Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would you forgive Clemens and Bonds if they Apologized??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
    Yes amphetimines can heighten alertness/quick boost of energy and fight fatigue all short term. Continued use can cause, insomnia, weight loss, hallucinations, confusion, anxiety and some other undesirable effects.

    You say it proven that amphetimines improve performance maybe so but the same could be said of steroids.

    The jury is still out, theres another side that believes that steroid gives an edge to the user over those not using. Shortens recovery time from injuries, allows one to increase working out time, build lean muscle mass, add body weight which can in turn increase overall strength. Like speed it's believed that steroids can do damage if used over long periods.

    No one is going back 30 or 40 years, yes it was wrong to use greenies, can't undo what happened in the past. So whats your take, since they used greenie years ago lets just let steroids slide. You know that could never be. Makes no sense, they were doing greenies years ago, why be concerned about steroids. It's here, the ban accept it.
    Sure, there are negative side-effects to Greenies (Though a ballplayer who comes on this very site has stated the negative side-effects are over rated), as there are with steroids. The difference between the two being is that while one enhances performance immediately, and takes no work to reap from it's benefits, the other takes massive hours spent at the gym to reap from it's benefits, while risking potential injuries. If steroids were "better", why would players still risk taking Greenies knowing about these supposed horrific side-effects to them? Why would they take them when they can use steroids? I think the answer is because they work. The benefit is there. How much do these players rely on them, well, take a look at these allegations made by Grimsley detailed In the Grimsley Affidavit:
    Tejada’s name was mentioned when Grimsley described a conversation he had with Orioles teammates Tejada, Palmeiro and Sammy Sosa about how they would play after baseball banned amphetamines.
    http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...20095/1118/RSS

    That allegation right there, along with other ball players today admitting Greenies is rampant, clearly shows that there is (or was) a vast Amphetamines problem in baseball that players still try to get around today. Why Mitchell didn't try to get any information on that is beyond me. The report was a joke.
    Last edited by Skin & Bones; 02-20-2008, 08:52 PM.

    Comment


    • #47
      And Just to throw this out in the open:
      Amid discussion of steroids and human growth hormone, amid an atmosphere more tame than tempestuous, it was Representative John F. Tierney, a Massachusetts Democrat, who caught everyone’s attention when he asked why the number of major leaguers claiming therapeutic-use exemptions for attention deficit disorder had mushroomed to 103 this past season from 28 in 2006.

      To Mr. Tierney, the implication of the sharp increase was clear. Players were brazenly getting around the ban on amphetamines by making attention deficit disorder claims that allowed them to use stimulants like Ritalin and Adderall. Based on the 2007 numbers, Mr. Tierney said, the use of such stimulants among major leaguers was “almost eight times the adult use in our population.”

      How, Mr. Tierney wanted to know, had baseball allowed this to happen?
      And -
      Dr. Allan Lans, the Mets’ team psychiatrist from 1985 to 2003, was more blunt. “The No. 1 drug use of sports is really amphetamines,” he said. “Amphetamines are the real performance-enhancing drugs that people should always have been worried about.

      He said he was not surprised that players were seeking exemptions to use certain stimulants, and were citing attention deficit disorder. “The ballplayers who are smart want a legal way to get amphetamines, not an illegal one,” he said. “The doctors are easily conned.”
      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/sp...mulant.html?hp

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Skin & Bones View Post
        And Just to throw this out in the open:

        And -

        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/16/sp...mulant.html?hp
        I don't doubt that there was and still may be more greenie use than steroids but thats not because they improve performance more so than steroids if thats the point you may be trying to get across.

        Thats an easy one to figure out. Lot easier to just pop a pill rather than keep some sort of schedule to inject ones self. I'm not surprised , pop that pill then take the field......or take the needle and do some lifting. The pill is easier not of more value to performance.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
          I don't doubt that there was and still may be more greenie use than steroids but thats not because they improve performance more so than steroids if thats the point you may be trying to get across.

