Lofunzo wrote: mweir145 wrote:
Lofunzo wrote:I also don't like dealing with hypotheticals. What if I was put in that situation?? Well, I wasn't. Bonds was and we see what path he chose. Don't fault me for having a problem with him choosing the wrong path.
When you're judging somebody for using steroids in baseball and calling for longer punishments
despite never actually having been a baseball player and being put in a similar situation, yes hypotheticals are an appropriate thing to bring up. If you, or anybody else who is angry about his reported PED use, would do the same thing as him if put in that position, than it's hypocritical to continiously call him out on it. People have and will always look for edges within and outside the rules, this is not new. Baseball is not perfect, it never has been, and it never will be. Nobody should pretend that it is. That has to be recognized in all of this. Suspending Bonds to prevent him from ever playing again, or restricting him from getting into the HOF won't change anything in the big scheme of things. His use was merely just a small piece of a much, much larger picture. I mean Bonds has already served his punishment (if that's what you want to call it) for his failed amphetamines test, and his assumed steroid use in baseball came when no PEDs were even agaisnt the rules (and then there's also the part about nobody being able to prove anything). Why doesn't everybody just move on? There's nothing really left to discuss here. Unfortunately, you and many others are jumping on a moral high horse, deciding that grown grown men using steroids is a terrible, terrible thing, and subsequently ripping this guy more than others just because he's setting a record. What Bonds did is not better or worse than what anybody else did, but he continues to receive more criticism than many others for doing what was exactly the same act.
I stopped reading there because I never said that. If you are going to continue a thread that would probably be better off left going into the sunset, at least get it right. I never said that.
Not directly in those words, no. That was more of a generalization of many, rather than just you. Either way, you can take that little bit out, and the entire statement still applies anyway. But you did say this: "If you think that I am "ripping Bonds to shreds", I ask that you come back to reality. I have remained consistent from day 1. This thread is about and has been about Bonds testing positive for amphetamines. How exactly have I ripped him to shreds?? He tested positive and I feel that he should be punished accordingly
. I am ripping him because I don't want to give him a free pass??"
We already know he's been punished accordingly. If you break the rules of a sport, you deserve whatever suspension or punishment that is handed down for that rule breaking offense. I've never argued that. I've questioned the rules and laws, but I've never said anybody should directly disobey them if they are in place. It's for the players to decide whether the benefits outweigh the costs. And as I've previously stated, without me ever being in that situation, I'm not going to judge their decision-making in that situation. Anyways, as we know, Bonds has already been through all that, yet you and several others have continued to rip this guy over the course of this thread. Why? If it's not that you want more a punishment for him, than what is it? Why are we even discussing this? Why did this thread get to be so long, and why did you make so many posts in it? Obviously you weren't satisfied with something. There really shouldn't be that much to talk about. He took amphetamines like so many others in baseball over the past half-century have done, and served the first punishment of it's kind for that act. What else is there to say? Unless you think that he deserves more of a suspension for what he's done, than what exactly are we talking about here?
And Lofunzo, I think you know that I never just let threads "go into the sunset." And with kentx making more of hate-filled posts again, it certainly wasn't time to end it. BTW, the reason I wasn't able to reply to that post for so long was because I have been particularly busy over the last little while. I didn't purposely wait that long to get back into this thread.
Lofunzo wrote: Just because it might be human nature to cheat, that still doesn't make it right and it still doesn't change the fact that I have yet to hear 1 solid defense of Bonds that didn't include other players into the equation. This deflection of blame is now so far out there that we have somehow gone from taking PED's to drinking during prohibition to jaywalking.
That's because as far as I know there isn't any, apart from the little thing about PEDs never actually being agaisnt the rules when he reportedly took them. I'm not exactly sure what's wrong with that, though. He "cheated" in a "cheater's" world. Nearly every single guy on the top 10 of the HR list, has bended the rules, or seeked an extra advantage in some way. These are facts. Supposedly, the entire reason Bonds went into PED use in the first place (according to Fanairu-Wada and Williams' book), was because everyone else around him was using them, and he was thus encouraged to use them to keep up with the times. Yet Bonds is really the only one that has ever received hate out of all the players in baseball that have ever used anything. It is clear hypocrisy, as wrveres likes to say, and that's why so many people defend Bonds using arguments involving other players. It's been pretty obvious for a long time. And I've gotta tell you, arguing those points is far better than being hypocritical about the entire thing.
And I think it's in an athlete's nature to try to gain whatever advantage he can get over the competition. They have a different mentality than most people, it's that competitive mentality, along with skill, that allowed them to even reach those high levels in the first place. If there if available options like PEDs that have the ability to possibly make them better players, a large percentage will take them (particularly if there are no direct rules agaisnt them), as shown in baseball's past). It's a stretch to say that's it's human nature to cheat (I remember I cheated on a spelling test in grade 3, and I felt terrible after it, and haven't done anything like it again since
), but people will always do it, particularly if there are large benefits, we do know this.