Don't be a brownoser-The Bluenoser Interview - Page 2

canadiancreed · 11-22-2013, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpriske

As canadiancreed (I think) was trying to remind us, there was a time when players openly gambled on games. (Though I think there is a BIG difference between a player trying to play better and one that is trying to play worse).

Actually I was trying to state that no precedent on being illigial makes things ban worthy....or something like that. I forgot where i was going with that one.

Bluenoser · 11-22-2013, 03:07 PM

I thought it was a good discussion. I think at the end of the day we all have our feelings about who should be in the HOF and what criteria they should meet. Some have similar feelings, others are far apart. Gotta respect them all.

For me, character will always be part of the measuring stick. I don't begrudge pro athletes the big salaries they make. Their industry generates that kind of revenue, then they certainly deserve a fair share of it. They are a big reason why it generates those $$$.

Having said that, I do begrudge them when they ask for more if the industry isn't generating it. I believe it has to be a two way street.

I also believe that if they're going to take the publics money to play baseball for a living, they have a responsibility to represent the game as a professional in all aspects, and not just with stats. Baseball fans of all ages should be able to admire baseball players not only for their skill, but also for the way they carry themselves as human beings.

That's just me though.

The Wolf · 11-22-2013, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpriske

Steroids were not against the rules of mlb until 2001.

THEY WERE ILLEGAL IN 1988.

You think that illegal acts that aren't specifically mentioned in baseball rules are somehow legal? Murder isn't mentioned in baseball rules. Neither is rape. Nor war crimes.

Steroid users were and are all criminals. Get that through your head. They weren't nobly trying to play better baseball for the fans; they were criminal drug users, breaking the law for their personal profit. In other words, evil and despicable scum.

rpriske · 11-22-2013, 05:31 PM

I tried to change the subject back, but...

This is just blatantly untrue Wolf. It is fairly well documented that the majority of players who were using steroids were doing so to aid recovery from injuries. That means a prescription. That means they are legal.

I say majority as I am one of the people who believe that EVERYONE used steroids through this period (and before). Using does not mean abusing (not to say there weren't people abusing... but let's be honest, there are people who abuse cough medicine or any other legal medications). A player who was told that there was a drug he could take LEGALLY that would help him heal faster or work through an injury would do so. It was their primary purpose after all.

And of course there are plenty of studies that now so that this is pretty much the only benefit that ball players got from steroids, but there are others who say differently. I accept that it isn't clear.

Now that is not allowed. Okay. No problem. But to claim it wasn't allowed through the 90's is a base fabrication at worst or a misunderstanding of the situation at best.

I laugh at this because it reminds me of the ridiculous fights against marijuana now, despite the REAMS of information that shows its positive medicinal benefits. I could probably find five people that I know within a day who have prescriptions, and I bet you (or people like you) would claim they are breaking the law, when they certainly aren't.

The Game · 11-22-2013, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpriske

It is fairly well documented that the majority of players who were using steroids were doing so to aid recovery from injuries. That means a prescription. That means they are legal.

So every player from Canseco to Braun who took steroids was injured? Also not every player who was injured needs to take steroids to recover. Not every doctor will superscribe steroids for an injury.

Side note:Look at Bonds now he is back to normal 1992 size.
Google Image Result for

injury log · 11-22-2013, 06:24 PM

Steroids have been banned in baseball since 1991. There wasn't any kind of comprehensive testing before 2003, but steroids were certainly against the rules of the game.

I don't personally think it matters so much if steroids were illegal (against federal law). For one thing, there are lots of illegal things a baseball player might do that most of us would agree should not disqualify him from the Hall of Fame - smoking pot for example. For another, when we're talking about cheating in sport, I don't see why federal law is relevant. What matters is the spirit of the activity - whether it's intended to compromise the fairness and integrity of the game - and not whether someone can go to jail for it. And by that benchmark, I don't even think it matters if steroids were explicitly banned by baseball, since I think anyone using them would know they're doing so to gain an unfair advantage over others, regardless of what the rulebook says.

All that said, I think there's room to have a much more nuanced discussion about this issue than usually takes place. At the very least, we can acknowledge that Bonds and Clemens were not isolated examples of players using steroids to gain an unfair advantage over everyone else. Rather, they were using steroids to try to gain an advantage over a lot of other players who were also using steroids. That doesn't excuse what they did, but if we exclude from the Hall only players who were known users, I think we have to accept that we'll be rewarding with Hall induction a lot of players who were just smart enough not to get caught. Now that may be better than admitting a lot of known steroid users to the Hall, but it still doesn't seem right to me.

The Wolf · 11-22-2013, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpriske

This is just blatantly untrue Wolf. It is fairly well documented that the majority of players who were using steroids were doing so to aid recovery from injuries. That means a prescription. That means they are legal.

Lies. Your entire post was nonsense. Try to sell that crap elsewhere.

Padreman · 11-22-2013, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Lies. Your entire post was nonsense. Try to sell that crap elsewhere.

Yeah sorry wolf is right. It just does not sound right maybe some did but majority did it for money

Gil Thorp · 11-22-2013, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpriske

That means a prescription. That means they are legal.

