[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
So do I have this straight, Redbean?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you don't because everytime you attempt to clarify it, you rephrase and misattribute my position.

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]

It is your position that the 1991 memo, which on its face prohibited non-prescribed steroids, did not ban steroids? The prescription qualifier, in your mind, removes the prohibition?


[/ QUOTE ]

My position is that the 1991 memo did not unilaterally ban all steroids.

The language addresses illegal drugs, including prescription drugs for which the player does not have a prescription.

The memo, if anything, banned illegal steroids, and those prescription steroids for which a player did not have a prescription.

<u>Now, it's your turn.</u>

Is it your position that THG, aka "the clear", (that Bonds is alleged to have used), was an illegal or controlled substance tht required a prescription prior to 2003?

Because it wasn't....Oops!....

That's right, it was added to Schedule I in 2003.

Which brings me back to my original question.....which rule did he break from 1998-2002....even assuming your assertions of him taking THG are true?