Jump to content

White Sox v. Mariners


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 990
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Apr 24, 2006 -> 08:45 PM)
Carl is looking pretty heavy

It's all a question of motivation for him any more. And I think last year might have been the last year he really got up for a season, since he was playing to try to get 1 more contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Apr 24, 2006 -> 10:46 PM)
Just a guess, but I'm thinking illegal substances.

 

Yes sir, and those illegal substances made him A LOT of money. In a case like Beltre, you can see why he'd be tempted to do it, ESPECIALLY in a contract year.

 

GAS!!! and Reed is gone. Heading to the 7th 2-1 Sox. This feels like last year right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Apr 24, 2006 -> 08:46 PM)
Just a guess, but I'm thinking illegal substances.

Well, that was in 2004, so there was certainly testing...we wouldn't necessarily have known because you had to test positive like 3 times in order to get a suspension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Apr 25, 2006 -> 03:48 AM)
Well, that was in 2004, so there was certainly testing...we wouldn't necessarily have known because you had to test positive like 3 times in order to get a suspension.

 

The testing in 2004 was quite poor, if I remember correctly. I thought it was after the 2004 season where the testing became "legit".

Edited by fathom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Apr 24, 2006 -> 10:48 PM)
I feel like we caught a break that inning, as Sexson's out seemed like a definite homer off the bat.

 

Nah, he got under it and it appeared to catch a jet stream. Was amazed it carried that far, damn thin air in Seattle is always a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Apr 24, 2006 -> 08:49 PM)
The testing in 2004 was quite poor, if I remember.  I thought it was after the 2004 season where the testing became "legit".

The good news, IMO, is that maybe this MLB investigation might expose the couple percent who did test positive in 04, since I'm not sure there was the guarantee of confidentiality like there was in 03.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Apr 24, 2006 -> 10:49 PM)
The testing in 2004 was quite poor, if I remember correctly.  I thought it was after the 2004 season where the testing became "legit".

 

Yep, and he could have been on HGH and never got caught anyways. Hell, there are guys right now on HGH (*cough* Giambi */cough*) that are still taking advantage of the fact the system has flaws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...