Tom and sq

[BillW]

We were getting off topic, so had to bring it over here.

Tom, I didn't mean social value, I said "value to society" which very unclearly meant monetary value :) (contribution to the GNP).

I am not arguing the ethical value of either vs. a fireman, janitor or pres. of US. I'm just saying that the way it is. Ex.: How many firemen could have pulled what OJ did? ... I'll bet MJ could! PVal being of lesser "value" probably could not pull that one off.

Horseracing would not ban PVal for life unless it was more in their fiscal interest than leaving things as they are.

Again, I'm not saying I like it, I'm just saying that is the way it is.

Bill

[Tom]

Originally posted by BillW
We were getting off topic, so had to bring it over here.

Ex.: How many firemen could have pulled what OJ did? ... I'll bet MJ could! PVal being of lesser "value" probably could not pull that one off.

Bill

?????? Do you mean murder two people and get away with it?
And then get off because he was a celebrity and had a jury of proven idiots/racists?
I think I am missing something here.

Frankly, I don't think we should ban atheletes for drug use.
If they choose to rish their health, then let them. Let them do what they are capable of in their lifes - entertain us. For most, that is all they are ever going to be capable of. Throwing a ball through a hoop, running around other people, riding a horse, or in OJ's case, cutting and running <G>
Entertainment is all these guys are capable of, so let them. When they retire, they can be guests on Politically Incorrect.
I just used firemen as an example becasue they risk their lives to help other people, while sports "heroes" do whatever they can to take care of themselves. That was the social value I meant.

:confused::rolleyes:

[boxcar]

Tom opined with:

>>
I think I am missing something here.
>>

Ditto. Maybe you can help me out here?

>>
Frankly, I don't think we should ban atheletes for drug use. If they choose to rish their health, then let them. Let them do what they are capable of in their lifes - entertain us.
>>

And what about the health and lives of the innocent people around a druggie -- such as other jockeys in a race with PVal? Or don't you think drugs impair a person's judgment, reflexes, etc.?

Boxcar

[sq764]

Tom, when you say athletes shouldn't be banned due to drugs, that's entering a grey area.. A couple of reasons..

1) Let's say PVal showed up one day at the track high as a kite and down the stretch of a race, he reacted slowly and caused a big accident?? Is this only effecting himself? I don't think so..

2) Let's take football, or even baseball. If Barry Bonds was taking steroids, sure, he's hurting himself, but isn't he also hurting the game? Isn't he getting an unfair advantage over players that don't use steroids?

I think players who continually use drugs, whether its pot, coke, heroine or steroids, should be banned. And the reason can be either the risk to others factor, or the unfair advantage factor..

[Tom]

I don't suggest that jockeys be allowed to ride under the influence or drugs or alcohol. Are they now allowed to drink when away from the track? Why not use pot when they are not riding.
As for baseball, the players have already ruined the game. Besides, the players on steroids hbit better and farther and make the game more interesting. Remember the home run battle a couple of years ago? Better living through chemistry.
If drugs (or booze) affect an athletes performance, he gets benched or loses mounts, just like if he had a physical problem.

[Lefty]

sq764, no. 1 has already occurred. A few yrs ago PVal was in a bad riding accident and a couple of horses were killed. He was sued and has had a few million in judgements levied against him.
That's why these guys shouldn't be out there if they are on drugs.
It just as easily could have been a couple jocks that got killed, Tom.
I don't think all these homers are because athletes on stereoids, the damn ball is "juiced" But steroids should be banned.