Not that we didn't know that Bonds was juicing but SI is now breaking it WIDE open with this weeks cover story...They have EVERYTHING…original charts, tests, dates, all the grand jury testimony, emails,notebooks….EVERYTHING…all from the San Fran investigators….check it out at sports illustrated.com
I've heard already that this may just make BB retire before the season starts....

Hmmm, should be interesting to see what comes of this. My guess is nothing more than before, but we'll see.

No suprise, but I will enjoy watching the truth be told with hard evidence and facts instead of hearsay and speculation.....

To me it will also be interesting to see how hypocritical ESPN is with this...given how in bed they are with BB I hope they distance themselves quickly from him and cancel his "reality" show immediately...I think ESPN needs some major competition---like Fox News was to CNN...they have gotten too complacent as the only major sports outlet...

73*
700*
*****************

Need I say more?

Yep, that was my comment too.

A big huge asterisk in the record books.

Out of respect for the game, he should just retire now and let the bambino's record stand at 2nd place all time.

How can he have an asterisk? As much as I hat saying it, steroids weren't banned by the league at that time.

If he still wants to play, he only has one choice... sue right away. Anything else would be an admission of guilt, imo.

I'd say no asterik either. No asterik, because his achievements should be shitcanned, period.

The problem is, there is no public demand anymore. Most people just don't give a shit anymore, because baseball has long refused to clean up its act. History has shown that it takes a LOT of public pressure for MLB to get their asses in gear, and the people are tired of the steroid talk. It may be just my opinion, but come on, this has been going on since '98 with the andro, for chrissakes..

The proposal that was just agreed upon by MLB and the PA was a good one for punishment, (50, 1 year, life, I think it was), but I say if you really want to get rid of it, go straight for the jugular. First offense, 1 year, second offense, 5 years (which would eliminate many careers of users), third offense, life. MLB just came out with the whole "supplement store" a couple of days ago (great idea, IMO), so there is no excuse now.

As far as Bonds goes, is he innocent? Does Wilmac get laid? Of course, the answer is a resounding, "FUUUCCCKKK NO". This is nothing new, but as several people mentioned, it finally has concrete evidence to back it up. Kick his ass out of the game, and strip all of achievements, I say.

If the commish had any balls he would ban him for life tomorrow, and wipe out all the records he holds.

Amen, brotha!
I used to love ESPN until they became the sports version of MTV. Reality shows, game shows and Chris "Yabba Dabba Doo" Berman is still there. Someone has to cut out his tongue!

If he had any balls, he would lock out the players union and get a real system in place like the NFL did in the 80's and the NHL did last year. In other words, baseball needs a new commish.

I still get a crack out of people who just don't get it and play the race card. :rolleyes: It's sad really.

Hey, Knight School rules!

Bank robbery is not banned by baseball either. Point being, they are ILLEGAL.

Dude needs to get banished from the game ala Pete Rose style.

s

I read the thread three times. I still am missing the "race card". I'm just not seeing what the fuck you're talking about.

Who played it? How?

I'm going to speculate that he either is referring to Bonds himself or supporters of Bonds in general. In the past day or so race has been mentioned in relation to McGuire not being hounded about obvious steroid abuse (he got out while the gettin' was good) and about the attention and promotion from MLB that McGuire recieved during his home run chase with Socia.

Bonds wasn't the center of attention and was jealous and now blames it on the media and white people. While McGuire had the brains to walk away with his money, records and shame, Bonds arrogantly wants to collect his paycheck, not answer questions when the truth is the topic and soil the game while mocking the fans and press with his presence.

Interesting.

I've been listening to espnradio.com all day yesterday and today.

I haven't heard anyone mentioning race at all. So I guess I didn't realize anyone was making that argument.

My bad, I guess I should have clarified. Socal pretty much said what I wanted to. I was indeed talking about Bond's supporters and black people who just disrespect their own race by playing the race card. A few have called in to my local talk shows sparking all sorts of crap and it just pisses me off. It demoralizes those who actually have to deal with racism. They just don't get that Bond's is the one with the single season hr record and threatening the career hr record... and he just happens to be black.

So is doing cocaine and other drugs, but there are plenty of athletes in the HOF in all sorts of sports that have been found guilty of doing it. Gambling was already banned in baseball long before Pete Rose even picked up a bat.

