Marion Jones and Barry Bonds


This Forum was created to divert traffic from Current Events at the height of the BALCO scandal. It comes and goes as "needed"; it's back to being locked.

Marion Jones and Barry Bonds

Postby carlosreyes2k » Fri Nov 30, 2007 2:52 pm

Well this is interesting. USTAF Rep Robert Weiner is saying Barry Bonds' records should be wiped like Ms Jones' were.
I'm beginning to wonder about the purity and sanctity of any sport. Especially baseball. Gaylord Perry wrote about about how he cheated. It was called "Me and the Spitter". He's in the Hall of Fame!
Mr. Weiner didn't mention McGuire, who admitted using Andro, and Sosa who also have records. I wonder why that is?
The thing is HGH and andro weren't against baseball rules when people were using them. They are now. Not saying if that makes it right or wrong, I'm just saying... I don't know if the rules were in effect when Bonds was allegedly perjured himself to the Grand Jury. Not sure I want to know because yes, I am a major fan of his.
As for Marion I feel a bit sorry for her but I'm feeling pretty ok with the fact that her marks are being erased as we speak.
If it wasn't against the law when someone does something no asterisk.
Track and Field is doing the right thing but you can't apply that to everyone retro-actively.
Oh and baseball made a ton of $$ during all those races so maybe that had something to do with their coming late to the show eh? :lol:
carlosreyes2k
 
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 4:50 pm
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Marion Jones and Barry Bonds

Postby CookyMonzta » Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:15 pm

carlosreyes2k wrote:Well this is interesting. USTAF Rep Robert Weiner is saying Barry Bonds' records should be wiped like Ms Jones' were.
I'm beginning to wonder about the purity and sanctity of any sport. Especially baseball. Gaylord Perry wrote about about how he cheated. It was called "Me and the Spitter". He's in the Hall of Fame!
Mr. Weiner didn't mention McGuire, who admitted using Andro, and Sosa who also have records. I wonder why that is?
The thing is HGH and andro weren't against baseball rules when people were using them. They are now. Not saying if that makes it right or wrong, I'm just saying... I don't know if the rules were in effect when Bonds was allegedly perjured himself to the Grand Jury. Not sure I want to know because yes, I am a major fan of his.
As for Marion I feel a bit sorry for her but I'm feeling pretty ok with the fact that her marks are being erased as we speak.
If it wasn't against the law when someone does something no asterisk.
Track and Field is doing the right thing but you can't apply that to everyone retro-actively.
Oh and baseball made a ton of $$ during all those races so maybe that had something to do with their coming late to the show eh? :lol:

The rules banning performance-enhancing drugs in baseball were not in effect when Bonds went before the grand jury. Technically, what he did in the years before and during 2003, before the BALCO raid, were perfectly legal in baseball.

For them to erase his records would require that every game he participated in should be forfeited, including his team's participation in the 2002 World Series. For that to happen, they'd literally have to go back and replay that series between the Angels and the team the Giants beat to make it to the World Series. We know that will not happen.

I feel sorry for Marion for one reason: She is being made to pay for all the sins that were committed by those who came way before her, starting with the state-sponsored drug programs of the GDR, the USSR and much of the former Communist Bloc. If her performances are erased and her medals revoked, why not theirs, considering that the evidence against them is as bright as a big nuke against Marion's flashlight?
CookyMonzta
 
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Marion Jones and Barry Bonds

Postby dj » Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:52 am

CookyMonzta wrote:The rules banning performance-enhancing drugs in baseball were not in effect when Bonds went before the grand jury. Technically, what he did in the years before and during 2003, before the BALCO raid, were perfectly legal in baseball.


Stop buying into this BS propounded by the head-in-the-sand sportswriters covering the four major pro sports!

Steroids without a doctor's prescription became illegal in baseball the moment they became illegal in the U.S.: Oct. 1990. (U.S. industry cannot operate outside of federal law without exemptions--like Major League Baseball's anti-trust exemption.)

Baseball codified that steroids were illegal in June 1991.

