If you were a voter, would you vote for Mark McGuire and others who have allegedly used performance enhancing drugs?
2006-11-30 07:43:23 · 18 answers · asked by cold runner 5 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Never! Whether the drugs were banned or not, McGwire, Bonds, Sosa and all the others deliberately took chemically enhancing drugs to gain an unfair advantage over their peers. That my friend is dishonest. There is no justification for cheating. Some people in here like to split hairs when it comes to the technicality of their actions. I don't buy it! It's like they're saying, " I did not have sex with that woman!" Define sex, Define cheating!! It's all the same. The integrity of baseball is at stake here and the sports writers have an obligation to uphold it. The fact is McGwire wasn't that good a player. Check his stats. Except for the chemically enhanced home runs, his numbers are very unremarkable. He was not a very good hitter and was a below average defensive player. Even if he didn't cheat, he does not belong in the HOF.
2006-11-30 14:22:48 · answer #1 · answered by The Mick "7" 7 · 20⤊ 0⤋
Mark McGwire may have (probably) used some type of human growth drug but what he has been accused of using was not illegal, let alone against any rules of the time he played.
Let's look for a moment at another rule and law that has changed over the years. What do Hall of Fame players Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Walter Johnson, Cy Young and about 50 others have in common?
They played their Hall of Fame caliber careers before the rules and laws were changed that barred non-Caucasian players from competing in Major League Baseball.
Does this mean that Cy Young did not really win 511 games; or Babe Ruth did not really hit 714 home runs; or that Ty Cobb did not really have a lifetime batting average of .367?
Of course it does not. They played in Major League Baseball under the rules of the game at that time. Mark McGwire did as well; he was never proven to do anything illegal.
2006-11-30 16:59:36 · answer #2 · answered by jpbofohio 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am on the fence for McGuire going into the Hall of Fame because I really thought he only hit homeruns and never really did the little things like play defense and come up with clutch hits and I mean hits not dingers!
2006-11-30 16:59:41 · answer #3 · answered by jesse r 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If I were a voter no I would not. But keep in mind that voters have consistantly voted in "cheaters" of one form or another and while I believe they will send a message to all the players this year by not voting him this year in I also believe that eventually they will vote him in (and other "cheaters" ). As long as there are competitive sports cheating will exist and sportwriters are all too aware of this (and they know a lot more "realities of the game" than we ever will).
2006-11-30 21:06:53 · answer #4 · answered by viphockey4 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I would vote for Mark McGwire . 1-he retired BEFORE baseball made it against the rules to use steroids/HGH/etc...So even if he did, it wasn't against the rules....2-I though we lived in a country where you were innocent until proven guilty...3-He never tested positive that I know of?
I guess pitchers were not using? Well we all know the answer to that one, thanks to Jason Grimsley...
Do I think anyone who puts that crap in their body is stupid, you bet your a ss I do...But, you don't make rules retroactive then hold players accountable for those rule changes...Some time in the future smoking, drinking , womanizing and chewing may be against the rules what are you going to do then? Empty the HOF?
2006-11-30 16:14:01 · answer #5 · answered by C_F_45 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, I don't know about McGwire, maybe I'm biased because I'm a Cardinals fan, and LaRussa believes McGwire didn't use steroids, though honestly, I really think he did. I would have to say no, I wouldn't vote for any player who uses steroids. The whole steroid scandal is ruining the game.
2006-11-30 20:37:24 · answer #6 · answered by GERMANY EURO CHAMPS 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All except Palmeiro. Technically, baseball didn't have a rule and didnt test for steriods before the new policy came out. Since then, the only player who was even remotely HOF worthy would have been Palmeiro and he got caught.
2006-11-30 16:08:43 · answer #7 · answered by Vin 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO. They dont deserve to be in the hall of fame for using steriods and the other people who dont use steriods earn the spot and not most of them get it all the time.
2006-11-30 18:26:04 · answer #8 · answered by ~*mU$t@Ng B@sEb@lL*~ 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, as long as it's allegedly and not proven. If it's proven but before it was illegal in baseball then yes also. Baseball should have stopped this a long time ago and this wouldn't even be an issue.
2006-11-30 22:41:50 · answer #9 · answered by Jeff 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
NO WAY!!!
The hall of fame is for great players not great juicers.
And Pete Rose NEEDS to be the hall.
2006-11-30 19:33:53 · answer #10 · answered by pat 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