Should we take away all his wins?
He's an admitted Cheater, in his own words, in his own book
2007-08-09 11:49:06 · 9 answers · asked by Big Ed 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Exactly, the hypocrisy in all this is that any of those records are pristine anyway. They all occurred in different eras and do not compare. Are the numbers put up before the integration of baseball really the same as the numbers put up after. The talent level in the league ballooned. But baseball is a statistical beast, and people will attempt to defend the sanctity of their stats forever. I don't necessarily appreciate Bonds' accomplishments as much as Hank Aaron's, because I do find them highly suspect. But at the same time, the position that those who are already in the Hall are somehow infallible and shouldn't be sullied by this new breed of cheaters is a bunch of bunk. Put Barry in, put Petie in and explain the controversy that surrounded them in their displays. The controversy, sadly, is as much a part of baseball history as the numbers.
2007-08-09 12:01:53 · answer #1 · answered by 8of2kinds 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Perry was what I'd call an acute cheater - that is, his cheating only affected individual games and could be easily detected by any umpire who bothered to check the balls. Penalties for cheating on that scale are well defined (fine, suspension for a few games).
Getting banned from the game (which is essentially what you're suggesting, though not in so many words) is a punishment that has generally only been given for offenses that affect the integrity of the sport - usually gambling, though there have been some drug-related bannings and the steroid policy now have a 3-strikes-and-you're-banned punishment.
2007-08-09 19:37:45 · answer #2 · answered by JerH1 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People: steroids are illegal. They are dangerous to your health AND their use sets a bad example to young athletes everywhere.
The issue isn't cheating, or cheaters - players will always try to get away with whatever they can and that is part of the game and the rules - but steroids (and hGh for that matter) is about abusive behaviour and the idea that it is ok to do it for the sake of competition.
2007-08-09 19:36:44 · answer #3 · answered by fastjazzcat 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No he shouldn't. When baseball banned the spitter players who were known to throw it were allowed to continue to throw it. Also teams were allowed to designate two pitchers to throw it. Mlb was allowing them to cheat why should he get kicked out? It was baseball that messed that up. It is just like them to turn the other way for so long on the steriod issue. Can't blame a player for trying to win games and taking advantage of the system. He was known to throw it and they allowed it.
2007-08-10 01:28:40 · answer #4 · answered by mattius337 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If he gets kick outta the Hall of fame than Barry Bonds Shouldnt be allowed in it
2007-08-09 18:53:04 · answer #5 · answered by G@B3 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Anybody with the name Gaylord should get an asterisk.
2007-08-09 18:53:19 · answer #6 · answered by Veritas et Aequitas () 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, he should. He would doctor baseballs. Don Sutton shouldn't be there either since he used sandpaper.
2007-08-09 19:37:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good point. There have always been cheaters and there always will be. Frankly, I dont care.
2007-08-09 18:55:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Once in I don't think you can remove them.
2007-08-09 19:39:15 · answer #9 · answered by Sharon S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