PDA

View Full Version : Innocent until proven guilty



3arod13
06-21-2007, 03:38 AM
As we all know, it suppose to be "innocent until proven guilty." However, in today's society, it's seems more like it's always "guilty until proven innocent."

As I watched ESPN News this morning, John Kruk said without a doubt, Sammy Sosa is a sure Hall of Famer. He said it hasn't been proven that Sammy Sosa used steriods (although we all know he did, especially based on how he used an interpreter at the hearing and we all know why he did that), so there should be no asteriks next to Sosa's name.

O. J. Simpson - not proven guilty, but many believe he did it. Is he is jail...NO!

Many of us don't like cheaters. However, I do agree with Kruk that Sammy Sosa hasn't been found guilty of anything and until he is found guilty, you can't punish him or anyone else.

We all have mixed opinions about it and are all sick of talking about it.

Bottom line to me is, until proven guilty, he, McGwire, Palmerio, Bonds, etc. should not be punished for what we all believe. We all know many in the past, present, and most likely the future, will continue to cheat. There are proven cheaters in the Hall of Fame.

As an avid Juan Gonzalez collector for many years, once I knew he used steriods (yes, not proven but it my opinion, he did), I made the choice to no longer be a fan or collect of Juan Gonzalez.

Overall, it's a sad situation for all.

JasonM33
06-21-2007, 04:37 AM
I ask you this. You gave up being a fan of Juan but what makes you think Arod is clean? Even if he is, there's no way to prove that he's clean. How about Griffey? They are ALL tainted. To be fair you'd have to punish all of them or none of them. It's not really possible to punish all of them so in my opinion no one should be punished. Steroids are a problem that is too complex and far reaching to ever be fixed. You can only shrug and accept it. I think it's up to each individual to decide how they feel about it.

Unfortunately we are in a situation where the clueless sportswriters with their phony outrage have become the judge, jury and executioner. These sportswriters are human beings with their own opinions, biases and agendas. Inevitably, some players are going to be singled out and made and example of, while others are going to get a free pass. The question is who gets a free pass and what funky logic are they going to use to justify it.

-Jason M

3arod13
06-21-2007, 04:48 AM
I ask you this. You gave up being a fan of Juan but what makes you think Arod is clean? Even if he is, there's no way to prove that he's clean. How about Griffey? They are ALL tainted. To be fair you'd have to punish all of them or none of them. It's not really possible to punish all of them so in my opinion no one should be punished. Steroids are a problem that is too complex and far reaching to ever be fixed. You can only shrug and accept it. I think it's up to each individual to decide how they feel about it.

Unfortunately we are in a situation where the clueless sportswriters with their phony outrage have become the judge, jury and executioner. These sportswriters are human beings with their own opinions, biases and agendas. Inevitably, some players are going to be singled out and made and example of, while others are going to get a free pass. The question is who gets a free pass and what funky logic are they going to use to justify it.

-Jason M

Jason, if you read my comments, I agree with you. I stated, "innocent until proven guilty." The only player we know for a fact that used steriods it JOSE CANSECO. That's only because he admitted it.

As far as Juan Gonzalez is concerned, he's also innocent until proven guilty. However, me no longer being a fan or collector of Juan Gonzalez...that is my personal choice. I no longer have any respect for him as a player. Again, that's my personal choice. If he was inducted into the Hall of Fame, then so be it. Again, he's innocent until proven guilty.

Players have been doing and taking things to enhance their ability for years. Pitchers scuffing up/greasing baseball to cheat...on and on and on.

I still say, "innocent until proven guilty." Punishing or convicting someone based on what we believe, it ridiculous!!

Tony

3arod13
06-21-2007, 04:57 AM
I ask you this. You gave up being a fan of Juan but what makes you think Arod is clean? Jason M

Nothing has come out about Arod not being clean. JOSE CANSECO admitted that he helped Juan Gonzalez with steroids. I watched Juan Gonzalez over the years, and even before he was mentioned/connected with steriods, I believed he was doing/taking something.

