Alex Rodriguez tested positive for roids' in 2003

[3074326]

Which is a great point.....

If MLB did not have any roids on the banned substance list... who is to say A-Rod and the rest were "cheating" at all?

If it weren't considered cheating, why did they even do these random tests? There was obviously a thought somewhere in MLB that said "hey, steroids are illegal and maybe we should make sure that our players aren't using them to get an unfair advantage over the guys who want to be lawful and play the game with integrity."

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Call me when he gets busted using enhancers in '09 (when there is expanded testing and a clear MLB anti-enhancement agenda) -- until then I have trouble getting upset about players "cheating" back when the sport made virtually no effort to prevent them from doing so.

It is also alarming that A-Rod was told in 2003 that the test would have no consequences - that the league was simply getting an idea about the depth of the "problem" and that all results would stay confidential....


Umm....

not so much.

I don't mean to make A-Rod a victim here.... just saying.

 

[3074326]

Call me when he gets busted using enhancers in '09 (when there is expanded testing and a clear MLB anti-enhancement agenda) -- until then I have trouble getting upset about players "cheating" back when the sport made virtually no effort to prevent them from doing so.

Weren't they illegal in '03? Do you not see a huge problem with that?

A-Rod doesn't deserve to be punished by the league. That's their own fault. But he deserves (and will get) every bit of scrutiny that he deserves..

 

[billmac91]

Enhancing physical ability is kind of on a level by itself IMO. I should've been more specific and said "he used steroids" instead of "he cheated."

Not all cheating is the same.. there are different penalties for a reason.

Using roids' just isn't in the same league as a "spitball" ....so I agree.

A spitball is along the lines of receivers using stickum, or offensive and defensive lineman spraying eachother with slick substances so opposing players can't clench them.

The corked bat is pretty low, but it also comes with a nasty stigma. Albert Belle was dogged for months after getting caught. I think the current policy of 50 games is pretty solid on Roids'. The current problem for baseball is explaining why they protected users, and did nothing to stop it.

The similarities to WWF are pretty striking to me.....

WWF was/is an entertainment business, that depends on larger than life characters. Upper-managemnt turned a blind eye to roids' and actually encouraged roid use according to some. (McMahon was alleged to have supplied and used himself in the late 80's.)

Bud Selig and upper-management turned a blind eye to roid use in the late 90's and early 2000's. Someone within baseball allegedly tipped off Gene Orza in 2004 to let A-Rod know he had a test coming up. This after failing a "supposedly" secret test in 2003.

Two businesses that only looked at entertainment value, and what was good for the bottom line. It will be ineterseting in another 10-20 years if there is a consistent plague of MLB players getting sick, suffering side-effetcs of roid use. In the late 90's and early 2000's, it wasn't as if they were taking sophistcated doses of HGH, which actually can be healthy if used properly(according to some). It sounds like a lot of these guys were using anabolic steroids, which certainly causes long term health isues.

 

[BayBuck]

If it weren't considered cheating, why did they even do these random tests?

Because they were trying to get a baseline for how much steroid-use was going on, as part of the CBA renegotiation to allow for expanded testing. This wasn't random testing, it was confidential/anonymous testing as part of that negotiation. There was no testing that could lead to suspension until 2005.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

If it weren't considered cheating, why did they even do these random tests? There was obviously a thought somewhere in MLB that said "hey, steroids are illegal and maybe we should make sure that our players aren't using them to get an unfair advantage over the guys who want to be lawful and play the game with integrity."

Well, it seems to me to be withing the authority of the Commissioner to ban substances bad for the game. He failed to do so. If there is nothing saying I may not smoke weed, I may smoke weed. If nothing says I may not shoot heroin, I may shoot heroin.

Again, I recognize steroids are illegal in the United States (Well, the one's we're talking about, anyway). But, that being so, they were NOT illegal in baseball.

There is a critical difference.

What I'm saying is, hate A-Rod all you want... hate Bonds.. whoever... but if you want to BLAME someone... blame Bud Selig.

