Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2009

RSS |

Twitter

NFL Adds Concussion Rules

Teams must now keep independent neurologists on hand

7 hours, 31 minutes ago
Teach a man to fish

Man Reels in
157-lb Bluefin
—in His Kayak

Waiting for the fish to exhaust itself can be quite a ride

4 hours, 6 minutes ago
Steelers Fan Kills
Misbehaving Pup

Pit bull would 'not behave' before TV broadcast, so...

1 hour, 27 minutes ago
The Meaning of Caster Semenya

Gender a more fluid concept than sports are prepared to handle

1 hour, 36 minutes ago
Iraqi Prisoners Taunt Wis. Soldiers Over Favre Defection

Detainees get into the Packers-Vikings rivalry

Nov 20, 09 9:30 PM CST
movie review

Bullock Shines in
Crowd-Pleasing Blind Side

Football chick flick lacks suspense, delivers happy ending

Nov 20, 09 1:25 PM CST
GOODNIGHT, SWEET PRINCE

Georgia Mourns
Football Mascot

Bulldog, 4, served less than 2 full seasons in shortest reign ever

Nov 20, 09 12:24 PM CST
Soccer Stars' Fave New Cure: Horse Placenta Massage

It's injected into injured area, then massaged

Nov 18, 09 9:30 PM CST
HAND OF GOD II

Furious, Irish Beg France for Rematch Over Handball

President will even take matter up with Sarkozy

Nov 19, 09 8:06 PM CST
men of the year

Eastwood Is
Top 'Badass'

Kobe Bryant, Chris Pine, Barack Obama make 2009's elite list

Nov 19, 09 7:33 PM CST
IAAF Denies It
OK'd Gold
Medal for
Semenya

Talks continuing in gender controversy

Nov 20, 09 3:54 AM CST
'I'm Like, That Is Not Me:'
Dirty Soccer Player

Elizabeth Lambert confused, remorseful about hair-pulling episode

Nov 18, 09 11:10 AM CST
Olympics, anyone?

Afghans Revive
Goat-Carcass Sport

Buzkashi draws sponsors in post-Taliban economy

Nov 18, 09 11:49 AM CST

|NEXT STORY »

OPINION

Let Steroids Users Into Hall of Fame

Baseball should allow performance-enhancing drugs

By Nick McMaster| Posted Jun 20, 09 10:33 AM CDT|

(Newser) – The Hall of Fame has become baseball’s weapon of last resort against players who’ve used performance-enhancing drugs. Baseball writers can’t ban drug users from the sport or take away their money—but they can deny them a spot in Cooperstown. This crusade is senseless, writes Zev Chafets for the New York Times. Millions of Americans use “performance-enhancing” drugs—think Adderall or Lexapro—why can’t MLB just be honest about what players are doing?

“If everyone has access to the same drugs and training methods,” reasons Chafets, “then the field is level.” Steroids are changing the game, but the game—its equipment, rules, and demographics—has never stopped changing anyway. The only thing, in the end, that fans will not tolerate is “the sense that they are being lied to.”

[Images (2)]

[Quotes (1)]

Fans cheer as Texas Rangers' Sammy Sosa heads toward home celebrating after hitting his 600th career home run in 2007. (AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez)

Former Giants left fielder Barry Bonds waves to fans in San Francisco in April. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

Like it or not, chemical enhancement is here to stay. And it is as much a part of the national game as $5.50 hot dogs, free agency and Tommy John elbow surgery.
- Zev Chafets

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

11.23.09

Books Are Bad for You

11.20.09

The Health-Care Wars Have Just Begun

48 comments

VIEWING:

Alexandria
Jun 20, 09 10:38 AM CDT

They shouldn't even play. What message are we sending to children when athletes have to use illegal drugs in order to make themselves better? Oh, you too, Little Timmy, can earn millions if you just destroy your body for a sport instead of practicing and trying really hard at it naturally. Please. And the field isn't level if you have one athlete who is naturally gifted against another athlete who uses steroids. How is that fair? Athletes who 'juice up' don't deserve the attention, fame, or money they get. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 1:27 PM CDT

What's the difference between taking steroids and, say, getting a cortisone shot or undergoing Tommy John surgery? The latter two enable performance, while the former enhances it, you say? Bull, I say--especially considering that some players (e.g., Andy Pettitte) have taken steroids only to recover from injuries faster. In any case, claiming that steroids "destroy [the] body" while "trying really hard . . . naturally" doesn't is supremely disingenuous. Just ask any of the scads of ballplayers who've seriously injured or risked seriously injuring themselves playing the game. As for the competitive disadvantage steroids put nonusers at, what about the competitive advantage that kids who grow up in Florida (where you can play ball year-round) have? Do Floridians not "deserve the attention, fame, or money they get"?

