Why make rules – like the banning of HGH or the banning of steroids prior to 2004 – that you can’t (or won’t) enforce? There are basically three or four ways people look at rules:

[1] The moral high road: “If it’s not allowed, that’s it, I won’t do it whether or not there’s any chance of my ever getting caught.” We’d like to believe that most our sports heroes fall into this category, but last I checked Jesus Christ, Mahatma Gandhi, and Mohammed were not drafted (or paid) by the Yankees or Red Sox. Pro athletes are subject to the same frailties as the rest of us and are more likely to fall into one of the following categories.

[2a] Temptation: “I know that it’s not allowed, but the rewards outweigh the risks and costs.” When the rewards include greater levels of fame and adulation and potentially multi-million dollar contracts (and even the minimum salary is many times what most of these guys could make outside of sports), there is no risk of getting caught, and the cost is ‘only’ a guilty conscience; it is difficult for any mere human to resist that temptation.

[2b] Indifference: “I know it’s not allowed, but I don’t care. I’m going to cheat in any way I think I can get away with.” Of course, when there is ZERO risk of getting caught, this attitude is essentially the same as #3, below.

[3] Rationalization: “It’s only illegal if you get caught.” A surprisingly large number of athletes – both pro and amateur – take this perspective. They truly believe that it is not wrong to break the rules – it is only wrong to get caught. With this view, an unenforceable rule is not a rule at all. For these guys, you might as well erase it from the books.

A rule that is easy to enforce and almost impossible not to get caught at when breaking – like, for example, banning players from throwing a baseball bat at the pitcher – makes for a level playing field. Everyone will follow the rule or pay the penalty. If the penalty is severe enough to outweigh the reward, no one will break the rule. With rules that are more difficult to enforce you will start seeing players in categories #2 and #3 trying to get away with it. The greater the reward and/or the smaller the risk, the more players will attempt to break the rule. But when you make a rule that is completely unenforceable, only players in category #1 will even attempt to follow the rule. Instead of rewarding players who follow the rules by penalizing those who break them (at least, those who get caught), you are instead penalizing players who follow the rule by not giving them the competitive advantage enjoyed by those ignoring the rule.

In the case of steroids, if everyone’s taking HGH except Skeeter Honestball (and of course, not getting caught or penalized for breaking the rule), then poor Skeeter has a competitive disadvantage. What’s the message we’re sending with that?

[1] Why is the use of some chemicals (e.g. steroids) wrong, but the use of others (e.g. “diet supplements” and vitamins) acceptable and legal? It is my understanding that neither one will enhance your athletic performance by itself – you still have to work out and put in the time in the gym/weight room – but the goal of using either one is to give you a body more capable of doing your job as a professional athlete. While they may have different long-term consequences, isn’t our society based on the principle that individual ADULTS are free to choose what risks they wish to take and weigh the risk-reward equation for themselves?

[2] Why is it wrong for an athlete to alter his body through chemistry, but altering through weight training, diet, or surgery is okay? A few years back, Greg Maddux had Lasik surgery to correct his vision. I’ll bet seeing the strike zone clearer does wonders for one’s ability to throw strikes consistently. True, there are benefits in life-outside-of-baseball to having better vision, but there are benefits in life-outside-of-baseball to being physically stronger, as well.

Again, I am not an advocate of the use of steroids in any pro sport; I just wonder why it is given such a disproportionate reaction – especially in baseball.

Obviously that's completely untrue.

"make yourself into a great player through hard work"
"I value seeing a player preform to the best of his natural ability."

What is "natural" ability? That seems at odds with "hard work." We often hear about players with so much "natural ability" who didn't work hard enough to become great players. Does lifting weights push one beyond one's natural ability?

"Why is it wrong for McGwire and Bonds to use drugs to perform and we don’t complain when rock musicians or comedians do it? "

Because art isn't inherently competition. (I'm not saying that it's "wrong" for athletes to do it, but that's why the comparison fails.)

Maybe Selig wants a juiced-up home run derby? It's certainly a big part of All-Star week. After all, there aren't any Strike-throwing competitions or baserunning exhibitions, so maybe that's it?
Home runs are overrated in my opinion anyway. It's all about run production, regardless of how they're produced. Grand Slams are rally killers. I'll take 4 straight doubles and really put some heat on the defense.
Now I'm off track. 🙂

Get a grip on the element of baseball that Ken Burns and his ilk would have us believe is somehow above the level of the rest of society.
It's just baseball. Have a beer and enjoy the game.

I'm convinced that's why Gossage got in after years of waiting. They had to put someone in, and in a weak class, his was the most likely name. If he's on the ballot with Rice and Henderson or prior years with Ripken and Gwynn, he's still waiting. It's a flawed system.

On another note. I've heard people say that Steroids weren't considered bad before 2004 when punishments were handed out. That's not true. They were illegal since 1991. They just didn't have a punishment. It's like my 9th grade Spanish class. Cheating is wrong. But everybody except me in the class cheated and the teacher allowed it. What did I get? B's while everybody else got A's.

Finally, Palmeiro was suspended for steroid use in the first set of steroid testing with punishments. About 5 months after he testified before Congress saying he never took any. Several months later, he was out of baseball and not even a Viagra joke anymore.