2007-07-21 13:33:21 · 19 answers · asked by REX 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Don't you idiots who listen to everything the media says have something else to do? Like go to a Fergie concert or something?
Get off Barry's nuts, this ish is too old.
2007-07-21 13:50:38 · answer #1 · answered by GOB BLUTH 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Let me preface this by saying that I do not like Barry Bonds, but if you're going to put an asterisk, then you'd have to put an asterisk in the record book next to EVERY player's stats that is under suspicion of using steroids. Do you think that should happen?
You can't put an asterisk next to one player. Don't you realize that most players used? Including pitchers?
You have to realize, a majority of the players who have been suspended for failing drug tests have been pitchers. That means he hit home runs off of pitchers who were on the roids. Sounds like an even playing field to me.
2007-07-21 13:40:52 · answer #2 · answered by Cush 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
No, we learned from Roger Maris that putting an asterisk by his name is stupid. Barry Bond's hasn't been proven to have taken steroids yet. Until there is firm evidence, he should be presumed innocent. If at a later time, he is proven to have used a banned substance then the record should be taken away.
No one is excited about him breaking the record because of the suspicion of steroid use. Its pretty sad . . .
Hank Aaron was so much more of a role model, hopefully someone will eclipse Bond's record if he breaks the HR record . . .
By the way . . . shouldn't Josh Gibson be recognized as the HR king (880 HR's, I believe)
2007-07-21 14:55:45 · answer #3 · answered by Tim H 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i do no longer think of baseball could ever get rid of the records of a participant. The record books are black and white, there is no gray section. whilst Bonds hits #756, he will have hit extra homers then the different participant in important league background. this would be a fact it somewhat is actual, inspite of no rely if he became on steroids, HGH, PCP, Heroin, crack or perhaps NyQuil. although, baseball, extra then the different interest, has an somewhat wealthy background in line with peoples judgment of a gamers skill and character, no longer in straightforward terms his documents. the great factor approximately baseball is the arguments approximately who became extra suited, and, although Hank Aaron is the best-ever chief in HR's, I very seldom see him called the suitable participant of all time. Barry Bonds stands out as the all-time chief in HR's and not something can replace that, yet in spite of that record, he's a lot extra possibly to be remembered as a drug person, a liar, and a grade A ***hollow. subsequently baseball is so great!
2016-12-10 18:39:47 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not. Why should Bonds be singled out for retribution?
My Take: Major League Baseball made a concious decision after the 1994/95 Strike to gain revenue. It was obvious during the 1998 McGuirre-Sosa season long Homerun tournament that something was not right. MLB chose to not have a stringent enforcement and testing in place for Steroids, because they were gaining back fans that had left because of the Strike.
Give Bonds his due-he is one of the games greatest players, and was long before "he got larger."
All this will be moot because Alex Rodriquez will most likely hit over 800 Homeruns!
2007-07-21 13:54:28 · answer #5 · answered by Richard V 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
YES.The asterisk is there in the court of public opinion(outside of the Bay area) already.Mc Gwire will be snubbed from The HOF and Bonds' name may be passed up as well.It has turned into a "who's a Giants fan and who isn't" argument,obviously at this point.The real issue is the truth,and I'm sure we will never know that.Thus the asterisk!
2007-07-21 14:22:13 · answer #6 · answered by doug s 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Wow, I've never seen this question before!
No asterisk, no special notation, nothing to set it apart. Someday someone will break Bonds' record and the whole point will be moot.
2007-07-21 15:47:36 · answer #7 · answered by blueyeznj 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nah; the asterisk is SOOOO 20th century.
Bonds deserves nothing less than a double dagger or sectional.
2007-07-21 15:13:53 · answer #8 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
no, because he is the best to ever play. if he did take steroids he must have stopped by now because he would have been caught with all the tests he has to take, yet he is still putting up good numbers. another reason is that the investigation on bonds has been extended by 6 months because they cant find anything.
2007-07-21 13:42:58 · answer #9 · answered by elias 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Did you hear about the steroid allegation in Golf? Should all Golf records in the last ten years have one to? Is Tiger Woods a farce?
2007-07-21 13:55:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