Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems
Log In Create Account

Mark McGwire admits to using steroids when he broke HR record

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ Mark McGwire admits to using steroids when he broke HR record
just_a_swimmer's avatar

just_a_swimmer

Senior Member

674 posts
Jan 12, 2010 12:43 PM
Hammerin'Hank wrote: I'm not going to defend his actions.....but...When he took whatever he took, it was not illegal and he still had to hit the ball. The same with all who took steroids. It shouldn't be that big of a deal.
I suppose it's happened in every sport...tell me something new.
It was illegal....They were just not testing. Big difference.
He knew what he was doing and he knew it was wrong. What ticks me off is the fact that he actually believes it did not help his performance. Cmon' why say that at all. Why say that he took small doses. I just wish he would have said I took them, it was wrong and I'm sorry. All the excuses are just wrong.
Especially the part that he would have hit all those homers without the stuff.
They I ask "why did you do it"
It is what it is. Thome and Griffey Jr. are the only two guys that are in the top however many that haven't been linked to roids. Those two are younger so my guess is they both did them but quit before they got caught and/or were able to pad their stats by being able to play longer. Both of those guy's numbers dropped off once testing began. Right there sais alot.
Jan 12, 2010 12:43pm
C

charliehustle14

Senior Member

2,224 posts
Jan 12, 2010 12:56 PM
crab42 wrote: Betting can make the playing field uneven... That's the whole reason that it's such a sin in baseball. You have to worry about the players not going all out, or a manager not making moves that he would/would not normally make.
I know where you're going with it and I agree. However, the one guy basically said I should know all about cheating since my name sake bet on baseball. However, I disagreed by saying betting is not cheating. It may 'cheat' the fans and the league....but it doesn't cheat the opposition.

Betting can alter the outcome in situations where the gambler is also a participant. However, to gamble doesn't give an edge to that individual like PED's, doctored baseballs, corked bats, etc. do.
Jan 12, 2010 12:56pm
From the Hills's avatar

From the Hills

Senior Member

190 posts
Jan 12, 2010 3:25 PM
charliehustle14 wrote:
crab42 wrote: Betting can make the playing field uneven... That's the whole reason that it's such a sin in baseball. You have to worry about the players not going all out, or a manager not making moves that he would/would not normally make.
I know where you're going with it and I agree. However, the one guy basically said I should know all about cheating since my name sake bet on baseball. However, I disagreed by saying betting is not cheating. It may 'cheat' the fans and the league....but it doesn't cheat the opposition.

Betting can alter the outcome in situations where the gambler is also a participant. However, to gamble doesn't give an edge to that individual like PED's, doctored baseballs, corked bats, etc. do.
http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/readers/baseball/cheaters.html

Fans say betting is cheating.
Jan 12, 2010 3:25pm
C

charliehustle14

Senior Member

2,224 posts
Jan 12, 2010 4:38 PM
From the Hills wrote:
charliehustle14 wrote:
crab42 wrote: Betting can make the playing field uneven... That's the whole reason that it's such a sin in baseball. You have to worry about the players not going all out, or a manager not making moves that he would/would not normally make.
I know where you're going with it and I agree. However, the one guy basically said I should know all about cheating since my name sake bet on baseball. However, I disagreed by saying betting is not cheating. It may 'cheat' the fans and the league....but it doesn't cheat the opposition.

Betting can alter the outcome in situations where the gambler is also a participant. However, to gamble doesn't give an edge to that individual like PED's, doctored baseballs, corked bats, etc. do.
http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/readers/baseball/cheaters.html

Fans say betting is cheating.
When was this article written up? Hard to believe Bonds, Canseco, and some of the others aren't even mentioned for PED's.

I don't care what a poll says, especially an ESPN poll lol Those things really are a joke...especially when it comes to the ones on some of their blogs.
It says out of 600 emails, Rose was mentioned in only 24 of them. However, when they released the poll, of course Rose got the 2nd most votes because he is a name people recognize more than most on there...more than McGraw, Niekro, Hrbek, Scott. Hell, even Gaylord Perry and Albert Belle aren't as identifiable as the Rose namesake.