By me no longer being a fan or collector of Juan Gonzalez because of allegations of his steroid use, does this mean I believe he's guilty...YES. Again, that's my personal opinion/choice. By me choosing to do this, this doesn't stop him from going into the hall of fame...suspend him from baseball...etc.

This isn't new to sports. Players have been taking things for years to enhance their ability.

JasonM33
06-21-2007, 05:13 AM
Hey bro,

Please don't missunderstand me. I do agree with you 100%. I just wanted to make a few points to illustrate that a degree of hipocrisy is built-in to this scandal and it's only going to get worse. You re right though, it should be innocent until proven guilty. So, who has been proven guilty so far. Bonds supposedly talked to the grand jury. Giambi, Palmero. These are the only guys I can think of. Oh yeah, didn't Sosa get busted with a corked bat? He he he. So, that begs the question. How many of his 600 homers were hit with a corked bat? What a joke.

-Jason M

3arod13
06-21-2007, 05:16 AM
Hey bro,

Please don't missunderstand me. I do agree with you 100%. I just wanted to make a few points to illustrate that a degree of hipocrisy is built-in to this scandal and it's only going to get worse. You re right though, it should be innocent until proven guilty. So, who has been proven guilty so far. Bonds supposedly talked to the grand jury. Giambi, Palmero. These are the only guys I can think of. Oh yeah, didn't Sosa get busted with a corked bat? He he he. So, that begs the question. How many of his 600 homers were hit with a corked bat? What a joke.

-Jason M

Jason, we are both on the same page. Appreciate your comments.

Tony

staindsox
06-21-2007, 06:59 AM
There are different ways of being "guilty." Anyone who read the SF Chronicle book or the Pearlman book on Bonds knows he's guilty. Proving someone guilty in a court of law...especially when people go to jail to protect you, isn't as easy as knowing someone is guilty. Bonds without a doubt is a user and there is more than enough proof to know this. Before Selig, a commissioner may have banned Bonds, just like Rose or Joe Jackson.

Sosa is a different case. His name hasn't been connected to anything. I think he used, but nobody has ever said that he has. There is more proof that Clemens has than Sosa. I don't think you can keep him out, whereas you could with Giambi, McGwire, Bonds, Sheffield, Tejada, Palmeiro...even Clemens.

***MAIN POINT***MAIN POINT***MAIN POINT***MAIN POINT***

BASEBALL IS NOT A COURT OF LAW. THE 1919 SOX WERE EVEN FOUND INNOCENT IN A COURT OF LAW, BUT EVERY SINGLE ONE, REGARDLESS OF HOW "GUILTY," WERE KICKED OUT OF THE GAME. NOT JUST KEPT OUT OF A "HALL OF FAME," BUT EXPELLED FROM THE GAME, THEIR LIVELIHOOD TAKEN FROM THEM. BASEBALL CAN DO WHATEVER IT LIKES, IT ANSWERS TO NOONE.

Selig could kick Barry out tomorrow if he were a "real" commissioner and not a puppet for the owners (yes, he is an owner and he always held their best interests in mind, not the game's). Remember even Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays were permanently banned from the game at one point? Baseball has always had its own rules and has never had to prove its case in making any decision.

Chris

3arod13
06-21-2007, 07:30 AM
[quote=staindsox;43705]There are different ways of being "guilty." Anyone who read the SF Chronicle book or the Pearlman book on Bonds knows he's guilty. Proving someone guilty in a court of law...especially when people go to jail to protect you, isn't as easy as knowing someone is guilty. Bonds without a doubt is a user and there is more than enough proof to know this. Before Selig, a commissioner may have banned Bonds, just like Rose or Joe Jackson.

Sosa is a different case. His name hasn't been connected to anything. I think he used, but nobody has ever said that he has. There is more proof that Clemens has than Sosa. I don't think you can keep him out, whereas you could with Giambi, McGwire, Bonds, Sheffield, Tejada, Palmeiro...even Clemens.

