Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lil Bit Special

**A-Rod Tested Positive For Steroids In 2003** [Merged 3X]

Recommended Posts

Do you Yankee haters need some more lotion? Tissues? I could run to the store.

Can't do anything about the cramps in your hands, though. Sorry.

Pardon the interruption. Resume your fap, fap, fapping.

:rl:

Hey does this mean that Yanks titles are now in dispute aka the Patriots titles??

Whats good for the goose.................;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How could they even tell? From what I understood this was done blind. They were not interested in the who tested but the how many tested. Would they even be able to tell which sample belonged to whom? This is fishy.

ya i thought odd when i saw it was 2003..

seems a liltte odd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How many titles have they won since Rodriguez got there?

You need Viagra to fap, don't you?

oh, i thought they won AL-E a few times?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Same as everybody elses-With the Feds.

The players Association blew it when they never saw to it that the files be destroyed, as they were to be.

ya i just herad that on TV,,feds have all test results..more big names to come..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Didn't this 'leak' come from the Bonds trial? Aren't all these names and test evidence? I'm a life long Yankee fan but trying to make excuses for his name being leaked is crazy, the guy was considered "the best player in the game'. That's why his name was leaked, reports are saying he was aware of it and he denied using it also.

arod now goes into bonds/mcgwire territory,,no HOF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meh, It'll kill me if Jeter was named though....

i really dont think he will..

jeter is old school..with him its about the game,,not about the accolades,,u always new A-Turd was about cash and fame..not the game itself..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who knows? When Palmerio was outed it shocked me, thought he was clean.

I thought it turned out Raffy said he was juiced cause of a additive in the Chimichanga's his wife cooked..I beleive him :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you shouldn't try to evaluate facts because you are obviously blinded by delusional homerism........

Homer got busted also????

Homer-s-Arrest--40846.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. What I am saying is while many players use, just because ANOTHER high profile Yankee player gets caught does not mean you can say everyone is using as a attempt to make light of it or quote Rob Neyer as if that makes it ok to cheat. No hate for Yankees just the chest thumper fans during good times who feel any negative discussion on them is off topic in instances like this.

If you can't handle non Yankee fan opinions maybe going back to JI's circle jerk is best for you. If you can, then this board is a great place to talk baseball with VARIOUS fans opinion allowed.

:rl::rl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
we'll never know if they played a big part or not. We dont know if he used them in his early stages of his career and impact they had.

What is known is he did steroids. He cheated. He lied about his cheating. And his career will forever be tainted. Since he was a great player to begin with, its even stupider that he used them.

Too bad they dont have a drug that helps you hit in the clutch. I'd even help pay for him to use that drug!

I have no sympathy for the guy. In my eyes he's no better than any other player who used them.

:bwahaharoll:

Thats pretty f'in funny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can't be so selective as to necessarily know WHEN these guys did in fact use.

If you are caught onse, unfortunately, that casts doubt over a career. That is the stigma standard.

100% agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So A-Rod admits using steroids from 2001-2003 with the Texas Rangers

:rl:

legalese 101..admit only to what they have evidence of..

this doesnt mean he didnt 'use' before 2001..I hope NO ONE is that naive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you want a sport where everyone competes on a level playing field, or one where there are disadvantages if you don't "cheat"?

Does that bother you.

I know you are younger, but for me, "numbers" meant a lot about this game. There were benchmarks on how you judged players.

The 90's took those benchmarks and shattered the ceilings. While we were initially led to believe what a difference the "ball" and the "athlete" had made in achieveing that, it is dissapointing to find out that they were chemically altered.

I would rather that sport be "pure" and be about what you truly earn to accomplish. Let's not cheapen the sport bey doing whatever we can get away with.

You don't remember such days, but the sport used to be a lot of fun. This is not.

yup,,these thugturds, bonds, mcgwire, aroid etc are RUINING the game..

thugturds all of them and not worthy of HOF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be fair, they have evidence he used in 2003, not 2001 or 2002.

duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

thats what i said,,he will admit to what they have evidenc eof..

but based on his admitted use, he is now suspect going back to day one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is only the test from 2003, not from '01 and '02.

He is admitting to more than they have evidence of. Which is the exact opposite of what you said.

He still comes off as a jackass, though.

I assume he has people who know hre used so he is fessin up,,

what we dont know is if he used in seattle or NY..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no evidence he used in 2001 or 2002, but he admited to using steroids from 2001-2003. So you're wrong.

:rl:

For the millionth time,,maybe thats why he isnt admitting it, cause no eveidence YET.

You have to admit, there is now doubt over his non-use prior to 2001..you arent that naive are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem.

He DID admit to 2001 and 2002 and there has been NO evidence.

oh lord,,wtf...

i know!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am assuming he is admitting fo rthe time with rangers,,people probably saw him shoot up or whatever..so test was 2003, but he was with them before..

let ssee if other players come forward, aka, clemens, and see i fthey say ; i saw him i nseattle etc'..

he is admitting to the 'timeframe' and team he was on base don 2003 test..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course there is, there's doubt over every player in his era, it's unfortunate, but I don't let it bother me.

not every player,,just the dirty ones who have been caught and now we assume they were using before and after the positive test

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Until it's proven these players HAVEN'T taken steroids, than there is no reason for us to assume they didn't.

Brian Roberts took steroids, I would of never thought that, but he did. He can play on my team though.

thats right...

there is a 103 dirty dogs still to be named

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing I'll point out, is just his admissions (Assuming he's being fully truthful) still diminishes what he's done the last 5 years with the Yankees. People have this "Incredible Hulk" mindset when it comes to steroids, where they inject themselves, double in size, and once they stop using they are right back where they began. But the reality is you retain a lot of strength gained from using Performance Enhancing Drugs for years after you stop using. I've seen some estimates of up to 80% of muscle mass is retained after using Primobolin.

u r right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
barrybobblemt5.gif Edited by SouthernJet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, if were only comparing players of era's....then I guess for this era, if you werent cheatin-you werent tryin.