There's an article that goes with it too.

Incorrect.

In 1991 the League Banned the use and possesion of Steriods. The players union didn't want the league to actually test any of the players, and the Commisioner gave into those demands.

Even if that wasn't the case- it doesn't matter if it was specficially stated that it was illegal because of the Best Interests of Baseball clause. And to top ot off, the Commisioner doesn't need to have an admission or a conviction in a court to be able to act.

Because you bring up Pete Rose, and mention that gambling (on baseball) was banned long before he did it

At the start and end of the 1919 season, there was no rule specifically making it illegal for players to bet on baseball. During 1920, the eight Chicago White Sox Players, Shoeless Joe Jackson, Chick Gandil, Swede Risberg, Buck Weaver, Happy Felsch, Eddie Cicotte, Lefty Williams, and Fred McMullin were cleared of any charges by a grand jury at the end of 1920, yet Kenesaw Mountain Landis banned all eight of them for life from baseball in 1921. None of the players addmitted at the time that they were involved in the fix - although Buck Weaver admitted knowing of the fix, but denied any direct involvement (being paid or trying to throw the games) in it. Fred McMullin got banned for pretty much the same since his playing time in the Series was limited to 2 pinch hit at bats and no playing time in the field. A few players admitted having a direct involvement in tossing the games - but that was years after already having been banned for life from baseball.

Those players were banned, and Landis made it illegal from that point on for any player to bet on baseball games, conspire to fix the outcome of any baseball games, or to fail to inform the manager or owner of the team if they knew of any players betting on or conspiring to fix baseball games.

As for any records -
A couple of thos players still hold (either by themselves or jointly) records in baseball. Being banned from the game didn't remove what they did on the filed prior to it. But those records are obscure and have no signifigant meaning either.
The single season Home Run record has always been overrated in my opinion - no one talked about it during the '80s.

True dat! ....although I will agrue the McGwire-steriods thing as there is no proof he used anything but Andro and suppliments, but that is for another time.....but Mac did walk away when he did and was left alone except for that foolish congress shame....but Bonds is still here trying to break one of the most reverred records in all of sports. And it is not so much Bonds that plays the race card, it is his minions and close supporters who try to get him out of this mess by deflecting the media glare in any other direction they can.

The bottom line is there are many people who are saying that Bonds took roids, and either they supplied him, watched him or helped him cover it up in some way.....and since there is proof of him using since 1998, who knows how long he used before that?

An asterik is called for no question, but he should be treated the same way as Pete Rose IMHO, banned now and kept out of the HOF.

Uh, wrong. Steroids was not "banned" in 1991. There was a memo with a proposal to get "illegal drugs" banned, but (like you said) the union didn't agree to it. Therefore, nothing was banned in the league.
Might want to read about the "Best Interests of Baseball clause" and who would actually win if Selig used that.
The big difference was that baseball immediately took charge after it happened.
This is a funny statement because no one even came close to the single season homerun record in the '80's. Of course no one talked about it. I remember when 35-40 homeruns would win you the homerun title. Hell, it was a huge deal when Cecil Fielder reached 50 in 1990. Make no mistake, this is a big deal and Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds broke it by using steriods, but the drug wasn't banned in baseball.

Again, I would love to see their records stripped, but I believe we're living in a dream world as long as Selig is the Commish.

What are you talking about? Bonds has played the race card himself plenty of times. I especially love his retaliation when he said he just wants to chase Babe Ruth down since he's white, but not so much Hank Aaron since he's black.
Again, I ask how you can put an asterisk on it if steroids weren't banned during that time? What about Palmeiro, Giambi and Sheffield when they become Hall eligible? Andro wasn't banned at the time, but it is now so does that mean McGwire gets one too?

Does anyone think MLB or even Congress will take any action after the book comes out?

I do. I don't know why, but I am holding out hope that he will be banned and his records will be either wiped out or an asterik will be there. No matter what happens in my mind Marris, Ruth, and Aaron's records will still stand no matter what sosa, mac, or bonds do.

It wasn't a proposal - it was the commissioner's Policy.

Ther Union has no say in the Comissioner's policy. That policy refers to rules and punishments for breaking the rules.

