Yes, Bonds should retire. He would finally show respect to the game, to the fans, and to Henry Aaron & Babe Ruth.
Whether he has tested positive yet or not, there is no doubt that he is a pharmecutically enhanced player. You do not get bigger and stronger as you age. No matter how hard you work out, you just maintain for awhile then Mother Nature takes over.
2007-02-28 02:16:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by Allan H 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am not a fan of Barry Bonds in the least bit. I think he takes the integrity of the game down a notch or two.
However, even after he's retired there will be steroid heat, scandals, questions as to who the home run king is. All these things will probably exist even after he has passed away. Sadly for him, his accomplishments will be marred with steroid talk and confusion. That goes for this era in baseball in general as well.
For more on the latest steroid bust, check out: http://active.typepad.com/teamsports
2007-02-28 18:25:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Active.com 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No I dont think so. Despite the allegations, Bonds has never tested positive for roids. Also, he was always a great hitter. It wasnt like he sucked and then all of the sudden became awesome. And last, it has been scientifically proven that the baseballs used in the "Steroid Era" were lighter than baseballs had been in previous years.
2007-02-27 12:18:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Who cares? Baseball does not revolve around racist steroid Bonds. Baseball will survive his total disrespect for the game and it's history. None of the current players in MLB are caring about this clown and HIS quest. Why should the fans? WE know what's up and WE know who the best players are and were.
2007-02-27 11:21:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Oh yeah. There isn't any doubt that he broke the rules concerning steroids and other drugs. You shouldn't ban or ignore players (McGwire, Sosa, Palmerio) when they did not break any rules. Bonds broke the rules, weak as they are to enforce, so baseball would be better off if he disappeared from view.
2007-02-27 14:19:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Superscoot52 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
this is one thing that i am sick of barry besides the streriods and all of the issues him and mark brought baseball back before those two were hitting homeruns not a lot of peple where watching baseball its boring my dad used to say now that the homeruns are up people are watching come one i am sick and tired of the steriod issue quit it already so he did or he didnt stop i am so sick of this people have nothng better to do then to get mad at another person sto and get a life
2007-02-28 12:06:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by nathan g 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I say let him play and see if he can do it. The homerun record is reflective of not just the player but the era he played in. I don't think you can compare them apples to apples.
Ruth's 714 homeruns wan a reflection of his time, when the parks were huge. Aaron's 755 reflected the diluted pitching as the league grew larger. Bonds' XXX will reflect the era in which many players used performance-enhancing drugs.
2007-02-27 11:29:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
No. he adds constant excitement and controversy to the game. People would ridicule him even more if he retired so close to the record. He is, no matter what anyone else may say, one of the best hitters of all time. Look for him in the all-star festivities this year.
2007-02-27 11:21:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Ben T 1
·
0⤊
2⤋
I hope he just disappears from the world of baseball, but he really wants that record because he is a me-me-me-me person. I hope all the pitchers just walk his roided-*** so he never breaks the record.
2007-02-27 11:22:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by overfed longhaired leaping gnome 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ok first I think they are making a big deal out of the hole thing i meen that was 2 seasons ago then last season he wasnt on them came back from being hurt and still got 18 HRs...... i personly dont really like him but i would have to say he brings excitement to the game!!!
2007-02-27 11:30:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Colin P 2
·
0⤊
1⤋