Art Vandelay wrote: Bloody Sox wrote:
Art Vandelay wrote:Other than that, my only defense has been the same defense that I've made regarding every other accused steroid user: that they should all be able to use whatever they want.
And to hell with all those guys who don't
want to shoot themselves up with all sorts of harmful/deadly crap just to get a fair shot at the big leagues and/or a big payday... go home you pansies!!!
There are millions of people all over the world under far more dangerous conditions for way less money, but nobody seems to care about them.
Unless I'm mistaken, we are talking about baseball, and I think we can all agree that in the grand scheme of things it is not really all that important. But here we are, all talking about it in late December.
The way I see it, if someone doesn't want to use PEDs because they don't want to risk their health, and without them they can't make it, then they should probably pursue another career path.
That reasoning is terrible. Why should a clean guy in Triple-A who is good enough to be in the majors but isn't only because everyone else is dirty be forced to quit something he is good enough to do? Or if a guy is a bench player in the majors making the league minimum but should be starting and making millions, why should that guy have to sacrifice millions of dollars?
I've had very dangerous jobs before, and nobody seemed to care, but if baseball players have to put their health at risk, then it's a huge problem?
Again, in the grand scheme of things, of course its not a huge problem - but if you are comparing baseball's problems to world peace, hunger, collapsing coal mines, etc. then that means that we can't ever discuss any
problems with baseball because they all pale in comparison.
It should be viewed as a risk associated with the job, if you can't cut it without PEDs, and you're unwilling to take them, find a new line of work.
That's crap. Getting a ball hit back at your face is an inherent risk, tearing an ACL sliding into a base is an inherent risk - being forced to ingest an illegal substance to stay equally competitive is not an inherent risk. In fact, it is the exact opposite of an inherent risk - I guess that would make it an extrinsic risk.
"The government cannot give to anyone anything that it does not first take from someone else"