Drinking is legal at age 21. High school kids still drink. It doesn't make any sense to use that argument about role models for kids. Using steroids is dangerous to the body no matter how old you are.
Printable View
Drinking is legal at age 21. High school kids still drink. It doesn't make any sense to use that argument about role models for kids. Using steroids is dangerous to the body no matter how old you are.
Wait, are baseball players playing drunk now too?Quote:
Originally Posted by Len-Det64
depends on who ur asking.....Quote:
Originally Posted by jbruin152
david wells?tony larussa?
or someone else?
But what about when they ban substances that you can buy at GNC over the counter? My problem with this whole situation is where do you draw the line of what is considered performance enhancing? Is it based strictly on the substance being illegal? If that was the case it makes sense but it's not the case. Many over the counter items that are legal are also banned. If you ban that you might as well ban weight lifting. That is performance enhancing and can cause injuries as well.......Quote:
Originally Posted by jbruin152
How about making it legal in the AL but illegal in the NL?
Steroids, designated hitters, spitballs, and huge pads for batters should all be legal in the AL.
I won't watch it but I bet lots of people will.
How? Players lie and hide it now, why wouldn't they lie and hide it then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hipcheck
The harsher the deterrent, the greater the chance that players will try to hide it. Props for thinking outside the box on the issue though.Quote:
Let that disclosure serve as a deterrent as opposed to some phony fine and risk of suspension that does nothing but make a player on roids does his best to use a masking agent and avoid being caught. The argument that "some players will be pressured to take them to catch up with those on steroids" will be a moot point.
What if the teams full of roid freaks dominated? I'm guessing they would too. Some teams will always sign 'bad character players' if they believe that they give them a greater chance of winning. Time will tell if Mike Vick ever makes it back to the NFL.Quote:
And the players who are on them will be met with a huge stigma attached to all of their stats and the players not on them will be heralded and most likely more sought after. Let public stigma and alienation serve as a deterrent.
With the many health/risks issues involved with those taking steroids; wouldn't a team be willing to pay a guy a little more knowing he is clean? Wouldn't the PR benefits of a team with "clean" players equalize the risk of fielding a team filled with Steroid freaks?