***MAIN POINT***MAIN POINT***MAIN POINT***MAIN POINT***

BASEBALL IS NOT A COURT OF LAW. THE 1919 SOX WERE EVEN FOUND INNOCENT IN A COURT OF LAW, BUT EVERY SINGLE ONE, REGARDLESS OF HOW "GUILTY," WERE KICKED OUT OF THE GAME. NOT JUST KEPT OUT OF A "HALL OF FAME," BUT EXPELLED FROM THE GAME, THEIR LIVELIHOOD TAKEN FROM THEM. BASEBALL CAN DO WHATEVER IT LIKES, IT ANSWERS TO NOONE.

Selig could kick Barry out tomorrow if he were a "real" commissioner and not a puppet for the owners (yes, he is an owner and he always held their best interests in mind, not the game's). Remember even Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays were permanently banned from the game at one point? Baseball has always had its own rules and has never had to prove its case in making any decision.

Chris, well said. Thanks for the comments!

On another note. The big deal about Arod and the blonde. Has anything been proven he was doing anything wrong? Although that should be between him and his wife, and nobody else.

I was suprised that a company terminated their contract with him based on the media. I find that ridiculous also. Speculation he was doing something wrong, not factual. Did anyone hear any updates on Arod and the blonde?

Tony/quote]

bigtime59
06-21-2007, 07:59 AM
However talented a player he may be, Pay-Rod is an extremely insecure, tone-deaf doofus with a taste for East German strippers...and he plays for the Yankee$. There is enough of his stuff out there, to make you believe that quite a bit of it is "questionable", yet it remains extremely expensive.
Collecting his stuff isn't even on my radar screen. It's bad enough to get burned on a Dale Sveum Diamondbacks jersey for $300. Getting burned on a Pay-Rod jersey for $3000, well, that's a kettle of fish I don't care to sample.

Mark
bigtime39@aol.com

cjclong
06-21-2007, 07:59 AM
The only thing I know about "ARod and the blonde" is that ARod's wife, who people took great joy in reporting was packing her bags to leave him, was actually going to meet him in Boston and there were pitures of them there together. The steroid question on this thread is a legitimate question for baseball and everyone will have different opinions. Why people would take delight in hoping a player's marrigage would break up is beyond me.

3arod13
06-21-2007, 08:15 AM
However talented a player he may be, Pay-Rod is an extremely insecure, tone-deaf doofus with a taste for East German strippers...and he plays for the Yankee$. There is enough of his stuff out there, to make you believe that quite a bit of it is "questionable", yet it remains extremely expensive.
Collecting his stuff isn't even on my radar screen. It's bad enough to get burned on a Dale Sveum Diamondbacks jersey for $300. Getting burned on a Pay-Rod jersey for $3000, well, that's a kettle of fish I don't care to sample.

Mark
bigtime39@aol.com

Ouch! Although I do agree there is just way too much arod stuff out there, and much of it I wouldn't buy either, I am happy to say I have a solid Arod HR bat! Letter's from Arod, PSA, SCD, and Rawlings.

I've learn so much in this forum. Since being apart of this forum, I have learned just how much stuff arod does sign as "game used" when it wasn't. Sad for the hobby...sad for the collecor!

Great comments by all! Tony

Canseco44
06-21-2007, 08:24 AM
I think people should also be aware that just because a player doesn't change into the size that Canseco did doesn't mean he isn't taking an enhancer of some kind. There are many different kinds of steroids including mass builders, toners, and some that can help with stamina. I heard Dick Butkus state that one of the largest group of users is teenage girls. He stated this on an episode of American Chopper. They use it to build definition and to lose weight. My point is, usually the only players we go after are the obvious ones who add 40 pounds of muscle over the off season. One person I that comes to mind is Clemens. How can a guy that old still pitch like that? Lets not just look at the body builder type like Canseco and Bonds. If I had to pick one person who was accused in Cansecos book that he was lying about it would have been Palmero. Now look at him. I think we should just watch a Steroid free sport like pro football.