I fail to see what Rose did as being cheating. It doesn't fall into the definition of what cheating is. He may have cheated the league, cheated the fans, cheated his teammates, cheated an organization, etc.....but nothing he did gave him an edge in the game. Do I think a Vaseline ball is less of an offense than betting on the game as a participant? You're damn right I do. But despite being a loftier offense, I still don't think it can be considered cheating.

What he did was shameless, there's no disputing that. But I've been around and played the game all my life and when I hear cheating in baseball...I think of PED's, corked bats, doctored baseballs, etc.....I don't think about betting on the game as cheating. And obviously most of the 600 people who submitted emails didn't either since he was only mentioned in 24 of them.
Jan 12, 2010 4:38pm
KnightRyder's avatar

KnightRyder

Senior Member

1,428 posts
Jan 12, 2010 5:29 PM
just_a_swimmer wrote:
Hammerin'Hank wrote: I'm not going to defend his actions.....but...When he took whatever he took, it was not illegal and he still had to hit the ball. The same with all who took steroids. It shouldn't be that big of a deal.
I suppose it's happened in every sport...tell me something new.
It was illegal....They were just not testing. Big difference.
He knew what he was doing and he knew it was wrong. What ticks me off is the fact that he actually believes it did not help his performance. Cmon' why say that at all. Why say that he took small doses. I just wish he would have said I took them, it was wrong and I'm sorry. All the excuses are just wrong.
Especially the part that he would have hit all those homers without the stuff.
They I ask "why did you do it"
It is what it is. Thome and Griffey Jr. are the only two guys that are in the top however many that haven't been linked to roids. Those two are younger so my guess is they both did them but quit before they got caught and/or were able to pad their stats by being able to play longer. Both of those guy's numbers dropped off once testing began. Right there sais alot.
actually steroids werent illegal. they werent a banned substance in baseball at the time, thats why there was no testing . today they are a banned substance in baseball and they still arent illegal. just illegal to obtain without a doctors prescription.
Jan 12, 2010 5:29pm
KnightRyder's avatar

KnightRyder

Senior Member

1,428 posts
Jan 12, 2010 5:31 PM
From the Hills wrote:
HighRoller74 wrote: You have no idea what players of the older generations were doing to gain a competitive edge. To act like no one from that generation didn't do illegal stuff to make themselves better is just naive.
You may be right, but if you guys are so sure older generations were doing things to their bodies to gain an advantage please tell me what it was. Facts!!!???
And don't give me pitchers using vaseline, spit, sandpaper, or Ty Cobb sharpening his cleats.
here is a piece that mentions mickey mantle and steroid use http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4192628
Jan 12, 2010 5:31pm
C

crab42

Member

66 posts
Jan 12, 2010 6:42 PM
The betting itself isn't cheating... the actions that result from said bets is where the cheating lies. It can't be proven one way or another, only Rose knows for sure. But I will say that whether it be steroids, corked bats, doctored balls, or betting on games; I don't believe any of them deserve the death penalty, which is what Rose recieved and what most steroid users are likely recieve once the HOF balloting comes there way. Hopefully the hollier than thou media realizes that these players are part of an era, and an era that deserves to be recognized in the HOF. The Hall is a museum, and to keep the history of the game from being displayed is just as much of a travesty.
Jan 12, 2010 6:42pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jan 12, 2010 7:15 PM
KnightRyder wrote: actually steroids werent illegal. they werent a banned substance in baseball at the time, thats why there was no testing . today they are a banned substance in baseball and they still arent illegal. just illegal to obtain without a doctors prescription.
Actually, steroids have been illegal - or perhaps you prefer "strictly prohibited", i.e. "banned" - in baseball since at least '91, and this was reiterated in a memo sent to all teams/players in '97 or thereabouts.

