It's not that I'm a fan of the juiced-up players, but this seems to be a losing battle. They ban andro, so players switch to THG. They catch on to THG, so players move to AMP or whatever the new thing is. It just seems like cheating will occur, so why not let the athletes make the choice?
The playing field actually seems more unlevel than it would without the rules. Or am I just becoming worn down?
2006-10-16 08:32:58 · 6 answers · asked by Craig S 7 in Sports ➔ Baseball
EDIT - For those of you who mention records and asterisks, how will we know in the future who cheated or not? With the advances in steroids, many guys will never be caught.
2006-10-16 08:38:52 · update #1
I tend to agree with you. I don't much care what any ENTERTAINER does to himself, as long as they do not hurt anyone else.
Did I care what drugs Kurt Cobain used to make good music? No. It was his choice... and his music was pretty damn good.
Do I care if Clemens or Bonds is on HGH? Not really. A home run blast is AMAZING to see. I don't step back and think "Oh, I'm not impressed. He had laser eye surgery." or "That guy had ligament replacement surgery, so that curve ball shouldn't count."
Do I care that Ken Caminitti may have died at an earlier age because of his greed and desire to "be the best player he could be, at ANY cost to himself?" No. As long as it was NOT at the expense of anyone else's health and/or safety, I really don't care what people do to THEMSELVES.
I sure was impressed in 1988 when Canseco was the first to go 40/40. Does it lessen how impressed I was back in then, after finding out he was chemically aided? no.
Look, I could take HGH from now until the end of time, and I still could not catch up to a 78 mph change up, let alone 98 mph heat! You do STILL have to have the talent for the game... and if you use an enhancer, you STILL need put in the work to be great.
2006-10-16 08:57:21 · answer #1 · answered by baseballfan 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, it is a scientific advance like any other. Should we put an aterisk next to atheletes who have the advandtage of dietary science and physiolgy thereby making them better atheletes. The answer is no. In the same way making equipment more effective, lighter, heavier, whatever yields better results. Advances in science should not negate achievement.
Legalize steroids so that it is an even playing field. They are adults who have the right to ingest what they want to ingest. As far as players go as being a role model. As long people show the effects of steroid use and don't try to hide it or sweep under the rug or overstate it and blow it out of proportion then people will make intelligent decisions.
2006-10-16 16:02:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
All of those steroids should be banned, all of them. Not only is it giving them an unfair advantage, but it sends the message out that cheating to win is good. I think you are becoming worn down; these multi-millionares should have to work to be over-paid, not have it land in their lap in the form of a needle.
Steroids are unacceptable, but the only people who should have an asterisk are those who were caught using, see Rafael Palmeiro. It is unfair to give an asterisk to players only suspected, since there is not evidence, and also because who knows if the pitchers who were throwing to them weren't juiced either.
It's a big mess, I know, and it is baseballs' own fault; doesn't anyone else think it's hypocritical for Selig to go after players for steroids when he turned a blind eye for a whole decade? If he would of been able to work something out with the strike, baseball wouldn't of needed McGuire and Sosa's homerun chase (and an increase in steroids around the league) to make the sport popular again.
2006-10-16 15:45:29 · answer #3 · answered by wernerths 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
steroids have really bad effects on people like 10 - 20 years after they get done taking them...something like that. So the answer is a no brainer....no steroids allowed.
And I agree with the people, especially former players, that if someone did take steroids, whatever stats they have should be accompanied by an asterisk to show there was additional help to achieve those numbers.
2006-10-16 15:37:31 · answer #4 · answered by brewbeer212 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i'd rather see natural talents or people that work hard for their fmae
2006-10-16 15:35:51 · answer #5 · answered by Steveo 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
did I say NO?
2006-10-16 15:37:09 · answer #6 · answered by Tim C 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