No Babe Ruth should not be taken out because steroids weren't illegal at that point.
Considering the very first steroids were under development in the mid 30's it was awhile before they were widely used by the public. No, Babe Ruth didn't using any kind of growth hormone, he drank beer, ate hot dogs and smoked. Baseball players weren't very good athletes back then, Ruth is no different. But he was able to hit a fastball, and something that helped him hit a fastball was the fact he used a corked bat.
Things is they were when all those guys eligible this year did the majority of their work that has them in the discussion.
Except most of these players prime was pre-anabolic steroid and HGH ban. But they are still guilt... what are you smoking.
Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron didn't cheat the game. Barry Bonds did.
I've already explained Ruth and Aaron multiple times. Aaron is very well known for using amphetamines, and has even admitted it... Bonds has admitted to using HGH that Greg Anderson rubbed on him to help recover from an injury. HGH substances weren't banned until 2005, two years before Bonds last at bat. And was forced out of baseball so who knew how many more years he would of been productive, as he was still a very good player in 07'. But an interesting thing is... Bonds has NEVER failed a test for a banned substance, that's why he has been laughing at the court because no one really has any proof once so ever. Innocent until proven guilty under the court of law, MLB should be the same.
Were him and the other recent ones helped and encouraged by owners, agents, and Selig? Of course there is no questioning that however there were other all-star callibre players who were able to do it without cheating the game by using steroids.
There was also a ton of career minor leaguers that were never any good at the major league level that were known substance abusers. Every team was full of them.
I hate how all pro sports hall of fames operate. I hate all of their selection processes and it's a ridiculous system. Personally, a player should be judged against his own generation and there should be no magic unwritten numbers you must attain before getting consideration.
You do compare to there own generation. But Baseball is a game of numbers, it always HAS been and always WILL be. That will never change. If you can't except that then stop watching because you obviously don't understand this game one bit. Players will always be compared to the past and the present. Its just how it is.
Those who took steroids in the 70s and 80s were not cheating anything and everybody had steroids as an option for enhancing performance.
Players didn't really use any sort of steroids then though, not until the 90's really. Mostly amphetamines, which WERE and still are banned.
Because of that, the achievements of the best players in those eras whether they were using steroids or not are still valid. They are he best players of their respective generation when steroids were the norm and perfectly legal.
Yeah and that goes for the same up until the ban of the substance in 02'-05'.
The thing is they aren't legal anymore and haven't been for some time. Whether they were encouraged or not they still had the final say and they decided to take them anyway, that is cheating, and cheating doesn't belong in the hall. /rant
You do realize there is many ways to take one of these substances, and it wasn't uncommon for coaches, trainers, managers to give players something and say its something completely different. Players trusted these people more then, then they do now.
Clearly.
You'll have to excuse Prosthetic. His team's greatest player was the greatest roider in MLB history.
He's trained to be sympathetic.
More like I don't ignore facts. But unless you guys can actually post something factual instead of talking out your ass then you might make more of a case then the courts were able too.
I defend everyone in that era, not just Bonds.
But while your at it, go look up picture of early Pujols and the Pujols of now.
.