          Thats an easy one to figure out. Lot easier to just pop a pill rather than keep some sort of schedule to inject ones self. I'm not surprised , pop that pill then take the field......or take the needle and do some lifting. The pill is easier not of more value to performance.
          I'd argue that the pill is extremely valuable in specific games, especially if your physically not up to playing.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Skin & Bones View Post
            Sure, there are negative side-effects to Greenies (Though a ballplayer who comes on this very site has stated the negative side-effects are over rated), as there are with steroids. The difference between the two being is that while one enhances performance immediately, and takes no work to reap from it's benefits, the other takes massive hours spent at the gym to reap from it's benefits, while risking potential injuries. If steroids were "better", why would players still risk taking Greenies knowing about these supposed horrific side-effects to them? Why would they take them when they can use steroids? I think the answer is because they work. The benefit is there. How much do these players rely on them, well, take a look at these allegations made by Grimsley detailed In the Grimsley Affidavit:

            You just gave an answer to your line, your question that follows the bold letters. Thats why they prefer greenies. Isn't is easier to just drop a pill rather than use steroids which most users probably combine with working out.
            Steroids may be of the same value or better but taking that pill is less work, thats probably the reason, it's not because greenies ar better.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
              You just gave an answer to your line, your question that follows the bold letters. Thats why they prefer greenies. Isn't is easier to just drop a pill rather than use steroids which most users probably combine with working out.
              Steroids may be of the same value or better but taking that pill is less work, thats probably the reason, it's not because greenies ar better.
              I never said they were better, I just argued that if MLB really cared about it's drug problem they would of told Mitchell to investigate Amphetamines use by players as well.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by MyDogSparty View Post
                That would be a self-assumption on your part. It is possible to believe that Clemens used PEDs for an extended period without the hate and predjudice.
                Yes it was. I was basing my self assumption from what I have read on 4 baseball boards and what I have heard on ESPN radio. I should have said percentage wise, other then let some assume, I meant every fan and person of the general public. I have read to many "I hope that Clemens rots in jail" or other replies of the same content, on to many boards, to know that there is more hate of Clemens shown, then the assumption he just was a long term user, without hate being a factor. I can't believe how many so called baseball fans, are clicking their heels, over the fact that Clemens is the victim of a witch hunt<------IMO.......just so they can hate more on Clemens. You also have to figure in the Yankees hate and Yankees players hate, of the fans, that is still the biggest hate of any sport, on any board or paper that I have read.

                So IMO<-------Much hate and prejudice has been thrown at Clemens because of his fame and the fact that he was a Yankees player that sold his wares, months into the last few seasons.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by SHOELESSJOE3 View Post
                  I'm with you on that one, the game never was and never will be completely clean. If the fans wanted it that way we would never watch the game of baseball or in plain truth we would not watch or attend any sport.

                  I'm not going to shut out the game I love because it has flaws and rule breakers.

                  As for Roger, he can't win, admit or fight, he is now viewed differently than some years ago. Because there others who have not been brought up front won't change how he is viewed. It still goes back to the fact that he put himself in this position. He supplied the ammo by his supposed action. I say supposed because even though I think he was a user he still has to be considered innocent.

                  I agree with you on his stance but not on how the situation came about.

                  Selig/ ex owner of a small market club appoints Mitchell to head the investigation

                  George Mitchell/ Red Sox front office/ member of Congress/ chairman of the board for the drug company involved/ and I'm not sure but I believe that Scheer(?} who was at the hearing, works for Mitchell's law firm that he owns.(?) IMO<------- That is way to much conflict for Mitchell to have been appointed and I'm sure anyone who is standing in Clemens shoes, or is a fan of Clemens, feels the same way. Even a good percentage of neutral baseball fans would agree on that.

                  Red Sox/ no active players on list. Didn't resign Brian Donnelly just hours before the list was released. Gabe Kapler a body builder sat out a year in his youth to coach a Red Sox minor league team?????????? Kapler trying out for the Brewers this year????????

                  Brewers/ no active players on list that I know of.

                  Yankees Players/ have a target on their back, can't be this much of a coincidence with the wide spread use of PED's in MLB.

                  Yankee Hate/ #1 in the Nation, which makes many haters 2nd fav team "whoever is playing the Yankees."

                  MLB/ Letting most players collect HOF career stats before the player becomes a focal part of a investigation for the sake of making MLB look good on their stance on PED's in the sport.