The minor leagues began punitive testing in April 2001.

MLB began survey testing in March 2003.

MLB began punitive testing in June 2004.

Consider t&f's situation with hGH. Even though we don't test for it, it's still illegal. In the same way, steroids have been illegal in baseball far longer than most people are willing to fess up to.

http://thesteroidera.blogspot.com/2006/ ... eline.html
dj
 
Posts: 6198
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby gh » Sat Dec 01, 2007 8:41 am

you know we hate it when people confound emotion with facts!!
gh
 
Posts: 46301
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Marion Jones and Barry Bonds

Postby Jacksf » Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:16 am

CookyMonzta wrote:
carlosreyes2k wrote:Well this is interesting. USTAF Rep Robert Weiner is saying Barry Bonds' records should be wiped like Ms Jones' were.
I'm beginning to wonder about the purity and sanctity of any sport. Especially baseball. Gaylord Perry wrote about about how he cheated. It was called "Me and the Spitter". He's in the Hall of Fame!
Mr. Weiner didn't mention McGuire, who admitted using Andro, and Sosa who also have records. I wonder why that is?
The thing is HGH and andro weren't against baseball rules when people were using them. They are now. Not saying if that makes it right or wrong, I'm just saying... I don't know if the rules were in effect when Bonds was allegedly perjured himself to the Grand Jury. Not sure I want to know because yes, I am a major fan of his.
As for Marion I feel a bit sorry for her but I'm feeling pretty ok with the fact that her marks are being erased as we speak.
If it wasn't against the law when someone does something no asterisk.
Track and Field is doing the right thing but you can't apply that to everyone retro-actively.
Oh and baseball made a ton of $$ during all those races so maybe that had something to do with their coming late to the show eh? :lol:

The rules banning performance-enhancing drugs in baseball were not in effect when Bonds went before the grand jury. Technically, what he did in the years before and during 2003, before the BALCO raid, were perfectly legal in baseball.

For them to erase his records would require that every game he participated in should be forfeited, including his team's participation in the 2002 World Series. For that to happen, they'd literally have to go back and replay that series between the Angels and the team the Giants beat to make it to the World Series. We know that will not happen.

I feel sorry for Marion for one reason: She is being made to pay for all the sins that were committed by those who came way before her, starting with the state-sponsored drug programs of the GDR, the USSR and much of the former Communist Bloc. If her performances are erased and her medals revoked, why not theirs, considering that the evidence against them is as bright as a big nuke against Marion's flashlight?


Marion was not competing against the athletes from the GDR and USSR, so that reason to feel sorry for her is ridiculous.
The 'everyone else was doing it' arguement is completely childish and sounds like something a 4th grader would say.
The only reason to feel sorry for Marion is that she was immensely talented, but was stupid enough to use PEDs anyway, AND, to think that she wouldn't get caught, especially in light of the company she was keeping.
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby bad hammy » Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:59 pm

I don't feel sorry for Bonds or Jones (they both knew what they were doing and lied through their teeth about it), but the fact is that they are both tip-of-the-iceberg scapegoats.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby 26mi235 » Sun Dec 02, 2007 8:52 pm

bad hammy wrote:I don't feel sorry for Bonds or Jones (they both knew what they were doing and lied through their teeth about it), but the fact is that they are both tip-of-the-iceberg scapegoats.


They might be tip-of-the-iceberg, but they are not scape goats. What are they scape goats for; do they take the blame so that others do not have to? I do not think so.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby bad hammy » Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:12 am

26mi235 wrote:What are they scape goats for; do they take the blame so that others do not have to? I do not think so.

In the general public's eye they, particulalrly Bonds, take all the heat. The rest of the guilty are hardly a blip on the radar.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Marion Jones and Barry Bonds

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:38 am

dj wrote:Steroids without a doctor's prescription became illegal in baseball the moment they became illegal in the U.S.: Oct. 1990. (U.S. industry cannot operate outside of federal law without exemptions--like Major League Baseball's anti-trust exemption.)

