Barry Bonds

[Steve B.]

Barry Bonds cheated ... end of story!!

Damn- I'm glad there are so many judges, juries, and executioners on this Forum.

Anyone ever watch 12 Angry Men?

 

[Full Canvas]

From American Thinker

August 6, 2007

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/...lls_great.html

_______________________

 

[jeansandtshirt]

Originally Posted by Steve B.

Damn- I'm glad there are so many judges, juries, and executioners on this Forum.

Anyone ever watch 12 Angry Men?

The court of public opinion is much different than a court of law.

 

[Steve B.]

The court of public opinion is much different than a court of law.

Precisely

 

[Tomasso]

Originally Posted by jeansandtshirt

The court of public opinion is much different than a court of law.
Yes, and that's why Barry is going to spend some quiet time in a little room for a couple of months. He's about to learn that while one can lie to his wife, the press and Willie Mays with impunity, you can't lie to the Feds.

 

[Film Noir Buff]

Originally Posted by jeansandtshirt

The court of public opinion is much different than a court of law.

It's the court of public opinion that keeps bringing up the federal investigation and failed but "imminent" indictments as a reason to believe Bonds used steroids. If the court of public opinion is such a self justifying stance, why is it coaxially mounted to the legal process?

 

[hchamp]

Originally Posted by lawyerdad

The bill's in the mail . . .

If I'm being billed then let me ask you why the prosecutors would wait to bring an indictment if they already had the evidence needed to prosecute him? Isn't it clear this isn't the case? That the evidence is wanting?

 

[Tomasso]

Originally Posted by hchamp

If I'm being billed then let me ask you why the prosecutors would wait to bring an indictment if they already had the evidence needed to prosecute him?
Would you rather they rush to judgement?

 

[hchamp]

Originally Posted by Thracozaag

1992 is when he started wearing the elbow brace, to rehabilitate his injury; somehow he's manged to wear it ever since.

koji

Originally Posted by ken

I don't know where to find the rule book. The comment Koji made was that Bonds is held to a different standard than other players in regard to body armor. I think that article confirms that, regardless of the reasoning behind the double standard.

The article says there was no rule for body armour before 2001, so Bonds was not held to a different standard before then. And since 2001, players who have a medical reason to wear this equipment can do so. The article says that there are several players, including Bonds, who qualify under this exemption. So again, Bonds is not breaking any rules or being treated differently than other players.

 

[hchamp]

Originally Posted by Manton

1) I suppose it is theoretically possible for an athlete to get better at that age, but I'll bet the examples are exceedingly rare. Other people have a better command of the statistics than I do, but I think those who see something anomalous about Bonds but not about Aaron or Maris make a better case.

2) Not just bulking up, but what it did to his entire physiology. Look at his head, for instance. He just looks like a different person.

3) I don't need to prove anything. I am simply stating my judgement based on the available evidence. OJ Simpson was acquitted of murder but I still think he did it.

1. Aaron's performance also picked up between his 35th and 39th years. And it should be remembered that Bonds' was more of an all-around player than Aaron in the first part of his career. So when he consciously changed his goal to chasing home run milestones, it shouldn't surpise that the comparisons jump out more.

2. Pictures?

3. Relax. That was the generic "you". And OJ is a bad example. He had the benefit of a trial. Bonds hasn't. WMD in Iraq would be a better comparison. Rush to judgment in the court of public opinion before the formal investigation (by weapons inspectors) had a chance to run its course. You know how that one turned out.

 

[hchamp]

Originally Posted by Brian278

Never mind his association with Greg Anderson, who a former teammate claimed told him exactly what steroids he had Bonds on and that he could get them for him too. And add the physiological evidence of the numerous accounts from teammates of his acne-ridden back, a notorious steroid side effect.

How many steroids he took, quantifying the effect on his performance, how great of a player he is or would have been may be up for debate, but the preponderance of evidence that he at least took some of them makes the bias of someone who has all the same evidence as the rest of us and doesn't come to that conclusion incredibly obvious.

If it's so easy then prosecute him.

And pimples on your back proves that you're on steroids? So there are no other causes of acne? Like poor hygiene?

 

[hchamp]

Originally Posted by Tomasso

Would you rather they rush to judgement?

You mean like what many here are doing?

No. I'd rather withold judgment until the feds show they can prove his guilt. I'm just wondering why it's taking them so long to do this.

 

[Tomasso]

Originally Posted by hchamp

And pimples on your back proves that you're on steroids? So there are no other causes of acne? Like poor hygiene?

 

[hchamp]

Btw, most players are taking the same "innocent until proven guilty" stance. And they know more about this steroids stuff than anyone.

 

[Tokyo Slim]

Originally Posted by hchamp

Btw, most players are taking the same "innocent until proven guilty" stance. And they know more about this steroids stuff than anyone.
Yes, since many of them are on performance enhancing drugs themselves.

Even if they themselves aren't it would run counter to the interests of their team if they lost a few players of any caliber due to stricter steroid rules.