Since '91 , any federally illegal substance is explicitly illegal and banned in MLB. The Steroid Act in '91 made steroids a level 3 controlled substance, which is to say illegal without a legit medical prescription.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1151761/index.htm
COMMISSIONER FAY VINCENT'S JUNE 7, 1991, MEMO

Each team and the players' union received the memo, which begins, "This memorandum sets forth Baseball's drug policy." The memo goes on to say, "The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players or personnel is strictly prohibited.... This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs ... including steroids or prescription drugs for which the individual in possession of the drug does not have a prescription."
Jan 12, 2010 7:15pm
Hesston's avatar

Hesston

Senior Member

516 posts
Jan 12, 2010 7:30 PM
he will never get into the hall, he had to do this so he can get back in baseball........ go away steroid news go away.
Jan 12, 2010 7:30pm
KnightRyder's avatar

KnightRyder

Senior Member

1,428 posts
Jan 12, 2010 7:45 PM
gut wrote:
KnightRyder wrote: actually steroids werent illegal. they werent a banned substance in baseball at the time, thats why there was no testing . today they are a banned substance in baseball and they still arent illegal. just illegal to obtain without a doctors prescription.
Actually, steroids have been illegal - or perhaps you prefer "strictly prohibited", i.e. "banned" - in baseball since at least '91, and this was reiterated in a memo sent to all teams/players in '97 or thereabouts.

Since '91 , any federally illegal substance is explicitly illegal and banned in MLB. The Steroid Act in '91 made steroids a level 3 controlled substance, which is to say illegal without a legit medical prescription.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1151761/index.htm
COMMISSIONER FAY VINCENT'S JUNE 7, 1991, MEMO

Each team and the players' union received the memo, which begins, "This memorandum sets forth Baseball's drug policy." The memo goes on to say, "The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players or personnel is strictly prohibited.... This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs ... including steroids or prescription drugs for which the individual in possession of the drug does not have a prescription."
so basically if you have a prescription they are legal. and getting a prescription is not hard
Jan 12, 2010 7:45pm
From the Hills's avatar

From the Hills

Senior Member

190 posts
Jan 12, 2010 7:56 PM
KnightRyder wrote:
From the Hills wrote:
HighRoller74 wrote: You have no idea what players of the older generations were doing to gain a competitive edge. To act like no one from that generation didn't do illegal stuff to make themselves better is just naive.
You may be right, but if you guys are so sure older generations were doing things to their bodies to gain an advantage please tell me what it was. Facts!!!???
And don't give me pitchers using vaseline, spit, sandpaper, or Ty Cobb sharpening his cleats.
here is a piece that mentions mickey mantle and steroid use http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4192628
Zev Chafets should stick to writing about Israel and the Middle East.
Jan 12, 2010 7:56pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jan 12, 2010 9:45 PM
KnightRyder wrote: so basically if you have a prescription they are legal. and getting a prescription is not hard
If you have a LEGIT prescription. Doctors go to jail for prescribing meds without a justifiable medical purpose. Being part of a fraud would not excuse a player/person from legal actions. I believe the proper term would be "co-conspirators".

And do you really think most of these players were getting steroids prescribed by a doctor?
Jan 12, 2010 9:45pm
just_a_swimmer's avatar

