I mean everyone has ben CRYING about Barry Bonds and him needing an asterisk....What they gonna say now about Roger CLemens, Eric Gagne, Miguel Tejada, Andy Pettite, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc. According to the report ATLEAST 5% of baseball players tested positive. And that was when they KNEW they'd be tested. Who knows how many laid off in time to pass. I say an asterisk needs to be placed on the whole STEROID ERA......As an American, I am embarrased that this is OUR National Pasttime.
2007-12-13 06:55:03 · 13 answers · asked by Ssshhhh Im becoming aroused™ 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
Sounds good to me. I've been embarassed with them since 1994, this is just icing on the cake. I always thought I'd come back to the MLB some day, but if the league's response to this is as weak as I expect it to be, good riddance.
2007-12-13 06:58:59 · answer #1 · answered by Rossonero NorCal SFECU 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
MLB has to become far more strict about the use of drugs. Regular and suprise testing, zero-tolerance policies, suspensions or outright banning from the game - they did it especially with Darryl Strawberry and other drugs, now it's time to do this across the board.
NO PLAYER known to have violated this policy should be allowed in the Hall of Fame - and taken out, if it's learned later he violated the rules.
ALL records established by players using steroids or other performance-enhancing should be listed - but not with an asterisk. Put those records down at the BOTTOM of the relevant columns, and give the records earned HONESTLY by effort, ability and natural physical prowess the honors.
Put Hank Aaron back on top where he belongs!
2007-12-13 15:36:25 · answer #2 · answered by Der Lange 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sweety Barry Bonds doesn't need an asterisk, he needs a fuc*ing reality check to stop shoveling drugs up his @ss! I also think that the reason why players use drugs is because some of these coaches are very hard on the players and now a days playing games is no longer about the joy of sports but about who makes the most money, so they feel that the more steroids the shovel the better they will be! Sorry for the honesty but I say it as I see it!
Would you check this out plz?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArdC716y4TjpfX_6L3Cw6lXty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071213141631AACDRI7
2007-12-13 18:15:07 · answer #3 · answered by ♀♥♂ LOVE IS A FUNNY THING ♂♥♀ 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'd say to place an asterisk on both sides of the entire line showing Barry Bonds' achievements in all of the record books. That will definitely highlight it and make it easy for everyone to spot the true HR records for generations to come. Make sure the asterisks are colored bright "Giants" orange too!
The notation should read "HR King, Barry Bonds", next to the record!
2007-12-14 17:09:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
5%, 60-80 players, that is NOT the majority of MLB. That's not where near! So since when does that mean that all of MLB is taking steroids and needs and asterisk. I agree that it's a very bad, and sad thing but it doesn't mean that all are doing it. If you watch all the players it's very obvious that not even half of them could be taking steroids. Otherwise everybody would be big, and everybody would be great and everybody would be playing like WS champions. It's just not true that most or all of them are steroids users. We've got to be realistic here.
2007-12-13 15:02:49 · answer #5 · answered by St. Louis Cardinals Fan 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
You can't blame the saints because of the sinners. You can't put the asterisk on the whole era because not everyone was doing it, even if it was 5%.
Yes, it is an embarassment, a punch in the gut, slap in the face, whatever you may call it, but only thing you can do is, mention what is happening or what happened in that era, to future generations.
2007-12-13 15:01:18 · answer #6 · answered by Miguel A 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes!!! So if they named 80 people does that mean they got most of them? No!!! They haven't checked all dealers, just a few. Then they found the players from a few dealers.
In a sport where testing is not very strong and there are $100 million dollar contracts available, the need for steroids is high for ALL players to level the playing field.
Old players use them to stay at a competitive level. Average players use to get to that upper contract level, poor players use to stay in the majors.
The best example would be Adrian Beltre. He was an average player but then he exploded one season and hit 48 homeruns (twice more than his past career high) and hit .332. Despite his history of being average, he got a huge contract to play in Seattle.
What about those who come from poor countries? If they don't get the huge contract, their family doesn't live so well back home!
Would you really be surprised if 90% of players used before? Back then without adequate testing, what prevents a player from using?
Use your brain and REALITY!
2007-12-13 15:15:10 · answer #7 · answered by Dom 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The asterisk is a myth. It's never been used. Won't ever be used. It's a euphemism and no, MLB won't do that because it may effect revenue in the future.
2007-12-13 16:38:14 · answer #8 · answered by Sarrafzedehkhoee 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No need to, anyone who knows anything about baseball will know that this is the steroid era. we know babe Ruth didnt play against the best in the world, we know about the dead ball era, we know about expansion and the watered down talent, this is just another unfair advantage and not the last.
2007-12-13 15:10:11 · answer #9 · answered by Face on Fire 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They should ban everyone of them from baseball. What's good for Pete Rose is good for the rest of them. Either that or reinstate Pete Rose.
2007-12-13 22:30:14 · answer #10 · answered by Starr 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