What the Union did not agree to was Testing for the drugs. Vincent could not get player testing done without their approval. As an example of how opposed the players union was to any sort of testing, Rob Dibble was shot down at a meeting of players and their Union reps when he suggested that players not only be tested for drugs, but also screened for illnesses and disorders (like cancer, which John Kruk would later be diagnosed with)...Dibble has claimed this a number of times in a number of forums. He mentioned it earlier today on his radio show with Kevin Kennedy on XM radio.

The wording of Fay Vincents 1991 policy -
The Commisioner's policy made the possesion and use of any drug (including steriods) illegal. The punishments for use of those drugs was left to the discretion of the Commish.

A number of players have been suspended by the Commissioner for using Cocaine and other drugs...
A couple of examples of people punished under the 1990 Drug Policy (which the 1991 policy amended)
Dwight Gooden was suspended for use of illegal drugs in Septemember of 1994 by Bud Selig for the remainder of the 1994 season and the entire 1995 season.
Darryl Strwaberry was suspended for violation of the drug policy on Februrary 6th, 1995 for 60 days. He's suspender again for 140 days on June 18th, 1999. He's suspended again for 1 year on February 28th, 2000.

the 1919 World Series Fix? what do you mean by immediately? If you mean right after the series ended (as the Movie Eight Men Out implies) during the offseason...

Incorrect - the scandal didn't break until the during the height of the pennant race in 1920.
The players were not banned until after they faced a Grand Jury in the following offseason of 1920 (to make sure that the play of baseball was interrupted by players being unavailible to play) and were aquitted of all charges. They were not banned until 1921 - almost a full 2 years after they threw the series (and after an unknown number of other games during the 1920 season were thrown by some of those same players - according to Happy Felsch)

Keep in mind the hard evidence for Bonds just came out. Selig really can't continue to turn a blind eye to this as he has done in the past.
He's been really careful at making sure the descions he makes doesn't impact the owners negatively.
Let's not forget that Selig lead the owner's 18-9 vote of No Confidence against Fay Vincent after his Policy concerning Steroids and because of the owner's unhappiness in Vincent's role during the 1990 lockout.
Selig also let multi-punished and convicted drug abuser Steve Howe off with reduced punishmnets for violating the policy in the early 90's.
Plus, he overturned Vincet's banishment of Steinbrenner.
Fay Vincent banned Steinbrenner for life for paying Howie Spira, a small-time gambler, $40,000 for "dirt" on his outfielder Dave Winfield after Winfield sued Steinbrenner for failing to pay his foundation the $300,000 guaranteed in his contract. Selig (a friend of the Boss) overturned that lifetime ban.

Having an owner as a Commissioner is a huge conflict of interest, and Selig becoming Commish should never have happened.

At this point, with the facts coming to light - he may be forced into doing something to save some of his tarnished reputation.

http://www.baseballplayamerica.com/page4.html
Again, it was not "banned" in baseball... at least to those involved in the CBA. The ones in the CBA are the only ones we really care about.

As far as the Black Sox Scandal, I'm not going to go into anymore because I really haven't read too much about it, nor really care to right now (especially since there seems to be a couple different stories out there). My original point was that 1919 or 1920 or whatever is waaaay before Pete Rose was even born.

Nismo - Yes, the Black Sox was before Rose. But my point for mentioning the Black Sox is because those players got banned by the Commissioner for doing something which wasn't against the rules at the time they did it.

Therefore, it doesn't matter if Steroids weren't specifically mentioned as being Illegal at the time they were used.

For all intents and puposes, the Commissioner said he would punish those players with Drug problems - including steriods.

Now that makes the use of Steroids illegal - if they were not the commissioner wouldn't punish them for using it.
ESPN Mag report on the Memo

I believe you're trying to compare apples to oranges. Those guys threw the World Series as a team. They were busted and taken care of appropriately sometime within the next year. Rose was dumb enough to do something related to that 70+ years later. Bonds, McGwire, Giambi, Palmeiro, etc. took a drug themselves that wasn't banned. That's why nothing will come of this. Again, I ask, are they going to ban McGwire for taking Andro that's now banned or all those players busted for taking other drugs like cocaine? Is Palmeiro, Giambi and Sheffield now banned? It doesn't look like they are. Hey, I'm all for it if they do because it messes with the integrity of the game, but you got to do it to all players.
That's funny because that was the first article I found when I looked this up. I was like, why hasn't anything else came about this after reading that. Then, I found Mr. Vincent's comments and realized that it was ESPN just trying to make something more than it is. I'll take Vincent's comments over ESPN any day, especially since he wrote the memo.