 

[AKAK]

What's the penalty now? They've obviously learned not to be as worthless as an organization and recognized that it's a form of cheating more punishable than pretty much anything else.

I hope you're not arguing that using steroids isn't a form of cheating. Any illegal performance-enhancer is cheating, no matter what the rules say IMO. Emphasis on IMO.

Which is a great point.....

If MLB did not have any roids on the banned substance list... who is to say A-Rod and the rest were "cheating" at all?

And there's the problem...

These guys are "cheaters" because they have crossed a line in our minds as to what is fair play and isn't.

Rose, specifically broke rules in place, so did Gaylord Perry.

Keep in mind that these guys weren't "trying not to get caught" well... because, they weren't getting tested way back when.

But, at the end of the day, you have to just not like them... I don't see ringing up hundreds of guys for "conduct detrimental" or whatever you can think of.

What they did wasn't "fair"-- there's no arguing that... but... its like that kid who calls a foul everytime you breath on him, and says he never fouls you... its not fair, there's no ref... but... you can quit or or you keep playing.

Chicks dig the long ball...

 

[BayBuck]

Weren't they illegal in '03? Do you not see a huge problem with that?

A-Rod doesn't deserve to be punished by the league. That's their own fault. But he deserves (and will get) every bit of scrutiny that he deserves..

Oh no, illegal! :tongue2: No, frankly, I don't care what kind of drugs some big time athlete or movie star was using 6 years ago. Sure, bring on the scrutiny -- it's ARod and NYY, that comes with the territory -- but I wish everyone would spare us all the great moral consternation here. This is not a matter for congress or something that takes away from the great tradition of baseball or even something that I worry will shatter my kids' hopes and dreams in life... :)

 

[3074326]

Because they were trying to get a baseline for how much steroid-use was going on, as part of the CBA renegotiation to allow for expanded testing. This wasn't random testing, it was confidential/anonymous testing as part of that negotiation. There was no testing that could lead to suspension until 2005.

Again, if it weren't cheating, why did they even bother? Someone knew this was cheating. Everyone did. The fact that the agreement was made so that the results were confidential tells me that.

Well, it seems to me to be withing the authority of the Commissioner to ban substances bad for the game. He failed to do so. If there is nothing saying I may not smoke weed, I may smoke weed. If nothing says I may not shoot heroin, I may shoot heroin.

Again, I recognize steroids are illegal in the United States (Well, the one's we're talking about, anyway). But, that being so, they were NOT illegal in baseball.

There is a critical difference.

What I'm saying is, hate A-Rod all you want... hate Bonds.. whoever... but if you want to BLAME someone... blame Bud Selig.

I think the blame goes to everyone. I cannot defend or defer blame from the actual user, who clearly knew it was not moral, to the person who is just a huge fucking idiot.

I see your position clearly, I just don't agree with it. :tongue2:

 

[Bucklion]

Does the cheating credibility out the window thing go for spitballers/foreign substance users? Bat Corkers?

Just curious, since above it was argued that not all cheating is the same... just wanted to know how you came out on that score.

George Brett had the memorable pine tar game...does that mean his career is invalid? No, because it was an isolated incident, a one game (one time) thing. Maybe he used too much pine tar on other bats too, I don't know, but I don't think anyone would argue George Brett wasn't a HOFer because he got tossed from a game for using too much tar on a bat.

That said, yes, guys like Gaylord Perry, the cheating that happened game after game, week after week, season after season, should have been taken into consideration for his candidacy. If it wasn't, shame on the voters, because it defiles the integrity of the game.

