Barry Bonds

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Bonds certainly isn't the only one to cheat,but he is the one who wants the most coveted record in the sport.Sosa,and Mc Gwire would get the same disgust from the fans (if they were going for this record with padded stats.)

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Bonds certainly isn't the only one to cheat,but he is the one who wants the most coveted record in the sport.Sosa,and Mc Gwire would get the same disgust from the fans (if they were going for this record with padded stats.)

I personally still have Maris with the single season HR record. A-Rod is going for it this year in my world.

[The Bid]

Mac and Sosa knew they cheated. Bonds still wont admit that hes taken steroids, its not rocket science. Giambi implicated him and so have others. Giambi went from being a monster, to being a GOAT. He should have his contract voided and be forced to pay back all the money he got.

Bonds should be ashamed of himself for cheating his way into the record books.

[Ferdinand]

Originally Posted by The Bid

Bonds should be ashamed of himself for cheating his way into the record books.

I wish that would be the case but Bonds could hardly care less about honoring the great tradition of baseball, just himself.

But then, I suppose if Pete Rose could do what he did......

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by pgardn

I personally still have Maris with the single season HR record. A-Rod is going for it this year in my world.

But Maris played in 8 more games than Ruth...

[ELA]

In certain respects this is a frivolous debate. As of now, Bonds innocence or guilt is not a legal issue or a question before a court of law. The infrastructure does not exist to bring this issue to any substantial or real conclusion. This is very unfortunate in my eyes. MLB is guilty of a complete lack of governance, self-governance, or whatever you want to call it, and negligence as well in setting any assemblence of standards.

To me, this takes away from the what is at the core or the essense of the sport. I remember when Mark McGuire was going for the season HR record. Primetime TV, every major station broke away from their regular programming to show McGuire's next at bat. I remember when he hit that record breaking HR. I was single at the time, sitting at home doing some work. I remember how I felt when I watched it. I remember feeling like I was part of history -- watching it live, seeing it, experiencing it. Call it corny, but I remember standing up, alone, in my home, and clapping. I also remember, even though I was single, feeling that one day I would be able to tell my son that I saw it live. But I also remember how I felt when the talk of steriod, enhancement, etc. use came about. It took something away from it.

Unfortunately, this is not an issue of guilt or innocence. His freedom is not on the line or anything of the like. This more may be a case of a court of morality, and everyone having a different sense of values and judgements.

Anyway, great points and discussion.

Eric

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by ELA

In certain respects this is a frivolous debate. As of now, Bonds innocence or guilt is not a legal issue or a question before a court of law. The infrastructure does not exist to bring this issue to any substantial or real conclusion. This is very unfortunate in my eyes. MLB is guilty of a complete lack of governance, self-governance, or whatever you want to call it, and negligence as well in setting any assemblence of standards.

To me, this takes away from the what is at the core or the essense of the sport. I remember when Mark McGuire was going for the season HR record. Primetime TV, every major station broke away from their regular programming to show McGuire's next at bat. I remember when he hit that record breaking HR. I was single at the time, sitting at home doing some work. I remember how I felt when I watched it. I remember feeling like I was part of history -- watching it live, seeing it, experiencing it. Call it corny, but I remember standing up, alone, in my home, and clapping. I also remember, even though I was single, feeling that one day I would be able to tell my son that I saw it live. But I also remember how I felt when the talk of steriod, enhancement, etc. use came about. It took something away from it.

Unfortunately, this is not an issue of guilt or innocence. His freedom is not on the line or anything of the like. This more may be a case of a court of morality, and everyone having a different sense of values and judgements.

Anyway, great points and discussion.

Eric

Good points! And yes, it is a shame that baseball has lost some innocense. Sports are a mere reflection of society at large and this is certainly an example of that...the lines become blurred and pretty soon guilt is viewed as a matter of degree. My only issue is our seemingly unending desire to think the worst of people we dislike coupled with a willingness to be judge, jury and executioner...we "know" this guy is guilty and that's that...history tells us this is not the path of justice, reason and equality...

[ELA]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Good points! And yes, it is a shame that baseball has lost some innocense. Sports are a mere reflection of society at large and this is certainly an example of that...the lines become blurred and pretty soon guilt is viewed as a matter of degree. My only issue is our seemingly unending desire to think the worst of people we dislike coupled with a willingness to be judge, jury and executioner...we "know" this guy is guilty and that's that...history tells us this is not the path of justice, reason and equality...

Thank you, and I agree with you -- and we have the very same debate when it comes to the drug issues and abuses in our very own sport and business.

Eric

[King Glorious]

I sure hope weight gain and increase in size from 22 to 36 isn't what clearly makes someone guilty of steroid use. If so, mark me down as guilty too cause I'm a lot bigger than I was then.