-2

IN RESPONSE:

wwwonderer
Jun 22, 09 1:25 PM CDT

I understand your thoughts Alexandria. If that's the case, what's going to stop the overambitious dad from applying steroids in the womb? At the same token, I think it's just as unfair for women to compete in beauty, er... I mean 'talent' pageants, with fake breasts and fake hair. How can ANY woman take a compliment for her beauty, when that SAME beauty can be purchased by anyone. At the same token, how much will people worship these athletes when then find that they can purchase similar 'talent'.? Maybe fan admiration goes down, and maybe that's good. With the financial crisi the world has been going through lately, rescaling ALL (espcially ENTERTAINMENT) INDUSTRIES seems inevitable in order to maintain good societal balance.

| 0 minutes ago

sameold
Jun 20, 09 10:48 AM CDT

I agree with the previous poster. We might as well build cyborgs to play sports for us and then root for them... Reply

| 0 minutes ago

paul123
Jun 20, 09 10:58 AM CDT

How 'bout simply building a "steroid users" wing to the hall of fame. This way, they still make it in, but in a room, say, in the basement... Reply

| 0 minutes ago

jeangnome
Jun 20, 09 11:05 AM CDT

To allow them into the Hall of Fame lessens the achievements of those who didn't use "performance enhancing drugs." Reply

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 22, 09 12:35 AM CDT

It absolutely does not.

| 0 minutes ago

Forderon
Jun 20, 09 12:53 PM CDT

I'm disappointed in all the comments so far; very simple and lacking in nuance. 1. These same journalists crying foul are hypocritical douchebags. They're the ones who willingly ignored the widespread usage while it was happening and instead wrote fluff pieces and built up the home runs as grand theater instead of doing their job and asking questions. Now they're on their high horses and using their HOF vote to get back at the players who "betrayed their trust". Bullshit. 2. The Baseball Hall of Fame is a MUSEUM and RESEARCH CENTER of baseball. Where does it say that only the good, clean people can get in? Where/when was this decided? Ty Cobb was a flaming racist and a complete asshole in his day and he is in, among many others who I'm sure had many vices. Letting the PED users in simply documents the history of the game, which is what's it's supposed to do and if anything, the clean players will look even better because of it. 3. Don't bring "the kids" into this. No one is asking them, you're thinking for them in typical American over-parenting tradition. 4. As this article mentions, the game, it's players, equipment, and rules have changed many times throughout its rich history. Should we exclude players who wear elbow pads? Should we adjust stats for the different rules and regulation changes over the years? Where does it end? All of this bile is simply journalists and HOF voters feigning mock betrayal at something they created through their incompetence and clinging to a false sense of what baseball should mean. I am not excusing the players who cheated in any way. They deserve to be identified and there should a note on their plaque that they used PEDs. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 20, 09 1:28 PM CDT

Sorry if my above post is included in the "lacking in nuance" comment. I'll try to be more significant in the future. As far as the hall, it should be reserved for natural achievement, reguardless of personality. Ty Cobb, for example was indeed an A-hole, but that is irrelevant to the hall. It's a free country, you can be an a-hole if you want to. The hall however shouldn't be sullied with performance enhanced behemoths who would not have had near the success that they did have, were it not for the outside influence of steroids.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 1:33 PM CDT

I agree with Forderon, except with the bit about noting on a player's HOF plaque that he used steroids. That is, as long as Ty Cobb's plaque doesn't mention the facts that he not only didn't have to face black players, but actually assaulted black people for no other reason than that they were black. (Also, to call steroids "PEDs" is to beg the question. I.e., it's trying to prove that the substances enhanced performance (as opposed to simply enabling it or having no effect) by assuming that the substances are performance-enhancing.)

