2022 Hall of Fame Class

[Rovin Romine]

People's minds are mostly made up. Personally, I don't care at all if a player juiced. It's just how the game was played. An era of ridiculously bloated freaks hitting dingers and throwing hard fastballs into their 40s. Everyone, EVERYONE, knew players were on something at the time and it was totally fucking awesome baseball to watch. I would vote them all in. I was entertained.

Well, I can only hope the writers and the vets remember those people who were squeezed out of the game because they didn't want to inject a bunch of body-altering chemicals. The consequences of doing so are pretty horrible both individually and systemically. Which is why they were controlled substances outside of anything one likes to fantasize Bud Selig did or didn't give a shit about.

And that's why cheating matters, and why you shouldn't enshrine someone who rode a needle into the record books. No matter how entertained one was. The more you normalize that shit, the more prevalent it becomes, and you force high school kids into the choice between doping and risking brain cancer, or forgoing a scholarship.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

EDIT: nm

 

[Seels]

How do people mentally equate greenies and steroids? Is there a larger false equivalence...ever??

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

How do people mentally equate greenies and steroids? Is there a larger false equivalence...ever??

How do you mean? Both are illegal drugs that give you a boost.

 

[Dahabenzapple2]

How do you mean? Both are illegal drugs that give you a boost.

Did greenies allow you to hit a baseball 10% farther?

 

[Ale Xander]

How do people mentally equate greenies and steroids? Is there a larger false equivalence...ever??

Greenies are actually "worse" in my mind (at least for hitters)

 

[Ale Xander]

Did greenies allow you to hit a baseball 10% farther?

You can't hit it farther if you can't hit it at all.

Steroids help you after contact. Greenies help you with the contact.

 

[Ale Xander]

Well, I can only hope the writers and the vets remember those people who were squeezed out of the game because they didn't want to inject a bunch of body-altering chemicals. The consequences of doing so are pretty horrible both individually and systemically. Which is why they were controlled substances outside of anything one likes to fantasize Bud Selig did or didn't give a shit about.

And that's why cheating matters, and why you shouldn't enshrine someone who rode a needle into the record books. No matter how entertained one was. The more you normalize that shit, the more prevalent it becomes, and you force high school kids into the choice between doping and risking brain cancer, or forgoing a scholarship.

Greenies were more normalized than steroids.

https://www.ozy.com/the-new-and-the-next/did-bostons-favorite-slugger-bring-meth-to-major-league-baseball/78569/

 

[reggiecleveland]

Greenies are actually "worse" in my mind (at least for hitters)

Funny you say that. I read a lot of sports stuff and Ball Four was big deal, mostly for A. Impkying Mickey Mantle was an alcoholic and B. Exposing MLB players used greenies. In follow-up interviews, Bouton said pitchers were less unhappy about the stimulant revelation, even thankful, and hitters were pissed.

 

[Dahabenzapple2]

You can't hit it farther if you can't hit it at all.

Steroids help you after contact. Greenies help you with the contact.

This isn’t true. All amphetamines do is keep you more awake or less tired. More evidence that steroids also helps with focus and eyesight.

 

[Daniel_Son]

Greenies were more normalized than steroids.

https://www.ozy.com/the-new-and-the-next/did-bostons-favorite-slugger-bring-meth-to-major-league-baseball/78569/

Amphetamines were definitely used back then, maybe even by top players, but that's a pretty terrible article. Accusing Williams of "introducing meth to baseball" just because he was in the service?

"Did Teddy Ballgame use PEDs? No one knows, says Light, but those with Williams’ experience as fighter pilots were more likely to use amphetamines as part of their postwar routine. “I have no doubt that servicemen brought [amphetamines] back to baseball,” Light says. “It wasn’t taboo in the service. It was a way of life for when you needed an extra pick-me-up.”

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

This isn’t true. All amphetamines do is keep you more awake or less tired. More evidence that steroids also helps with focus and eyesight.

I've never heard the bolded part before. Where did you read that?

As far as amphetamines helping or not helping ball players, I'd say that they did. It's speed, it gives you energy to play at your best when it's an August day in St. Louis after a night playing in San Francisco and you're facing Nolan Ryan and you can barely hold a bat, much less swing one after getting to the park a few hours after you landed. Will they make a ball go 10% farther? No. But it will do other things for you.

Really, it comes down to this: either you think illegal drugs/stimulants shouldn't be allowed in the game or not. I don't care. Steroid, amphetamines, LSD, take it all and see what happens. If you feel the opposite, what is your line? You seem cool with greenies but not PEDs, how come? Both give you an artificial boost.