People don't look at everything. Bonds came to SF in 1993 and played there in Candlestick Park through the 1999 season. In his first six seasons there, he hit 235 home runs in 888 games. I didn't use the 1999 season because that's the one that he allegedly started using steroids. The point is that in his first six years in SF, he hit an average of 39.2 home runs per season in 148.0 games per season. To allege that he didn't start hitting home runs until he started using steroids is wrong. There has been one season that was an outlier for him and that was the 73 hr season. I showed in another thread where even if he had only hit 35 per season after his alleged use started, instead of the 45+ he was hitting, he still would be close to the 700 mark anyway and averaging 35 a season wouldn't have been a stretch. Aaron and Ruth did it during comparative age years so why couldn't Bonds have? Also, consider the fact that in 2000, they moved to another park, one where the right field fence is 19 feet closer than at Candlestick. That surely has helped his cause too. If one wants to allege that he started beginning with the 1999 season and that he's added an average of 10 hr's a season to what he would have been getting, go ahead and take off 80. Hell, take off 100. That would put him at 651. But then also consider that he only played 113 games in his rookie season, only 112 in the strike year of 1994, only 102 in 1999, only 130 in 2003, only 14 in 2005 and only 130 in 2006. Give him some of those games back and it's very easy to see how he could be at or beyond 700 right now. Hell, u want to take off 200 because of steroids? Fine. Put him at 551 now. But then give him back 360 games that he missed during those years I mentioned. That's just over two years. Give him the 35 per season average and that's 70 hr's. U could take away 200 hr's from steriods and the guy could still be over 600. No matter how u want to look at it, he's one of the greatest hr hitters in the history of the game. That is a fact.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

Good points! And yes, it is a shame that baseball has lost some innocense. Sports are a mere reflection of society at large and this is certainly an example of that...the lines become blurred and pretty soon guilt is viewed as a matter of degree. My only issue is our seemingly unending desire to think the worst of people we dislike coupled with a willingness to be judge, jury and executioner...we "know" this guy is guilty and that's that...history tells us this is not the path of justice, reason and equality...

innocent til proven guilty--i believe that. but no one is saying bonds should be in jail, and his freedom certainly hasn't been taken away without due process. what we're talking about his peoples' opinions on him, his character, etc. you know, kind of like talking about michael vick. altho comments have been prefaced with 'if', i'd say most feel that vick is lacking in character. that's not judging without a trial, it's using your own common sense. by the same token, common sense would tell you that an adult doesn't suddenly grow two shoe sizes.
also, bonds himself admitted to using stuff-creams, etc, that he said he didn't know what they contained. his own words cause questioning about his legitimacy--he has said that he used things given to him--but claims not to know what was in them. umm, yeah. his own common sense should have told him that you don't use something that you aren't sure what it is, and if you suddenly start to grow when you've started something new, hey, maybe there's something not quite right.

do i think he should be shown as the record holder when he breaks it? yeah, he should. is it tainted? yes, it is. by his own actions and words, it is. should selig be in attendance? yes. there is no way, since there is no evidence, that he should not be credited. BUT, it doesn't mean that everyone must stand and cheer when he breaks it.

[timmgirvan]

Well spoken,Danzig!

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by Danzig

innocent til proven guilty--i believe that. but no one is saying bonds should be in jail, and his freedom certainly hasn't been taken away without due process. what we're talking about his peoples' opinions on him, his character, etc. you know, kind of like talking about michael vick. altho comments have been prefaced with 'if', i'd say most feel that vick is lacking in character. that's not judging without a trial, it's using your own common sense. by the same token, common sense would tell you that an adult doesn't suddenly grow two shoe sizes.
also, bonds himself admitted to using stuff-creams, etc, that he said he didn't know what they contained. his own words cause questioning about his legitimacy--he has said that he used things given to him--but claims not to know what was in them. umm, yeah. his own common sense should have told him that you don't use something that you aren't sure what it is, and if you suddenly start to grow when you've started something new, hey, maybe there's something not quite right.

do i think he should be shown as the record holder when he breaks it? yeah, he should. is it tainted? yes, it is. by his own actions and words, it is. should selig be in attendance? yes. there is no way, since there is no evidence, that he should not be credited. BUT, it doesn't mean that everyone must stand and cheer when he breaks it.

Mrs Z, it isn't a matter of whether he'll go to jail or not, he's still entitled to the same rights. Sure, we are all entitled to our opinion but when those opinions are expressed publically as facts...that's a different story. As you mentioned, in the case of Vick, I have posted here that IF he's guilty of dog fighting, he should be banned from the NFL for life...others may agree or not but the point is that I've made no statement of "fact" about his innocense/guilt. Right now, no charges have been made, no evidence of his involvement...so to me, he remains an innocent man. If you read the posts made in this thread you see that Bonds is being treated differently by many...no qualifying "IF" but "he's guilty" as a statement of fact! Some say it's no big deal...I say it's a huge deal!