Todd

cjclong
06-21-2007, 09:41 AM
Many players today take better care of themselves and thus are able to play longer. Most player's careers used to be over in their mid 30's. They didn't work out in the off season and caroused even during the season. Mickey Mantle is one who said he wished he had taken care of himself when he was younger so he could have had a longer and better career. The question was asked "how can Clemons pitch like that at his age? "The assumption being he must take steroids. Of course Nolan Ryan was doing the same thing at close to the same age until he hurt his arm. One thing both Ryan and Clemons had in common was that they trained hard as well as having natural genetic advantages. And years ago people were asking how Warren Spahn could pile up the wins and innings "at his age."I never heard anyone accuse Spahn of using steroids or Ryan either. This business of saying some players took steroids so everyone must presumed quilty or "tainted" is as silly as saying some people comit murders so every person in this country must be prsumed to be guilty of murder or "tainted" by the number of murders we have. Do I know Clemons or anyone else didn't take steroids for a fact. No. But I also don't know for a fact that every adult I know hasn't murdered someone.

3arod13
06-21-2007, 09:54 AM
As proven by the many different threads over the past year about this topic, we can all agree that we need to put the past behind and now be concerned about today and in the future.

This has been going on for a long time. We all agree that natural ability is what we want to see. Then, the numbers and performance mean so much more.

Myself, I would like to see the steriods issue put behind us and let's move on. I'm sure if we dig deeper and deeper into many other areas, we can easily find out more than we even thought of.

I love baseball. I just want to see these type things get better so we can talk about the positive things in baseball, vice whose cheating on their wifes, getting in touble in their off time, etc.

Let's pay ball!!

mwbosoxfan
06-21-2007, 10:15 AM
Speaking of Roger Clemens....Does anyone collect Clemens game used hats? There has been much discussion about Bond's head size and shoe size increasing through his alleged PED usage. Photos would tend to support this. What about Clemens? As shown in early Sox photos, he is a mere stick compared to now. His head also looks significantly larger now. I've never heard any discussion about Roger's head size, so I was wondering if anyone might have different hats through the years.

staindsox
06-21-2007, 10:39 AM
For the record on Clemens...what he is doing is unprecedented. After coming out of retirement last year at 43 (44 that August), he had a 2.30 ERA? He couldn't do that at 32 or 33 with Boston. Nobody in the history of the game has done that. He was mentioned in Canseco's book. Is it just a coincidence that he asked Jose what steroids to mix for different effects when it looked like his career was over and then went to Toronto the next year and began winning Cy Youngs again? Maybe, but let's not forget the Grimsley report. He was mentioned in two places, besides just comparing his body size and head size. Let's look at his shoes too. Apparently Bonds foot grew three sizes from age 35-40. I wonder if Roger did too. Nothing like a midlife growth spurt. I idolized Roger when I was a kid. I wanted to pitch like him. I hate saying it, but he's a dirty as the rest. It's not right to point the finger at Sammy or Mark and let Roger off the hook.

Canseco44
06-21-2007, 10:44 AM
Canseco may have ratted out his fellow players, but a lier is one thing he is not. For anyone who has picked up his book, he is telling the truth. Like he said, if it was a lie don't you think we would have seen some lawsuits by now.

Todd

3arod13
06-21-2007, 10:52 AM
Canseco may have ratted out his fellow players, but a lier is one thing he is not. For anyone who has picked up his book, he is telling the truth. Like he said, if it was a lie don't you think we would have seen some lawsuits by now.

Todd

There's no question, I believe everything Canseco says. He has no reason to make up anything now that he's out of baseball.

However, just like Brian Bosworth did, they both did it after the fact. I don't give props to anyone who does that. Canseco didn't do it for good reasons. He did it because he's bitter against MLB and wanted to get them back.

staindsox
06-21-2007, 11:55 AM
Absolutely! Jose mentioned Palmeiro, Pudge, and Juan Gon in Texas. He also mentioned McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, Giambi, Tejada. Those names have proven to be questionable. Jose said it first and has not been proven false once. He even said LaRussa knew about usage...Tony later acknowledged that this too was true. I'm not a Canseco fan, but everything he has said has been dead on so far.

