It looks like Bonds will break Aaron's record and I'll have to "suck it up" ! Do you think it's fair for him (Bonds) to go into the record books without an * next to his name designating that steroids MIGHT have been involved ?
2007-05-11 13:45:17 · 16 answers · asked by 1wiseguy 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
yeah. coming from a braves fan, Hank Aaron should keep the record. If Bonds name goes into the record books without a * then that will suck, becuz of the steriod alligations.
2007-05-11 13:51:31 · answer #1 · answered by Dan 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
A-Rod doesn't need steroids, at least not right now. Lets just wait and see how his body holds up to time in a few years. As for Bonds, he was definitely not the only player using them, but has become the poster boy for hating them. I don't hate him, I just don't think that all of his hrs are honest. There are other players that have had the ability to break the record without steroids too. I think that Ken Griffey Jr would be up there if he would have remained healthy during his career.
2016-05-21 00:33:48 · answer #2 · answered by hallie 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yesit is fair for him to not have a * next to his name, because a lot of the pitchers used steroids too. Plus, the league had no rule against using steroids when he did, so why should he punished. What good does a * next to his name do anyways. He will still be the player to hit the most homeruns. Also, how do we know that Babe Ruth didn't use a corked bat, or if Aaron used steroids. Who knows?
2007-05-11 13:58:11 · answer #3 · answered by bob b 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There wasn't the technology to detect steroids back then than there is now. Steroids have been around since 1922, so anyone between then and now could have used it. A lot of players have been using steroids in the past decade and there was no rule against them until recently. I'm not saying Aaron took them or even Ruth took them, but...1. they did not have the technology back then than we do now and 2. they weren't banned back then so no one really paid attention to it.
If Bonds breaks the record, enjoy it, whether he took steroids or not how many times are you going to see someone hit 750+HR?
2007-05-11 13:54:34 · answer #4 · answered by jackdupp1 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
help me understand...
how can steroids improve a players reaction time, and improve eye - hand coordination.
even an honest player has trouble hitting a fastball.
so, how do steroids improve hitting?
could hank aaron have faired facing nolan ryan, roger clemons, randy johnson, mariano rivera?
i'm not taking anything away from aaron, but strength and conditioning among players have certainly improved during the last 30+years. if bonds did take steroids, shouldn't his swing be slower due to overly sized forearms deltoids,and biceps?
please help me understand.
2007-05-13 12:19:26 · answer #5 · answered by david g 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Only morons and Giant fans believe that guy was not taking steroids and you have to be a moron to be a Giants fan anyways. Look, how many more homers would have Hank hit if he were on the juice like the modern day guys? Obviously he would have hit more. It is what it is, Barry will get the record but we all know he was on the juice and thats the way it is. Arod breaks the record in 10 years anyways. They are all guilty but they were not testing and the owners wanted them to do it because homers sells tickets. Same people who do not think Barry was on steroids think OJ is innocent and that JFK was killed by a lone gun man.
2007-05-11 15:35:28 · answer #6 · answered by teamjesus_ca 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes it is fair. I have stated this so many times. HE WAS NOT CAUGHT taking steroids, he was SPECULATED in taking steroids. If he was tried and caught, then yes, he should go with an * near his name.
Who's to say that Hank or Babe for that matter didn't use 'roids.
I just love hearing fans comments that Barry shouldn't get this and shouldn't get that because he was speculated in using 'roids but Hank, Babe, Joe D., all of them could have been using them without an care in the world back in those days, due to technology not being as advanced now.
2007-05-11 14:40:45 · answer #7 · answered by babygirlda4125 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm a firm believer that if a person hasn't been caught then I can only speculate as to whether they are guilty or not. Bonds and other major leaguers have the subject of steroid usage but only a few have admitted to using them and if I'm correct, Bonds wasn't one of them.
2007-05-11 13:55:24 · answer #8 · answered by Phade3 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He definitly earned the *... not necessarily the honor of having his name put next to Aaron.. I think that it's a bunch of BS... if you can't tell I'm not a Bonds fan either. He cheated, and shouldn't even have his name in the record books. The public won't accept it...
2007-05-15 06:00:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well the only reason i want to see bonds break the record is so i can witness history in my era but even if he does break i think people will still remember Aarons as one of the greatest batsman and aaron is the one who started it all of
2007-05-11 13:49:49 · answer #10 · answered by AustinRivers 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