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 1:36 PM CDT

paul123: Ty Cobb "would not have had near the success that [he] did have, were it not for the outside influence of" excluding black ballplayers from the big leagues. Should he be removed from the Hall? I don't think so, and I don't think that someone like Barry Bonds should be excluded.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 20, 09 2:13 PM CDT

Your right anchower, Ty Cobb would not have had the same success. due to the exclusion of black players...he may have had MORE success, or he may have had LESS success. We will never know and we need not speculate, as it is a ridiculous and pointless exercise. His performance should be and is measured based on the players/teams that he did face, not on those whom he may have or should have faced. To say he would have done worse by playing black players is just as racist as saying that he would have done better by facing black players.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 3:07 PM CDT

What an absurd thing to say, paul123. There are a finite number of players in MLB. As such, if MLB had not excluded nonwhites in Ty Cobb's day, the best nonwhite players would have replaced the worst white players. Hence, the competition Cobb would've faced would've been much better, and hence, his numbers would indubitably have been worse. But how he likely would've done isn't the point: The point is that he had an unfair advantage over people like, say, Pete Rose, who faced nonwhite players his entire career. And how is it in any way racist to point this out? (By the way, your argument works against you. You neither know how many players actually took steroids, nor do you know whether steroids actually made any of them better (as opposed to bigger). So if, as you claim, it's impossible to know how Ty Cobb would've fared had he had to face nonwhite players, it's impossible to know how Barry Bonds would've fared had he never taken steroids. You've given no basis for rejecting the one counterfactual while embracing the other.)

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 20, 09 3:13 PM CDT

Anch, if anything is absurd, it's your own faulty thinking. You are assuming that all replacement black players would have been excellent players, which is racist. Some would have been great, some good, and some poor. You see this today: There are all sorts of races in baseball, which is great I might add, and I guarantee I can point out awesome ones, and piss poor ones for each race if you like. Adding a new race to the baseball gene pool, at best, would alter a player's stats only slightly, as you would get good and bad players in the mix as his opponents. Do you even understand the game of baseball, or are you just race baiting? Maybe, "Dont feed the trolls" should apply to me here, as I just don't think you know what you are talking about.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 5:32 PM CDT

You're really getting on my nerves, p123. As I said, the worst white players would've been replaced with the best nonwhite players. The reasons that you have bad players of all races today are two: One, expansion always lowers the mean talent level. Relatedly, we have now reached a day and age where not only Jackie Robinson-Don Newcombe-Elston Howard types can get onto major-league rosters. In Ty Cobb's day--pre-expansion--the cream of the Negro Leagues crop would have replaced the dross of white major-leaguers. You evidently know nothing about the history or workings of the game, so I would ask that you please shut the fuck up. Also, arguing in good faith is not trolling, but accusing people who argue in good faith of trolling is fucking bullshit. Fuck you.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

kokuaguy
Jun 20, 09 6:06 PM CDT

Paul, disagreeing with you (however forcefully) does not constitute troll like behavior. Anchower is obviously highly intelligent, very well informed about a broad variety of topics, and a capable, articulate debater. It's unfortunate that some on this site are pretty good at pushing his buttons and provoking the kind of language that gets his posts flagged and lessens their effectiveness. I enjoy reading both of your posts very much, except when your disagreements degenerate into pettiness and name calling.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 6:48 PM CDT

This "paul123" labeled me a troll and a racist (the latter twice). Even though all I said, essentially, is that American apartheid, by systematically excluding black and Latino players from the big leagues, as a matter of FACT lowered the mean talent level of major-league ball. And because his competition wasn't as good as it would've been had baseball not been party to Jim Crow, Ty Cobb's numbers are inflated. To illustrate: Say nonwhite players weren't allowed in MLB today. Wouldn't the mean talent level be much lower (and wouldn't, say, Mark Teahen's numbers be significantly higher if he never had to face C.C. Sabathia)? Well, the same was true in the day of Ty Cobb (who never had to face, among others, Cool Papa Bell). The corollary to all this is that paul123 is a know-nothing fucking twat. (By the way, Cobb wasn't just an "A-hole," he was a criminal. "It's a free country," yes, but not so free that you should be able to get away scot-free with stabbing and choking black people just because they're black.)

