[bnorth]

Originally Posted by G1911

People will seek a competitive advantage if they are liable to get away with it, by and large. People will generally lie, cheat, steal and do far worse if they believe the act is 1) to their gain and 2) they won't get caught. However, that does not excuse any misdeed because people in another time would have probably also done it if that route was available.

These arguments ignore that Pud Galvin and Babe Ruth gained nothing by weird experiments that were legal and not against the rules. Mickey Mantle did not turn the game into a mockery video game by having a greenie that did not violate the rules. The titanic gap between an energy stimulant and the result of steroids is incredibly obvious. I am very sympathetic to the early steroiders who were not violating baseball's rules at the time of their use, but I do not see any logical or reasonable comparison between Galvin and Bonds.

Would many members heroes have probably done the same thing if they had been able to and had access? Yeah, surely. Did they? No they didn't. A person is responsible for their actual actions, that people are generally of poor moral character and would do the same things if they didn't expect to be caught is not a defense. The steroid users are not special villains, but they are also the ones who actually did violate the rules and actually did turn the game into a video game joke.

I am pretty sure this is the first time I have ever seen someone say Ruth and Mantle did not put up video game numbers.