-
Posts
4536 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Sessh
-
That's interesting. It's odd then that there's so much talk of "painting the black" as being a virtue for pitchers. "Painting the black" is described as throwing the ball over the edge of the plate on mlb's "basic baseball lingo" page as well. Odd as well considering throwing the ball over the plate is a strike. I guess this is another one of those gray areas. I've always heard that "painting the black" of the plate was a good thing and I've never once seen or heard that disputed.
-
It's not an insult at all, but years of baseball knowledge aren't necessary for this. The black edge of the plate is clearly visible and the ball clearly touches it. There is no dirt between the ball and the black, therefore it touched it. I don't know why you would take that as an insult? It's pretty clear in the photo. The same edge is on the other side only not as prominent (covered with a little dirt).
-
I see it brush the black in the photos you showed, but I still say it's too close to take. He said it didn't touch the black? It's low if it's anything and it might be. Even on that fourth picture of the pitch FX, the "3" circle is both in line with the outside corner line on the pitch FX (on the black) and like 1/4th of the ball is above the knees. Strike two was on the black as well. Two and three are the same pitch as far as the outside corner goes, but the third was lower.
-
It showed it low and away, but the ball was very close to the point on the edge in that corner of the strike zone. The overhead showed the ball barely touch the black, but it did touch and Palmer noted as much. Like I said, it really could have gone either way, but it was too close to take with two strikes.
-
I meant the part where everyone cares what people are doing or using and it's this huge distraction. I didn't mean the PED's themselves, I don't care about those. I did before I found out how far back it all goes, but once I uncovered that reality, I stopped caring because it's all so silly.
-
I'm 36, so yes I am. :laughlol:
-
People actually sit back and hope others get caught? The Three Ring Circus Sideshow AKA MLB steroid scandals continue.... I miss when this wasn't a part of baseball.
-
Good point about Arnold. Stallone, too. Vince McMahon, too. I am certainly open to the idea that we've been lied to about steroids and PED's VIA exaggeration of health risks just like with recreational drugs which we're finally starting to see the light on.
-
For sure, but especially back in the 80's those guys were on something. I'm sure all the steroids didn't help though on top of all the other stuff. Mixing stuff like that is never good and the head trauma is definitely a factor as well.
-
Probably not as dangerous as they once were, no. I personally don't get it myself. You could point to all the pro wrestlers that have died early deaths and say "Ah ha!", but those guys seem to take far more of that stuff than would be advantageous for a baseball player. Have there been any reports about baseball players that took steroids or PED's that have suffered negative health effects later in life? Bonds, McGuire, Sosa (though he has gone off the deep end in other ways. He's pulled a Michael Jackson. Have you seen him lately?), Canseco etc.. they all seem fine. I have to wonder what how dangerous they really are myself.
-
It doesn't matter to you that many of those 700 used PEDs? Mantle, Aaron, Mays and the list goes on? Good article here about amphetamine and Bud Selig admitting amphetamines had been in baseball for seven or eight decades. Your "700 best" contain many, many players who used PEDs and set many, many records with their assistance. That's your elite club and it's the same as the players in the game since the 80's who have taken most of the blame for things that had been in the game before they were born.
-
You do realize that baseball has been like this for a very, very long time right? Personally, I think personal accountability and responsibility is becoming a lost art. If someone wants to smoke cigarettes for example, they are responsible if they get cancer and they knew the risks beforehand and did it anyway. It's really the same with PED's to me. It's their bodies. If they want to do things that may harm their bodies, they have to deal with that. I just don't like this whole idea that we need to protect people from themselves. These are adults that made a decision and they will have to deal with whatever consequences that decision brings. It's not like they didn't know the risks beforehand.
-
As long as there is demand, the black market will be there to supply. It is no different, really. There is money to be made and someone is going to make it.
-
I wonder what Lew Ford would think of that? :laughlol:
-
I would be surprised if players found that to be reasonable. At that point, you'll be disrupting family life for players based on constant suspicion without a shred of proof to warrant it. I think that would be a deterrent to being a baseball player at all. What if they have kids that wake up at 3AM and can't go back to sleep making the parents have to get up instead of getting up 4-5 hours later with the extra rest. I think disrupting life to that extent is too far and will elicit push back. I wouldn't stand for being subject to that kind of invasion of my private life based on nothing but baseless suspicion. Ridiculous. I think a compromise is the way to go. Prohibition doesn't work.
-
That crossed my mind too, but it seems to cross a line. Should this stuff be so intrusive that it is disrupting the lives of entire families? I think that is going too far. We can only go down this prohibition road so far, but I really don't get why this is still the preferred approach to drugs. It has never worked anywhere it has been tried, so maybe it's time to try something new. Does everything have to be banned? Can there be some kind of compromise where we allow some PED's, but restrict dosages and require constant monitoring by a doctor and maybe even administration of the drug by a doctor? I just think this road has been traveled enough times to know that it simply does not work. This bullheaded, prohibition approach only creates a black market that will always be better than your testing program. You just can't win this way.
-
Good points, but I don't think the increased penalty you propose would do anything except motivate players to do a better job of not getting caught which I guess comes down to finding a better chemist.
-
See, there's also the fact that PED's have been in baseball for over 100 years. The MLB testing program is a much younger entity and has a lot of catching up to do. The black market for PED's is well established and new suppliers will pop up as fast or faster than others will be caught. I just don't see how this will stop so long as there is money to be made and demand for the products.