-1

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 20, 09 10:05 PM CDT

Anch, sorry if i'm getting on your nerves, but I don't really care. Your arguments are flawed. Yes, bad white players would be replaced with better black players, but you leave on one important thing, which is the human element. This new blood, would at the very least motivate existing players to a higher level I believe. Watching a greater percentage of betters would likely improve the game of others around them. Even the best players go on cold streaks, and sombody always has to lose. So like I said, the stats would alter only slightly. As far as my knowledge of the game, I would put my smarts up against yours any day. You may ask that I "please stfu", but to that I say not a chance and tough potatoes if you cant take it. Arguing in good faith is not trolling, but trying to make something a race issue that isn't and calling me fuckwad or fucktwat or whatever "clever" name you can come up with may be.

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 20, 09 10:17 PM CDT

kokuaguy, i'm very suspicious of anchower's inteligence and ability to debate articulately. This is NOT based soley on today's banter, but based on past posts. Today, I have not tried to push his buttons, although this post may, but that's tough. Again ,it has never been purposefull. I have not tried to be petty. Name-calling, well, yes we are both guilty, however in the course of a debate, we sometimes lose our demeanor, some more than others. I called him a racist based on the following comment: Ty Cobb "would not have had near the success that [he] did have, were it not for the outside influence of" excluding black ballplayers from the big leagues. Based on that statement alone, I took i to mean that a player would automatically be good if he were black. This is absurd, just as it would be to say, all blacks are good at basketball. That is a racist comment indeed. He later clarified what he was talking about and I saw a glimmer of intelligence when he tried to explain the whole talent pool thing, but it was obfuscated by the "f-you's" and other obscenities.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 11:17 PM CDT

Have you ever even watched a single inning of baseball, paul123? You make me seriously doubt it. And certainly no longtime fan would credit your speculative mumbo jumbo like, "Watching a greater percentage of betters would likely improve the game of others around them." In any case, if you took all the nonwhite players out of the game today, and replaced them with white Triple-A-ers, I can guarantee you that already good white hitters like, say, David Wright, would feast on the replacement pitching, and their stats would improve. That is exactly what happened with Ty Cobb. Why do you think no one's ever hit .400 since the leagues were integrated, huh? It's because it's easier to hit .400 when you never have to face some of the best pitchers in history because they're all shunted to the Negro Leagues. By the way, this is not only my view. It's a matter of simple logic, and that's why there's practically a consensus on the subject. (See, e.g., http://bleacherreport.com/articles/93737-greatest-players-in-mlb-history-the-debate-cant-begin-before-1960) You wouldn't know that, of course, because you're a brainless tool.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 21, 09 12:26 AM CDT

Hey, paul123, here's some more food for thought for you, you poser scum: "Simply stated, major league baseball records established during the 60 years of segregated baseball are tainted and therefore, meaningless." (http://www.blackcommentator.com/122/122_major_league_baseball.html); "[N]o teams prior to baseball's 1947 racial integration should be considered for all-time greatness, due to the excluded talent pool." (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/13831653/). Even the fucking commissioner of baseball agrees with me: "'There's no question not having to play against African-Americans made their life easier,' Selig said . . . ." (http://media.www.wsusignpost.com/media/storage/paper985/news/2004/04/19/Sports/True-Baseball.Statistics.Began.The.First.Day.Jackie.Robinson.Played-2108762.shtml) But oh yeah, you'd "put [your] smarts up against [mine] any day." Well, bring it on, putz.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 21, 09 7:53 AM CDT

Nice try anch...putz and brainless tool can be added to your diatribe. Name calling is the last bastion of those who have nothing of value to say. I've probably watched more baseball than you but if not, I've watched plenty of baseball nontheless. I didn't say stats wouldn't alter, I said stats would alter slightly not wildly. And this is on the average. If we are talking batting average, you may have some who would jump to maybe .400, and some who wouldn't. Take the average and I don't think you would have such a great spike across the board. As far as the stats for pre-segregated baseball, you and the comissioner should both go down to the hall of fame and shut it down together. Until that day, give it a rest. And heaven forbid sombody enters MLB with a nationality that hasn't been represented before, we'll have to start the stats all over AGAIN. That will be a bitch. BTW, you have anger issues, take a pill or something.