So I guess that makes doctor shopping and using store front "pain clinics" to obtain Oxycontin cool?

rpriske · 11-23-2013, 10:46 AM

Wow, you guys have been completely brainwashed by the anti-drug crowd.

rpriske · 11-23-2013, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Game

So every player from Canseco to Braun who took steroids was injured?

Where does 'a majority' equal 'every'?

(And I was quite clear about Braun. Players caught using after they were made illegal by MLB are breaking the rules of the game.)

The Wolf · 11-23-2013, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpriske

Wow, you guys have been completely brainwashed by the anti-drug crowd.

You post outright lies and try to justify criminal drug use and then you insult people who not only have better morals and common sense than you do and also know more about the subject than you do? Please go away.

rpriske · 11-23-2013, 10:56 AM

I should know better than to get in this discussion. There is no convincing people once they get on their high horse. I just have to accept that the Hall of Fame is a meaningless institution.

It just disappoints me.

Pete Rose and Joe Jackson should be in as well (though with an explanation as to why they were banned from baseball as part of their record history there).

The entire 'morals clause' is a joke as long as people like Ty Cobb are in.

Here is a good article about it from the National Post a couple of years ago (without debating steroids).

rpriske · 11-23-2013, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

You post outright lies and try to justify criminal drug use and then you insult people who not only have better morals and common sense than you do and also know more about the subject than you do? Please go away.

'outright lies' - THIS is a lie.

'justify criminal drug use' - THIS is a lie.

'insult' - I suppose people could take it that way, but my accusation is against the media anti-drug pr campaign that Americans are constantly bombarded with.

'better morals' - THIS is unmeasurable.

'common sense' - THIS is unmeasurable (and ridiculous if you include yourself on that list, as you have proven over and over on these boards that you have none)

'know more about the subject that you do' - THIS is unlikely, but possible. Not with YOU, of course, as you are clearly a blind crusader, but with the others, I don't presume to judge.

'please go away' - That is rich coming from the most generally disliked person on these boards, from what I can tell.

Questdog · 11-23-2013, 12:48 PM

Personally, I don't think morality off the field should be considered an issue. You never really can know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys; you can only know the public perception of them. But morality ON the field should be an issue and that is where Bonds and the his drug using buddies fail miserably. It is also where Joe Jackson and his mates failed even more miserably.

No matter how talented a player is, someone who makes a mockery of the game cannot be called one of its greats. The public needs to be able to trust the game is real and PED users and game fixers both violated this trust.

iverbure · 11-23-2013, 03:11 PM

the majority of the public is just pissed about roids in general cause for years they were fooled into thinking these men were doing it legit and Canseco told everyone they were on roids. The public laughed and assumed Canseco was just trying to get back in the spotlight. Several years later they all figured out he was right and they all felt stupid. Hence the crusade against roids.

anyone who actually studied up on performance enhancers and steroids rather than spouting off the usual negative rhetoric regarding their usage probably is someone you should engage in discussion so you can educate yourself.

The Wolf · 11-23-2013, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpriske

'outright lies' - THIS is a lie.

'justify criminal drug use' - THIS is a lie.

'insult' - I suppose people could take it that way, but my accusation is against the media anti-drug pr campaign that Americans are constantly bombarded with.

'better morals' - THIS is unmeasurable.

'common sense' - THIS is unmeasurable (and ridiculous if you include yourself on that list, as you have proven over and over on these boards that you have none)

'know more about the subject that you do' - THIS is unlikely, but possible. Not with YOU, of course, as you are clearly a blind crusader, but with the others, I don't presume to judge.

'please go away' - That is rich coming from the most generally disliked person on these boards, from what I can tell.

Wrong. You have posted nothing but lies. Stop it, your defense/endorsement of criminal drug use is embarrassing.

Padreman · 11-23-2013, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Wrong. You have posted nothing but lies. Stop it, your defense/endorsement of criminal drug use is embarrassing.

Lol

rpriske · 11-23-2013, 04:02 PM

And with that, Wolf goes back on my ignore list. I had him off for a while, but he is such an ignorant blowhard that he really makes this board awful.

Luckily there is an easy fix. Goodbye.

Padreman · 11-23-2013, 04:12 PM

Ok guys lets take it easy here poor Bluenoser I feel bad for him

all he wanted was to unite us all

11-23-2013, 03:11 PM	#36
iverbure Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 71	the majority of the public is just pissed about roids in general cause for years they were fooled into thinking these men were doing it legit and Canseco told everyone they were on roids. The public laughed and assumed Canseco was just trying to get back in the spotlight. Several years later they all figured out he was right and they all felt stupid. Hence the crusade against roids. anyone who actually studied up on performance enhancers and steroids rather than spouting off the usual negative rhetoric regarding their usage probably is someone you should engage in discussion so you can educate yourself. Last edited by iverbure; 11-23-2013 at 03:34 PM.