Nismo - I'm not comparing the 1919 Sox to Bonds.

But as for the team comment
Again - to point out - McMullen only had 2 at bats during the Series going 1-2 with a single, no playing time in the field
Weaver knew of the fix, but claimed to not be a part of it. His numbers during the series support that claim.

Back to the point - Here is my argument:
The Commissioner can punish players for commiting acts which are not expressly prohibited by major league baseball.

The 1919 Sox are merely an example of that argument.

Now you jump ahead to asking if Players are going to be banned for drug use - Using Steroids is more like Corking a bat or doctoring a ball - except instead of doing it to the equipment you are using you are doing it to your body. Players are not suspended indefinately for a first time offense (See Slammin Sammy Sosa's Superball Sin) but they are punished to some extent. And they always have their name attached to the offense (see George Brett and the Pine Tar rule - Gaylord Perry and the Spitball)

edited to add: I don't recall actually saying or posting anywhere that Bonds should be banned for using steroids. Don't put words into my mouth. Bonds does deserve a lengthy suspension for his use of steriods overe the past 7 years (and a suspension of other players who have used that are still active is appropriate as well) That being said: end of edit

An example needs to be made - and Selig's failure to do anything about the subject has lead to more rampant use of performance inhancing drugs. The reward for using steroids far outwieghed the risk of being caught.

Referring to Vincents comment about the 1991 policy - I hadn't seen or heard that anywhere before - yet I have heard from a number of other sources (though not in print) that Steroids were banned in 1991 although baseball wasn't allowed to test for the substance.

The whole idea of saying that the Black Sox got banned even though gambling wasn't illegal yet when they did it implies that you're arguing that Bonds and Co. should get banned too if it's proven that they took the juice. If you're not saying that, then I don't know what we're arguing anymore because that was my original stance. You can't put an asterisk, can't ban them, can't do anything because steroids weren't banned during that period.

BTW, you don't have to explain to me that steroids is cheating. I'm always the first to say that everytime this topic comes up. Maybe someone like off2cjb will come in here an argue the other side of the coin because I'm on your side for that.

I wasn't arguing that using steroids is or isn't cheating. I've read enough of your posts to know that you think using steroids is cheating.

But, you are missing my point -
I'm not implying that Bonds should be banned. I'm not saying that any specific punishment should be imposed on Bonds.

I just wasn't making my argument as clear as I thought.
Here was what I posted originally as the start of my argument:
My argument is The Commissioner of baseball can impose a punishment onto players for committing acts which the rules of baseball did not explicitly prohibit at the time they committed those acts

Your argument, which you implyed to start and which you have refined, claryified and repeated in your last post is that the Commissioner can not do anything to those players because steroids were not illegal.

I've never suggested what the punishment should be, and to say that I've been implying a punishment means you haven't been understanding my argument

To prove my argument I cite an example in baseball history where that happened. The infraction and punishment are irrelevant to the point of my argument, except in that the infraction was not explicitly prohibited at the time and the Commissioner still gave them some sort of punishment.

I used the specific example of the 1919 White Sox because of this statement:
You implied that players who use drugs are not punished. Read back a couple of posts, and you'll see that is not true. They are punished, although not suspended for life from baseball (with the exception of Steve Howe, whom Selig un-suspended the year after replacing Vincent - a reason why i don't think Bonds will be banned from baseball for this)

You further imply that Pete Rose could only have been punished because what he did was already illegal.

My point in using the Black Sox was to show that they were punished for something which was not illegal at the time they did it (gambling on baseball games and conspiring to fix games for money). How they were punished is irrelevant to my argument.

That they were punished at all proves my argument.

Good article:
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Ag1toGfDEObTlGb7Ygl78xERvLYF?slug=jp-bonds031506&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Feds investigating if Bonds committed perjury

Now we're getting somewhere.

Down with Barroid.

I wanna see Barry in an interview with Dan Patrick.

Dan asks a question; Barry goes berserk, spinning into an unchecked 'roid rage, foaming at the mouth, and ripping Dan Patrick's limbs literally off his body.

Okay, that would suck because I like Dan Patrick, but man, wouldn't that kind of video be sweet?

I bet it would make the Top Ten on SC . . .