Official argue about all things Barry Bonds GOAT thread

[samsonh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You only admitted Hank used greenies once after that was brought to your attention. You were trying to say he was a habitual, admitted user and got called out on it.


[/ QUOTE ]

You sir, are the one being outright dishonest.

I previously posted that Hank Aaron admitted to using amphetamines, and cited the book and page number on which it was done.

That is a fact.

I never said Hank was a habitual user.

That is you lying.

[ QUOTE ]

There are several things with your Bonds arguements that bother me.


[/ QUOTE ]

It bothers me when you make patently false assertions as to what I have said, in the process of calling *me* dishonest.

[ QUOTE ]
But when you say Bonds never tested positive as proof of something it blows my mind.


[/ QUOTE ]

I've only claimed it to be proof that he hasn't violated the MLB Steroid Policy as written, which requires a failed test to consider a player in violation, short of an admission or conviction.

No matter how you feel otherwise, it is an undisputed fact that Barry Bonds has not failed a test, has not been convicted, nor has he admitted use.

It is *the* clearly stated burden of proof to be considered by the MLB Steroid policy....yet you have a problem with me citing it.

Sweet....

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you really trying to say that when you cited Hank's usage you were only saying he used one time? hahahaha. Anyone can go back and read your post. I believe a poster 2 or 3 posts later called you out and you completely ignored the fact. In fact, even within the past few days you have put Hank into the same breath as admitted dopers, without adding that he only used once. Very similar to the rugby argument you had where neglected to add that the competition was only among 4 teams. And then you completely ignore the point about the Clear being untestable, again. Done arguing.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you really trying to say that when you cited Hank's usage you were only saying he used one time? hahahaha.


[/ QUOTE ]

I certainly didn't say it was habitual, as you've claimed.

[ QUOTE ]

Very similar to the rugby argument you had where neglected to add that the competition was only among 4 teams.


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, that's what this is about.....a rugby fan scorned.

And you're not really here to talk about Bonds....you're here because you're mad at *me*.

How cute...

PM me your name and address, I'll mail you out something from the fan club, and maybe a signed picture.

[ QUOTE ]

And then you completely ignore the point about the Clear being untestable, again.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because, like most of your arguments, they aren't based in reality, and just made up. The clear is detectable by urine test as administered by MLB.

But don't let the facts get in the way...

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Very similar to the rugby argument you had where neglected to add that the competition was only among 4 teams.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, not to steer too much off-topic, but you got to be three shingles short of a roof or something if you are really making this argument.

1. OP makes thread about hypothetical group of american football players getting 6 months to prepare and being able to compete on national stage in rugby.

2. RedBean posts excerpt from article detailing historical event in which group of american football players get 6 months to prepare and go on to win on national stage in rugby.

3. Guys like you cry foul "ITS NOT THE SAME! NOT EVEN CLOSE! YOU DIDN'T MENTION IT WAS ONLY 4 TEAMS! YOU ARE DISHONEST!"

4. To which I post the link to the entire article I cited, pointing out that no where does it mention there were only 4 teams...something I was sincerely unaware of outside that piece....despite it not fundamentally changing the substance of the similarity.....and I reiterate that I am not drawing any conclusion, I just thought those interested in the discussion would find an extremely similar situation to be somewhat interesting and worth a read.

5. To which guys like you stomp your feet and flail your arms and insist I am "dishonest".....for my posting of historical fact.

I mean, seriously.

[samsonh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Very similar to the rugby argument you had where neglected to add that the competition was only among 4 teams.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, not to steer too much off-topic, but you got to be three shingles short of a roof or something if you are really making this argument.

1. OP makes thread about hypothetical group of american football players getting 6 months to prepare and being able to compete on national stage in rugby.

2. RedBean posts excerpt from article detailing historical event in which group of american football players get 6 months to prepare and go on to win on national stage in rugby.

3. Guys like you cry foul "ITS NOT THE SAME! NOT EVEN CLOSE! YOU DIDN'T MENTION IT WAS ONLY 4 TEAMS! YOU ARE DISHONEST!"

4. To which I post the link to the entire article I cited, pointing out that no where does it mention there were only 4 teams...something I was sincerely unaware of outside that piece....despite it not fundamentally changing the substance of the similarity.....and I reiterate that I am not drawing any conclusion, I just thought those interested in the discussion would find an extremely similar situation to be somewhat interesting and worth a read.

5. To which guys like you stomp your feet and flail your arms and insist I am "dishonest".....for my posting of historical fact.

I mean, seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYI,
I completely agree that the football players would win. The first clip of rugby I have ever seen was the Youtube clip that was posted. You shouldn't assume things.

