I do not care if baseball players use steroids. I do not care.

Much of this prattling debate is about the "purity" of the game and how steroids soil it. Spare me.

Baseball players routinely do things to their bodies that none of us civilians would even contemplate. The notion that boosting one's testosterone level artificially is "bad," but horking a ligament out of your ankle and strapping it into your pitching elbow is "good" stretches credibility. How about Schilling risking being crippled by infection or complication so he could have a tendon stapled in place -- to pitch two goddamn games?

If somone told Ty Cobb he could run faster if he rubbed an ointment on his ass, he'd have filled a bathtub with it. Baseball players throughout the 60s were popping amphetamines before games like they were Tic-Tacs. Mickey Mantle was getting "vitamin" shots routinely (dextro-meth-amphetivins, actually) -- his homer chase with Roger Maris was shortened by an abcess he got from one of them. Darryl Strawberry and Tim Raines were coked out of their minds half the time. Sandy Koufax was shot-up with cortisone (a steroid) before and after games. This pious condemnation is ridiculous. The sport has never been "clean."

This behavior is its own punishment: Witness the shortened careers of Mark McGwire, Jason Giambi, Jose Canseco et al. Witness Sammy Sosa becoming a gelatinous mass of twitching strike-out beef. If an athlete wants to do that to himself in the name of his sport, I cannot say it is any worse than any of the other ridiculous things they do.

If it were discovered that a certain kind of spinach, fo example, imparted the same advantages, would it be right to ban spinach? How about vitamin E?

I am especially troubled that we are contemplating laws about it, exclusive to sports. it would be perfectly legal for any one of us to go to the GNC and buy a range of dietary supplements -- unless we happened to play baseball too, and then it would be illegal. I am uncomfortable creating a special class of citizens (professional athletes) who are not allowed certain personal freedoms, solely because of their occupation.

I don't care. I don't care. I don't care.

I remember seeing a thing on TV a while ago, where some pundits and ex-athletes were discussing the use of performance enhancing steroids in athletics (running, if memory serves). The viewpoint that sticks in my mind most was the guy who pointed out that winning athletes are people who will do whatever it takes to be the best they can be, and, by extension, better than their competitors. He was basically asking why certain drugs should be excluded from the process.

I think I agree with this but I'm not sure.

If people are augmenting their bodies so that they can be better at a game, there is something horribly wrong going on. Steroids are a waste of time and health. The players should eat healthful food, not sacrifice themselves to perform better. Strict laws on the matter are needed. This should not even be a question.

steve wrote:The sport has never been "clean."

That's a pretty useless argument. If you think that it's worth letting athletes fall out of shape from drug abuse then you have no regard for the game itself. Athletes should have a long career and try to avoid these injuries at all costs. If pitchers want to throw their arms to shit, that is a completely different story. That is natural, and there is a big difference. There should be laws. This is sickening.

-Noah

Noah, I don't think it's as much about condoning it as it is about the fact that it's just going to happen. These things have been going on since day one, and they're going to continue to go on. Lighten up, it's entertainment. 1500 years ago the Mayans played this game with a large rubber ball that weight almost 20lbs, they had to shoot it through a stone hoop using only their hips! When the game was over the leader of the losing team was put to death. I wonder what kind of shit went on in that sport. Either way, it makes your nit-picking kind of seem like small potatoes, eh?

Noah wrote: Strict laws on the matter are needed.

maybe yr joking?

LAWS for baseball players bloodstreams?
thats a waay beyond the scope of what laws are for, right?
what the a fuck?


also:
do the bad bloodstream having players go to jail?
give em the chair?

I had the prediction that I would see Steve posting about this a couple days ago when I saw it on the news. I laughed when I first saw it, I agree with everything you say though. Its funny that in the early days of baseball, players would do cocaine right before going up to bat like it was nothing, and now people are contemplating laws about legal substances regarding sports

justinc wrote:

Noah wrote: Strict laws on the matter are needed.

maybe yr joking?

LAWS for baseball players bloodstreams?
thats a waay beyond the scope of what laws are for, right?
what the a fuck?


also:
do the bad bloodstream having players go to jail?
give em the chair?

Rules, I should have said. There should be rules instituted by the league to prevent this bullshit from occuring. Really. This has nothing to do with liberty. They're getting paid, for fuck's sake.

-Noah

Clearly, one (possible) implication of Steve’s position is that the same holds for the Olympics. Not to blow the thread wide open, but are we to draw lines between professional and non-professional athletes (re: drugs) when Olympic teams are stacked with professional athletes? Legalize roids, etc, for sprinters, and . . .

I’m not thinking of a ‘slippery slope’ argument so much as just following the position through.

Steve,

You're not looking at the big picture. Regular people make great sacrifices everyday as well, not just professional athletes. You're falling into the same trap that you're condoning: separating professional athletes from people in all professions. If Curt Schilling wants to forego safety because he wants to perform in situations that might just be the pinnacle of his career, that's his choice. Maybe it's not the wisest one, but it's no different from someone who works 300 days a year or more for 14 hours a day because they want their company to be successful. It's no different from the firefighter who runs up the World Trade center doing his damndest to save people because _that_ is his job. It's no different from many of the risks that people take everyday knowing that the outcome could be detrimental to their wellbeing.

Rules and regulations are put in place to protect, that doesn't mean that people won't always try to find a way around them, or blatantly ignore them. This also doesn't mean that they shouldn't exist. Just the very fact of their existence is enough of a warning to most people that they could be on dangerous ground. If this stops even a minority of the people from ruining their lives, how can you argue that it's not a good thing?

When it was exposed that the East German atheletes in the Olympic games of the '80's had cheated buy using steroids, the entire US sporting community was super pissed. Now the same thing is happening with our own atheletes and we are giving them the benefit of the doubt. It's not only contradictory, but it's pathetic.

Barry Bonds is a tool.

track and field is, allegedly, much dirtier than baseball

anyway, i don't care about steroids as they relate to current users, but i think they should be banished from sports to the degree it is possible.

to the first part: HGH and/or roids or whatever don't really affect my opinion of bonds, for example. i think if i was singlemindedly focused on being the best athlete i could be, and there was something that would help me get there, i would at least research it to death and attempt to assess the risks and rewards of using it. i doubt seriously that i would reject it out of hand, even if it was illegal, unless there was a serious risk of getting caught.

to the second part: legalization of steroids etc. would compel anyone who wants to compete at the highest level (particularly in track and field) to use.

so, while i don't care much about them, and i understand the reason athletes use them, i think they have to be made strictly illegal and testing has to be frequent and widespread. otherwise, athletes are forced towards a practice that is unhealthy just to be competitive.

despite the human wreckage surrounding performance-enhancing drug use, some of this stuff can undoubtedly be used in moderation with good results. barry bonds doesn't show any sign of falling apart at the seams. but there's no way to regulate usage efficiently. it's either legal or illegal, and in that context, i think 'illegal' is the only way to go.