 

[Dahabenzapple2]

I've never heard the bolded part before. Where did you read that?

As far as amphetamines helping or not helping ball players, I'd say that they did. It's speed, it gives you energy to play at your best when it's an August day in St. Louis after a night playing in San Francisco and you're facing Nolan Ryan and you can barely hold a bat, much less swing one after getting to the park a few hours after you landed. Will they make a ball go 10% farther? No. But it will do other things for you.

Really, it comes down to this: either you think illegal drugs/stimulants shouldn't be allowed in the game or not. I don't care. Steroid, amphetamines, LSD, take it all and see what happens. If you feel the opposite, what is your line? You seem cool with greenies but not PEDs, how come? Both give you an artificial boost.

That is probably heresay so a moderator can strike it. It was back when Bonds was peaking that I remember reading about it

 

[LoweTek]

How do people mentally equate greenies and steroids? Is there a larger false equivalence...ever??

False equivalence severely understates a vast difference in net effect between a performance enabler (greenies) and a performance enhancer as well as a performance enabler (juice). Greenies got you on the field for a day. They didn't change your warning track power into cannon bombs. A pitcher would be able as opposed to being unable to throw an inning or two, maybe, with a greenie. A juicing pitcher as we saw with Roger, can outperform his own record as a young pitcher well into his 30s and into his 40s. A greenie does not have this effect.

All of this said, I'm way over the juicing arguments, as in, I'm over it... I used to have a very similar view to RR's, very indignant about the situation. And he is right, many on the margins players got squeezed out of the game because they chose not to assume the risk. It sucked, yes. It was unfair, yes. I guess I came to the view lots of people cheat at lots of different things and the majority are never suspected much less caught. It's just life.

I know a guy who pitched three years at UF and was invited to the first US Olympic Baseball team camp and got hurt. We went to lunch shortly after the Mitchell Report was released. His comment was one of my favorites about the entire juice era. "Judging from the names on this list, a lot of them should have taken more."

Point being a lot of margin players who juiced didn't get the desired effect.

As to the question regarding Clemens in the HOF, I'm at the point where if reasonable evidence exists indicating a pre-juice HOF worthy career they should eventually get in. Both Clemens and Bonds are examples of qualifiers using this criteria. ARod for example, is not. Sosa, Palmeiro, McGwire are not.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

I've never heard the bolded part before. Where did you read that?

I'm not an expert, but I believe the argument is that steroids strengthen the muscles that allow your eyes to focus. Seeing the ball is obviously extremely important to hitting and those muscles starting to weaken in your 30s is one of the things that cause hitters to get worse as they age. Taking steroids counteracts this and so would allow Bonds, for example, to be a much more effective 35 year old hitter than he otherwise would be.

 

[Rovin Romine]

I'm not expert, but I believe the argument is that steroids strengthen the muscles that allow your eyes to focus. Seeing the ball is obviously extremely important to hitting and those muscles starting to weaken in your 30s is one of the things that cause hitters to get worse as they age. Taking steroids counteracts this and so would allow Bonds, for example, to be a much more effective 35 year old hitter than he otherwise would be.

Bonds was also taking HGH, and it was reported his PED regimen improved his vision. https://www.sfgate.com/sports/kroichick/article/WHY-BONDS-USED-STEROIDS-Excerpt-from-Chronicle-2502614.php

 

[Ale Xander]

This isn’t true. All amphetamines do is keep you more awake or less tired. More evidence that steroids also helps with focus and eyesight.

Good luck hitting a 95 MPH fastball when you're asleep.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I'm not expert, but I believe the argument is that steroids strengthen the muscles that allow your eyes to focus. Seeing the ball is obviously extremely important to hitting and those muscles starting to weaken in your 30s is one of the things that cause hitters to get worse as they age. Taking steroids counteracts this and so would allow Bonds, for example, to be a much more effective 35 year old hitter than he otherwise would be.

That makes total sense.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

Bonds was also taking HGH, and it was reported his PED regimen improved his vision. https://www.sfgate.com/sports/kroichick/article/WHY-BONDS-USED-STEROIDS-Excerpt-from-Chronicle-2502614.php

Yes, probably should have used the phrase PEDs instead of steroids.

 

[Marciano490]

Yeah HGH improves eyesight. Amphetamines are probably more helpful than steroids - they aid focus and reflexes.

