No, he has yet to fail any of the tests he's been given for steroids and he hasn't done anything to warrant getting banned.
As soon as she starts failing tests for steroids and fails three of them for the lifetime ban...then and only then...will baseball have the right to ban him from the game.
Although at his age, if he were to fail two of them that would rob him of 100 games and it's hard to imagine him sitting out of 100 games and being able to bounce right back into home run hitting shape at his age.
I wouldn't expect him to fail any tests for steroids and I'd just buckle down to the fact that he is going to break the record and then he's going to retire and that's about all there really is to it.
As far as walking him? No, I think the managers have enough respect for Bonds, as do many of the players that they wouldn't do something so lame and underhanded. The simple truth is that eventually...some one would absolutely have to pitch to him.
It would make professional baseball as a whole look really, really bad if they did something like that, so it won't happen. Image is everything.
2007-01-20 07:11:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by tkatt00 4
·
3⤊
3⤋
I wouldn't give him anything to hit at any time from now to the end of time.
Baseball won't suspend him until he's at least been arrested, unless he tests positive for amphetamines again. They should, but then again, they should have done so some time ago. It's just that that @)$*#$)* who passes for a commissioner is also gutless.
And then there's the fact that Bonds doesn't yet have a contract for the '07 season. The Giants are trying to find ways to back out of their offer and understanding, and at this point, he's made himself persona non grata to the rest of the sport.
And then there's these questions, for you. Why is it that you feel varying the wording of your question from the similar questions that have been asked here, time and time and time again is going to change anyone's mind? And why do you and so many others care about what that artificially bloated excuse for a human being says or does?
2007-01-20 08:29:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
BAN HIM? For what?
NOTHING has been proven as to him doing anything wrong.
Any manager who walked him with the bases loaded and the game tied should be immediately fired, banned and put in a rubber room.
2007-01-20 13:46:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Well, many fans would outrage, they would have banned him by now if they were banning him. Well, one pitcher is bound to disobey and throw a pitch bons will get a hold of. Hell break the record. We cant do naything about it,
2007-01-20 08:02:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
No they shouldn't. It's obvious he's taken steroids, and they have the proof of amphetamines, but taking steroids doesn't make you hit the ball, it gives you great power, you still have to be good enough to make contact, and hit it where it won't be caught (other than the stands) he was good even before he got as big as the Hulk, he's one of the best to ever play the game, no one can deny that.
2007-01-20 07:16:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by kblavie 3
·
2⤊
3⤋
No its not right to ban Bonds i think he took the streoids but you still have to be a good hitter to do what hes done.As for walking Bonds no they wouldnt do that.I cant wait for the day when Bud Selig has to shake Barry Bonds hand
2007-01-20 07:09:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by groverpawhurt 2
·
4⤊
4⤋
They can't ban him but the record at this point is tainted. And if you think the steroids don't give him an edge you are kidding yourself.
2007-01-20 08:16:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by jimel71898 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
i bet he is walked at least 70% of the time this year...
2007-01-20 07:29:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by nas88car300 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
He should be tested once a week, Im talkin blood tests.....
2007-01-21 04:11:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
They already have been walking him for years and no they shouldn't ban him he's the greatest hitter since Ted Williams
2007-01-20 07:08:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by malone1423 4
·
4⤊
5⤋