When where steroids cheating?

[tigers527]

I have seen more then one thread claim that since steroids were not against baseball rules, it was not cheating.

Shortly after congress passed the law making steroids a federal offense in 1990, Fay Vincent came out with this.

In truth, steroids have been banned in baseball since 1991 -- in a policy baseball officials made little effort to publicize. A source provided a copy of the seven-page document to ESPN The Magazine on the condition of anonymity. Titled "Baseball's Drug Policy and Prevention Program," the memo was sent to all major-league clubs on June 7 of that year by then-commissioner Fay Vincent. He spelled out components of the program, and ordered, "This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids.
quote from this:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=steroidsExc&num=19

So just because there was not set punishment or testing, does not mean it was not against the rules. Toothless but not ruleless.

[Ytown Tribe fan]

The whole point is that MLB didn't enforce that rule until 2002, and didn't lay down explicit penalties until 2005.

A rule that is not enforced is not a rule.

Furthermore, I believe that MLB not only looked the other way in the late '90s, but was satisfied with the results of this bulking up during that time.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that MLB encouraged steroid and HGH abuse, but it didn't hurt the game back then.

Remember, after the '94 strike/lockout/missed postseason, MLB was at it's lowest point of popularity since perhaps 1919. The '98 All-Star Game/Ted Williams love fest was a big part of what "saved" baseball, according to the mediots, but the Mac/Sammy homer run chase was just as big a part of it.

You can fairly say that steroids/HGH/PED abuse actually helped baseball recover from the '94 disaster some five years later.

So now everyone is against it and the mediots are all wagging their heads in shame and pointing fingers, but they should be pointing them at each other as well fdor encouraging and embracing Mac and Sammy and, yes, Barry from '98 to '01. And they did, too.

[ssbguyincognito]

The commissioner can write all the memos he wants and send to them everyone in the world.

Unless steroid use is prohibited in the Collective Bargaining Agreement -- which are the rules agreed upon by players and owners, and the ONLY rules players must abide by -- then steroid use isn't against the rules.

Btw, where was this memo when Bud Selig was in charge?

[Johnny Evers]

For clarification - there was no CBA rule against steroids until recently? And, if this is true, there was no ACTUAL regulation against steroids until then, even though MLB declared PEDs cheating in 1991?

I can sort of identify with the idea that a breaking a rule that isn't enforced is not cheating. In Brian Gunn's fantastic Baseball Analysts piece (http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2007/08/roid_monster_or.php), he provides a short passage from Bill James on the issue:

I look at it this way. There's a rule in basketball against traveling but the NBA has pretty much stopped enforcing it. Well, they still call traveling but they will allow you to take about five steps without dribbling as you are running toward the basket. There was no "decision" not to enforce this rule; they just kind of lost track of it. They started not calling one step and progressed to not calling two steps, not calling three steps, and eventually they just kind of lost track of the rule. Should the players who took advantage of this failure to enforce the rule be banned from the NBA Hall of Fame? After all, aren't they cheating? They're not obeying the rules. Julius Erving, out. The Hall of Fame doesn't need cheaters like you. Kobe, Michael, get out. If you don't play by the rules the way Elgin Baylor did, you're not deserving.

Or it is, rather, the responsibility of the LEAGUE to enforce the rule? It seems to me that it might be the responsibility of the league to enforce the rule rather than the responsibility of the media to punish those who didn't obey the rule that wasn't being enforced. I won't name any players, but there are a whole bunch of superstars who are now or are going to be involved in the PED accusations. We CAN'T start picking and choosing who we honor on that basis. It's hypocritical, and it's impractical. And it diminishes the game.

[Bench 5]

I think the quote below from Bill James is a poor analogy. Traveling in basketball is not "cheating". It is a violation of the rules and if the ref believes that you traveled, they blow the whistle. If they are lax on calling traveling violations or on calling fouls, that doesn't mean that players are "cheating" any more than a batter who gets a break on a bad call is "cheating".

There are a lot of illegal activities that are not specifically stated as rules infractions by MLB. MLB was well behind the times when it came to steroids but absolutely zero players admitted to using steroids during the 90's. Why? Because they all knew it was considered cheating and they would have been fried in the press. If it wasn't such a big deal, then why weren't players openly admitting to it's use back then?

I am a believer that despite all the testing a significant number of players in any sport will get around the tests. The NFL probably has a greater % of players on steroids but they do a much better job of PR that they appear to have a stronger handle on the situation than MLB. Bottom line is that MBL has to complete the investigation, publish the findings and move one.

Based upon the wording chosen by Larry Bud Selig, I have a feeling that there will be recriminations for Bonds later this year.

I think that Bonds has been targeted because a) he dissed Babe Ruth for no other reason than the fact that Ruth is white and idolized by the public b) he wasn't truthful at the grand jury testimony and c) he comes across as someone who doesn't give a crap about all of the fuss. He acts like he is above the law. When he gets inducted in the HOF he better name his trainer in his speech.

[Brooklyn]

If you want another analogy, lets looks at golf. Players call penalties on themselves all the time. many times, they could just as easily keep playing and no one would know. It is up to them to enforce the rules.




A rule that is not enforced is not a rule.

.

you can debate whether it was really a rule or not because it wasn't in the CBA. The commissioner can put anything in a memo, does that make it a rule? But to say it is not a rule because it is not enforced is pushing it too far. There is a rule in my office that I can't use drugs. no one drug tests me. Does that me it is ok for me to show up strung out?

[tigers527]

For clarification - there was no CBA rule against steroids until recently? And, if this is true, there was no ACTUAL regulation against steroids until then, even though MLB declared PEDs cheating in 1991?

Actually I believe steroids back then would of fall under the illegal drugs rules. Meaning players could of been suspended in much the way that Strawberry and Gooden were in the 90s for coke. However, it is the what could MLB test for that took the teeth out of the rule.

While it is easy to point the finger at Selig and the owners, more of the blame falls upon the MLB Players Association.

The point is, a lot of folks on here point to the lack of a rule, but there was one. That pretty much has been there through every current players career, with a handful of exceptions (guys playing more then 16 years).

[bigtime39]

Day one...

[csh19792001]

Bonds has been targeted because a) he dissed Babe Ruth for no other reason than the fact that Ruth is white and idolized by the public b) he wasn't truthful at the grand jury testimony and c) he comes across as someone who doesn't give a crap about all of the fuss. He acts like he is above the law. When he gets inducted in the HOF he better name his trainer in his speech.

Actually, he should thank his pharm team first for procuring all of his "records".

[Pete Rose Rounding Third]

As much as I respect the work of Bill James, he's wrong about travelling. The call is missed here and there, but not terribly often. It's not at all like holding in football, which you could call on basically every play.

Anyway, for me using steroids (and HGH) is cheating, rules be damned.

[sturg1dj]

Actually I believe steroids back then would of fall under the illegal drugs rules. Meaning players could of been suspended in much the way that Strawberry and Gooden were in the 90s for coke. However, it is the what could MLB test for that took the teeth out of the rule.

While it is easy to point the finger at Selig and the owners, more of the blame falls upon the MLB Players Association.

The point is, a lot of folks on here point to the lack of a rule, but there was one. That pretty much has been there through every current players career, with a handful of exceptions (guys playing more then 16 years).

unless of course they got a perscription for the steroids, then it would be legal....just ask Chris Benoit how easy it is to get one of those......well he's dead but you get the idea