Cheaters Sometimes Prosper

by user Jetsrsuper

The thing about sports is that people cheat all the time, but we do not consider it illegal until you get caught.

In baseball, people use too much pine tar, use corked bats, scuff the ball. In hockey, goalies use equipment that is too big, players have the blades of their hockey sticks too large or bent at an illegal angle. In football, players put glue on their gloves so that it makes catching the ball easier. These are just several examples and there are many more. Until they're caught, nobody knows they cheated and they get away with it. In all sports people use performance enhancing drugs, whether steroids, another form of illegal drugs, or something that is technically legal.

People are quick to crucify Barry Bonds and the rest of baseball's recent stars. First of all, there still has to be proof that these guys actually took steroids. Now altough it is pretty obvious they did, without proof, you cant really do anything about it.

With regards to Barry Bonds, Bonds may be the excpetion. When he was younger, pre-steroids, he was a lilliputian of a man compared to what he looks like now. Pre-1999, which is about when he suddenly became a behemoth with muscles the size of Howard Johnson's chest, his stats probably would have gotten him into the hall of fame anyway. Pre-steroids, he was MVP 3 times, was one of only 2 members of the 40-40 club (at that time),

Member of 40-40 Club Pre-Steroids

<stats> Player=Barry Bonds Type=Batting Years=1996 </stats>

MVP 3 Times Pre-Steroids

<stats> Player=Barry Bonds Type=Batting Years=1990, 1992, 1993 </stats>

and was all around a great player. If proof exists for Bonds, which probably will happen, then the debate should be whether he deserves to get in pre-steroids, pre-cheating. Most people would say he disgraced the integrity of the game, and cheated, and should not get in to the Hall.

Maybe we should open up a separate wing in Cooperstown (or maybe a separate special Hall of Fame in the San Francisco area) for these steroid users. Jose Canseco has admitted to cheating and obviouisly will only end up in the Hall of Fame when steroids become legal (NEVER).

As for different types of illegal acts, like Pete Rose, if he bet on baseball, while involved with baseball, and it may have affected how he managed his team, even in the slightest, he disgraced himself and the integrity of the game, and there is no place for him in the Hall of Fame. His credentials as a player, as the all time hit leader and one of the hardest workers in baseball say that he deserves to be in the Hall. Maybe, if they ever open up the separate wing for cheaters, they can place Rose there as well.

Date

Sun 03/12/06, 11:34 am EST <pageTools></pageTools>

MetsJetsDevilsDraft Pick

1357 days ago

Score -1

I don't see how you can compare Rose and Bonds. Bonds cheated to get his stats, Rose earned everything he ever got. Rose does not deserve to make it to the Hall of Fame as a coach or an individual, but his career statistics are not tarnished. Bonds cheated to get the stats he did. His stats are not real. They are not the product of heart and talent, but chemicals. Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame and Bonds in the Hall of Cheaters with Rosa Ruiz.

Permalink | Reply

JetsrsuperWaterboy

1357 days ago

Score 0

Its not just about cheating vs not cheating, its also about the integrity of the game. I believe Rose should actually be allowed into that HALL, but what do they say on his plaque? Should they ignore his gambling on baseball, because that has become as big a part of his legacy as his stats and his days as a player. Bonds was a superstar pre-steroids, should we ignore that? Should we not allow people into the Hall of fame who had corked bats or too much pine tar? Should George Brett among others be immediately eliminated from even consideration because he was caught cheating?

Permalink | Reply

RoblefkoLegend

1357 days ago

Score 0

I agree with Jetsrsuper. You think anyone can hit 73 homers if they take steroids? If that's the case, 100s of players would have passed Roger Maris's 61 homers by now. Bonds was a superstar pre-steroids, and he is also a superstar compared to all the other steroids users now.

Permalink | Reply

JetsrsuperWaterboy

1357 days ago

Score 0

Exactly. How come that second baseman from the Tampa Bay Devil Rays (I forget his name maybe Alex Sanchez) hasn't hit 70 or 30 or 20 HRs. He was caught taking steroids. I dont condone steroids use, its illegal and it does denigrate the game, but he was a superstar before it. Hulk Hogan is in the WWE wrestling hall of fame and he obviously took steroids, why not Bonds, that cheating SOB.

Permalink | Reply

Anonymous Fanatic #1

1357 days ago

Score -1

How much did steroids really contribute to his stats? Take off 25% of his homers, let's say, and he's still got Hall of Fame numbers.

Permalink | Reply

Anonymous Fanatic #2

1357 days ago

Score -3

That is bull. If steroids didn't affect his performance he would not have taken. Them. we need to take step back and decide what the HOF is all about. Is it about performance as a player or is it about what type of person one is. If it is about performance than Rose has to make it in and Bonds has to be kept out. Rose earned everything with his performance. Bonds has to be discounted. You can't compare Bonds to Brett. Brett got caught once with having too much pine tar on his bat and there are serious questions if the ump was even right. You can't compare that with Bonds who has cheated in every at bat since 1997 or so. Pre Steorids Bonds was a great player, but so was Reggie Sanders. Most players without steroids start to fade lat in their career and sustain more and more injuries. Yet, Bonds got bigger and bigger and hit more and more HRs. His legacy was not made as a stick figured 40-40 pirate outfielder, but a roid raging cheating SF Giant. I say ban him from baseball for life and reinstate Shoeless Joe and Charlie Hustle. They may have gambled, but at least they didn't cheat!