                  MLB/ Selig and Fehr tap dancing around questions at a Congress hearing and lied about not supporting the silence of players and owners regarding the Mitchell report.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Skin & Bones View Post
                    I never said they were better, I just argued that if MLB really cared about it's drug problem they would of told Mitchell to investigate Amphetamines use by players as well.
                    I'm not sure if I stated that you said amphetimines were better or were a more effective performance substance. If I recall one of your posts contained an attachment, an article that said amphetimine use was more widespread than steroid use.

                    That article appeared to downplay steroid use, what about amphetimines. So my point of my later post, it was more convinient, easier to just drop a pill, greenies than to follow a schedule of steroid use which is often coupled with working out. Thats probably the reason greenies are preferred over steroids, not because greenies are a better, more effective performance booster.

                    I think they should have looked into, exposed more and discussed the use of amphetimines at the hearings. The Mitchell report should also have dug into the use of greenies but I think the explosion in recent times of the use of steroids made steroid use in the game their only target.

                    Both are bad and MLB should have done something about substance use years ago.
                    Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 02-21-2008, 05:15 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Forgive them for what? They cheated, whether at the time, it was against baseball rules or not. They both took substances, that without perspirations are illegal. As far as Andy goes, why do many think that he is better than Clemens. Because once backed up against the wall with no choice he, only then, decided to tell the truth. DO people really think that this is someone you can tell a kid is a role model. That if you do something illegal, and once questioned by the government, if then you tell the truth you are a good person. Maybe if once steroids and Hgh use had become a big issue, Andy had then come out and admitted it then possibly you have something. But he only did so once given no choice but admitting the truth. Only difference is that Clemens is more arrogant and probably at this point has convinced himself that he did not do them. Because he was once arguably the greatest pitcher to play the game. Now he is a guy that was in "Twilight of his carear" and used drugs to continue his carear.
                      Last edited by CJMorello; 02-21-2008, 08:40 AM. Reason: Gramar

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by zahavasdad View Post
                        Would you forgive Clemens and Bonds if they pulled an Andy Pettite and apologized and told Kids roids is Stupid and beg for mercy on the court?
                        Here's how I feel about this...

                        Imagine you have the perfect girlfriend. She's gorgeous, funny, cute, smart, and incredibly sexy. You are madly in love with her.

                        But, she gives you this vibe that she's cheating on you. You can't prove it, but you think she's fooling around.

                        Every time you bring it up, how friendly she is with certain guys, how she's often staying at "her sister's house", how funny she thinks some other guy is, etc. -- every time you bring it up, she gets defensive and calls you crazy and repeatedly denies cheating on you.

                        Years go by, and the same behavior persists, and she still repeatedly denies it. Then the relationship starts to come to an end. You just don't trust her anymore, even though you can't prove she's done anything. She senses the end but doesn't want to lose you, because you're awesome (and you are - pat yourself on the back) so she comes clean. She says she cheated on you, several times, mostly in the past - and that she didn't really know it was cheating because she was drunk, or in a different area code, or because it was a threesome. She's telling you because she wants forgiveness, she wants to start fresh, and she doesn't want the reputation as a CHEATER.

                        Do you forgive her?

                        I can't.
                        Swing and a drive! This one is deep! This one is... over the fence and into the neighbor's yard!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          If she was my girlfriend, the answer is no, it was my pick out of the population.

                          If she was a player on my favorite girls team where 40-60% are suspected cheaters, the answer is yes.

                          If she was a victim of a conducted witch hunt to single her out, my answer is yes.

                          If she was a victim of investigator with a conflict of interest, my answer is yes.

                          If she was the only one singled out in a league of non cheating players, my answer would be no.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Old Sweater View Post
                            If what Canseco and Caminiti said is true about the 40-60% using
                            Everybody knows there were more users than those named by Mitchell.

                            However, I wouldn't go by the proportional estimates of players who, by all accounts, tended to advocate their own usage and surround themselves with other users. I expect the clean players mostly kept their distance from those two.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              No I would not forgive them

                              They, and many like them, soiled the great game of baseball. They cheated and created "records" that are illegitimate. At least Mark McGwire had enough respect for baseball tradition to get out of the game, before he challenged a record.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                i wouldn't forgive 'em. even if they did apologize it'd be like "i'm just gonna say sorry so i don't look like the big piece of crap i am.".

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X