You never said Hank was a habitual user, yet you classified him as a drug cheat. Had you then mentioned that he only used once it would be different, but you conveniently left that for others to reveal.

I'll give you that the Clear was not illegal, but only because the knowledge of the Clear did not exist. The first that authorities knew about the Clear was when Graham mailed in a sample. Yet again it comes back to the spirit of the rule. Did Bonds violate steroid policy? Maybe not. But only because the policy was not up to date. And you seem willing to admit that point...

[chev9]

Marcus Allen was at his party? Barry must be a good guy. Marcus wouldn't hang out with bad people, you know other than OJ Simpson anyway.

Put me in the camp that thinks Barry is one of the GOAT, if not the greatest, has no problem with the steroids, yet thinks there's a 99% chance he's a complete douchebag.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
Marcus Allen was at his party? Barry must be a good guy. Marcus wouldn't hang out with bad people, you know other than OJ Simpson anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

I take it your not so up to date on the relationship between Marcus and OJ.

But, don't let that get in the way of you trying to draw comparisions between someone found liable for killing people and someone who hits curveballs for a living.

[chev9]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Marcus Allen was at his party? Barry must be a good guy. Marcus wouldn't hang out with bad people, you know other than OJ Simpson anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

I take it your not so up to date on the relationship between Marcus and OJ.

But, don't let that get in the way of you trying to draw comparisions between someone found liable for killing people and someone who hits curveballs for a living.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't even close to comparing Barry and OJ, and I definitely am not up to date with the OJ/Marcus relationship, who gives a [censored] about that. My point was that dropping names of people that attended his party is a funny way to argue that he must not be a bad guy. Lots of famous, rich people have parties where tons of other famous people attend. It doesn't make them good people.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
My point was that dropping names of people that attended his party is a funny way to argue that he must not be a bad guy. Lots of famous, rich people have parties where tons of other famous people attend. It doesn't make them good people.

[/ QUOTE ]

BSF had asked for any example of where Bonds had where he was friendly with teammates, so I posted it in response to him as it was relevant to what he asked.

Sorry if it didn't conform to your expectations.

Take a number and get in line.

[ QUOTE ]

I wasn't even close to comparing Barry and OJ.


[/ QUOTE ]

Riiight...

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

I completely agree that the football players would win. The first clip of rugby I have ever seen was the Youtube clip that was posted. You shouldn't assume things.


[/ QUOTE ]

Speaking of assuming things, I think the football players wouldn't stand a chance.....so I'm not sure how you are "completely agreeing", when we have different viewpoints.

Like I said, I merely posted a historical fact that showed it had happened before.

I never concluded that it would happen again, and I personally think it wouldn't be possible.

[ QUOTE ]

You never said Hank was a habitual user, yet you classified him as a drug cheat.


[/ QUOTE ]

Using the criteria as defined by the person I was debating, who defined "cheating" as even one-time use, in order to display his own hypocrisy as he quickly backed off that stance when he discovered Aaron himself had once admitted to PED use.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll give you that the Clear was not illegal,


[/ QUOTE ]

Nice of you to be so generous, considering you had asserted the opposite until I threw indisputable proof in your face.

Funny how that works, huh?

[ QUOTE ]

Did Bonds violate steroid policy? Maybe not.


[/ QUOTE ]

There is no maybe. It is indisputable fact that Barry Bonds has not violated the MLB Steroid Policy.

[samsonh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I completely agree that the football players would win. The first clip of rugby I have ever seen was the Youtube clip that was posted. You shouldn't assume things.


[/ QUOTE ]

Speaking of assuming things, I think the football players wouldn't stand a chance.....so I'm not sure how you are "completely agreeing", when we have different viewpoints.

Like I said, I merely posted a historical fact that showed it had happened before.

I never concluded that it would happen again, and I personally think it wouldn't be possible.

[ QUOTE ]

You never said Hank was a habitual user, yet you classified him as a drug cheat.


[/ QUOTE ]

Using the criteria as defined by the person I was debating, who defined "cheating" as even one-time use, in order to display his own hypocrisy as he quickly backed off that stance when he discovered Aaron himself had once admitted to PED use.

[ QUOTE ]
I'll give you that the Clear was not illegal,


[/ QUOTE ]

Nice of you to be so generous, considering you had asserted the opposite until I threw indisputable proof in your face.

Funny how that works, huh?

[ QUOTE ]

Did Bonds violate steroid policy? Maybe not.


[/ QUOTE ]

There is no maybe. It is indisputable fact that Barry Bonds has not violated the MLB Steroid Policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you wonder how I can call you intellectually dishonest? LOL. Take every point in my post that you cannot answer and avoid it. I likey. I take your avoidance as a yes that Bonds did take steroids.