View Single Post
Old 07-19-2013, 04:28 PM
34rancher 34rancher is offline
WSI High Priest
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,279

Originally Posted by TDog View Post
If teams forfeited games for having participants who test positive for banned substances, which is pretty much the way it goes at the amateur level, teams would have more reason to care about players using banned substances. Some fans want to take away Barry Bonds home runs, but you really can't do that unless you take away the Giants wins that were aided by Barry Bonds' home runs.

Logistically, if the problem is widespread, that doesn't work because if you tested after every game, the team forfeiting would sometimes have to forfeit as well. And its a long season.

In football, with no team playing more than one game a week, it would be easier to test every player before and after games. But America really doesn't care about football players using banned substances.
If both teams had to take a loss, I'm ok with that. Give em both a loss. Until it affects teams this is never going to end. How we allow these players to essentially cheat the game, others players, and the record books I don't understand how it's any different than Pete Rose. Ban them all.
Do the white sox know that it is Designated Hitter, not Designated Out?
Reply With Quote