Defending Bonds

[Luis_Rivera]

Originally Posted by DiMaggio5CF

The only reason that baseball is on a witchhunt is because for the past eight-plus years, we've repeatedly seen magic tricks performed on the field and magic spells cast on players' bats

What pisses me off about the whole steroid thing is that uneducated fans jump at it like it's the reason for the HR explosion in the late 90's.

What about all the new hitter friendly parks that started popping up right around the time of the beginning of the "steroid era"??

The increased use of supplements (steroids fall into this category) and understanding of strength training??

The cracking down on pitchers throwing inside to take the plate?? It used to be considered foolish to try and do anything but "go with" an outside pitch, but now a guy like Jeter can hang over the plate and drive it to center field.

Changes In Equipment?? Much, MUCH more of the bat's total mass is concentrated in the barrel at this point compared to even the '70s. That's why there's more splintered bats today... the handle is so thin.

Seriously, people... I'm not trying to say that steroids don't have an effect... but they're a small fish in a big pond FULL of reasons why HRs have shot up. The media found a hell of a story when Caminitti told his story to SI a few years ago and ran with it. It fits too perfectly to be challenged by the average fan... and it's interesting to a lot of people, so the theory is continually perpetuated by the media and they're making a killing on it. The ignorance surrounding this whole situation is overwhelming to me at times. That's why I hate it.

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

my understanding though is that while drugs for asthma are to avoid a life threatening occurance, steroids, speed, and what not are not drugs for anythign that coudl be considered lethal if not taken.

Maybes there's the possible difference?

Drugs for asthma is steroid.

I think his main point is that a lot of drugs for regular disease, like amphetamine for ADD, can also act as booster for those without the disease, and some people are abusing that.

[Skipaway]

Originally Posted by Luis_Rivera

What pisses me off about the whole steroid thing is that uneducated fans jump at it like it's the reason for the HR explosion in the late 90's.

What about all the new hitter friendly parks that started popping up right around the time of the beginning of the "steroid era"??

The increased use of supplements (steroids fall into this category) and understanding of strength training??

The cracking down on pitchers throwing inside to take the plate?? It used to be considered foolish to try and do anything but "go with" an outside pitch, but now a guy like Jeter can hang over the plate and drive it to center field.

Changes In Equipment?? Much, MUCH more of the bat's total mass is concentrated in the barrel at this point compared to the '70s. That's why there's more splintered bats today... the handle is so thin.

Seriously, people... I'm not trying to say that steroids don't have an effect... but they're a small fish in a big pond FULL of reasons why HRs have shot up. The media found a hell of a story when Caminitti told his story to SI a few years ago and ran with it. It fits too perfectly to be challenged by the average fan... and it's interesting to a lot of people, so the theory is continually perpetuated by the media and they're making a killing on it. The ignorance surrounding this whole situation is overwhelming to me at times. That's why I hate it.

It would be lovely if we can have the list of all steroid users and when they started using, so we can analysis the effects. It's also quite likely to act differently on different people.

[Long_Long_Name]

Originally Posted by RchW

I generally agree with you but there is an edge of hypocrisy in all of these "no drug" positions. The position seems to be "no drugs that we don't like". The we being the political flavour of the day.

My son has mild asthma and needs to take a puffer before he plays hockey. I'm sure most people would not have a problem with that. The puffer allows my son enough relief to play at his skill level. The problem is another kid who does not have asthma can get the same boost in air flow as my son. should he be allowed to take the puffer? I know for a fact that significant numers of parents go to the doctor and say, "Bobby coughs a lot when he is on the ice", and out comes the script. There goes drug free sport out the window.

I don't know the answer but I'll bet a lot of opinions on drugs in sport change when son or daughter get very good. Sad commentary maybe but I see it every season, in every sport.

I think that the only good reason to ban subtances is to protect the players from hurting themselves. If steroids were legal and had no side effects, then there would be nothing wrong with using them. The puffer you're talking about, does it have any side effects? Is it really reprehensible, or is is simply a moral dilemma?

It reminds of of some cyclists that have naturally high rates of... I think it's white blood cells in their blood, which benefits them by making them stronger athletes. Several other cyclists get transfusions right before a competition to raise their white blood cells count, which is illegal, because it just happens that having too high a count is dangerous for the cyclists. With that in mind, what generally happens is that if the cyclist can prove that he or she has an abnormally high rate, their name is cleared, and they get no sanctions. However, I think that's a flawed position; if you're going to punish people for trying to get at the same level as their opponents, an unhealthy level, why are the people with high blood cell counts allowed to race at all, if it poses a threat to their own health? Why would artificial danger not be tolerated, but natural dangerous disposition be tolerated?