Permalink | Reply

JetsrsuperWaterboy

1357 days ago

Score 1

Reggie Sanders was good, but he's no Hall of Famer. Truth be told, I dont care much for Bonds, he's a jackass, and he took steroids. Nevertheless, until its absolutely proven, he has to go in to the HOF. As for Rose, the rules are that if you bet on baseball, youre out for life. Same thing for Shoeless Joe, although there are doubts whether he threw the Series. The integrity of the game is the most important. Pete Rose-OUT. Shoeless Joe Jackson-OUT. Barry Bonds- question mark, if the vote were today, I would vote him in on the first ballot. If there's irrefutable proof that he juiced I say he should be out until he's dead and then they can vote to reinstate him. Same thing with Pete Rose, so maybe Shoeless Joe should be in. There never will be any cut and dry answers.

Permalink | Reply

MetsJetsDevilsDraft Pick

1357 days ago

Score -4

You still haven't answered the underlying question. If the most important thing is the integrity of the game how could you even consider a player who cheated EVERY TIME he went up to bat. Again, Pete Rose as a player never cheated and never bet on baseball. As a player he did not hurt the integrity of the game. There can't be much integrity to the game, on the other hand, if you cheat in ever at bat. Anyone who cares about the integrity of the game would have top say keep Bonds and the rest of the Roiders out of the Hall.

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

1357 days ago

Score -1

He didn't cheat "EVERY TIME he went up to bat." There is ZERO proof he took anything prior to 1998 and he was already a first ballot hall of famer by that time.

Permalink | Reply

MetsJetsDevilsDraft Pick

1357 days ago

Score -3

Oh, you are right. He only ruined the integrity of the game by cheating for 8 years. How many years does it take to be eliminated from the Hall? Another question that no one is asking is if the guy was a first ballot HOFer prior to 1998 why did he feel the need to cheat. Pete Rose played his whole career without cheating. Joe Dimaggio played his whole career without cheating. Ted Williams played his whole career without cheating. So why did Bonds, if he was as amazing as everyone says he was pre steroids, feel the need to cheat?

Permalink | Reply

Patrickburke1980All-American

1357 days ago

Score 0

great article, vote

Permalink | Reply

Bball3345Draft Pick

1357 days ago

Score -1

I can answer the question as to why he cheated. In 1998, McGwire and Sosa came onto the scene. They were inferior hitters to Bonds that were using steroids to take all the limelight. Bonds knew he was better than them so he tried to level the playing field by using steroids himself. When he leveled it, he rose to a whole new level. This question has been asked before in spite of what you said and this is the consensus answer.

Permalink | Reply

XinophDraft Pick

1356 days ago

Score -2

Cheaters especially prosper when they play for the Yankees (Giambi, A-Rod....)

Permalink | Reply

XinophDraft Pick

1356 days ago

Score -1

How many years does it take to be eliminated from the HOF? One or less.

Permalink | Reply

JetsrsuperWaterboy

1356 days ago

Score 0

Sosa is one of those guys with great stats that should never make it. He really disgraced the game. He was one of those smiley happy people, but its obvious he took some sort of steroids, he's been caught with corked bats. Its no wonder that he had to stop juicing last year and his stats were brutal. Nobody wants this bum and deservedly so.

Permalink | Reply

G-unit

1356 days ago

Score -1

Perhaps this is a subject for its own post (maybe 2), but do you think that the amount of money athletes make puts too much pressure on them . . . enough to make them take steroids? What if we capped salaries at that of the president of the US ($250k)? Before you spit back the standard rich owners line, maybe we could cap ticket prices or make it so that professional sports teams are no longer the only hugely profitable companies that use tax dollars to build their places of business. Would this work economically, or would such restrictions create some more lucrative form of black-market baseball? Can we wrap an economic harness around this?

Permalink | Reply

PeanMajor Leaguer

1356 days ago

Score 0

G-unit, i smell a long post from Awrigh01 in response to your post

Permalink | Reply

Juggernaut agmLittle Leaguer

1356 days ago

Score 1

G-Unit, who is "we?" The only entities that could impose such a cap would be the US government or Major League Baseball. The government has no right to do it, and MLB has no reason.

Permalink | Reply

G-unit

1355 days ago

Score -2

"We" are the people who pay these salaries with overpriced clothes, special radio, tv, and internet stations, and then further subsidize these games with at least three levels of tax dollars. I would like to see fans act first, but any government or conglomerate of governments in this country can regulate anything that it wants to really. The US government does not need rights to do anything. It can do anything that it wants, (be it officially or unofficially), so long as there is a strong enough economic or political impetus.

My concern stems from the increased use of steroids and other substances among young american athletes. The strongest arguments for abortion in the 1960s-70s were the shady backroom medical procedures that women were "forced" to have. Well, complications from steroids are producing a comparable if not worse horror. Young athletes taking unregulated doses of these substances that they purchase from some shade in the gym locker room develop horrible compluications. Most of them are forced to push the substances themselves in order to fund their own use. After complications arise (sexual complications, growths of foreign tissue in muscles and various vital organs, etc.), these young people have nowhere to go. Parents are a scary place to turn (at least that is what we say when it comes to pregnant teens), healthcare providers will certainly not be happy to pay for complications of such use, and too much attention drawn to an individual with such problems may lead to legal trouble. On top of that, any legal investigation will only begin with the user, and that user may be in further danger of reprisal like anyone in any illicit drug trade.

And this is all without getting into the long-term effects. You can't run away for a year and put your tumor up for adoption. Even though steroids have been around for a long time, exposing them as commonplace among professional athletes will only have the "everyone else is doing it" effect that young americans so love as a basis for engaging in activity. Awright01 will probably have more to post on this too.

Permalink | Reply