Quote:
Originally Posted by chippewastud79
I have no problem with banning players for life, but the problem is that there needs to be consistency. If Rodriguez goes for life, why does Braun get 65 games off his schedule on a team that is 20 games below .500? One could argue that Braun actually looks worse for baseball because he won an MVP and then immediately tested positive, to which he responded by throwing everyone under the bus, wrecked the testers reputation, lost Aaron Rodgers a year of salary and bet his own life on not cheating.
The Lifetime ban actually helps the Yankees, which I think is a joke. The Yankees don't want Alex back, they don't want to pay him, so the MLB is going to bail them out. Better believe the Yankees are pushing his ban behind the scenes.
Yahoo actually had one of their "sports commentators" release a video claiming that Pete Rose betting on baseball is actually worse than cheating the game with PED's. Of course the guy is a moron, but I digress.
|
I value your opinon on this Adam. I don't have issue with lifetime bans for PEDs. There should be daily or weekly testing of every player with a lifetime ban / voided contract for a positive test.
Unfortunately I think you're right about the Yankees. They're probably lobbying for him to get the ban so they don't have to pay $100 Million on an average player of the next few years.
On Rose, I disagree somewhat. If a player/manager admits to gambling on games he's involved with it implies a high probability of losing for proft. This is a bit worse than trying to get a competitive edge with some new drug. At least the cheaters are trying to win, not losing on purpose for profit. Both are unacceptable but I see the sports writer's side of this one.