A-Rod's Future (Bans, Injuries and Fraud)

[Divinity]

To be fair Pettitte only used HGH to recover from an injury in 2002, we aren't talking about anabolic steroids here, we're talking about a substance that was neither illegal, nor against the rules of the sport until 2005

 

He was using it to help rehab from an injury, not to help him pack on 20 pounds of muscle, and his use was very limited.

 

He was also one of the only guy's to come forward and be honest about it unlike most other players connected to PED's, who deny, deny, deny until they're trapped in a corner.

[User Name]

Goddamn you're a homer. Steroids are steroids.

[mvp 78]

Remember when everyone was amazed at how honest Palmeiro was in front of Congress? Sports writers and fans always want to believe in their "heroes." Laughable.

[Bellhorn04]

Goddamn you're a homer. Steroids are steroids.

 

You don't think there are degrees of abuse?

[User Name]

You don't think there are degrees of abuse?

 

For the purposes of this discussion, if you get caught using, you get caught using. A guy may use once and get caught, and another may use all the time, but does that make him different in the eyes of the rules when receiving their respective punishment? Does the guy who only used once not get branded as a past steroid user? If you use and get caught, you got caught cheating regardless of your usage patterns.

 

And for the record, Petitte's statement that he "only used to recover from a surgery" could be ******** for all intents and purposes.

Edited July 29, 2013 by User Name?

[redsoxrules]

According to repports, if Arod tries to appeal his suspension he will get a lifetime ban from MLB and

apparantly he is going to appeal it.

Is this guy an idiot? especially when he still has 60 MIL left on the table after 2014.

[mvp 78]

According to repports, if Arod tries to appeal his suspension he will get a lifetime ban from MLB and

apparantly he is going to appeal it.

Is this guy an idiot? especially when he still has 60 MIL left on the table after 2014.

 

It goes against the CBA. The union should fight this.

[Divinity]

For the purposes of this discussion, if you get caught using, you get caught using. A guy may use once and get caught, and another may use all the time, but does that make him different in the eyes of the rules when receiving their respective punishment? Does the guy who only used once not get branded as a past steroid user? If you use and get caught, you got caught cheating regardless of your usage patterns.

 

And for the record, Petitte's statement that he "only used to recover from a surgery" could be ******** for all intents and purposes.

 

HGH and steroids are NOT one and the same. He didn't take it to enhance his performance.

 

Andy is a honest and decent guy, which is why he stepped up and made these admissions, he's also deeply religious. I think it's likely he was in fact telling the truth.

 

The way I see it, if they did it before the league banned the substance, it doesn't matter. It was not against the rules of the sport they played, so it's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

 

If you want to blame someone for the prevalence of steroids in the sport from that time frame, you have to blame Bud Selig and the players' association, who fought tooth and nail to keep steroids off the testing list.

 

You can point fingers at general managers and staff for turning a blind eye, but it's the decision-makers who should have done something about it sooner.

[User Name]

HGH and steroids are NOT one and the same. He didn't take it to enhance his performance.

 

Andy is a honest and decent guy, which is why he stepped up and made these admissions, he's also deeply religious. I think it's likely he was in fact telling the truth.

 

So what? It's a banned substance. Why he took them is irrelevant. And he's so religious that he cheated and only confessed when the authorities were hot on his trail . Join the rest of us in reality.

 

The way I see it, if they did it before the league banned the substance, it doesn't matter. It was not against the rules of the sport they played, so it's irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.

 

And that's why i'm calling you a homer. Andy's a cheater, just like Manny was. And neither you nor i have any proof that he didn't continue using afterwards.

 

If you want to blame someone for the prevalence of steroids in the sport from that time frame, you have to blame Bud Selig and the players' association, who fought tooth and nail to keep steroids off the testing list.

 

That's a cop-out. Selig didn't tell them to cheat.

 

You can point fingers at general managers and staff for turning a blind eye, but it's the decision-makers who should have done something about it sooner.

 

Or i could first and foremost point the fingers at the players, who were the ones sticking needles up their ass. Stop making excuses for players just because you like them. Homer.

