Following the kerfuffle stirred up by the mainstream media over Philadelphia Phillies' OF Raul Ibanez and steroids possibilities, there seemed to be have been diminished amount of steroids speculation. The New York Yankees' $300 million man, Alex Rodriguez, was forced to the bench for rest. What no one asked was whether the absence of steroids was the reason for the lack of production. Until Buster Olney of ESPN.com in his column today.
Following a novel surgery for a baseball player, the question is unfair given the simpler explanation of post-surgery recovery. However, baseball fans have seen repeated dissembling by the players, and no longer trust what any of them state publicly. Normally, I'd say the threat of perjury would be all I needed to suspend disbelief, but the testimony of Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and Rafael Palmeiro puts the lie to that.
Is the inability to use steroids a legitmate avenue to pursue in trying to explain Alex Rodriguez's disappearing production?
Is the lack of steroids a legitmate question to ask about Alex Rodriguez?
No. The post-surgery explanation is the simplest. (40 votes)
Yes. What makes you think he wasn't lying even when he claimed to stop using them when he became a Yankees? (42 votes)
82 total votes