Baseball codified that steroids were illegal in June 1991.

The minor leagues began punitive testing in April 2001.

MLB began survey testing in March 2003.

Did baseball have a list of banned substances between 1991 and 2003? If not, it's meaningless to issue a general rule banning illegal substances since several PED's like androstenedione were legal during that period. Furthermore, what's to stop an athlete from doctor shopping until he finds someone who will give him/her a steroid prescription?
Also, according to the memo that Fay Vincent put out, the ban wasn't limited to PED's, but any illegal substance, which means recreational drugs also. I wonder how baseball viewed the consumption of alcoholic beverages during the Prohibition era, which covered most of Babe Ruth's career.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Snation » Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:15 am

I see these misconceptions all the time.

1. PEDs were indeed banned in baseball as far back as a policy memo from Fay Vincent in 1991, which was resent by Bud Selig in 1997.
http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation ... rform.html

2. PEDs were not tested for until 2003, with a stripped down protocol.
http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation ... -doct.html

3. And it doesn't matter whether or not PEDs were banned by baseball (the MLB doesn't need rules forbidding players to park in handicapped places), Steroids and HGH are controlled substances that are illegal without a legitimate doctor's prescription.
Snation
 
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:03 am
Location: sunny iowa

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:49 am

Snation wrote:I see these misconceptions all the time.

1. PEDs were indeed banned in baseball as far back as a policy memo from Fay Vincent in 1991, which was resent by Bud Selig in 1997.
http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation ... rform.html

2. PEDs were not tested for until 2003, with a stripped down protocol.
http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation ... -doct.html

3. And it doesn't matter whether or not PEDs were banned by baseball (the MLB doesn't need rules forbidding players to park in handicapped places), Steroids and HGH are controlled substances that are illegal without a legitimate doctor's prescription.


Both of the memos use the phrase "illegal drug and controlled substance". That phrase leaves a lot of wiggle room. Today's athletes would have no problem driving an eighteen wheeler through that loophole. And as I said earlier, androstenedione is neither illegal nor controlled, but it is performance enhancing.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Snation » Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:23 am

There is no wiggle room in the statements 'controlled substance' and 'illegal drugs'. None.

The list of controlled substances are well known. A prescription drug used without a doctor's prescription is illegal. A controlled substance used without a doctor's prescription carries with is further penalties for narcotics use (and distribution).

Since about 1931 with the prescription act in the United State there are major differences between 'over-the-counter' drugs, and prescribed drugs. With the 1990 revision of the controlled substances act, anabolic steroids were added as a controlled 'scheduled' drug. HGH followed.

Baseball did not need a list of 'prohibited substances'. There are clear differences between HGH for a kid with HGH deficiency and a MLB player getting HGH on the street. The prohibited list comes from the propensity to litigate everything, and from WADA attempting to make things airtight in anticipation of defense attorneys (and fair enough that someone wants a defined list of actual drugs, if they really want to read through it).

I don't know why people want to fight the idea that MLB indeed banned PEDs.

If you look at the substances used (nandrolone, winny, testosterone, HGH, etc.) there is no ambiguity. And if you look at the sources (local gyms, AIDS patients, BALCO, the Russian mafia) they are not professionals.

The PEDs were illegal, period. MLB has a policy against PEDs, period. MLB did not develop a testing program for various reasons, until 2003.

But don't confuse the facts.
Snation
 
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:03 am
Location: sunny iowa

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:07 pm

Snation wrote:There is no wiggle room in the statements 'controlled substance' and 'illegal drugs'. None.

The list of controlled substances are well known. A prescription drug used without a doctor's prescription is illegal. A controlled substance used without a doctor's prescription carries with is further penalties for narcotics use (and distribution).

Since about 1931 with the prescription act in the United State there are major differences between 'over-the-counter' drugs, and prescribed drugs. With the 1990 revision of the controlled substances act, anabolic steroids were added as a controlled 'scheduled' drug. HGH followed.