Of course, I must (as much as I HATE to, because I don't think you could assemble a quartet of bigger pudwhackers than Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, and Ass-Roid if you tried) admit one huge thing that has already been brought up and links to Perry. If the spitball was legal in 1912, than any pitcher who used it in 1912 cannot and should not have it held against him that it was outlawed in 19-whatever. It was legal at the time, so it was legal at the time. That doesn't excuse Perry for using it after it was banned. The same can be said of Roids if there was no baseball illegality (of course there was ACTUAL illegality, but that's a different issue) during the go-go 90's. I think Gay-Fraud and Bonds are definitely two of the best players of the steriod era. Do I think they are in the same class as Aaron, Frank Robinson, Mantle, DiMaggio, Ruth, Cobb, Mays and Clemete? Not even in the same zip code, even though their numbers might be bigger. Does that mean they shouldn't get in the Hall of Fame? I dunno, I guess in a way not, since they didn't actually "cheat" in a baseball sense.

I guess what I'm saying is what they is complete frauds, because they all denied it, but they aren't technically are cheaters if there was no rules against it. What I want is for Assnozzle Bonds and all the media buttplugs to stop using "greatest of all time" associated with himself, Ass-Rod, Mcfuckstick, and the rest of the modern era players. No one, NO ONE, is in the ballpark of those players above I mentioned in my eyes. Does that mean there should be no players from 1992-2005 in the HOF though? No, but I think the perspective is key, both to limit the hype associated with the modern day juicers and to preserve the sanctity of the greatness of the players like Aaron and Clemente.

 

[BayBuck]

Again, if it weren't cheating, why did they even bother? Someone knew this was cheating. Everyone did. The fact that the agreement was made so that the results were confidential tells me that.

Again, as something that was not specifically prohibited at the time, it was not cheating -- the testing was because MLB finally wanted to make it cheating. Sure, everyone pretty much agreed it was against the spirit of fair play or sportsmanship or whatever, which is why the players agreed to go along with it.

 

[BB73]

It is also alarming that A-Rod was told in 2003 that the test would have no consequences - that the league was simply getting an idea about the depth of the "problem" and that all results would stay confidential....


Umm....

not so much.

I don't mean to make A-Rod a victim here.... just saying.

I remember when those tests were given and hearing that the results would be anonymous and thinking, "Yeah, right".

Now Schilling is saying that the other 103 names should be released, so the six to seven hundred others that took the tests back then can have it known that their test results were clean. Either way it sucks.

The whole thing is such a mess, and yeah, I blame Selig. He needed to have the balls to institute better testing years ago - invoking the "good of the game" commissioner's powers, rather than letting the Player's Union prohibit any testing program with any real teeth. And the incompetent, complicit bastard made $17.5 million for being commish in 2007.

I haven't been to a MLB game in years, and that's not about to change.

 

[3074326]

Again, as something that was not specifically prohibited at the time, it was not cheating -- the testing was because MLB finally wanted to make it cheating. Sure, everyone pretty much agreed it was against the spirit of fair play or sportsmanship or whatever, which is why the players agreed to go along with it.

Haha, I don't know why a sample has to be taken to determine whether or not steroids should be banned substances. I know you didn't do this. I just think the entire thought process was stupid, and I'm not willing to let those off the hook who did it regardless of whether it was illegal or not. If I'm being unfair to those guys, sucks for them. I don't really care. :)

 

[DaytonBuck]

Well, it seems to me to be withing the authority of the Commissioner to ban substances bad for the game. He failed to do so. If there is nothing saying I may not smoke weed, I may smoke weed. If nothing says I may not shoot heroin, I may shoot heroin.

Again, I recognize steroids are illegal in the United States (Well, the one's we're talking about, anyway). But, that being so, they were NOT illegal in baseball.

There is a critical difference.

What I'm saying is, hate A-Rod all you want... hate Bonds.. whoever... but if you want to BLAME someone... blame Bud Selig.

Doesn't the players union deserve some blame this? They've held out against stricter testing and absolutely let their members down by letting this ARod situation leak.

 

[3074326]

Doesn't the players union deserve some blame this? They've held out against stricter testing and absolutely let their members down by letting this ARod situation leak.

And there's the allegation that the Union tipped Rodriguez that he was going to be tested in '04.