Texsox Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 06:15 PM) That doesn't mean he can't take steps to clean up the record book. I am as critical as anyone about the cheating. Unraveling the record book is a step that I would have to think long and hard about before starting. My first thought is no, but would like to hear arguments on both sides before forming an opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 06:15 PM) That doesn't mean he can't take steps to clean up the record book. Never said he shouldn't do that. What I don't want to see if someone 30 years down the line deciding to clean up the record book. Either do it now, meaning in the next few years, or don't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (WilliamTell @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 06:02 PM) I wouldn't mind something like that, or even a 3-5 year ban for the 2nd offense, which could end their career anyways. What I don't want to see if Selig trying to punish A-Rod or anyone that did steriods before the required testing started. Selig has no one but himself to blame for not getting involved in steriod testing. He should've gotten involved at least a decade ago. Agreed. I believe in the U.S. Government, something like that is called an ex-post facto law. But for all players proven of taking steroids, I believe there should be a * next to their name, and their place on the list should not be counted. So, if I had it my way, right now Barry Bonds would be at the top of the record books for career home runs, most home runs in a season, walks, etc., but there would be an * next to his name, and the person below him (granted they haven't been proven of PED use) would still be the ultime leader. Barry Bonds has been proven of PED use, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 10:01 AM) I disagree totally with your statement YAS. Bud Selig alone had the power to do something about the drug problem in baseball. He has the ability to take a unilateral action if he deems it "for the good of baseball". It was a power that Landis insisted on when he took over after the Black Sox scandal. This power still exists to this day. He could have instituted any level of testing and penalties that he saw fit. Instead he negotiated it with the union, and besides how long it took to institute, it became so watered down, even to this day, that it is almost counterproductive. If Bud Selig wanted Olympic style testing, it could be done tomorrow, and there isn't a damned thing the union could do about it. They couldn't even sue because of the baseball anti-trust exemption. If Selig did that, he would be breaking the contract signed with the union. It would result in an instant strike and that is something MLB could not allow to happen so soon after 1994. Granted, Selig does have those 'best intertests of baseball' powers, but he cannot assume a K.M. Landis attitude in this day and age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I totally agree with YASNY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 09:54 AM) I totally agree with YASNY. Who are you and what have you done with Milkman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (BearSox @ Feb 16, 2009 -> 08:24 PM) Barry Bonds has been proven of PED use, right? Depends on your definition of "Proven". Failed repeated drug tests? Yes. Convicted of perjury regarding those drug tests? Not yet, but perhaps soon. Jailed? Ditto. Publicly admitting/apologizing? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Punk A** B**ch. "I don't want to hear the commissioner turned a blind eye to this or he didn't care about it," Selig told Newsday in a Monday phone interview. "That annoys the you-know-what out of me. You bet I'm sensitive to the criticism. "The reason I'm so frustrated is, if you look at our whole body of work, I think we've come farther than anyone ever dreamed possible," he said, adding, "I honestly don't know how anyone could have done more than we've already done." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (YASNY @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 10:55 AM) Who are you and what have you done with Milkman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (YASNY @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 10:55 AM) Who are you and what have you done with Milkman? I was actually going to preface my post with, "Now I don't usually say this, but..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (YASNY @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 09:16 AM) If Selig did that, he would be breaking the contract signed with the union. It would result in an instant strike and that is something MLB could not allow to happen so soon after 1994. Granted, Selig does have those 'best intertests of baseball' powers, but he cannot assume a K.M. Landis attitude in this day and age. The thing is, baseball would have been much better for it in the long run. The owners know/knew the extent of the drug problem in baseball. There is nothing that will convince me otherwise. They knew they were living a fraud. In the end, all Selig's "actions" did was to try to protect ownership and management, and instead of having a bad period of relations with labor, we are now into about a 10 year long period where every single player and team has been looked as suspiciously. Instead of getting this out into the open, we have had a lynch mob mentality, and it is taking the integrety of the game down with it. Besides, I don't believe that the labor union would have actually tried to publicly justify going out on strike so they could NOT be drug tested, with the swirl of accusations that have surrounded them for a decade now. They would have been cutting their own throats from a PR standpoint, and they would make themselves all look guilty by association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 10:59 AM) Punk A** B**ch. What a prick. The ONE GUY who has the ability to fix the problem is lecturing the public on what is possible? f*** him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Selig could have dealt with this while the stadiums were half empty and the fans were clueless, or, as it turns out, he can deal with it now with record attendance and a fed up public. He got lucky in some ways. Much as you