Baseball did not need a list of 'prohibited substances'. There are clear differences between HGH for a kid with HGH deficiency and a MLB player getting HGH on the street. The prohibited list comes from the propensity to litigate everything, and from WADA attempting to make things airtight in anticipation of defense attorneys (and fair enough that someone wants a defined list of actual drugs, if they really want to read through it).

I don't know why people want to fight the idea that MLB indeed banned PEDs.

If you look at the substances used (nandrolone, winny, testosterone, HGH, etc.) there is no ambiguity. And if you look at the sources (local gyms, AIDS patients, BALCO, the Russian mafia) they are not professionals.

The PEDs were illegal, period. MLB has a policy against PEDs, period. MLB did not develop a testing program for various reasons, until 2003.

But don't confuse the facts.

I agree with most of what you've said. Of course it's illegal to get controlled substances from anyone but a licensed physician. But the patient isn't required to prove that a doctor is ethical before getting a prescription from him/her. When Lance Armstrong's doctor, Michelle Ferrari was convicted for illegally providing drugs for athletes, Armstrong paid no price. He just fired Ferrari and moved on. What price did the Carolina Panthers pay when it was revealed that they had a crooked doctor providing HGH for their players? If a doctor is willing to jeopardize his career for a buck why should the athlete care. As I see it, the athlete is only required to make sure the doctor has a current license. And you still haven't addressed my contention that there are certain PED's that are neither controlled nor illegal.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Snation » Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:46 pm

You have changed the subject some, but those are a couple good points.

1. The US Govt is generally not interested in the users of PEDs (especially if they are rich athletes). However, the Govt is interested in distributors and in unethical doctors. Dr. Shortt was sent up the river for prescribing PEDs to the Panthers, while the players played in the Super Bowl.

I disagree with this approach.

2. Another issue would be the anti-aging clinics that hand out HGH like candy to a geriatric.

Most athletes know what they are doing. They sneak around to unethical docs or the suspect anti-aging clinics.

With the controlled substances act, the doc needs to know why he is prescribing that particular drug, and he needs to justify it. This is enforced by the DEA, who apparently is not as interested in the patients. The doc can lose his license or serve time in jail for unethical and illegal PED RXs.

A different branch of Govt investigated the BALCO scandal, the IRS. They are more interested in money laundering and fraud. So there you go...not quite a unified Govt approach.

However because the athlete has a prescription doesn't mean he can use PEDs without discretion. He must apply for a TUE which mean he has to justify the drug (and apparently asthma is epidemic among cyclists). If the athlete doesn't obtain a TUE he is still in violation of the sport regs.

Doctors are highly regulated by the DEA and by states ethics laws. Athletes are not. I lobby for 'sports fraud' laws in the US which would place more responsibility on an athlete for PED use.

3. There are and were 'substances' that were legal PEDs. In the 1990s Andro was (although apparently weak). Caffeine can be a legal PED. An inhaler for asthma can be a legal PED, if a TUE is obtained.

Motrin, Tylenol, and LASIK surgery could be PEDs.

I am unclear if the removal of one kidney, a spleen, or part of the large intestine -- to reduce weight -- are legal PEDs.

jazzcyclist wrote:I agree with most of what you've said. Of course it's illegal to get controlled substances from anyone but a licensed physician. But the patient isn't required to prove that a doctor is ethical before getting a prescription from him/her. When Lance Armstrong's doctor, Michelle Ferrari was convicted for illegally providing drugs for athletes, Armstrong paid no price. He just fired Ferrari and moved on. What price did the Carolina Panthers pay when it was revealed that they had a crooked doctor providing HGH for their players? If a doctor is willing to jeopardize his career for a buck why should the athlete care. As I see it, the athlete is only required to make sure the doctor has a current license. And you still haven't addressed my contention that there are certain PED's that are neither controlled nor illegal.
:) :D
Snation
 
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:03 am
Location: sunny iowa

Postby Mennisco » Sat Jan 12, 2008 7:54 am

Barion Bonds?
Mennisco
 
Posts: 4110
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 3:43 pm
Location: Canada


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests