I've said all along, I cherish THE game more than A game. Records and statistics are more important in baseball than games being bet on, IMO. Even when someone bets their team to lose, or doesn't bet at all that day.

 

 

It just blows my mind that you think this way. So if you were a manager, you wouldn't have a problem with one of your players trying to throw the game to cover a bet, but you're outraged if he hits 200 homers in his career instead of 75 because he was on steroids? :confused:

It just blows my mind that you think this way. So if you were a manager, you wouldn't have a problem with one of your players trying to throw the game to cover a bet, but you're outraged if he hits 200 homers in his career instead of 75 because he was on steroids? :confused:

 

I'm not a manager, I'm a fan.

 

And again, I never said I wouldn't have a problem with it. You're again acting as if I'm choosing one right and one wrong.

I'm not a manager, I'm a fan.

 

And again, I never said I wouldn't have a problem with it. You're again acting as if I'm choosing one right and one wrong.

 

 

But you would rather have a player throw the game than bulk up with steroids?

I believe, JS, that if you took a poll that more people would be upset if they KNEW someone was betting on games than those that would be if they KNEW that Manny or Big Papi was taking HGH.

 

Heck, we KNOW of players doing it yet it hasn't affected anything to this point. We yawn at it.

 

That wouldn't happen if a betting scandal hit.

 

To clarify my earlier statement, I still think gambling is the bigger deal. I was just pointing out that I don't find it sensible to sluff off the PED thing as "no big deal."

To clarify my earlier statement, I still think gambling is the bigger deal. I was just pointing out that I don't find it sensible to sluff off the PED thing as "no big deal."

 

 

I don't think anybody is doing that. The question was whch is the greater baseball sin.

But you would rather have a player throw the game than bulk up with steroids?

 

No, I'd rather have neither. But, I'll humor you.

 

There's a really good chance, depending on many things, that a person throwing a game will have very little impact on said game. On top of that, we all know success is achieved in baseball less frequently than failure anyway. A leadoff man can't prevent the 3 hitter from knocking in the 2 hitter. A 3rd baseman can't make the pitcher groove a fastball.

 

The # of opportunities for impact can't be more than their few at-bats and how ever many balls are hit or thrown to them in one game. AND, those are only the games they're trying to throw.

 

Listen, I'm not saying it's okay to bet on games, against your team or otherwise. But as someone who doesn't bet on games and enjoys the history of it, I'd rather see guys like Hank Aaron have the homerun record. While they may have been on "greenies" or weed, or whatever. None of those things impacted someone's physical attributes like PED's, specifically steroids. If you think otherwise, look how out of shape players now look that played in the '70's. Not too enhancing.

 

For the record, Pete Rose doesn't rank in my top ten favorite players simply because he's a horse's patoot. Can't really stand him.

No, I'd rather have neither. But, I'll humor you.

 

There's a really good chance, depending on many things, that a person throwing a game will have very little impact on said game. On top of that, we all know success is achieved in baseball less frequently than failure anyway. A leadoff man can't prevent the 3 hitter from knocking in the 2 hitter. A 3rd baseman can't make the pitcher groove a fastball.

 

The # of opportunities for impact can't be more than their few at-bats and how ever many balls are hit or thrown to them in one game. AND, those are only the games they're trying to throw.

 

Listen, I'm not saying it's okay to bet on games, against your team or otherwise. But as someone who doesn't bet on games and enjoys the history of it, I'd rather see guys like Hank Aaron have the homerun record. While they may have been on "greenies" or weed, or whatever. None of those things impacted someone's physical attributes like PED's, specifically steroids. If you think otherwise, look how out of shape players now look that played in the '70's. Not too enhancing.

 

For the record, Pete Rose doesn't rank in my top ten favorite players simply because he's a horse's patoot. Can't really stand him.

 

 

I can buy that argument if there is only one player on the team that is trying to throw the game. What if gambling in baseball grew to the epidemic that steroid use did? What kind of mess would you have then? The question isn't which had the biggest impact on baseball, but which one is the greater sin.

I think your example of steroids was extreme as well.

 

It was, and I did it that way on purpose to show that if one can do an extreme example to make a point than so can someone else.

I can buy that argument if there is only one player on the team that is trying to throw the game. What if gambling in baseball grew to the epidemic that steroid use did? What kind of mess would you have then? The question isn't which had the biggest impact on baseball, but which one is the greater sin.

 

You mean a mess like when records (like them or not, they are an important part of baseball and its history) are tainted, when certain players - and therefore their teams - get an advantage over their opponents, when the fans becomes disgusted with the ongoing charade and saga of lies and deceit, when players basically tell to kids that it's okay to cheat and take potentially dangerous drugs into your body to help improve your standing over your peers? That kind of mess?

You mean a mess like when records (like them or not, they are an important part of baseball and its history) are tainted, when certain players - and therefore their teams - get an advantage over their opponents, when the fans becomes disgusted with the ongoing charade and saga of lies and deceit, when players basically tell to kids that it's okay to cheat and take potentially dangerous drugs into your body to help improve your standing over your peers? That kind of mess?

 

:thumb:

You mean a mess like when records (like them or not, they are an important part of baseball and its history) are tainted, when certain players - and therefore their teams - get an advantage over their opponents, when the fans becomes disgusted with the ongoing charade and saga of lies and deceit, when players basically tell to kids that it's okay to cheat and take potentially dangerous drugs into your body to help improve your standing over your peers? That kind of mess?

 

 

No, what you just mentioned doesn't even come close to what a gambling epidemic in baseball would do. If kids have to look to baseball players for what is morally right or wrong, then we have an even bigger problem.You're acting like as though we're saying that the drug problem in baseball wasn't a big deal. We're not saying that.

I can buy that argument if there is only one player on the team that is trying to throw the game. What if gambling in baseball grew to the epidemic that steroid use did? What kind of mess would you have then? The question isn't which had the biggest impact on baseball, but which one is the greater sin.

 

Well yeah, and if Oddibe McDowell was the only one using steroid's it wouldn't be that big of a deal either.

No, what you just mentioned doesn't even come close to what a gambling epidemic in baseball would do. If kids have to look to baseball players for what is morally right or wrong, then we have an even bigger problem.You're acting like as though we're saying that the drug problem in baseball wasn't a big deal. We're not saying that.

 

The problem with the premise of a "gambling epidemic" is that the feds would come down hard on it well in advance of it becoming an "epidemic."

No, what you just mentioned doesn't even come close to what a gambling epidemic in baseball would do. If kids have to look to baseball players for what is morally right or wrong, then we have an even bigger problem.You're acting like as though we're saying that the drug problem in baseball wasn't a big deal. We're not saying that.

 

Like it or not, pro athletes are heroes and role models to a ton of kids these days. Shouldn't be that way, but it is. If taking steroids helps make you the all-time HR hitter, then gee, it must be the thing to do.

 

And conversely, I've not seen anyone say that gambling is no big deal and wouldn't harm the game. It most certainly would.

Well yeah, and if Oddibe McDowell was the only one using steroid's it wouldn't be that big of a deal either.

 

 

There weren't any variables as part of the question though. It was a simple question.