Barry Bonds or Pete Rose.
2007-07-23 05:31:01 · 22 answers · asked by tardis1977 4 in Sports ➔ Baseball
I said ONLY pick one. ANYONE who says both is NOT going to get picked best answer!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-07-23 05:59:18 · update #1
I guess there are quite a few people who do not understand English!
How hard is only one?
If you were my students you would get an F for NOT following directions.
2007-07-23 08:05:14 · update #2
I would say that drugs are much worse than gambling. They made such a big deal about Pete Rose gambling and banned him from the Hall of Fame. What will happen to Bonds? Nothing! He'll be a Hall of Famer. Their priorities aren't straight. if they want to get rid of drugs in MLB, ban a juicer over a gambler.
2007-07-23 05:44:35 · answer #1 · answered by Gene Parmesan 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would readily say Barry Bonds because it taints his home run stats. (steroids). However, Pete Rose lied about his gambling. Had he admittrd his guilt, he would be in the hall of fame. He is the all time hit leader done drug free. My answer considering all the factors is drugs are worse by far.
2007-07-23 05:40:58 · answer #2 · answered by Mr. Sonny 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Drugs
2007-07-23 05:41:06 · answer #3 · answered by Sky Guy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're demanding a simple choice between complex issues. There are varying degrees of infraction involved with either topic.
But, AT ITS WORST, gambling is the greater evil, to the organization (here, professional baseball) if not obviously so to the involved individual(s). It has also been around for far longer, and though this fact is not especially relevant, pharmaceuticals are still evolving and could, someday, become more harmful. Today, they are not.
2007-07-23 10:19:23 · answer #4 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gambling- only because you stand a chance of throwing your game at the expense of your whole team.
With steroids...too many people were doing it to really have any control over it. Bonds just happens to be taking the fall for a whole generation of steroid users. Sad but true.
2007-07-23 05:46:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They both compromise the integrity of the game. However, there is only one that might make it's viewers do something damaging to themselves...and that's drugs.
Oh, and gambling is generally legal. The drugs and hormones that Bonds is purported to have taken are not legal to be used how he was using them. (And he admitted to a federal grand jury that he has taken drugs, just "not knowlingly." As if a guy as micro-managing about his health could unknowingly take something.)
2007-07-23 05:38:48 · answer #6 · answered by Left Bank Hook 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You fail to provide a reference point.
If you mean which is worse for the game of baseball, i'd say gambling while being an MLB player or manager is worse than being a druggie like, oh say, Steve Howe.
Howe messed himself up, several times, but his failings did not compromise the game of baseball on a larger scale.
2007-07-23 13:42:54 · answer #7 · answered by harmonv 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since drugs are illegal in all 50 states I'm going to have to go with drugs. Gambling is legal in so many states now that if you were going strictly from a legal standpoint you would have to say drugs
2007-07-23 06:13:58 · answer #8 · answered by Fisky 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In this case, they are both the same. Bonds did steroids to enhance his performance when he was already a guaranteed Hall of Famer just because he was jealous of McGuire and Sosa. Rose was making bets in games his own team that he was playing and managing on.
2007-07-23 05:48:46 · answer #9 · answered by jjburke 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
drugs . with drugs money goes down the drain with no risk reward. at least with gambling you have a chance for a return.
2007-07-23 06:14:15 · answer #10 · answered by MR TADS 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