Personally, I couldnt care less about steroids. Everyone seemingly used them. If it wasnt illegal and they didnt test, what the hell was preventing someone from using them? Morals? Come on.

What exactly is baseball going to do? Fire every player and start from scratch?

These guys chose to put this crap into their bodies. I really dont care, its their problem not mine.

The hysteria and outcry over this is boring and absurd imo.

damn..matt,,odd post..

why not just let them put robotic parts in thier body?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A-Rod interview raised more questions than answers

Story Highlights

The mirror Alex Rodriguez looked into was a fun-house mirror

Gammons stuck to the script throughout the interview, never asking follow-ups

It's wishful thinking for A-Rod to believe the questions should stop

textsize.gif

textsize_minus_d.giftextsize_minus_l.gif

textsize_plus_d.giftextsize_plus_l.gif

Unreal.

So lies the career, however neatly parsed for us, and the image of Alex Rodriguez. Even when he took a proper step forward, admitting on Monday that he was a drug cheat, the mirror he looked into was a fun-house mirror. Believe me now, he told us, while making belief difficult for people such as Tom Hicks.

Hicks, the owner of the Texas Rangers, paid Rodriguez $150 million to play just three seasons in Texas and then go away. The Rangers finished in last place every year and Rodriguez admitted on Monday that he was dirty every year, pretty much assuring that this was the worst investment in sports history.

Hicks made a similarly oversized personal investment in Rodriguez, befriending him and ceding to him strong influence on personnel matters. Of course, those times being what they were in baseball, those two discussed steroids, Hicks says, and Rodriguez didn't just slough off the subject. According to Hicks, Rodriguez personally assured his good friend that he would never get involved in anything like that. It was, of course, not just a lie but a dramatic lie.

"I feel personally betrayed," Hicks said on a conference call Tuesday. "I feel deceived by Alex. He assured me that he had far too much respect for his own body to ever do that to himself ... I certainly don't believe that, if he's now admitting that he started using when he came to the Texas Rangers, why should I believe that it didn't start before he came to the Texas Rangers?"

Hicks asks a very good question about Rodriguez's drug use, the kind of question about credibility that remains with Rodriguez even after his admission. The admission was wise, especially given a) he was caught cold by an impeccable story by SI's Selena Roberts and David Epstein and B) the road map for if and how to come clean has been clearly drawn by the lessons of other performance-enhancing drug users. We've reached a point where actually admitting three years of PED use, no matter what the qualifications, gets you bouquets. So, good for Rodriguez. He displayed some honor among scoundrels. If he continues to speak out against drug use and not run from the subject and his past, he will elevate himself further.

Like all things Rodriguez, though, it is never so simple. The calculation to his story was both clever and clumsy, and sloppy questioning left much to be desired. For instance, ESPN's Peter Gammons handed Rodriguez his own timeline by asking, "You're saying that time period was 2001, 2002 and 2003?" And when Rodriguez responded, "That's pretty accurate, yes" (emphasis mine), Gammons, as he did throughout the interview, stuck to the script and did not follow up.

What Gammons missed (and most of the news media that reported on it, for that matter) is that Rodriguez clearly never admitted to using steroids. His choice of words was Clinton-esque. He never wanted that sound bite in which he spoke the word "steroids" to put in the time capsule -- a manufacturing of the truth that created the clumsiness.

So we got Rodriguez first telling us he used "a banned substance," then saying "I don't know exactly what, um, substance I was guilty of using," and then going to the plural and saying, "I started experimenting with things that today are not legal." So what he is saying is that this fitness freak took something or some things for three years and didn't know what they were, but even though he didn't know what they were, he somehow knows that they were banned.

(SI and, in an independent follow-up story, The New York Times, reported that Rodriguez tested positive for Primobolan, one of the most expensive steroids available, and testosterone. Gammons never asked Rodriguez whether his "banned substance" was taken in tablet or injectable form.)

As contradictions go, Rodriguez also said he had some epiphany in spring training of 2003 to stop using PEDs, but acknowledged he played all his years in Texas, including 2003, under PEDs. He said he never knew he tested positive in 2003 until Roberts informed him last week, but the Mitchell Report stated that "all of the players [who tested positive] were notified by early September 2004" by the union. Even when Gammons asked him about being called "A-Fraud," a reference to a comment by teammates in 2004 in The Yankee Years, written by Joe Torre and myself, Rodriguez contradicted himself within a single answer. His immediate response was to blurt back "Never." But before he finished answering the question, he admitted, "So did I hear 'A-Fraud?' Yeah." Huh?

The worst performance, by both Rodriguez and Gammons, was in the treatment of Roberts. Rodriguez went out of his way to try to impugn Roberts -- mostly with what Roberts has called "fabrications" -- in response to questions that had absolutely nothing to do with her reporting. (Questions about World Baseball Classic testing, the union, the Hall of Fame and his daughters somehow sent Rodriguez off on Roberts.) Not once did Gammons follow up, letting attacks on a fellow journalist with a sterling reputation go unquestioned. Rodriguez was well advised to take the high road in making an admission, but he undermined that standing with a personal viciousness that took him off point.

Rodriguez's hope is that this managed interview will put his drug use in "a vault," he said, so he can move forward. It's a nice sentiment, not just as it applies to him but also for the entire Steroid Era. We should hope it is true. It's just not realistic, not when too many questions remain and the truth, like water from an aquifer, is relentless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  



Content Partnership

Yes Network

Site Sponsor

MILE-Social - NJ Social Media & SEO company
×
×
  • Create New...