have stated, I wish he did the ethical and moral thing and dealt with it "back then". Sadly, with American business ethics the way the are, he dealt with it in a manner that eventually will be applauded in business and PR schools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 12:07 PM) The thing is, baseball would have been much better for it in the long run. The owners know/knew the extent of the drug problem in baseball. There is nothing that will convince me otherwise. They knew they were living a fraud. In the end, all Selig's "actions" did was to try to protect ownership and management, and instead of having a bad period of relations with labor, we are now into about a 10 year long period where every single player and team has been looked as suspiciously. Instead of getting this out into the open, we have had a lynch mob mentality, and it is taking the integrety of the game down with it. Besides, I don't believe that the labor union would have actually tried to publicly justify going out on strike so they could NOT be drug tested, with the swirl of accusations that have surrounded them for a decade now. They would have been cutting their own throats from a PR standpoint, and they would make themselves all look guilty by association. Saying that baseball would be better for it is an opinion or an assumption. The fans were on the verge of turning their collective back on baseball just before the last real work stoppage threat was narrowly averted. In fact, the fans in Anaheim literally did turn their backs to the game. The union has always had an over the top arrogance during negotiations with MLB and I wouldn't doubt for one second that they would have gone out over this. If that occured, baseball could have found itself in a situation similar to the NHL has been facing for a few years now, though it appears hockey has turned the tide and is on it's way back to respectability again. Selig, I believe, had his hands tied. Bad relations with labor was not Selig's big concern, it was bad or nonexistant relations with the fans. While you can accurately say that the PED issue has been a PR black eye, I can accurately say that baseball is flourishing right now. In fact, unless the economy really hits the crapper and takes baseball down with it, I'd venture as far as to say that we are currently in the golden age of baseball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkfan Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 you the man yas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 (edited) I dont see how you can say Selig's hands were tied. Did Selig ever go to the FBI and DEA and tell them that there is a significant drug problem that should be investigated? Look at Phelps, he smokes one bong and a sheriff wants to arrest him. Then look at baseball, people are shooting needles in the locker room and no one says a word. The Players Union may have power through the CBA, but they have no power when it comes to federal or state law enforcement. If a player like Canseco was arrested in the locker room injecting steroids this era would have ended immediately. The only way for players to have gotten away with it for so long was Selig helping them. And if we are rewriting record books, why do players who doctor baseballs and cheat other ways get a pardon? Edited February 18, 2009 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmmbeeer Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 QUOTE (YASNY @ Feb 17, 2009 -> 10:16 AM) If Selig did that, he would be breaking the contract signed with the union. It would result in an instant strike and that is something MLB could not allow to happen so soon after 1994. Granted, Selig does have those 'best intertests of baseball' powers, but he cannot assume a K.M. Landis attitude in this day and age. This is an issue though, in my opinion, that the union will break shortly after a strike. How much public support do you think the union would get for refusing drug tests? Selig would only have to utter the words, "if they aren't cheating, then we shouldn't have a problem with testing...I'm looking out for the integrity of the game." Seriously, what the hell could the players' union possibly say in response that would justify a work stoppage in the public's eye? They say that the MLBPA is the most powerful union in the country, Selig had a chance to knock them down a notch. The players who weren't taking PEDs would have been pissed to be out of work to cover for the cheaters, the fans would've been behind Selig and against the union, leaving nothing but the hardcore union guys and PEDs users feeling strongly about the strike. I don't know, I firmly believe Selig could not have messed things up much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHizzle85 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Question that was brought up in a class of mine this afternoon. Vince McMahon was indicted in the mid-90's for supposedly distributing steroids to wrestlers in the WWF. Now Selig knows that players tested positive for PED's.... Should Selig be indicted? I think he should probably spend some time on the hot seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 QUOTE (MHizzle85 @ Feb 19, 2009 -> 09:27 PM) Question that was brought up in a class of mine this afternoon. Vince McMahon was indicted in the mid-90's for supposedly distributing steroids to wrestlers in the WWF. Now Selig knows that players tested positive for PED's.... Should Selig be indicted? I think he should probably spend some time on the hot seat. Do we know that Selig knew the individuals who tested postitive? I have not seen that confirmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 20, 2009 -> 05:17 AM) Do we know that Selig knew the individuals who tested postitive? I have not seen that confirmed. Somehow Gene Orza knew the players who tested positive in 2003, even though no one at the league or Union was supposed to know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 20, 2009 -> 11:09 AM) Somehow Gene Orza knew the players who tested positive in 2003, even though no one at the league or Union was supposed to know that. I wouldn't be surprised if Selig knew, but I have yet to see something that confirms Bud DID know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts