Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MLB To Investigate Steroid Use By Players!

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

  • #76
    Taco De Muerte: [taking steroids] will cause harm, but nowhere near as bad as someone who improperly abuses the drug.
    what is the best way that one can properly abuse drugs?

    To be honest with you, the" benefits " steroids provide an athlete doesn't overcome the negative reprecussions of the drug.
    there are many living, breathing people, and their doctors, who disagree.
    "you don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. just get people to stop reading them." -ray bradbury

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by west coast orange and black
      the idea that the records are the most sacred, that the mythology of the game is more important than what has actually taken place during the recent past is a peculiar one to me.
      Why would the recent past touch the same nerves for us? We've become desensitized to the home run. We've seen 60 homers not only hit multiple times, but easily surpassed multiple times in recent years. For 100 years before that, the number meant something. Now, not so much. Seems only natural for people to appreciate the "good ol'" days more, when what they held in high regard has been made a mockery of.

      "protecting mythology" without involving a "moral crusade" seems impossible to me.
      how can the mythology of the past be protected without looking at how the mythology was created?

      there is nothing laughable about wanting to learn the truth, is there?
      Not really sure what you're getting at here WC. Seems you're beating around the bush, instead of coming right out with what you want to say.

      What truth are you searching for? Are you speaking of greenies?

      Is there a "moral crusade" involved in appreciating baseball when it wasn't a strikeout or homerun video game like atmosphere?

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by west coast orange and black
        SHOELESSJOE3: Fair or not fair, coming down harder in todays time than the past, easy to see why, the record book was being rewritten.


        the idea that the records are the most sacred, that the mythology of the game is more important than what has actually taken place during the recent past is a peculiar one to me.

        "protecting mythology" without involving a "moral crusade" seems impossible to me.
        how can the mythology of the past be protected without looking at how the mythology was created?

        there is nothing laughable about wanting to learn the truth, is there?

        I'm not using the word sacred. My post about coming down harder today on suspect rule breakers was not to dismiss rule breakers in the history of the game but to get across the following. With all the rule breaking in the past the game was on a fairly even keel some spikes up some downs but there was never an offensive explosion like there was in the 1990s, 50 and 60 almost commonplace and even two at 70.

        Again what took place in 1920s was a different story, changes in rules, the ball and hitting style explain why offense took off, thatwas no secret.

        What took place in the 1990s was just more evident, up front and I think that had a great deal to do with the position MLB took on the steroids issue. Something baseball should have done years ago with greenies and steroids.
        Last edited by SHOELESSJOE3; 04-02-2006, 06:51 AM.

        Comment


        • #79
          the idea that the records are the most sacred, that the mythology of the game is more important than what has actually taken place during the recent past is a peculiar one to me.

          Why would the recent past touch the same nerves for us? We've become desensitized to the home run. We've seen 60 homers not only hit multiple times, but easily surpassed multiple times in recent years. For 100 years before that, the number meant something. Now, not so much. Seems only natural for people to appreciate the "good ol'" days more, when what they held in high regard has been made a mockery of.

          not everyone has become desensitized to the homerun, sultan, just those, it seems, who are stuck on the past. were last year's numbers lost on you?

          . . . . . . . . .

          "protecting mythology" without involving a "moral crusade" seems impossible to me.
          how can the mythology of the past be protected without looking at how the mythology was created?

          there is nothing laughable about wanting to learn the truth, is there?

          Not really sure what you're getting at here WC. Seems you're beating around the bush, instead of coming right out with what you want to say.

          What truth are you searching for? Are you speaking of greenies?

          Is there a "moral crusade" involved in appreciating baseball when it wasn't a strikeout or homerun video game like atmosphere?


          i am not limiting *the truth* of yesteryear to uppers, much like i do not limit *the truth* of the recent past to steroids.

          my point is simply this: the present inquiry/investigation is of particular players, not the substances themselves.
          the i/i will not "follow wherever it leads" -- baseball continues to step into the batter's box with its eyes closed.
          Last edited by west coast orange and black; 04-04-2006, 02:43 AM.
          "you don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. just get people to stop reading them." -ray bradbury

          Comment

          Ad Widget

          Collapse
          Working...
          X