Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 2 pages
But whatever Mays and Aaron took, we should all take that.
Did the testing for roids and the suspensions of users codify what had always been contrary to the principles and spirit of fair play and fair competition, or was it a redefinition of those principles? If it redefined them, what was the basis and/or reasons for the redefinition and where would we look to confirm that they were in fact the reasons?
I also don't see many (if any) people here saying we should take away Barry Bonds's records.
That doesn't follow (*), but taking it on its face the penalties are lower for amps, indicating that they are less of an affront to competition.
(*) For example, the roid ban could have been a codification of something always contrary; the amp ban could have been a discouragement of the use of addictive drugs, with little to no competitive intent or effect. The waiver process and frequent granting of waivers for amps would be consistent with this dichotomy.
codify what had always been contrary to the principles and spirit of fair play and fair competition
And so the answer to the ultimate question is quite clear.
It's a conspiracy, man!!!!
You must be new around here.
I have never before seen someone twist themselves into logic knots like this.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (1 members)
Page rendered in 0.4554 seconds, 57 querie(s) executed