Sessh

I understand that's how it's written and of course he agreed to it, but it's still not right to punish someone for something like this when no intent was proven for a first offense. Accidents happen to all of us and to now have the word "cheater' associated with his name in the slightest over this is ridiculous. I am perfectly aware of how it's written, but it's still not right.

Well, it seems I was wrong about the medicine he took after all. I thought someone would have checked MLBTR by now, but he apparently took something called Subrox C which is an OTC medicine. I am surprised no one checked MLBTR before now, but my fault for assuming someone did and I should have looked myself. It says there that Mondesi proved that he took the substance unintentionally which is why MLB reduced his penalty. If it was proved that it was an accident (which it was) and it was a first offense (which it was), there should be no penalty. If he is stupid enough to do it a second time, well that's just too bad. For a first offense that was proven to be unintentional and accidental with zero lack of intent, though? No way he should be penalized for that. The policy should be more forgiving than that in situations like these.

Maybe it was proven to some extent which is why the suspension was reduced, but yeah, it could have happened that way. I would think if MLB thought that, they wouldn't have reduced his penalty at all and just told him to deal with it. Obviously, there was some uncertainty or doubt that Mondesi did this on purpose. It would be quite a reach to declare that Mondesi decided taking large amounts of cold medicine was a good way to use PEDs. If this drug policy is such that a player can't even take cold medicine without being afraid of being labeled a cheater, there is something very wrong with the drug policy. As fans, we don't know the details of the situation, but it certainly is telling that his suspension was reduced instead of upheld as is.

What he probably took was a medicine called Mucovibrol C which contains Ambroxol and Clenbuterol . It is perfectly legal in the DR and available only by prescription. If it can be proven this is how he ingested Clenbuterol and it was truly an accident, he should get no penalty for this first offense. I see no reason to be unreasonable with all of this. Yes, he messed up; no, he did not gain a performance enhancing effect whatsoever from taking this provided he took it in the prescribed doses.

The edge of the zone especially when a mid to upper 90's fastball is involved. In video games, it's always when the ball is right at the edge of the strike zone; "on the black". I remember one such comment I heard in a baseball video game was something like "99 on the black; someone call the cops, you can't hit that!" Anyway, thanks for the clarification on that.

Oops, mlb baseball lingo.

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.

I see it now. The edit wasn't there when I replied. I didn't mean for that to come off as an insult as it most certainly wasn't.

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, then I stand corrected on what Palmer said. However, the photos you posted show clearly that it was on the black and so does the pitch FX. Anyway, I don't wanna argue with you again, bud. Especially not on something like this, so we'll just agree to disagree.

It seems so. I'm not sure what you think that black line that goes along the outside edge of the plate is if it's not the black of the plate, though. The ball brushes that black line. I can't see how you say it's two inches off the black.

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.

The second and third pictures clearly show it brushed the black of the plate.

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 guess Palmer was wrong too, then? He went on about it for a few seconds about how the edge of the ball touched the black. If it touches the black, it can't be two inches outside.

Yes, Palmer said as much when we saw the overhead view of the pitch. It was clearly on the black of the plate which was not consistent with what K zone showed. The edge of the ball was both on the black and at the knees. It could have gone either way, but it was way too close to take.

It was clearly on the black and close enough to knee level that he shouldn't have taken it. It was very close. It wasn't even that bad a call and certainly not a pitch you 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.