Canseco44
06-21-2007, 01:27 PM
True, I don't give Jose props for doing that either. I am one of the biggest Canseco fans who has ever lived, but it did make me mad when he did that. I am still a huge fan, because I know when you are mad at someone sometimes you tend to do stuff that you later regret. Whether or not he regrets it I don't know, but I do think some good things have come from it.

Todd

David
06-21-2007, 01:58 PM
The problem for the players is that they don't talk about steroids, who uses and who doesn't. There is a self imposed code of silence. Due to this, the players, fans and sportswriters know there are many, many players who have used steroids than the players will ever talk about it. It is only natural for players and sportswriters to wonder which are the players who used and which didn't-- and it's the players and their union who are most at fault for this, not the fans and sportswriters.

David
06-21-2007, 02:17 PM
If the players know who used steroids but won't tell, and the fans know the players know who used steroids-- guess what? The fans are going to speculate and guess which players used steroids. They are going to try and fill in the missing information held back by the players. And guess what? The fans aren't going to believe every player who says he didn't use steroids, as the fans know that most players who use steroids don't admit it.

If steroids are bad for the game and are against the law, I never understood the source of pride in players covering for MLB steroid users. I collect and sell memorabilia and if I found out a fellow seller was forging or nefariously altering memorabilia (ala trimming baseball cards), you bet I would tell collectors what he is doing. I don't owe it to the forger to keep quit about what he is doing. My allegiance is to the collectors who don't wish to spend hard earned money on forgeries and trimmed cards. My allegiance is to the sellers who are honest.

JasonM33
06-22-2007, 01:43 PM
In my opinion you are comparing apples and oranges.

-Jason M

David
06-22-2007, 02:37 PM
If I keep quiet about a dealer who I know trims cards, who am I protecting? The dealer who trims cards.

If, through the 'code of silence,' players keep quiet about steroids users, who are the protecting? The players who use steroids. They certainly aren't protecting the fans or the game of baseball or the players who didn't use steroids.

Baseball could use a few more Jose Cansecos, not fewer.

David
06-22-2007, 02:43 PM
I should add that Ken Caminiti was black balled by many players. Do you know why? Because had the gall to talk publicly about his personal steroid use.

JasonM33
06-22-2007, 09:06 PM
I respect your opinion but I think we should just shrug our shoulders and accept reality. Professional athletes use performance enhancing drugs, and they deliver a better product on the field because of it.

-Jason

3arod13
06-23-2007, 07:01 AM
Professional athletes use performance enhancing drugs, and they deliver a better product on the field because of it.

-Jason

What? Are you serious about this remark? That's suppose to be a good thing? It's cheating! I care about a better product based on working out and natural ability.

David
06-23-2007, 02:58 PM
My view on baseball players and steroids is, if steroids didn't help baseball players wouldn't take them. And if baseball players didn't think taking steroids was wrong, they wouldn't deny taking them (Remember, players would deny taking steroids even when it wasn't against the rules and there was no punishment).

My last rhetorical question would be, would MLB be better if players used aluminum bats? That would definitely produce more home runs and runs.

JasonM33
06-23-2007, 05:03 PM
What? Are you serious about this remark? That's suppose to be a good thing? It's cheating! I care about a better product based on working out and natural ability.


Deadly serious. For me personally, I would rather that no one in pro sports ever took steroids. I feel this way because steroids have warped one of the most important parts of the game. Statistics and all-time records. With all of the steroid drama it's impossible to know who took them and when they were taking them. It screwed the whole thing up beyond repair.

However,

I do believe that steroid using players are better than their non juiced counterparts. They are able to do things that normal players can't do. Specifically I'm refering to the modern player that can combine home run power with the footspeed to steal bases at the same time. Also, older players are able to perform at a high level for much longer than they otherwise could. Look at Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. So, yes I believe that they bring a better product to the field.

-Jason M

David
06-23-2007, 05:22 PM
But that is an argument for giving players aluminum bats. If you give Craig Biggio an aluminum bat, he'd triple his home runs, raise his batting average significantly and get to 3,000 hits as fast as lightening. However, I don't know of any serious baseball fan who would consider giving Craig Biggio an aluminum bat an improvement on the game, even though it would raise his level of play significantly from old man levels. Most, including Biggio himself, would consider the achievements from his new aluminum bat to be a joke.

