Posted by MikeT23 on 8/24/2012 1:47:00 PM (view original):
So, really, you allow the Lord High Poobahs of baseball to determine cheating for you. OK, fair enough.
I realize you like to play devil's advocate and stir the pot, but sometimes you just make yourself look like a complete moron. Rules define cheating. If you're talking about ethics, that's something entirely different. No action, in and of itself, is inherently cheating. It's the context of the rules you do it within.
For example: Closed book exam - opening your textbook = cheating. Open book exam - opening your textbook = encouraged.
Tommy John surgery is a corrective procedure. If you can find me someone who's intentionally severed there UCL in an attempt to comeback stronger, I'll give you full props, but I'm quite confident you'll come up empty handed. Stealing signs - frowned upon, but not cheating. Most players will tell you, if someone is flashing obvious signs for you to intercept, then it's their problem. You get caught stealing them, expect a fastball between the shoulder blades.
Another way to look at it is EVERYONE has access to TJS...EVERYONE has access to signs on the field...not everyone has access to steroids, and not everyone wants to risk suspension or imprisonment.
Context determines cheating. If you want to get into an argument of ethics or morality, that's a totally different bag.