Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout
We as sports fans don't cry foul with minor changes, new techniques, new surgeries. Should baseball record books be fixed to reflect pitchers who had Tommy John surgery? What about the NHL record books to taint defenceman that had knee surgery, something Bobby Orr never had access to. How many records would he hold if he could have played? We'll never know, so is it fair to have a Coffee, or Chelios holding records that rightfully belong to Orr but don't do to medical advancements?
Steroids are a drug yes. But so are the painkillers that I'm certain have improved over the past 125 years. If we want to have "perfect" records, then we have to play in a realm of medical technology of the 1900's. If you're not willing to accept that, is it right to draw the line at steriods?
|
The blurring of the lines is certainly not going to go away. Those lines just keep getting more and more blurry. It certainly doesn't feel right to just let anything go, but that may end up being the only option.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see genetically engineered athletes in my lifetime. Would you let a genetically engineered athlete who was not using performance enhancing drugs compete for the records of non-enhanced athletes? Would big business that has money wrapped up in the sport allow it?
Professional sports are so different from sports as they are normally played are for fun that they are already practically becoming endeavors in designing uber-athletes. Just look at the development that goes into young children in order to groom them to attain professional careers in sports. If you were a potential parent wouldn't you have some interest in having a child with genetically enhances abilities if it would earn them hundreds of millions of dollars?