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 21, 09 8:01 AM CDT

btw, happy father's day anch.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 21, 09 5:11 PM CDT

As in baseball, so in life: There can be only one winner. And me and the commish and every other rational being on the planet win, and you, the lonely subretard holdout, lose.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 21, 09 10:15 PM CDT

*scoffs*- I'll let you believe that you "won". It's a debate, and I don't think there is really a winner anchower, or loser for that matter. We have discussed a point that cannot be proven, and have voiced our opinions on an outcome that can never happen, unless you know a way to go back into time and desegregate baseball. Your links were pretty lame btw. They were nothing but opinion pieces. Congrats.... you win one free "internets".

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 21, 09 11:31 PM CDT

It can easily be proved, you braying ass. Just resegregate baseball today. If you think that guys like Chase Utley and Dustin Pedroia wouldn't put up significantly better numbers than they already have against the replacement-level and sub-replacement-level players that would take the place of all the banned nonwhite players, then you don't have a fucking clue about baseball. Have you ever even taken a math or statistics or logic class? Do you even know what SABR stands for, without Googling it? But no matter, you do know what STFU means. So do it.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 21, 09 11:42 PM CDT

By the way, your original idiot claim was that steroid users should be banned from the Hall because their stats are inflated. My point is simply that Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth and every other pre-integration HOF-er's stats are also inflated. There is absolutely nothing controversial about my statement, but you continue to challenge it with nothing but mystical bullshit about "the human element" and "new blood." I challenge you to provide a cite to even a single publication that agrees with your inane proposition that players like Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth would've fared as well or better than they actually did had the leagues been integrated when they played. You won't be able to, so why don't you fuck the shit off instead.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 21, 09 11:56 PM CDT

"[O]pinion pieces" not good enough for you, paul123? Well, here's the conclusion from someone who actually did the math. From Mark Armour's essay, "The effects of integration, 1947-1986," from the 1/1/2007 issue of the Baseball Research Journal: " HOW MUCH DID THE BLACK PLAYERS IMPROVE THE GAME? One argument often used in making the case to induct players from the Negro Leagues into the Hall of Fame is that there were just as many great black players playing before 1947 as there were afterward. This argument, while not without holes, is a compelling one. There were players like Willie Mays and Frank Robinson playing in the 1930s, the theory goes, and they should be honored just as [their] successors were. A parallel argument is to consider the game of the 1960s without its great black players. The baseball of the 1930s, I propose, was comparable to the baseball of the 1960s if all of the black players were somehow removed from the game. Had segregation continued for another generation, players like Harmon Killebrew, Ron Santo, and Norm Cash would have been the superstars and we would not have known that there were better players who were prevented from playing. Mays and Aaron and Clemente, those wonderful players who remade the game, would have remained in the shadows, and we would be wondering today whether they really could have competed in the great major leagues. What would baseball have been like in 1965 without Willie Mays and the 27 other black stars? It would have been immeasurably worse. It would have been, I suggest, comparable to the baseball played in 1946." Choke on it, dipshit.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 21, 09 11:58 PM CDT

ok, prove it. Go and resegregate baseball and get back to me. Until then, you can only speculate. I have nothing to prove to you, but yes I have taken logic classes, stats classes and higher math classes and I know what sabr is. However again, you leave out the factor of the human element, but I guess you cannot see beyond your own nose and arrogance. You are a pitifull man sir...STFU you say? I will not. Why don't you take your own advice and try it yourself? Sadly, you will not. Instead, you will rattle your sabres and call more names and site more meaningless opinion pieces instead of possibly considering that there may be some validity to a point other than yours. Is that so hard for you? I'm big enough to say that you make some good points when you are not cusing and having temper tantrums, even though I disagree with them. Grow up sir. Is the best you can come up with "STFU"? Are you an 8th grader? To answer you, you cannot prove that players stats would be deflated to any significant degree. There is nothing mystical about that. Unless you can bring these people back to life and make them play, it's open to debate. I'ts like my saying that the 85 bears would kick the NE pats's super bowl team any day. YOu can play that game 10 times or 100 times and get different results almost every time. Similar, but different. I challange you, oh wait, I have and you gave me opinion pieces, never mind. You end with, "You won't be able to, so why don't you fuck the shit off instead." I'm not sure what you are talking about, but since I believe you have had some experience at that maybe you could tell me how it's done little man

IN RESPONSE:

scruffynerfherder
Jun 22, 09 12:00 AM CDT

Anchower, give it up he's got the best of you.

