Barry Bonds: 2nd All-Time in HR

[The_Met_Threat]

We call them cheaters just as you call Bonds a cheater, yet you have no proof. You're a hypocrite.

We are not trying to prove Ruth cheated. You are trying to prove that Bonds cheated, and you have not done that.

if you are going to accuse someone of somthing you should be able to back it up correct?? i mean that's what you bonds apologists scream at us everyday.

If you are asking me to agree to that, then ultimately you are wrong about bonds, and the Bonds Haters arguments are all invalid.

[The Miner Part 2]

We call them cheaters just as you call Bonds a cheater, yet you have no proof. You're a hypocrite.

We are not trying to prove Ruth cheated. You are trying to prove that Bonds cheated, and you have not done that.

if you are going to accuse someone of somthing you should be able to back it up correct?? i mean that's what you bonds apologists scream at us everyday.

If you are asking me to agree to that, then ultimately you are wrong about bonds, and the Bonds Haters arguments are all invalid.

so youre not answering the question?

[PlayingWithFire]

We call them cheaters just as you call Bonds a cheater, yet you have no proof. You're a hypocrite.

We are not trying to prove Ruth cheated. You are trying to prove that Bonds cheated, and you have not done that.

if you are going to accuse someone of somthing you should be able to back it up correct?? i mean that's what you bonds apologists scream at us everyday.

You guys started the accusations, you guys back it up first. Oh, you can't

[The_Met_Threat]

Look at this as if it were a criminal court room. The Bonds apoligists are the defense we don't have to prove anything. You are the prosecution and you are trying to prove that Bonds took steroids. Me saying that Ruth cheated, whether it is true or false, has nothing to do with the innocence of bonds. You have changed the subject into a prosecution of Ruth, in which you are trying to defend. This is a thread about Barry Bonds, convince me, with proof that he has taken steroids and "cheated". I don't think you have admitted that there is proof that he took steroids, and you seem to be walking around the subject of proof against Bonds and focusing on proof against Ruth. There is none in either case. So i give you an ultimatum...

A) Call Bonds a cheater, but also admit ruth, aaron and other certain HOFer's cheated too

B) they are all innocent

[The Miner Part 2]

Me saying that Ruth cheated, whether it is true or false, has nothing to do with the innocence of bonds.

no kidding. but if you blurt out lies during a thread do you not deserve to be called out on it?

[The_Met_Threat]

Me saying that Ruth cheated, whether it is true or false, has nothing to do with the innocence of bonds.

no kidding. but if you blurt out lies during a thread do you not deserve to be called out on it?

umm i think you just summed up what this thread is. Bonds haters blurting out lies, and the bonds apoligists calling them out on it. May i remind you that you havent backed up your claims of "*".

[teddy ballgame]

we don't have to prove anything.

A) Call Bonds a cheater, but also admit ruth, aaron and other certain HOFer's cheated too

B) they are all innocent

You are completely contradicting yourself. So, you don't have to prove Ruth cheated, but we have to agree that if Bonds did, they all did? I'll agree they all cheated when you prove it, not just say "I don't have to prove he did but you have to admint he did."

Me saying that Ruth cheated, whether it is true or false, has nothing to do with the innocence of bonds.

Ruth and Bonds innocence are unrelated, but we have to agree that they either both cheated or are both innocent?

[The Miner Part 2]

just keep changing the subject.

you all call ruth a cheater and all you have to back it up is, well nothing.

[PinotResa]

Ruth used a trick bat at times, it's fact. Everyone knew he was a cheater and didn't care because they knew just about everyone did it. Ruth threw spitballs and scuffed the ball as well, like many others. It's noted that Ruth was one of the more notorious cheaters (likely because he was good too) in many articles of the day. Again no one really cared. The trick bat is noted by the commishioners office, Baseball Abstract and in the 1923 Reach Guide

Aaron used amphetamines/greenies. It's in his own autobiography.

Just about everyone has cheated, get over it.

[The_Met_Threat]

we don't have to prove anything.

A) Call Bonds a cheater, but also admit ruth, aaron and other certain HOFer's cheated too

B) they are all innocent

You are completely contradicting yourself. So, you don't have to prove Ruth cheated, but we have to agree that if Bonds did, they all did? I'll agree they all cheated when you prove it, not just say "I don't have to prove he did but you have to admint he did."

Me saying that Ruth cheated, whether it is true or false, has nothing to do with the innocence of bonds.

Ruth and Bonds innocence are unrelated, but we have to agree that they either both cheated or are both innocent?

To your first response: I can answer this quite simply. You base your assumptions that Bonds is a cheater on a book and some rumors. I base my assumption that Ruth cheated on the same thing. There is no evidence or proof. So if you call Bonds a cheater based solely on rumors then, you also have to admit Ruth cheated unless you believe for some reason that one person's rumors are more credible than the next.

To your second response: Look above.