 

[jose melendez]

Good luck hitting a 95 MPH fastball when you're asleep.

wouldn't change my chances much.

 

[epraz]

Really, it comes down to this: either you think illegal drugs/stimulants shouldn't be allowed in the game or not. I don't care. Steroid, amphetamines, LSD, take it all and see what happens. If you feel the opposite, what is your line? You seem cool with greenies but not PEDs, how come? Both give you an artificial boost.

This. Also, the intent of players taking greenies and other PEDs are the same, so to the extent this is a character clause discussion, there's no distinction there.

 

[allmanbro]

I wonder how this all would have gone if Bonds and Clemens had not been so good. I mostly agree with the argument that the lingering problem with the steroid era for baseball history is that it sullied baseball's sacred numbers, especially 755 and 61, but also things like the significance of 400 and 500 home runs. To the extent this drives people's voting, the weird implication is that they would have had an easier time getting in if they had been less good. Imagine if the best players with credible accusations had been Manny, Sheffield, Palmeiro, and Pettite. Certainly plenty of people would still care, but I would guess much less. For example, I think it's actually pretty likely Manny and Palmeiro (at least) would have had a much easier time getting in without Clemens and Bonds at the top of the ticket.

If they got in this year, Bonds and Clemens would have had their enshrinement delayed 10 years, and been put through this exercise every year. Is that compelling as a punishment itself to anyone? I think it might be, but I also dislike the idea of singling out a handful of players for severe punishment like this in the first place.

 

[Rovin Romine]

I wonder how this all would have gone if Bonds and Clemens had not been so good. I mostly agree with the argument that the lingering problem with the steroid era for baseball history is that it sullied baseball's sacred numbers, especially 755 and 61, but also things like the significance of 400 and 500 home runs. To the extent this drives people's voting, the weird implication is that they would have had an easier time getting in if they had been less good. Imagine if the best players with credible accusations had been Manny, Sheffield, Palmeiro, and Pettite. Certainly plenty of people would still care, but I would guess much less. For example, I think it's actually pretty likely Manny and Palmeiro (at least) would have had a much easier time getting in without Clemens and Bonds at the top of the ticket.

If they got in this year, Bonds and Clemens would have had their enshrinement delayed 10 years, and been put through this exercise every year. Is that compelling as a punishment itself to anyone? I think it might be, but I also dislike the idea of singling out a handful of players for severe punishment like this in the first place.

Bonds and Clemens have a distinct public record of their doping. (A-Rod confessed and then got caught doing it again.) They're all fantastically rich, and they get their asses kissed by their old teams whenever they make appearances. (Except Bonds maybe?) This is a public accolade. That they want despite their doping, cheating, and non-admissions.

So I'm not really sure how this is "singling them out" or how it's a "severe punishment."

On a related note, how many of the current HoF inductees actually were caught doping? I know Piazza (4 years) said he used a then-legal supplement but then quit ahead of the wave of public opinion, and there were rumors about Bagwell (7 years).

 

[luckiestman]

That is probably heresay so a moderator can strike it. It was back when Bonds was peaking that I remember reading about it

that was a claim about HGH

 

[BigMike]

Bonds was also taking HGH, and it was reported his PED regimen improved his vision. https://www.sfgate.com/sports/kroichick/article/WHY-BONDS-USED-STEROIDS-Excerpt-from-Chronicle-2502614.php

I would say as far as I can tell the science on can HGH improve vision is mixed at best. It seems there definitely may be some improvements when dealing with aging patients. And Bonds at 36 is not what I mean by and aging patient. Hard to say, actually almost afraid to click on any links from most of the sites that address. there seems as much concern that it is dangerous with younger people.

 

[McBride11]

This isn’t true. All amphetamines do is keep you more awake or less tired. More evidence that steroids also helps with focus and eyesight.

Uhhh what? You gonna have to provide some references for this? Unless you're thinking of corticosteroids (not anabolic) for certain retinal conditions?

 

[Dahabenzapple2]

Uhhh what? You gonna have to provide some references for this? Unless you're thinking of corticosteroids (not anabolic) for certain retinal conditions?

See above - in concert with HGH

 

[Hank Scorpio]

What????? There were rumors when Clemens gained a lot of weight during his last 2 years with the Red Sox.

I remember some criticism about his weight in the Boston Herald some time during 1995 or 1996. Front page of the paper featured a fat, slovenly caricature of Roger Clemens eating a sub sandwich or something while on a pitching mound. Headline read “Roly Poly Roger”… I don’t think there was any perception he was juicing at the time.