[jacksonianmarch]

The union has no interest in fighting this fight for him. MLB cannot suspend a guy for life due to roids unless they've been caught three times. But actively trying to obstruct MLB's investigation is likely why theyre trying to ban him for a long, long time

[a700hitter]

Pettitte is a cheater, liar and a huge hypocrite. He was a known huge hypocrite long before HGH came into the stor. Remember that he went to Houston to be close to his family. Well, they gave him a big fat contract. TheYankees were scared about his elbow. After that contract was up and his arm was still sound, the Yankees wooed him back with big bucks. Being close to his family had its price.

[Divinity]

 

And that's why i'm calling you a homer. Andy's a cheater, just like Manny was. And neither you nor i have any proof that he didn't continue using afterwards.

 

 

How was using HGH prior to 2005 when MLB banned it considered cheating? I'm pretty sure to cheat at something that require's you do something that's against the rules and gives you an unfair advantage, which he didn't.

 

Prior to 2005 all players were free to take HGH as they wanted. Pettitte also said if had been been banned back then he wouldn't have taken it.

 

Was it stupid? Yeah, it was stupid. Was it desperate? Yeah, it was probably desperate. Was it cheating? No, I don't think so.

 

Comparing Pettitte and Manny is like apples and oranges. Manny took actual steroids, which were banned by MLB since 1991. Manny gained a huge amount of muscle/power after he started using them.

 

What Manny did was cheating, just like Clemens, Giambi, and A-Rod who all took steroids well after they were banned.

 

 

Pettitte is a cheater, liar and a huge hypocrite.

 

My post above addresses why I don't think players who took HGH prior to 2005 were cheating.

 

What did he lie about though? I agree with you about him being a hypocrite, but that's about it.

[a700hitter]

How was using HGH prior to 2005 when MLB banned it considered cheating? I'm pretty sure to cheat at something that require's you do something that's against the rules and gives you an unfair advantage, which he didn't.

 

Prior to 2005 all players were free to take HGH as they wanted. Pettitte also said if had been been banned back then he wouldn't have taken it.

 

Was it stupid? Yeah, it was stupid. Was it desperate? Yeah, it was probably desperate. Was it cheating? No, I don't think so.

 

Comparing Pettitte and Manny is like apples and oranges. Manny took actual steroids, which were banned by MLB since 1991. Manny gained a huge amount of muscle/power after he started using them.

 

What Manny did was cheating, just like Clemens, Giambi, and A-Rod who all took steroids well after they were banned.

 

 

 

 

My post above addresses why I don't think players who took HGH prior to 2005 were cheating.

 

What did he lie about though? I agree with you about him being a hypocrite, but that's about it.

I am pretty sure that HGH and steroids were banned substances prior to 2005. There was just not an enforcement mechanism for the cheaters. Also, they didn't have a test to detect HGH. Finally, obtaining the HGH was a crime. So let's add criminal to Pettitte's description.

[User Name]

^Yeah, let's stop calling him a cheater. Criminal fits him much better. Contradicts the notions of a "deeply religious" person if you ask me.

[Divinity]

I am pretty sure that HGH and steroids were banned substances prior to 2005. There was just not an enforcement mechanism for the cheaters. Also, they didn't have a test to detect HGH. Finally, obtaining the HGH was a crime. So let's add criminal to Pettitte's description.

 

Steroids were banned in 1991. HGH wasn't banned until 2005.

 

Obtaining marijuana is a crime too, is anyone who take's a hit of weed a "criminal" ?

[User Name]

By definition, yes. You are defending the indefensible here. Petitte is a cheater. For all we know, he's still cheating. Stop being a homer.

[Divinity]

By definition, yes. You are defending the indefensible here. Petitte is a cheater. For all we know, he's still cheating. Stop being a homer.

 

well damn, 48% of American's have admitted to trying marijuana. I guess by definition nearly half of our population are criminals.

 

How am I being a homer? I don't think any player who used HGH prior to 2005 when it was offically banned cheated. Regardless of what team they played for. Stop being a hater.

[User Name]

well damn, 48% of American's have admitted to trying marijuana. I guess by definition nearly half of our population are criminals.

 

How am I being a homer? I don't think any player who used HGH prior to 2005 when it was offically banned cheated. Regardless of what team they played for. Stop being a hater.

 

Yes, and then you're not just a homer, you're a defender of cheaters. The only reason HGH was not "banned" before 2005 is because there was no reliable way of testing for it, but possessing HGH without a prescription was a criminal act way before 2005. You are stretching the truth in order to defend a morally reprehensible and downright criminal behavior. Stop.

