[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Another lie. A test did exist for THG in 2003 but MLB did not test for it
[/ QUOTE ]
MLB began testing for THG in 2003, almost immediately after it was added to the FDA schedule of bannedsubstances....(remember, you were already wrong about that one.) [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
Tsk tsk, just takes a simple Google search to prove this wrong....
Read article
I'll highlight for you...
The newly discovered steroid THG was not tested for, and baseball cannot retest because the samples weren't saved. But it already has been added to the banned list for next year. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
[/ QUOTE ]
Tsk, Tsk....the FDA added THG in Oct 2003, and the "2004 baseball year" begins in Oct 2003.....
It's all in the details.... [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
Put simply, MLB begin testing for THG as early as Oct of 2003.
Which last time I checked, despite being classified by the CBA as part of the "2004 baseball season"....is most definately still a part of the 2003 calendar year.
After all, why would they have tested in the early part of 2003 when the substance wasn't even illegal.
Nevermind that you originally and incorrectly asserted that it was illegal all along and that MLB didn't test for THG at all....[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Don't sweat being wrong, bro....you seem to get lot's of practice at it....you're still upset about being dead wrong about THG's legality in 2003, aren't you?
[/ QUOTE ]
RB,
You can pretend its me who uses word games when its entirely you. Please read that article and its details. Testing began in the 2004 season, not the 2003 season as you had implied several posts up. You seem to want to argue semantics to hide the point of the post: Bonds' samples were not tested for THG during the 2003 season, meaning if he had been using he would not have been caught that year. The first time he could have been caught was the 2004 season- even if that is Oct-28-03.
THG was not illegal because authorities had no idea it existed. You cannot ban something if you don't know it exists. If your hero Bonds took THG before the 2004 season he may not have been breaking the steroid policy, but he was most certainly gaining an advantage, an advantage that MLB ruled was illegal the moment they found out about it, which is what the entire argument is about. I would also like to find where I said that MLB never tested for THG. Putting words in my mouth again.
Now I am sure you will respond by editing out the parts of my post you cannot answer or refuse to answer, something you do well, but I wish you the best. It was fun debating but I am not going to change your mind, nor you mine. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]