11-23-2013, 04:12 PM	#40
Padreman Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2013 Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico (formally San Diego, CA.) Posts: 4,140 Blog Entries: 1	Ok guys lets take it easy here poor Bluenoser I feel bad for him all he wanted was to unite us all __________________ Chargers= Despicable Traitors

11-22-2013, 03:07 PM	#22
Bluenoser Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In The Moment Posts: 13,680	I thought it was a good discussion. I think at the end of the day we all have our feelings about who should be in the HOF and what criteria they should meet. Some have similar feelings, others are far apart. Gotta respect them all. For me, character will always be part of the measuring stick. I don't begrudge pro athletes the big salaries they make. Their industry generates that kind of revenue, then they certainly deserve a fair share of it. They are a big reason why it generates those $$$. Having said that, I do begrudge them when they ask for more if the industry isn't generating it. I believe it has to be a two way street. I also believe that if they're going to take the publics money to play baseball for a living, they have a responsibility to represent the game as a professional in all aspects, and not just with stats. Baseball fans of all ages should be able to admire baseball players not only for their skill, but also for the way they carry themselves as human beings. That's just me though.

11-22-2013, 05:31 PM	#24
rpriske Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Spencerville, ON, Canada Posts: 23,972 Blog Entries: 1	I tried to change the subject back, but... This is just blatantly untrue Wolf. It is fairly well documented that the majority of players who were using steroids were doing so to aid recovery from injuries. That means a prescription. That means they are legal. I say majority as I am one of the people who believe that EVERYONE used steroids through this period (and before). Using does not mean abusing (not to say there weren't people abusing... but let's be honest, there are people who abuse cough medicine or any other legal medications). A player who was told that there was a drug he could take LEGALLY that would help him heal faster or work through an injury would do so. It was their primary purpose after all. And of course there are plenty of studies that now so that this is pretty much the only benefit that ball players got from steroids, but there are others who say differently. I accept that it isn't clear. Now that is not allowed. Okay. No problem. But to claim it wasn't allowed through the 90's is a base fabrication at worst or a misunderstanding of the situation at best. I laugh at this because it reminds me of the ridiculous fights against marijuana now, despite the REAMS of information that shows its positive medicinal benefits. I could probably find five people that I know within a day who have prescriptions, and I bet you (or people like you) would claim they are breaking the law, when they certainly aren't.

11-22-2013, 06:24 PM	#26
injury log Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 9,162	Steroids have been banned in baseball since 1991. There wasn't any kind of comprehensive testing before 2003, but steroids were certainly against the rules of the game. I don't personally think it matters so much if steroids were illegal (against federal law). For one thing, there are lots of illegal things a baseball player might do that most of us would agree should not disqualify him from the Hall of Fame - smoking pot for example. For another, when we're talking about cheating in sport, I don't see why federal law is relevant. What matters is the spirit of the activity - whether it's intended to compromise the fairness and integrity of the game - and not whether someone can go to jail for it. And by that benchmark, I don't even think it matters if steroids were explicitly banned by baseball, since I think anyone using them would know they're doing so to gain an unfair advantage over others, regardless of what the rulebook says. All that said, I think there's room to have a much more nuanced discussion about this issue than usually takes place. At the very least, we can acknowledge that Bonds and Clemens were not isolated examples of players using steroids to gain an unfair advantage over everyone else. Rather, they were using steroids to try to gain an advantage over a lot of other players who were also using steroids. That doesn't excuse what they did, but if we exclude from the Hall only players who were known users, I think we have to accept that we'll be rewarding with Hall induction a lot of players who were just smart enough not to get caught. Now that may be better than admitting a lot of known steroid users to the Hall, but it still doesn't seem right to me.

11-23-2013, 10:46 AM	#30
rpriske Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Spencerville, ON, Canada Posts: 23,972 Blog Entries: 1	Wow, you guys have been completely brainwashed by the anti-drug crowd.

11-23-2013, 10:56 AM	#33
rpriske Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Spencerville, ON, Canada Posts: 23,972 Blog Entries: 1	I should know better than to get in this discussion. There is no convincing people once they get on their high horse. I just have to accept that the Hall of Fame is a meaningless institution. It just disappoints me. Pete Rose and Joe Jackson should be in as well (though with an explanation as to why they were banned from baseball as part of their record history there). The entire 'morals clause' is a joke as long as people like Ty Cobb are in. Here is a good article about it from the National Post a couple of years ago (without debating steroids).

11-23-2013, 12:48 PM	#35
Questdog Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: In a dark, damp cave where I'm training slugs to run the bases...... Posts: 16,142	Personally, I don't think morality off the field should be considered an issue. You never really can know who are the good guys and who are the bad guys; you can only know the public perception of them. But morality ON the field should be an issue and that is where Bonds and the his drug using buddies fail miserably. It is also where Joe Jackson and his mates failed even more miserably. No matter how talented a player is, someone who makes a mockery of the game cannot be called one of its greats. The public needs to be able to trust the game is real and PED users and game fixers both violated this trust.

11-23-2013, 04:02 PM	#39
rpriske Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Spencerville, ON, Canada Posts: 23,972 Blog Entries: 1	And with that, Wolf goes back on my ignore list. I had him off for a while, but he is such an ignorant blowhard that he really makes this board awful. Luckily there is an easy fix. Goodbye.