 

[McBride11]

I'm not an expert, but I believe the argument is that steroids strengthen the muscles that allow your eyes to focus. Seeing the ball is obviously extremely important to hitting and those muscles starting to weaken in your 30s is one of the things that cause hitters to get worse as they age. Taking steroids counteracts this and so would allow Bonds, for example, to be a much more effective 35 year old hitter than he otherwise would be.

Ciliary (smooth muscles) are not affected by anabolic steroids generally, skeletal muscle is. The majority of vision loss in ones 30s is from presbyopia (stiffening of the lens that provides focus). Please provide cites.

Yeah HGH improves eyesight. Amphetamines are probably more helpful than steroids - they aid focus and reflexes.

Please provide cites.

This article of a scientific study shows GH caused excessive retinal blood vessel growth and worse vision.
https://www.science.org/content/article/growth-hormone-turns-blind-eye

IGF1, one of the hormones HGH potently produces, negatively impacts eyesight
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6041402/

And HGH can increase intracranial pressure and neovascularization of the retina (bad)
https://www.aao.org/eye-health/tips-prevention/growth-hormone-children-vision-eyes-myopia

 

[McBride11]

See above - in concert with HGH

Not a cite, please see my post #430.

There are some wild assertations about anabolic steroids and HGH being thrown around. I am happy to be wrong, but the sources I provide disagree.

 

[Dahabenzapple2]

Not a cite, please see my post #430.

There are some wild assertations about anabolic steroids and HGH being thrown around. I am happy to be wrong, but the sources I provide disagree.

You got me / as I mentioned previously I have nothing to cite. Not as outlandish as amphetamines helping someone hit better but whatever

 

[Ale Xander]

You got me / as I mentioned previously I have nothing to cite. Not as outlandish as amphetamines helping someone hit better but whatever

You don’t think focus and reflex are important to hitting?

 

[BaseballJones]

And by my quick math, Clemens had bWar of 92.6 from 84-97, and from I can tell McNamee said 1998 was the first injection year (I don't know if that was pre or post season, but his bWar in 98 was 8.1).

But that 92.6 puts Clemens above notable HoF such as : Spahn, Pedro, Nolan, Gibson, Halladay (bWar 65). I didn't go past there.

Neither of Kershaw nor Scherzer are going to catch 92 and both are likely to be HoF.

Clemens had a HoF career before the roids in 1998.

Im sure BB and Arod are similarly strong.

The refusal to vote for these guys is actually incredible. Clemens first half of his career , before roids, would slot in at #13 in HoF pitcher bWar, out of 84 pitchers. Oh and he had plenty of memorable moments, RoY, TWO 20 strikeout games, pitching triple crown (97) (another in 98).

If Clemens had dropped dead on Jan 1 1998, he would have been in the HoF years ago.

edit - links
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/clemero02.shtml

https://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_pitching.shtml

If you assume that it was 1998 when Clemens started using, and either 1999 or 2000 when Bonds started using (let's say 1999), then here's the stats for those two players before they started using PEDs:

Clemens (1984-1997): 213-118 (.644), 2.97 era, 149 era+, 2,882 k, 1.15 whip, 8.5 k/9, 1 MVP, 6 AS, 4 CYA, 7 top-10 CYA, 92.7 bWAR
Bonds (1986-1998): 411 hr, 1,364 r, 1,216 rbi, 445 sb, .290/.411/.556/.966, 164 ops+, 3 MVP, 8 AS, 8 top-10 MVP, 99.9 bWAR

Both totally had HOF careers before they started taking PEDs, if you believe the standard timeline.

Now look at the two once they started taking PEDs:

Clemens (1998-2007): 141-66 (.681), 3.38 era, 133 era+, 1,790 k, 1.21 whip, 8.6 k/9, 0 MVP, 5 AS, 3 CYA, 5 top-10 CYA, 46.0 bWAR
Bonds (1999-2007): 351 hr, 863 r, 780 rbi, 69 sb, .316/.505/.712/1.217, 214 ops+, 4 MVP, 6 AS, 5 top-10 MVP, 62.9 bWAR

Unbelievable.

 

[lexrageorge]

I remember some criticism about his weight in the Boston Herald some time during 1995 or 1996. Front page of the paper featured a fat, slovenly caricature of Roger Clemens eating a sub sandwich or something while on a pitching mound. Headline read “Roly Poly Roger”… I don’t think there was any perception he was juicing at the time.