just_a_swimmer

Senior Member

674 posts
Jan 12, 2010 10:03 PM
KnightRyder wrote:
just_a_swimmer wrote:
Hammerin'Hank wrote: I'm not going to defend his actions.....but...When he took whatever he took, it was not illegal and he still had to hit the ball. The same with all who took steroids. It shouldn't be that big of a deal.
I suppose it's happened in every sport...tell me something new.
It was illegal....They were just not testing. Big difference.
He knew what he was doing and he knew it was wrong. What ticks me off is the fact that he actually believes it did not help his performance. Cmon' why say that at all. Why say that he took small doses. I just wish he would have said I took them, it was wrong and I'm sorry. All the excuses are just wrong.
Especially the part that he would have hit all those homers without the stuff.
They I ask "why did you do it"
It is what it is. Thome and Griffey Jr. are the only two guys that are in the top however many that haven't been linked to roids. Those two are younger so my guess is they both did them but quit before they got caught and/or were able to pad their stats by being able to play longer. Both of those guy's numbers dropped off once testing began. Right there sais alot.
actually steroids werent illegal. they werent a banned substance in baseball at the time, thats why there was no testing . today they are a banned substance in baseball and they still arent illegal. just illegal to obtain without a doctors prescription.
Steroids were banned in baseball in 1991. They approved testing in 2003. With or without a prescription players were not to take steroids. I am sure if they had legit prescriptions there would have been no reason to lie.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/23/health/main579709.shtml
Jan 12, 2010 10:03pm
F

Foul Tip

Senior Member

113 posts
Jan 13, 2010 1:46 AM
NcGuire on his first day as the St. Louis hitting coach.

'' Ok men, meet me and the trainer in the clubhouse bathroom in ten minutes''.
Jan 13, 2010 1:46am
KnightRyder's avatar

KnightRyder

Senior Member

1,428 posts
Jan 13, 2010 8:09 PM
gut wrote:
KnightRyder wrote: so basically if you have a prescription they are legal. and getting a prescription is not hard
If you have a LEGIT prescription. Doctors go to jail for prescribing meds without a justifiable medical purpose. Being part of a fraud would not excuse a player/person from legal actions. I believe the proper term would be "co-conspirators".

And do you really think most of these players were getting steroids prescribed by a doctor?
didnt paul byrd have a prescription. alot of doctors prescribe drugs all day for various reasons . did you ever hear of hormone replacement therapy. doctors are basically drug dealers with a degree. and yes i do believe those players can get a prescription with out a problem. not saying that they did . but it wouldnt be hard to get one.
Jan 13, 2010 8:09pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jan 13, 2010 8:18 PM
KnightRyder wrote: and yes i do believe those players can get a prescription with out a problem. not saying that they did . but it wouldnt be hard to get one.
And a fraudulent medical prescription is not going to excuse their actions.

Drugs have pretty specific, officially sanctioned uses. You don't prescribe steroids willy-nilly. It's safe to assume that a professional athlete competing at a high level is not going to meet the conditions or criteria for prescribing steroids, other than temporarily for treatment of mono or staph.

Yes, it would be legal with a legit prescription. But you're argument is a complete non-starter.
Jan 13, 2010 8:18pm
KnightRyder's avatar

KnightRyder

Senior Member

1,428 posts
Jan 14, 2010 9:15 AM
gut wrote:
KnightRyder wrote: and yes i do believe those players can get a prescription with out a problem. not saying that they did . but it wouldnt be hard to get one.
And a fraudulent medical prescription is not going to excuse their actions.

Drugs have pretty specific, officially sanctioned uses. You don't prescribe steroids willy-nilly. It's safe to assume that a professional athlete competing at a high level is not going to meet the conditions or criteria for prescribing steroids, other than temporarily for treatment of mono or staph.

Yes, it would be legal with a legit prescription. But you're argument is a complete non-starter.
they dont prescribe anabolic steroids? geez thats a new one. what world have you been living in. i see it done quite alot.
Jan 14, 2010 9:15am
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jan 14, 2010 11:05 AM
KnightRyder wrote: they dont prescribe anabolic steroids? geez thats a new one. what world have you been living in. i see it done quite alot.
On an ongoing basis? To a pro athlete competing at the highest levels? I don't think any of these guys are kids with pituitary problems.

