tainted? Yes, I accept your view on it, but there will be others who'd argue the complete adverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayepecks Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 But now it is illegal according to MLB...Who are you to say it will be tainted? Yes, I accept your view on it, but there will be others who'd argue the complete adverse. 585089157[/snapback] Now it is illegal to use them in MLB, yes. But, when he took them, it was not banned. Andro is still not illegal to take, it's only banned by MLB... but, taking steroids has ALWAYS been illegal, and Bonds ADMITTED to taking them. Yes, there will be others who find the opposite... but, one way or another, it either helped him, or it didn't. It didn't take away from him that year, that's obvious. And it just so happened that the year he started taking the steroids (according to Bonds himself), he broke the record... coincidence? You make the call. I don't think it is merely coincidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L3thal Veteran Posted December 12, 2004 Veteran Share Posted December 12, 2004 I don't think it is coincidence either. If you take a look at my earlier posts, I clearly stated that his HR numbers are pretty much consistent except his 73-HR year. Obviously, he did take steroids that year, but ever since, his numbers have gone down to normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[hxc] Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 I don't think it is coincidence either. If you take a look at my earlier posts, I clearly stated that his HR numbers are pretty much consistent except his 73-HR year. Obviously, he did take steroids that year, but ever since, his numbers have gone down to normal. 585090033[/snapback] thank you for the clear up, i'm not really into baseball but this 'morality' question with Bonds is quite interesting. i'm really quite undecided on the issue. on one hand, he is a great athlete and can do very will without steroids, probably could have put himself into the hall of fame without them. on the other hand, he did take steroids and that should have some effect on whether he should be accepted or not. hmmm. i will need to think further on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[hxc] Posted December 12, 2004 Share Posted December 12, 2004 I don't think it is coincidence either. If you take a look at my earlier posts, I clearly stated that his HR numbers are pretty much consistent except his 73-HR year. Obviously, he did take steroids that year, but ever since, his numbers have gone down to normal. 585090033[/snapback] thank you for the clear up, i'm not really into baseball but this 'morality' question with Bonds is quite interesting. i'm really quite undecided on the issue. on one hand, he is a great athlete and can do very will without steroids, probably could have put himself into the hall of fame without them. on the other hand, he did take steroids and that should have some effect on whether he should be accepted or not. hmmm. i will need to think further on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts