Cheating seems to be the buzzword

[joshfan]

Ellie Howard honed his shinguard buckles to scuff the balls for Whitey Ford and others
I guess under todays scrutiny these great players should be erased from the record books

[Paulypal]

Ellie Howard honed his shinguard buckles to scuff the balls for Whitey Ford and others
I guess under todays scrutiny these great players should be erased from the record books

No they wouldnt. Never. The players of years past are patted on the back for "cheating". Gaylord Perry admitted to throwing spitballs as his main weapon - an illegal pitch- and then got into the HOF. Jim Kaat explained how the catcher or shortstop would cut the ball as you mentioned. Thats ok though. These things were all considered as part of the gamesmanship of baseball.

They had a bucket of balls after Mike Scott pitched a game....every ball was cut in the same exact spot. What happened to him? Nothing. It was gamesmanship. Believe me - 10 minutes after they laid out the first diamond players were looking for any edge they could get.

Ridiculous double standard.

[Los Bravos]

I'm really tired of this line of argument. This kind of stuff is similar to long term steroid abuse much like a litterbug and Charlie Manson are both criminals.

[sturg1dj]

I'm really tired of this line of argument. This kind of stuff is similar to long term steroid abuse much like a litterbug and Charlie Manson are both criminals.

your opinion. why is steroids so much worse?

[spark240]

josh, pauly, sturg... these exact points have already been discussed. Read the existing threads.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

No they wouldnt. Never. The players of years past are patted on the back for "cheating". Gaylord Perry admitted to throwing spitballs as his main weapon - an illegal pitch- and then got into the HOF. Jim Kaat explained how the catcher or shortstop would cut the ball as you mentioned. Thats ok though. These things were all considered as part of the gamesmanship of baseball.

They had a bucket of balls after Mike Scott pitched a game....every ball was cut in the same exact spot. What happened to him? Nothing. It was gamesmanship. Believe me - 10 minutes after they laid out the first diamond players were looking for any edge they could get.

Ridiculous double standard.

Only in your mind are they patted on the back. They broke some rules and if caught would have be punished. It's just that with the drug testing if caught the punishment is more severe.
All that broke rules in any fasion were cheating, so whats your remedy, since some think that form of cheating was less of a rule breaking( I don't,cheating is cheating) we should give slack to the steroid users.

The drug testing is here, not only in baseball, it's the real world. Because some slip through the net does not mean testing will end.

[sturg1dj]

josh, pauly, sturg... these exact points have already been discussed. Read the existing threads.

I know, I made them.

[Paulypal]

Only in your mind are they patted on the back. They broke some rules and if caught would have be punished. It's just that with the drug testing if caught the punishment is more severe.
All that broke rules in any fasion were cheating, so whats your remedy, since some think that form of cheating was less of a rule breaking( I don't,cheating is cheating) we should give slack to the steroid users.

The drug testing is here, not only in baseball, it's the real world. Because some slip through the net does not mean testing will end.

Here is the remedy. Ready? Lets keep testing, make the testing process as thorough as possible going forward. Make the punishment more severe for anyone doing anything illegal, on the field or off. Steroids, cocaine, doctoring balls, amphets, illegal bats,,etc. Make the punishments fit the crime and enforce them.

Also --- we can not go backwards. I think they only way to deal with the past roid era is to let the records stand. No asterisks. Mac, Sosa, Bonds, Clemens have to go into the HOF. They meet the requirements to get in. IF we people want to make the distinction thats fine, but in they should go.

[BoweryBoys]

None of these type arguments are ever going to convince the majority of fans who feel that steroid use in MLB, and the players who use them, are clearly wrong. This double standard stuff doesn't wash. Cheating is cheating, of course, but one type of wrong does not excuse another which goes without saying. Also it is disingenuous to argue that all cheating, just like all crime, is one and the same of the same severity.

Here's just one example, all players who knowingly used steroids without valid prescription for valid reason since 1991 were breaking the law. Technically are they then criminals? If so, of course their crime is not nearly as bad as murder, bank robbery, etc. However they still violated the law. Should they be treated as harshly by the criminal justice system as if they committed a worse crime? Of course not but just because their crime is to a lesser degree does not mean they don't deserve some measure of punishment fitting the level of their crime.

In the same way, spit-ballers and ball-scuffers were violating the rules and cheating, yes. Were they knowingly breaking certain laws of the USA? Of course not. Apples and oranges and steroid apologists and excuse makers knowingly make this disingenuous argument but it convinces few. As for me, speaking as just one fan, I would say that steroid users are the third worse disgrace to the history of the game, just behind segregation and throwing games for gamblers. To argue that spit-ballers, etc, rise to the same level is too ridiculous to be taken seriously.

I don't know for sure but it seems to me that many fans are not as disgusted by the idea of steroid use as they are by a few already great players who have seemed to use them to make their legacies appear to be even greater then they otherwise would have been without the prolonged peak and career that steroids allowed them to increase and pad their numbers. One could also argue that Whitey Ford cheated the game in a sense by scuffing the ball and Gaylord Perry the same with spit balls and hold them in contempt for that. Fine, that is a legitimate argument. But let us be honest and admit that in no way, shape or form does that excuse players who also cheated the game by use of steroids. Many fans are sick of the players who used because they then want to make out that they did it all on just talent alone while trying to conceal their little secret. Seems to me you can't have contempt for the past cheating of guys like Gaylord Perry without also having contempt for Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, A-Rod as well. At least not and be making an honest argument.

[BoweryBoys]

Here is the remedy. Ready? Lets keep testing, make the testing process as thorough as possible going forward. Make the punishment more severe for anyone doing anything illegal, on the field or off. Steroids, cocaine, doctoring balls, amphets, illegal bats,,etc. Make the punishments fit the crime and enforce them.

Also --- we can not go backwards. I think they only way to deal with the past roid era is to let the records stand. No asterisks. Mac, Sosa, Bonds, Clemens have to go into the HOF. They meet the requirements to get in. IF we people want to make the distinction thats fine, but in they should go.

There is that disingenuous style argument again that doesn't wash. Equating illegal drug use, the only reason for which is enhanced performance, with other forms of "breaking the MLB rules" by cheating like spit balls, etc to get enhanced performance. Let us be honest and see the difference in severity and not deliberately use the blanket term "illegal" as if to imply that a guy corking a bat is breaking the law and committing a crime. Steroid guy, yes, bat corker no. Yes, let's be reasonable here and do make the punishment fit the crimes. Gamble and throw games - lifetime ban with no HOF eligibility. Test positive for steroids - minimum season ban. Caught again - lifetime ban and no HOF eligibility. Caught spit-balling or bat corking - month long ban and heavy fine. Caught again - season ban and heavier fine. Let us stop trying to excuse steroid users by trying to claim all things are of equal severity and deserve equal punishment.

As for HOF, I highly doubt that Bonds, Clemens or McGwire will ever get in their but they made their own beds so I won't cry about it.

[dominik]

Then Arod will also not get in, right?

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Here is the remedy. Ready? Lets keep testing, make the testing process as thorough as possible going forward. Make the punishment more severe for anyone doing anything illegal, on the field or off. Steroids, cocaine, doctoring balls, amphets, illegal bats,,etc. Make the punishments fit the crime and enforce them.

Also --- we can not go backwards. I think they only way to deal with the past roid era is to let the records stand. No asterisks. Mac, Sosa, Bonds, Clemens have to go into the HOF. They meet the requirements to get in. IF we people want to make the distinction thats fine, but in they should go.


Sounds good to me. I don't make any distinction in rule breaking, doctoring balls rule breaking just like all others, breaking a rule is breaking a rule.

At this time steroids is on the front burner and will be there for some time. I do realize that the program is not going to catch all who break the rule, is any program perfect. As long as there is testing the fear factor will scare some away from using. and catch some users. If some get caught while some others do not, all I can say, too bad for those that got caught in the net.
Don't use and you have nothing to worry about. For some posters too keep harping on the fact that we should not come down so heavy on those caught because they are not alone, other use and some how escape the net............pure nonsense, use and put yourself in jeopardy.

On the HOF, thats up to the voters. On the numbers, I say leave them as they are and no asterisk on any numbers.

[Seattle1]

I'm really tired of this line of argument. This kind of stuff is similar to long term steroid abuse much like a litterbug and Charlie Manson are both criminals.

I agree. Not by even the most wild stretches of the imagination can steroids be remotely considered simply as "gamesmanship." Not even close. Steroids are so far past the line, that the people who take them can't even see the line anymore!

[STLCards2]

". Gaylord Perry admitted to throwing spitballs as his main weapon - an illegal pitch- .

Do you have a quote with him saying this? I heard from him (not personaly, of course) that he very seldomly used it- and that the fear of the "spitpitch" coming is where the real edge came.

Not making any form of value judgemnt here - just checking up on facts. I'll leave the moral equivilancy debates up to everybody else.:D

[joshfan]

Do you have a quote with him saying this? I heard from him (not personaly, of course) that he very seldomly used it- and that the fear of the "spitpitch" coming is where the real edge came.

Not making any form of value judgemnt here - just checking up on facts. I'll leave the moral equivilancy debates up to everybody else.:DDidn't Perry use Spitter in his autobiographys title?
Are Steroids worse then altering the ball?
I don't think so
90 plus from 60-6 is hard enough to hit without it defying the laws of physics due to deliberate alteration
Gee I'm tired, pass the greenies

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Didn't Perry use Spitter in his autobiographys title?
Are Steroids worse then altering the ball?
I don't think so
90 plus from 60-6 is hard enough to hit without it defying the laws of physics due to deliberate alteration
Gee I'm tired, pass the greenies

I think so. If one does benefit from steroids, it is then built in, as long as he shedules use, it is with him for every at bat.
The pitcher has to some how, wet or scuff the ball, sometimes aided by the catcher or infielder. I would think he certainly could not throw an illegal pitch all the time. This is not a free pass, throw one illegal pitch and it's rule breaking.

The pitcher is not out on the field every day, steroid user brings his built in chemical use every at bat.

I'm sure this will open up another debate, you ask and I gave my opinion, but I will admit both are rule breakers.

If Perry threw one illegal pitch and I'm sure he did, he broke a rule but I wonder how many he threw or how good he was at that. Opposing bench, baseline coaches, umpires and TV cameras with replay, slo-mo and frame by frame and took 20 years to catch this guy in the act. I realize his teammates could play a part and I also realize there are eyes on his teammates the other team is aware of that, 20 years, this guy must have been the best cheater ever.

[STLCards2]

Didn't Perry use Spitter in his autobiographys title?
Are Steroids worse then altering the ball?
I don't think so
90 plus from 60-6 is hard enough to hit without it defying the laws of physics due to deliberate alteration
Gee I'm tired, pass the greenies

He may have, but that still doesn't mean that he used them as his "main-weopan." Again, as far as what is worse, I will let you decide. I have made enough mistakes in my life, I do not feel it right for me to flame other people's choices day after day, thread after thread, post after post. I am just looking for evidence that he said he used the spitter all the time. I don't care about the title - what did the content say?

[Allie Fox]

Perhaps I'm just rationalizing but I certainly equate a difference between steroid use and spitballing/ corking bats.

Here goes:

When an individual cuts or spits on or greases a ball prior to a pitch he is gaining an advantage over one individual for one at bat (nowadays it may only be a single pitch with as many balls as they use). They may use the pitch against every player but rarely have I heard a pitcher say they threw a spitter exclusively, even Perry.
The same thing with a corked bat. The advantage is one individual over another.

