Disgusted with Bonds?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

OK now you're conveniently remembering things incorrectly. They had betting slips and sworn testimony that he had bet. The fact that he wasn't convicted had nothing to do with it. Bonds on the other hand has, as far as we know, no direct evidence against. Sure we all believe he juiced and he probably di. Also Pete Roses situation had a precedent. Gambling have always been strictly prohibited. The performance enhancerment situation has no precedent. Rose's situation was easy to deal with. It didn't involve the entirety of the league.

I think you're misunderstanding me.
Someone brought up the point, Bonds wasn't convicted of doing roids, therefore we shouldn't do anything. Rose was not convicted either. I am just pointing out the similarities. I'm in no way saying Rose is innocent. There is overwhelming evidence in BOTH cases to prove they are guilty. There is direct evidence...court reports, books implicating Bonds etc. Just no one on the stand saying it under oath right now.

So I ask this question...what if after Bonds gets the record, he retires, then all this drug abuse comes out and he is convicted...what does MLB do?

BTW, there has always been rules banning substance abuse in MLB too...but enforcing it is where MLB lost their path.