PED use was an unasked question in MLB circles at that time. It started to get some notice when McGwire was caught with a steroid needle androstendione in his locker. Before then, fans did use to mock Canseco, but he seemed to enjoy the attention.

Obviously, we can never prove that Clemens was juicing in 1995-96. But speculating that he may have is hardly a "libelous assertion" (lol). There was the weight gain, followed by a resurgence in his pitching ability late in 1996 that was soon followed by 2 dominant seasons in Toronto where he was the best pitcher in the AL at age 34 and 35. Steroids do allow the body to recover more quickly and do help aging players stay in the game longer. If he started juicing in 1996, when Canseco was on the team and when Roger was in a contract year, it could easily have been 1997 before he reaped the benefits over a full season.

Personally, I would still vote for him if I had a ballot. I think his pre-PED career numbers are sufficient, as they are with Bonds as well. MLB didn't care at the time. The legality is in a bit of a grey area when it came to using them. But I can understand why people keep him off as well, and I don't exactly find myself filled with sympathy or even empathy for one Roger Clemens.

EDIT: Thanks for the correction, @Albatross Contract

 

[McBride11]

You don’t think focus and reflex are important to hitting?

Correct, greenies (dexadrine), an amphetamine, can improve focus, energy, and reaction time. All 3 important for a baseball player daily, and especially so after a long overnight cross country flight. Ergo Greenies are also a PED
Anabolics make you stronger, they don't necessarily increase focus (or eyesight). Bonds was a stellar hitter before roids, he just added more power.

 

[BigMike]

What we know for sure is that if you take HGH, AND you spend 5 hours a day of hard training, you can really increase your physical strength and performance.

 

[Rovin Romine]

The legality is in a bit of a grey area when it came to using them.

Just so people know, anabolic steroids weren't always an illegal substance in the US, but they were tested for in international competition in the late 60s and onward. There was a growing public debate about them in the 70s and 80s. When Ben Johnson got stripped of his Olympic medal in 88, it was the inflection point. Congress spent two years having hearings on the issue, and in 1990, Congress passed an Anabolic Steroids Control Act, which specified criminal penalties for users or coaches who encouraged individuals to use anabolic steroids. HGH was also uniquely singled out, and specifically made part of the 1990 act.

So no, there wasn't any grey as to the legality for Bonds or Clemens using anabolic steroids and HGH. There's an absolutely bright 1990 line.

However it's important to note they were drugs prior to that. You couldn't go up to your pharmacist and get them over the counter. There was no "out of the blue" congressional action that caused grandma to have to throw out her needles. I'd say by the early 80s, everyone in any sport in the US was completely aware of the issue - aware that international competition was tested and regulated for PEDs, and to use such was regarded as cheating, no matter what the technical illegality on any given island. (If there was a grey area, I'd say it was very dark grey, and limited to the 60s and perhaps the early 70s.)

 

[PC Drunken Friar]

It started to get some notice when McGwire was caught with a steroid needle in his locker.

Whoa, I have never heard this. I know that he casually had a bottle of creatin in his locker... But a needle?

 

[Albatross Contract]

Whoa, I have never heard this. I know that he casually had a bottle of creatin in his locker... But a needle?

He had neither a needle nor creatinE in his locker, he had a tub of androstendione, a legal over-the-counter anabolic steroid precursor you could pick up at GNC.

http://www.cardsconclave.com/2018/08/22/marking-mcgwire-androstenedione/

 

[lexrageorge]

Just so people know, anabolic steroids weren't always an illegal substance in the US, but they were tested for in international competition in the late 60s and onward. There was a growing public debate about them in the 70s and 80s. When Ben Johnson got stripped of his Olympic medal in 88, it was the inflection point. Congress spent two years having hearings on the issue, and in 1990, Congress passed an Anabolic Steroids Control Act, which specified criminal penalties for users or coaches who encouraged individuals to use anabolic steroids. HGH was also uniquely singled out, and specifically made part of the 1990 act.

So no, there wasn't any grey as to the legality for Bonds or Clemens using anabolic steroids and HGH. There's an absolutely bright 1990 line.

However it's important to note they were drugs prior to that. You couldn't go up to your pharmacist and get them over the counter. There was no "out of the blue" congressional action that caused grandma to have to throw out her needles. I'd say by the early 80s, everyone in any sport in the US was completely aware of the issue - aware that international competition was tested and regulated for PEDs, and to use such was regarded as cheating, no matter what the technical illegality on any given island. (If there was a grey area, I'd say it was very dark grey, and limited to the 60s and perhaps the early 70s.)