With steroid use the advantage is over the entire field. The player that uses has the advantage of quicker recovery from the tweaks of everyday play, a few miles per hour on the fastball, a few more feet to the long ball, etc. This to me, is where the degree of "wrongness" is increased.

I don't think that it's okay to throw a spitter or cork a bat. Those are against the rules and should be dealt with accordingly. However I think steroid use is definitively worse and also should be dealt with.

[SHOELESSJOE3]

Perhaps I'm just rationalizing but I certainly equate a difference between steroid use and spitballing/ corking bats.

Here goes:

When an individual cuts or spits on or greases a ball prior to a pitch he is gaining an advantage over one individual for one at bat (nowadays it may only be a single pitch with as many balls as they use). They may use the pitch against every player but rarely have I heard a pitcher say they threw a spitter exclusively, even Perry.
The same thing with a corked bat. The advantage is one individual over another.

With steroid use the advantage is over the entire field. The player that uses has the advantage of quicker recovery from the tweaks of everyday play, a few miles per hour on the fastball, a few more feet to the long ball, etc. This to me, is where the degree of "wrongness" is increased.

I don't think that it's okay to throw a spitter or cork a bat. Those are against the rules and should be dealt with accordingly. However I think steroid use is definitively worse and also should be dealt with.

I've seen the situation the same way and have posted wording similar to what you have.
I am sure the reply will now be, makes no difference, cheating, breaking a rule is the same no matter what rule is broken.
That is certainly true but the reasons why chemical use if frowned upon more so, taken more seriously is also true.

[sturg1dj]

There is that disingenuous style argument again that doesn't wash. Equating illegal drug use, the only reason for which is enhanced performance, with other forms of "breaking the MLB rules" by cheating like spit balls, etc to get enhanced performance. Let us be honest and see the difference in severity and not deliberately use the blanket term "illegal" as if to imply that a guy corking a bat is breaking the law and committing a crime. Steroid guy, yes, bat corker no. Yes, let's be reasonable here and do make the punishment fit the crimes. Gamble and throw games - lifetime ban with no HOF eligibility. Test positive for steroids - minimum season ban. Caught again - lifetime ban and no HOF eligibility. Caught spit-balling or bat corking - month long ban and heavy fine. Caught again - season ban and heavier fine. Let us stop trying to excuse steroid users by trying to claim all things are of equal severity and deserve equal punishment.

As for HOF, I highly doubt that Bonds, Clemens or McGwire will ever get in their but they made their own beds so I won't cry about it.

1. The HOF is separate from MLB. So MLB cannot put in a rule about who does and does not get into the HOF.
2. If we are kicking people out of the HOF for using illegal substances then once again, for the 1 millionth time let me bring up amphetamines which have been illegal since 1970 and are considered worse by the DEA than steroids. This includes many players starting around 1945 when the soldiers who were using them on the front lines brought them back to the states. Compared to amphetamines, steroids have not been illegal for long at all.

[CardsFan1982]

None of these type arguments are ever going to convince the majority of fans who feel that steroid use in MLB, and the players who use them, are clearly wrong. This double standard stuff doesn't wash. Cheating is cheating, of course, but one type of wrong does not excuse another which goes without saying. Also it is disingenuous to argue that all cheating, just like all crime, is one and the same of the same severity.

Here's just one example, all players who knowingly used steroids without valid prescription for valid reason since 1991 were breaking the law. Technically are they then criminals? If so, of course their crime is not nearly as bad as murder, bank robbery, etc. However they still violated the law. Should they be treated as harshly by the criminal justice system as if they committed a worse crime? Of course not but just because their crime is to a lesser degree does not mean they don't deserve some measure of punishment fitting the level of their crime.

In the same way, spit-ballers and ball-scuffers were violating the rules and cheating, yes. Were they knowingly breaking certain laws of the USA? A simple knowledge of the law would tell you that you cannot be punished according to US laws simply for testing positive for a drug at work. You have to possess the drug "in hand"....................So technically they can't be treated as criminals. This has been covered MANY times on the site.