You were wrong about this and rather than just admit it you're carrying on about some imagined loophole. Even if these guys had presciptions (which most, if not all, certainly did not), there would have been no valid medical reason for their prolonged use. Steroids have their uses, but you're not going to find any for a healthy 20-40 yr old elite athlete, other than briefly in recovery of surgery or serious illness, both of which would be easily verifiable.
Jan 14, 2010 11:05am
just_a_swimmer's avatar

just_a_swimmer

Senior Member

674 posts
Jan 14, 2010 11:30 AM
Exactly, there is no reason for a healthy athlete to take steroids. Steroids are prescribed only when things are really bad and they are a quick fix until alternatives can be found. I've been on steroids due to Rheumatoid arthritis. I was watched very closely and limited in the amount I could take in addition to being told you can't these forever. They can help you now but in the long run can kill you. I know people who have taken them for a very long time under a doctors care but in no way does that compare to athletes shooting them up. Not even talking apples to apples.

If Mark McGwire was going to come clean he should have just come clean. It would have been better. Instead he continued to lie and try to sugar coat it by saying he took low doses and only to recover. Bull crap.......I believe Canseco shot him up too. Maybe if he wasn't shooting up so many steroids he may not have had the injury issues. Steroids over time break down your body and they are not good for you. Once you start you can't stop then you continue and you take more and more. No different then being a drug addict.
Jan 14, 2010 11:30am
KnightRyder's avatar

KnightRyder

Senior Member

1,428 posts
Jan 14, 2010 12:15 PM
look i have seen it first hand , a perfectly healthy person was prescibed anabolic steroids. so dont tell me i'm wrong when i seen it done.
Jan 14, 2010 12:15pm
just_a_swimmer's avatar

just_a_swimmer

Senior Member

674 posts
Jan 14, 2010 12:22 PM
From a medical Journal
"Anabolic steroids were first isolated, identified and synthesized in the 1930s, and are now used therapeutically in medicine to stimulate bone growth and appetite, induce male puberty, and treat chronic wasting conditions, such as cancer and AIDS."

Yea I could see why a perfectly healthy male would need a script for Anabolic Steroids.
Jan 14, 2010 12:22pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
Jan 14, 2010 5:31 PM
just_a_swimmer wrote: From a medical Journal
"Anabolic steroids were first isolated, identified and synthesized in the 1930s, and are now used therapeutically in medicine to stimulate bone growth and appetite, induce male puberty, and treat chronic wasting conditions, such as cancer and AIDS."

Yea I could see why a perfectly healthy male would need a script for Anabolic Steroids.
My point exactly. The only way a "perfectly healthy male" would be subscribed - temporarily I might add - would be for something like strep, mono, staph (to strengthen the immune system) or possible in recovery from major surgery (to stimulate bone growth/healing).
Jan 14, 2010 5:31pm
KnightRyder's avatar

KnightRyder

Senior Member

1,428 posts
Jan 15, 2010 6:33 PM
gut wrote:
just_a_swimmer wrote: From a medical Journal
"Anabolic steroids were first isolated, identified and synthesized in the 1930s, and are now used therapeutically in medicine to stimulate bone growth and appetite, induce male puberty, and treat chronic wasting conditions, such as cancer and AIDS."

Yea I could see why a perfectly healthy male would need a script for Anabolic Steroids.
My point exactly. The only way a "perfectly healthy male" would be subscribed - temporarily I might add - would be for something like strep, mono, staph (to strengthen the immune system) or possible in recovery from major surgery (to stimulate bone growth/healing).
thats shows how wrong you are.
Jan 15, 2010 6:33pm
just_a_swimmer's avatar

just_a_swimmer

Senior Member

674 posts
Jan 15, 2010 10:14 PM
From your article.
"Medical Examiners has taken immediate action and launched its own investigation. If the board determines the doctors are prescribing anabolic steroids illegally,"

Your previous posts were acting like doctors on the up and up are giving steroids to perfectly healthy people. From your own article it states they are prescribing the anabolic steroids illegally. Sure the crooks are going to subscribe to perfectly healthy people but the point is it is illegal then and now.

You proved what we were saying. What exactly is your point? That crooked doctors prescribe drugs to people who shouldn't get them? You proved your point.
Jan 15, 2010 10:14pm