Should baseball records of steroid using players be removed from the books

[sellitman]

And should their plaques be removed from the Hall?

[salinen]

1. Modern surgical techniques

have turned gimps into Cy Young winners. Should these bionic men be removed also?

[sellitman]

2. Are operations illegal?

Medical advancement in surgical techniques are a little different than illegal drugs don't you think?

[salinen]

3. Yes, but the results are similar

Ty Cobb could not have had Tommy John surgery. So the guy who is being surgically altered has an advantage over the pre-modern surgery players, and therefore, the records are somewhat comprimissed. I don't know. Next thing a player will have a gorilla's arm surgically attached and he'll win 30 games.

[sellitman]

7. Robbing a bank and going to ...

college can both get a person lots of money. One is ethical and legal.

[joeybee12]

10. Nice analogy!

I think I'll use it sometime!

[HuckleB]

16. You still have to have the talent.

Repair and enhancement are very different things. Further, one aims to heal, while the other is so dangerous, causing such horrific long-term health dangers that it has been deemed illegal based on that alone.

You are comparing apples and oranges. There is no comparison.

[PDittie]

5. Steroids weren't illegal when they were taking them

Corked bats and spitballs and players throwing the World Series were once 'legal'.

Baseball's motto ought to be "If you're no cheating, you're not trying."

[cruadin]

8. I don't think that corked bats, spitballs and throwing games...

were EVER "legal"---it's just that some of that crap was more common in a less closely regulated era.

As for steroids--EVERY professional sport has been touched by their use--- both legitimate (for injury rehabilitation) and illegitimate (for performance enhancement.) Some sports just have higher profile figures, and therefore more extensive press coverage of their abuses.

salinen (in POST #1) makes a good point about modern surgical techniques giving contemporary players an edge in minimizing what were once career-ending-injuries and in prolonging normal careers. But, you could also make the argument that higher nutritional and health standards during an athlete's childhood development and certainly more scientific training regimens as a player have the same effect.

The fact is today's athletes are better developed, better trained, and better conditioned than their counterparts were from even a generation ago. I don't think you can compare a baseball player from today with a player from the 30s or 40s without being aware of the fundamental differences in our society. The use and abuse of steroids is only one more factor in that calculation.

[Caution]

26. The spitball was in fact legal

corked bats were not, not was throwing games, though there was an era when throwing games was *very* common.

[HuckleB]

17. Steroids were not legal for Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, etc...

what are you talking about?

[PDittie]

4. good point n/t

[BuyingThyme]

6. Absolutely and abolutely.

I used to be a big fan of some of these guys, but I'm now ready to let them all go.

Advantages are always realized over time, but cheating is a whole different thing.

The cheaters should be remembered as nothing more than cheaters.

[tx_dem41]

9. The question comes down to the legality/illegality within baseball of

steroids when they were used. If they were within the rules of baseball at the time of the use, then the records should be maintained. At that point, it is incumbent on the fans of baseball to call this era, the "Steroids Era" (much like the "Deadball Era"), and discount records accordingly.

[underpants]

13. Exactly they weren't illegal in baseball so the records should stand

IMHO

[HuckleB]

18. Anabolic steroids were illegal.

Where is this bit about them being legal coming from?

[kick-ass-bob]

11. No.

There is no reason and no precedent for it. There are cheaters in the Hall and steroids were not even outlawed by MLB (that's their own fault).

There should be a different standard for them to get in (like 473 HRs being discounted some) but their records should stand.

[ThorsHammer]

12. Aren't they regulated under federal law anyway?

I was under the impression that they were a controlled substance anyway, unlike creatine, andro, etc. If this is so, I would vote yes-yes, regardless of what baseball's rules say.

[Smirking_Chimp]

14. Nah just give 'em an **

**=juiced ballplayer

[DrGonzoLives]

15. No

It technically has not been against the rules of the game. You can't create after-the-fact rules to fuck people over.

[HuckleB]

19. Yes, it has been against the rules of the game.

What are you talking about?

[MousePlayingDaffodil]

20. While the use of anabolic steroids . . .

. . . without a prescription has, as a matter of federal law anyhow, been illegal since around 1990, I don't believe that Major League Baseball actually prohibited their use until September 2002.

[HuckleB]

21. Nope.

They were prohibited in MLB well back, during the 1980s. That was made very clear during the Canseco interview on 60 Minutes last Sunday.

[MousePlayingDaffodil]

23. I can't dispute your point . . .

. . . as I didn't see the Canseco interview. But I have been unable to determine, through an internet search, what exactly was MLB's policy on performance-enhancing drugs prior to 2002. What little information I've found indicates that the use of performance-enhancing drugs was not prohibited by MLB until 2002, but that may well be inaccurate. If anyone has a link to a reliable source of information in this regard, I would appreciate it.

[MousePlayingDaffodil]

25. I stand corrected.

What you heard during the Canseco interview was apparently correct. I did some more digging on the internet, and finally found information that indicated that MLB did indeed prohibit the use of steroids (strictly speaking, use without a prescription) prior to 2002. The information to the contrary out there is apparently based on the misapprehensiion that, because MLB had no testing protocol in place prior to that time, the use of steroids was not prohibited. Such was not the case.

[ProfessorGAC]

22. No. Never Convict Without Irrefutable Proof

I'm not one who's willing to believe Jose Canseco and Ken Caminiti are unimpeachable sources.

If there isn't incontrovertible proof, then we assume innocence. I'm not willing to be a neocon over this steroid thing.
The Professor

[jakefrep]

27. NO

Unless we can somehow get urine samples from 5 or 10 years ago, we will NEVER know the true scope of baseball's steroid problem. The only evidence we have is anecdotal evidence from dubious sources. There needs to be more to justify placing any sort of black mark against their careers.

[kaitykaity]

24. No and no.

I know they did it, every fan knows they did it.
But fans want long balls, and the players need
juice for that.

I mean, come on. How many people want to watch
punch-n-judy single bunt sac fly steal baseball
anymore?

[Caution]

28. No and No

There is no way to know for sure who was using, is using and who did use. All throughout the 70's amphetamines were used constantly, should all of those records be expunged too? Gaylord Perry is an avowed cheater and his plaque stays. The one hard fast rule for a lifetime ban is to gamble on the game.

The rules are changed constantly to prevent players from gaining an unfair competative advantage and they are now instituting hard steroid testing (which I'm sure some will beat). The spitball was made illegal, the mound was lowered, and any other of a hundred rules changes over the course of the history of the world's greatest game.

The record books are filled with players who have records that are absurd from era to era. Will we ever have another 500 game winner? No. Could Cy Young have won this much in this era? Hell no he couldnt have, steroids or not. The records are all wonderful, but true fans love the game itself, this just becomes another piece of its rich history (albeit a negative piece).

The records should stand and the plaques should stay. Those who used steroids will pay the price eventually and if they don't well then they got away with cheating just like so many of the people whom we consider great at what they do.