JasonM33
06-23-2007, 05:35 PM
I understand what you are saying but I don't even acknowledge aluminum bats. Real baseball is played with wood bats. I can't stand that rediculous plink sound they make when they hit the ball. That's why I don't watch college baseball. I'd rather just pretend that it doesn't exist. As a matter of fact I'd rather watch people play wiffle ball.

-Jason M

JasonM33
06-23-2007, 05:38 PM
Also, I don't think aluminum bats would raise their overall level of play. If the guy is slow he's still going to be slow. Aluminum bat's aren't going to help anyone steal bases or throw people out. Steroids on the other hand.......

3arod13
06-23-2007, 05:43 PM
Deadly serious. For me personally, I would rather that no one in pro sports ever took steroids. I feel this way because steroids have warped one of the most important parts of the game. Statistics and all-time records. With all of the steroid drama it's impossible to know who took them and when they were taking them. It screwed the whole thing up beyond repair.

However,

I do believe that steroid using players are better than their non juiced counterparts. They are able to do things that normal players can't do. Specifically I'm refering to the modern player that can combine home run power with the footspeed to steal bases at the same time. Also, older players are able to perform at a high level for much longer than they otherwise could. Look at Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. So, yes I believe that they bring a better product to the field.

-Jason M

Wow! Unbelieveable!

3arod13
06-23-2007, 05:45 PM
Also, I don't think aluminum bats would raise their overall level of play. If the guy is slow he's still going to be slow. Aluminum bat's aren't going to help anyone steal bases or throw people out. Steroids on the other hand.......

Acutally, not according to your thinking. Maybe steroids will help (lol)

3arod13
06-23-2007, 05:47 PM
Acutally, not according to your thinking. Maybe steroids will help (lol)

Didn't see you already said that. I guess I can only assume you LOVE jose canceso so much, that you'll defend steriods.

I can't honest believe you think it's a good thing.

JasonM33
06-23-2007, 05:52 PM
LOL

Again, I'm not advocating steroid use. I'm just stating what I believe to be a fact. I think everyone has a right to their own opinion and no one is wrong.

-Jason M

David
06-23-2007, 06:19 PM
I agree that real baseball is played without aluminum bats.

However, I also believe that real baseball is played without steroids and human growth hormone.

One reason I dislike steroids et al, is that the enjoyment (for me, at least) of watching a track race is to see who is the fastest human, not to see which runner takes the most effective illegal drugs. If everything is about performance, then they might as well scratch the humans and insert cars and greyhounds. If the Olympics were truely about the fastest, strongest and most agile, no human would be entered. Your 7 year old, slightly over weight tabby cat can perform better on the parallel bar than any human Olympic Gold Medalist. Your neighbor's pet whippet would win the 100, 200 and 400 meters. The horse at the local farm would win the marathon, mile, long jump and (naturally) 3000 steeplechase without getting winded. A pair of Cal Tech grad students could devise a robot to win the pole vault with no need for the pole. If all that matters about baseball is performance and the excitement of the long ball, they might as well insert robots for players and use aluminum bats and rubber balls.

This helps explain why, to me, artificially enhancing performance doesn't make a sport better. It makes it worse. Seeing a horse run fast can be enjoyable and we're all aware that horses are faster than humans over a two mile race. However, that does not mean inserting a horse into a human two mile foot race makes the human foot race better. After the race, which the horse finished in about 1/3 the time as the second place finisher, spectators will remark that the race was about the most pointless and stupid spectacle they've witnessed.

JasonM33
06-23-2007, 06:29 PM
As I said before. I would prefer that no one ever took steroids. But, since they did and the problem is beyond repair I think we should just accept it. That's my opinion. Also, I'm dissapointed to have my opinion dismissed as being just because I like Jose Canseco. No hard feelings though. To each his own.

-Jason M

David
06-23-2007, 06:53 PM
I respect your opinion and posts on the matter.