[Divinity]

Yes, and then you're not just a homer, you're a defender of cheaters. The only reason HGH was not "banned" before 2005 is because there was no reliable way of testing for it, but possessing HGH without a prescription was a criminal act way before 2005. You are stretching the truth in order to defend a morally reprehensible and downright criminal behavior. Stop.

 

I don't buy that, steroids were banned in 1991 while they didn't test players for it until a decade after.

 

You don't think beloved Yankees pitcher Andy Pettitte could have found a doctor to write him a script back then? I mean come on now.

[yankees228]

Morally reprehensible? I guess I can understand the desire to use hyperbolic language to prove a point, but that's quite the combination of words as it relates to the topic at hand.

[User Name]

In Petitte's case it's well deserved given the circumstances. Remember the "super-religious nice guy" persona? Yeah, that went out the window.

[User Name]

I don't buy that, steroids were banned in 1991 while they didn't test players for it until a decade after.

 

You don't think beloved Yankees pitcher Andy Pettitte could have found a doctor to write him a script back then? I mean come on now.

 

That doesn't even make sense. Whether they tested for it or not makes it no less illegal.

[yankees228]

In Petitte's case it's well deserved given the circumstances. Remember the "super-religious nice guy" persona? Yeah, that went out the window.

 

So because Person A is deeply religious and took steroids he's morally reprehensible? Is that the logic, or am I mistaken?

[Emmz]

 

^How to liarpants.

 

Edit: This actually reminds me a lot of what Pettite was saying when he got busted. He was trying to shame people the same way, I think he said something about how using HGH once shouldn't ruin an entire career of hard work, etc.

 

I never thought of him as being full of s*** back then, but I kind of do now. He was dishonest, and he did cheat, but least he admitted it, something that Ryan Braun didn't do.

 

@y228: If he's religious, it doesn't make a difference necessarily, but you should try and stick to what the Bible says is right, right? If you're supposedly a very religious person, and you're caught cheating/being dishonest, you have to live with that. You're probably not going to live it down, because religious people are supposed to set an example. That's what you're usually going for if your PR is that you're very religious, you're cleaner than a preacher's sheets and you're an exceptional human being that cares.

Edited July 30, 2013 by Emmz

[User Name]

So because Person A is deeply religious and took steroids he's morally reprehensible? Is that the logic, or am I mistaken?

 

It is when you take steroids, lie about it, and then come clean and cry like a little bitch only 'cause you'll get caught. Also if you're "deeply religious" and you engage in illegal activities, isn't that morally reprehensible?

[yankees228]

I guess I'll respond to both points together, considering they amount to the same thing ... which is, if you're deeply religious, partaking in actions that violate the religious text to which you subscribe is a morally reprehensible act.

 

There's so many avenues to take, but I'd like to point out that even if the laws of their religion would describe their actions as morally reprehensible, there's probably more objective standards that can be applied. It's also worth noting that very few Christians, if any, follow their religious text in an exact manner. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of theology knows this to be true. If you want to call of these people hypocrites I wouldn't put up much of an argument on that count, but that would also be going in a different direction than the one being argued.

[yankees228]

Also, to the other part of Emmz's point, I don't hold religious people to a higher standard. Far from it, in fact.

[Emmz]

I don't hold anyone to a different standard. He's a liar and a cheater, and there's not much I need to add to that. You make it sound like I'm the one who's holding him to a higher standard because he's religious. He holds himself to a higher standard by being religious, and being a liar and cheater just makes that all kind of seem like a pathetic PR stunt.

[yankees228]

How do you know what standard he holds himself to? That's a huge assumption. Religious views do not always dictate the standard to which people hold themselves.

 

There's no need to concoct scenarios to make Pettitte look worse than he already does. The guy used some illegal drugs. That's the extent of it. Judge him on that, not on some perceived motives or intentions.

[Emmz]

Holding yourself to a higher standard is the basic point of almost every religion.

 

If he isn't holding himself to the standards of his religion, then he isn't religious, and that just makes him even more dishonest.

 

He did illegal drugs that give him a competitive advantage over other players (also known as cheating) and he lied about it (also known as dishonesty).

 

This has nothing to do with his integrity as a religious man, I think that's what you're focusing on way too much. It has everything to do with his integrity as a human being, though.

 

Also, what scenarios did I create in an attempt to demonize Pettite?