2006-06-23 15:34:41 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Baseball
I think its sad that a person who is looked up to by kids and adults alike has to live a lie about his sports ability. Yep
2006-06-23 15:52:42 · answer #1 · answered by hatingmsn 6 · 6⤊ 7⤋
No. Think about all the players who had used steroids or other illegal steroids before him - should we wipe all of there records off the record books too? Keep in mind many of the pitchers Bonds faced could very well have also used steroids (check the most current issue of ESPN magazine). Should all the pitchers that struck out Bonds who were on steroids have their K's taken away? Aaron and Ruth played in an era where cheating (though not exactly steroids) was just as rampant. It is a ridiculous notion to think that they would strip Bonds' records for his past actions; especially when so many of his other colleagues were doing the same thing.
2006-06-23 23:24:59 · answer #2 · answered by J3ff 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can't take away his records; it opens up a huge Pandora's box.
If you take away his HRs, then did the Giants actually score those runs? Or do you have to reconstruct all those games? Did the Giants actually not make the WS in '02? Or if they did score, how? How do you put this in the stats?
And don't think for a minute that Bonds was the only one who was juiced. What about the pitchers he hit off who were juiced? What about every other juiced hitter? Do you have to take away their stats/records as well? Then you have almost an "empty space" from ~1990-2000, where only about 1/2 of the runs *actually* scored.
See the problem?
2006-06-23 22:57:27 · answer #3 · answered by K-Dawg 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. For one thing, steroid testing did not go into effect when the vast majority of his HRs came about. McGwire took PEDs that were perfectly legal under MLB and admitted as much.
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. If Bonds is caught during testing, then the discussion might shift, but you can't pull records based off non-analytic responses. You should be found to have tested positive first.
--Maury Brown
Baseball Prospectus
2006-06-23 23:18:37 · answer #4 · answered by Maury B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I hate Bonds but I don't think they should. MLB knew what he was doing like they knew what everyone else was doing. For all we know the commissioner's office was getting the roids for the players to help make their game more popular. The record should stand but whenever somebody mentions anything about it they should say, "yeah, but he was on steroids so it doesn't count"
2006-06-23 22:42:09 · answer #5 · answered by nep1293 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. First of all, there is no proof yet.
Secondly, they have never done this before. There are plenty of other players they would have to do this to, if they did it to Bonds.
Lastly, they would never do this. It would hurt baseball if all of a sudden all those stats didn't count. Fans would feel they wasted their time watching those games.
2006-06-24 00:21:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If he tests positive yes if not no records should stand on there own merit he is a great athlete!
2006-06-23 23:19:28 · answer #7 · answered by LedZeppelin4ever1955 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only if it is proven. So far he has been accused by people looking to gain fame for them selves or to deflect the blame else where. He hasn't tested positive yet.
2006-06-23 22:45:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here's a concept; whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
2006-06-23 22:40:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What proof is there of steroid abuse? He never tested positive.
BTW, I believe he used, but belief isn't enough. Proof is.
2006-06-23 22:38:22 · answer #10 · answered by danceman528 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No! He never tested positive for any drugs. Don't me a hater.
2006-06-24 01:54:58 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