| Since baseball had no antisteroid rules when Barry Bonds was allegedly taking them, so he wasn't cheating. |
|
Cheating is breaking the rules since there weren't rules against steroids he couldn't have been cheating. By not implamenting a testing or punishment policy to the 91 rule, wasn't Major League Baseball giving de facto permision for steroid use? |
|
The ban on steroids began in 1991, so if he has used them since that year, he has broken the rules. |
|
By not making any attempt to test for steroids and enforce the ban MLB was giving de facto permision for their players to use steroids. Report It Yes, MLB was definitely dragging their feet (along with the players' union, of course) when it came to the banning of certain enhancers and the instituting of drug tests. MLB may not have had a rule against it back then but it was still illegal to use steroids. Doesn't that supersede the rules of the MLB? That's like saying using an illegal bat is not against the rules. The rule was there and the players due to their own union were on the honor system. They don't go xraying every bat but if you get caught (See Sammy Sosa) its still cheating. No there was no testing but the players new it was illegal. You're intelligent and smart because you are telling the truth and not spewing lies like the Barry haters! Congratulations to you for being smart and congratulations to Barry! you are correct Nope. Bonds is still one of the best hitters of all time whether he used steroids or not. Since it is illegal in the United States of America to use steroids, it is against the rules in baseball to do such a thing. Baseball rules don't say anything about murder either, but you cant kill another player - it is against the law. |
| Topic Related |
|
|