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 22, 09 12:03 AM CDT

Sorry, Mark Armour's essay is another opinion piece. Choke on that.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 22, 09 12:18 AM CDT

Take your own medicine, paul123. Prove to me that steroids affected, say, Mark McGwire's performance. To do that, you'll have to show me how he would've done had he not taken steroids. Meaning, on your view, you'll have to go back in time and take all his steroids away and see how he does. But you can't do that, any more than I can segregate baseball. That's why some of us have these things called brains and imagination and reason, and using all those, we can figure pretty precisely how things might have gone. For instance, with McGwire, we can look at his stats before he started taking steroids. We can do something similar with Ty Cobb and Babe Ruth. You can't, though, because you have no brains, no imagination, and no ability to reason. You do, apparently, have, in scruffynerfherder, someone willing to suck you off. So go fuck each other, the two of you, and leave those of us who are not inbred fuckwits alone.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 22, 09 12:49 AM CDT

anch, If taking 'roids were not going to improve Mark McGwire's performance, why would he have taken them. Or why would anyone take them if they weren't going to provide some benefit to them. I'm sure they weren't taking it for the side effect of shrinking testicles. So there is your proof. Mark still would have been a good player, but I think the 'roids enhanced his stats, nobody with a brain can argue that. So there is your proof. I don't have to go back in time like you have suggested and blah blah blah. I dont have brains, imagination, reasoning? I've got more than you pal, which at this point isn't saying much. Let's agree to disagree, and please take an anger management class.

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 22, 09 1:01 AM CDT

Food for thought, from: http://www.sportingo.com/baseball/a9722_how-great-black-baseball-players-were-denied-big-mlb-stage-because-racism "Unfortunately, it is just a guess where to rank the players from the Negro Leagues for several reasons. First, many of them never played in MLB, or when they did, they were past their prime. For instance, the legendary Satchel Paige did not start pitching in MLB until he was around the age 42 or 43, depending on which date of birth you believe. Second, the statistics from the Negro Leagues were incomplete. Third, those statistics are almost meaningless when comparing them to the MLB statistics, since the quality of the Negro Leagues were hard to determine. Fourth, the leagues were different statistically. From 1930 to 1950, the batting average in the Negro Leagues was .308, while the batting average in MLB was .269. This difference was apparently (from what I read - including quotes from Negro League hitting stars such as Buck O'Neil) the result of a lack of pitching depth in the Negro Leagues.". Yes, this too is an opinion piece, and I think it minimalizes the black players too much, but still it basically says you cant compare the two leagues.

IN RESPONSE:

scruffynerfherder
Jun 22, 09 1:07 AM CDT

Dude, just because I think he's got some valid points, especially with that last piece from the sports blog, doesn't mean you have to jump on my shit! He's getting the best of you, deal with it asswipe.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 22, 09 1:19 AM CDT

Is it not possible that McGwire took steroids because he THOUGHT they would help him, but that they didn't ACTUALLY help him? Anyway, I don't know how you can deny out of hand that white players' pre-integration stats are inflated and then say, "I think the 'roids enhanced his stats, nobody with a brain can argue that," when you have zero knowledge about how steroids affect the human body or a position player's ability to hit or field a baseball. But forget it. I'm through trying to knock sense into your cinder block of a head. You're beyond help. I'm fucking done with you. Sayo-fucking-nara.

-2

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Jun 22, 09 9:17 AM CDT

Don't be so sure that I don't have any knowledge of steroids or their affect on the human body. I assure you that I do. As to your question: "Is it not possible that McGwire took steroids because he THOUGHT they would help him, but that they didn't ACTUALLY help him?", the answer is yes, but only on the short term. The longer you take anabolic steroids, you WILL have body mass increase and increased performance. That is the whole point of taking them, which is exactly why he did take them. If anyone is doing any denying, it is you. Your common sense knowledge is truely lacking, and I am quite happy to not have any of your sense knocked into me, rocket me towards a plebe-like status. Hasta la vista chump.

| 0 minutes ago

OrderedChaos
Jun 20, 09 1:29 PM CDT

The Players Union has too much power. Players should be subjected to true random screenings. Teams should be allowed to review contracts once it has been established that a player has taken PED, and take measures they feel are appropriate (fines, suspensions, terminations, nothing, clap on the back, atta boy). Any records established while under PED are given an astrix, with an explanation as the why the *. Reply

-1

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 1:42 PM CDT

What are you TALKING about. At least since 2004, players have been subject to mandatory random testing. Why do think Manny Ramirez is serving a 50-game suspension right now? And if teams want to be able to do something if it turns out one of their players used steroids, then they should negotiate for that power when forming their player contracts. As for asterisks, I'm OK with that as long as Ty Cobb gets an asterisk for slapping a black elevator operator, stabbing a black security guard, and choking the wife of a black groundskeeper, as well as for never having had to face a single black ballplayer in his Major League career.

| 0 minutes ago

kokuaguy
Jun 20, 09 1:40 PM CDT

This debate is very enlightening and helpful. I feel sorry for the young athletes who will feel it is necessary to compromise their health in order to achieve "fame." Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Fondue
Jun 20, 09 7:00 PM CDT

All I'm going to say is; if you can't be a record from the 30's with all the knowledge available and multi-million dollar compensation, then you're weak sauce in my book. Reply

-1

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 7:44 PM CDT

You mean "break" a record from the '30s? Well, there are several old-time records that will likely never be broken. Cy Young's 511 career wins, for one. Not as long as teams stick with a five-man rotation, and not as long as young pitchers like Joba Chamberlain and David Price aren't allowed to throw many innings. Also, compensation and knowledge aren't the relevant factors: Asymmetrical knowledge might help someone break a record, but what does compensation have to do with it? Alex Rodriguez is guaranteed $275 million on his current contract whether he breaks Barry Bonds' career home-run record or not; whatever additional incentives his contract contains for breaking that record are nothing compared to the guaranteed money. Also, it was easier for players in the '30s to set records (many of which have since been broken), since they didn't have to face any nonwhite players, and since baseball was 80 years younger then. And you can't really believe that every player who fails to break a record from the '30s today is "weak sauce."

| 0 minutes ago

ack
Jun 20, 09 7:22 PM CDT

Something I didn't see commented on: the fact that these players BROKE THE RULES. There's an argument to be made about whether to ban performance-enhancing drugs, for sure. But MLB has decided to ban them, and thus players who use them are breaking the rules. Ergo, they shouldn't be in the hall of fame any more than someone who uses an illegal bat, or spitballs, or what have you. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 7:50 PM CDT

MLB didn't ban steroids until 2002, the year after Bonds broke McGwire's home-run record, and three years after McGwire and Sosa broke Maris's record.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 7:51 PM CDT

Four years, I meant.

IN RESPONSE:

ack
Jun 20, 09 9:53 PM CDT

A good point, then. Keep anyone who used them post-ban out of the Hall. But those who used them before they were banned ... well, you can't blame them any more than you can blame people who try different diets.

IN RESPONSE:

anchower
Jun 20, 09 11:26 PM CDT

Well, you could argue that they were illegal, even if MLB itself hadn't banned them. But the real question is, how do we know whether taking steroids really helped someone like Barry Bonds? I mean, it's easy to believe that they did, but where's the proof? More specifically, steroids appear to have made Bonds bigger and stronger, but did they increase or decrease his bat speed? Improve or worsen his vision? Make him more or less patient at the plate? And if pitchers were also taking steroids (we know that Andy Pettitte did and suspect that Roger Clemens did, too), maybe there really was no advantage, ultimately. In any case, as long as pre-integration players with inflated stats are welcome, so should suspected juicers with inflated stats be.

IN RESPONSE:

Forderon
Jun 21, 09 1:50 PM CDT

Thank you achower for your well-reasoned posts

-2

| 0 minutes ago

View all 48 comments »

sports • steroids • MLB • anabolic steroids • Baseball Writers' Association of America • Baseball Hall of Fame • Mark McGwire

from our news partners

Mysteries of 'Jennifer Lopez Falls' & 'Adam Lambert AMA' Solved
(4 hours, 17 minutes ago)
Joel McHale Secretly Wants To Be Thor
(5 hours, 18 minutes ago)
Jessica Simpson Calls Perez Hilton 'Sad'
(5 hours, 48 minutes ago)
Today's Best Celebrity Twitters for 11/23
(5 hours, 49 minutes ago)

Grandparents are cool because they let you do things mom...
(7 minutes ago)
Today's most incoherent actual headline: "Trooper fired after hat fib...
(1 hour, 58 minutes ago)
Photoshop this held horse [Photoshop]
(2 hours, 15 minutes ago)
How the Resale Subculture drives Black Friday, why Cyber Monday...
(2 hours, 19 minutes ago)

Teaser Trailer: Beastly
(2 hours, 20 minutes ago)
The Hangover Wants A Golden Globe
(2 hours, 35 minutes ago)
Kat Dennings Joins The Thor Cast
(3 hours, 20 minutes ago)
Trailer: JCVD In Universal Soldier: Regeneration
(3 hours, 55 minutes ago)

Associated Press

Matsui's bat, Damon's spikes among items donated for display at Baseball Hall...
(Nov 5, 09 2:41 PM CST)
Baseball commissioner Bud Selig welcomes Cardinals' hiring of Mark McGwire...
(Oct 29, 09 6:58 PM CDT)
Sports equipment maker Amer Sports 3rd quarter net profit falls 12 pct to ??29...
(Oct 29, 09 12:07 PM CDT)
Mark McGwire joins the St. Louis Cardinals as Tony La Russa's hitting coach
(Oct 26, 09 3:26 PM CDT)

What is Newser?

Face it: there's too much news. At Newser, we choose the most important stories from hundreds of US and international sources and reduce them to a headline, picture, and two paragraphs. And we do it 24/7—you can come back morning, noon, night (and in between) for something new that matters. Read less, know more.

Learn more »

Let Steroids Users Into Hall of Fame

Baseball should allow performance-enhancing drugs

[Images (2)]

[Quotes (1)]

For Female Umps,
No Field of Dreams

Female umpire speaks out against baseball's 'stained-grass ceiling'

MORE ABOUT:
sports • MLB • sexism • umpire • baseball • umpires • glass ceiling • Jay-ZTV • women's issues

McGwire Back in Baseball,
as Cardinals Hitting Coach

La Russa brings former star aboard, says steroids questions fair game

MORE ABOUT:
Iraq • St. Louis Cardinals • Tony La Russa • steroids • Mark McGwire • Bill DeWitt • baseball

Umps Under Fire
After Rash of
Botched Calls

Postseason miscues have MLB considering drastic changes

MORE ABOUT:
sports • MLB • umpire • baseball • umpires

sports • steroids • MLB • anabolic steroids • Baseball Writers' Association of America • Baseball Hall of Fame • Mark McGwire

MOST POPULAR STORIES

[ By Views ]

[ By Comments ]

from our news partners

Associated Press

About

Help

Tools

Site Maps

What is Newser?

Let Steroids Users Into Hall of Fame

Baseball should allow performance-enhancing drugs

[Images (2)]

[Quotes (1)]

Related Newser Stories

MLB'S GLASS CEILING

For Female Umps, No Field of Dreams

Female umpire speaks out against baseball's 'stained-grass ceiling'

MORE ABOUT: sports • MLB • sexism • umpire • baseball • umpires • glass ceiling • Jay-ZTV • women's issues

A SHOT FOR THE OFFENSE

McGwire Back in Baseball, as Cardinals Hitting Coach

La Russa brings former star aboard, says steroids questions fair game

MORE ABOUT: Iraq • St. Louis Cardinals • Tony La Russa • steroids • Mark McGwire • Bill DeWitt • baseball

mlb playoffs

Umps Under Fire After Rash of Botched Calls

Postseason miscues have MLB considering drastic changes

MORE ABOUT: sports • MLB • umpire • baseball • umpires

sports • steroids • MLB • anabolic steroids • Baseball Writers' Association of America • Baseball Hall of Fame • Mark McGwire

MOST POPULAR STORIES

[ By Views ]

[ By Comments ]

from our news partners

Associated Press

About

Help

Tools

Site Maps

What is Newser?

For Female Umps,
No Field of Dreams

MORE ABOUT:
sports • MLB • sexism • umpire • baseball • umpires • glass ceiling • Jay-ZTV • women's issues

McGwire Back in Baseball,
as Cardinals Hitting Coach

MORE ABOUT:
Iraq • St. Louis Cardinals • Tony La Russa • steroids • Mark McGwire • Bill DeWitt • baseball

Umps Under Fire
After Rash of
Botched Calls

MORE ABOUT:
sports • MLB • umpire • baseball • umpires