I guess, but I've also seen different opinions with regards to their legality for personal use.

Also, if you do want to limit the Hall to those that never used an illegal substance, the Hall would probably have about all of 10 plaques total, and definitely zero of anyone that played after 1970.

 

[Sad Sam Jones]

Whoa, I have never heard this. I know that he casually had a bottle of creatin in his locker... But a needle?

The creatine craze was already out in the open before 1998, so no one would have batted an eye if it was creatine instead of Andro in McGwire's locker. I remember SI going in depth about creatine around 1997 because it was what Brady Anderson was willing to give public credit to for his 50-homer season in '96. At the time it sounded like the new greenies, insofar as everyone was openly using it and there were tubs of the stuff in locker rooms. However, it was tied to an influx of hamstring injuries, which created a short-lived controversy. Of course, it was also reported on with a tone of *nudge, nudge, wink wink* that they figured the public would except the use of creatine so they could use it to cover up the rampant steroid usage in the game.

McGwire's public favor started to turn after the Andro was seen on camera in the summer of 1998. Then the media tried to make Sosa the protagonist in the home run race by asking him what he was using, to which he responded "Flintstone vitamins". The best PED of all-time though is still Mickey Tettleton's Froot Loops (mind you, Tettleton was also an early teammate of the Bash Brothers).

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

The creatine craze was already out in the open before 1998, so no one would have batted an eye if it was creatine instead of Andro in McGwire's locker. I remember SI going in depth about creatine around 1997 because it was what Brady Anderson was willing to give public credit to for his 50-homer season in '96. At the time it sounded like the new greenies, insofar as everyone was openly using it and there were tubs of the stuff in locker rooms. However, it was tied to an influx of hamstring injuries, which created a short-lived controversy. Of course, it was also reported on with a tone of *nudge, nudge, wink wink* that they figured the public would except the use of creatine so they could use it to cover up the rampant steroid usage in the game.

McGwire's public favor started to turn after the Andro was seen on camera in the summer of 1998. Then the media tried to make Sosa the protagonist in the home run race by asking him what he was using, to which he responded "Flintstone vitamins". The best PED of all-time though is still Mickey Tettleton's Froot Loops (mind you, Tettleton was also an early teammate of the Bash Brothers).

The bottle of Andro might have been spotted in the summer of 1998, but public favor was still very much behind him at the time. IIRC, the reporter who wrote about the bottle was villainized for doing so.

 

[PC Drunken Friar]

That's right. Got Creatine and Andro mixed up. So was there ever an exposed needle seen?

 

[snowmanny]

I guess, but I've also seen different opinions with regards to their legality for personal use.

Also, if you do want to limit the Hall to those that never used an illegal substance, the Hall would probably have about all of 10 plaques total, and definitely zero of anyone that played after 1970.

Except Jeter, of course.

Also I think the exposed needle was seen on the tape of the Rams practice.

 

[lexrageorge]

Except Jeter, of course.

Also I think the exposed needle was seen on the tape of the Rams practice.

Maybe it was a record player needle. Anyway, correction to my misrememberance has since been made.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

That's right. Got Creatine and Andro mixed up. So was there ever an exposed needle seen?

If there was an exposed needle in McGwire’s locker, I’ve never heard about it. I’m not saying that I’m a baseball savant or have read everything, but I’d be shocked if I missed that.

I am 99% sure that this isn’t true.

 

[E5 Yaz]

I didn't think we were here to talk about the past

 

[Fred not Lynn]

So no, there wasn't any grey as to the legality for Bonds or Clemens using anabolic steroids and HGH. There's an absolutely bright 1990 line.

The grey area was the entire world outside the border of the United States…a player could spend the winter eating steroids and lifting weights in the Dominican Republic, and never once violate US law. That’s where MLB was negligent in the matter. MLB needed to create, clearly communicate, and enforce their OWN anti-doping rules - not just fall back on the law of the land.

I'd say by the early 80s, everyone in any sport in the US was completely aware of the issue - aware that international competition was tested and regulated for PEDs, and to use such was regarded as cheating, no matter what the technical illegality on any given island.

Except strangely if you had pictures of any sort of work implements on your uniform you seemed to be exempt from all that…

 

[opes]

I didn't think we were here to talk about the past

Nice.