|
|
#21
11-03-2007, 11:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
Haha this stuff is getting kind of crazy. We definitely dont need a caffeine thread. It is funny that that even got made into such a big deal since it isnt even applicable to anyone outside of, like...me, and it doesnt do anything to any of the pro- or anti-steroids arguments. It just makes a couple med students hypocrites is all. [/ QUOTE ] You're wrong about the caffeine. You may have argued it better than I can (won't be the first time), but you are sadly wrong. 
|
|
#22
11-03-2007, 11:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] For the record, I think that Bonds is both the Greatest of All Time, as well as a cheater, but I really don't care that he cheated, since it was IMO known and condoned by the players, the union, and ownership. So I guess I'm kind of in the middle on this whole topic. [/ QUOTE ] I think he is really close to GOAT, he'd probably get my vote, and I also think he probably took steroids and/or HGH. I'm very much on the fence with regards to whether he cheated or not, leaning towards not. Definitely dont care though. [/ QUOTE ] We actually agree on most of this, except that I'd say he cheated. Of course, I believe that a lot of players have cheated in his era, so my criticism of Bonds in that respected is mostly muted. For RedBean, when I say cheated, I don't mean "failed a drug test" or even "took drugs/steroids and wasn't caught", I mean he took something artifically that significantly increased his ability to play the game. I also understand that Mcgwire and Clemens most likely did the same.
|
|
#23
11-03-2007, 11:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
In relative terms, it's obviously Ruth. In absolute terms, it's obviously Bonds. [/ QUOTE ] Well worded and I'd have a tough time arguing against it (hell, I have a tough time arguing anything!). But, since Bonds just wants to spend time with his family, I wish he'd go do it. [ QUOTE ] I don't think he took any steroids/HGH that were illegal by law or that were banned under the MLB steroid policy. [/ QUOTE ] When you say "illegal my law", does that mean if a physician subscribes it, you consider it legel and not cheating? The real question for you is: Did Bonds take steroids at all?
|
|
#24
11-03-2007, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
My argument about Bonds has nothing to do with the RP thread. [/ QUOTE ] Yet you continue to bring it up in every unrelated Bonds thread...... [ QUOTE ] In one case you say we have incomplete info and should wait to make a decision. In the other you take the same type of disputable evidence and are 100% sure of the outcome. [/ QUOTE ] Here we go, once and for all, since you're apparently dying to talk about RP in every Bonds thread.... In one case, RP has admitted responsibility. In the other case, Bonds has denied the allegations. Big difference.. In one case, we are electing the leader of the free world. In the other case, a man is being paid to hit curveballs. Big difference... In one case, RP has admitted being dishonest for his own political gain. In the other case, Bonds has maintained he is telling the truth. Big difference And lastly.... In one case, we have a political candidate <u>who is asking for our votes</u> lying about the origin of disgustingly racist views and the defending them on the basis that he thinks they are accurate. In the other case, you have a baseball player <u>who is not asking you for anything</u> and just wants to show up for work and swing the bat. Big Difference. If you think it's the "same type" of disputable evidence, then I just don't know what to say, other than take it to another thread if you want to talk about presidential candidates and their defense of racist views. And FWIW, I'm not voting for Bonds in the presidential elections either.
|
|
#25
11-03-2007, 03:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official argue about all things Barry Bonds GOAT thread
[ QUOTE ]
Well, he should feel the need to give back to the game and to the fans that pay him for playing this game. [/ QUOTE ] You might want to look at the back of his baseball card and see just how much Bonds gave to the game.
|
|
#26
11-03-2007, 03:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
For RedBean, when I say cheated, I don't mean "failed a drug test" or even "took drugs/steroids and wasn't caught", I mean he took something artifically that significantly increased his ability to play the game. [/ QUOTE ] I think that is the common theme with everyone....their definition of "cheating" is what they arbitrarily decide they want it to be based on their own personal preferences......with complete disregard for whether or not it was in violation of the rules that govern the sport. Arbitrarily imposing your preferences on "artificially increasing your ability to play the game" in determining cheating is a fuzzy determination that isn't applied consistently to all areas......and in my personal opinion, I defer to the rules that the players agree to play by in judging whether or not they violated them. But out of curiousity...using the same logical standard.....do you similar view players who had artifical enhancements to their eyesight via lasik surgery to be cheating? What about players who have had Tommy John surgery to resurrect their careers....when in the past, this wouldnt have been available to them?......and players who get cortisone shots that allow them to play when they otherwise wouldn't be able?.......taking a tylenol for a headache?
|
|
#27
11-03-2007, 03:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
When you say "illegal my law", does that mean if a physician subscribes it, you consider it legel and not cheating? [/ QUOTE ] It means I don't think Bonds broke any laws, nor violated any rules of baseball. He played by the rules as they were agreed too.....just as we expect everyone to do.....and not necessarily as they would be interpreted arbitrarily by random fans who don't like him because he hit a three-run homer against their favorite team. [ QUOTE ] The real question for you is: Did Bonds take steroids at all? [/ QUOTE ] The real answer is we don't know....and it doesn't matter if it wasn't illegal or in violation of the rules of baseball. It only matters to those who wish to impose their own definition of the cheating, disregarding completely the rules that govern the sport.
|
|
#28
11-03-2007, 04:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
My argument against RB has always been about whether or not it is likely Bonds ever used PED's, with a slight tangent on whether using them was cheating before there was a policy. [/ QUOTE ] I thought your argument with me was because you objected to me saying that that Bonds didn't cheat? Like I said before, I don't begrudge you having an opinion that Bonds cheated based on whatever personal bias you choose....like I've said, my primary interest is in discussing the facts, not your opinion. After all, your opinion is your opinion....it can be whatever you want, and that's fine with me..... But, it doesn't change the facts. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] When it comes to your opinion and the facts, the two paths don't cross, like I said in the other thread. -- Reposted from the other thread: [ QUOTE ] My opinion is, even in the face of all the facts that you have presented and that I agree are facts, that it is likely that Barry Bonds at one time used an illegal substance as defined by MLB rules or by law. [/ QUOTE ] Fair enough, I can respect your opinion, even though it lacks any proof or credible evidence. After all, it's just your opinion and you can think whatever you like. Christ, after all you think Hank, Willie, Brett, and Smitty are 99.98% likely to be cheaters, or whatever arbitrary number you assigned. The facts say different, but they usually don't get in the way of people's opinions when people don't want them too. You've made it clear you conceded the facts as accurate, and aren't disputing them, and all I'm only really concerned about the facts....not so much with speculation and conjecture, nor with the opinions of random joes based on their own personal bias. If you change your mind though, and want to discuss the facts, lemme know...otherwise your personal opinion has been duly noted and I concede your ability to form it based upon whatever arbitrary reasons you prefer. Just realize they don't change the facts. Have a nice day. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
|
|
#29
11-03-2007, 04:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
What percentage chance do you assign to a random player from the years 1996 to 2003 of ever using a PED? What percentage chance do you assign Barry Bonds from the years 1996 to 2003 of ever using a PED? [/ QUOTE ] 0% chance of cheating for both groups between 1996-2002, as their wasn't a policy.
|
|
#30
11-03-2007, 04:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Bonds Responds
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The real question for you is: Did Bonds take steroids at all? [/ QUOTE ] The real answer is we don't know....and it doesn't matter if it wasn't illegal or in violation of the rules of baseball. [/ QUOTE ] It matters in many people's opinions. Again: Do YOU think Barry Bonds took steroids at any time for any reason? Not your facts, what is YOUR opinion? Yes or no? It only matters to those who wish to impose their own definition of the cheating, disregarding completely the rules that govern the sport. [/ QUOTE ]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
