PDA

View Full Version : Should the other 103 names be made public?


Viva Medias B's
02-11-2009, 08:53 AM
Should the other 103 names be made public?

Thome25
02-11-2009, 09:01 AM
Absolutely YES....YES.....YES!!! I think that all of the names need to be made public so that baseball can move on from this and begin to heal. If the names are made public then alot of the speculation and unanswered questions can be cleared up.

MLB can't move on from this debacle any other way. It's either that or let it drag on and on for another 10-15 years with the speculation still running rampant. Baseball needs to get through this and squash it once and for all.

sox1970
02-11-2009, 09:11 AM
No way. They took that test as a survey test. The results were never supposed to become public. Not only that, just because 104 tests were positive doesn't mean the other 1100 players have been fully clean in their careers. Bottom line, baseball was a mess in the 90's and early 2000's. Testing and penalties are in a good place now, and they should move on.

DumpJerry
02-11-2009, 09:12 AM
No way. They took that test as a survey test. The results were never supposed to become public. Not only that, just because 104 tests were positive doesn't mean the other 1100 players have been fully clean in their careers. Bottom line, baseball was a mess in the 90's and early 2000's. Testing and penalties are in a good place now, and they should move on.
Excellent point.

spawn
02-11-2009, 09:14 AM
No way. They took that test as a survey test. The results were never supposed to become public. Not only that, just because 104 tests were positive doesn't mean the other 1100 players have been fully clean in their careers. Bottom line, baseball was a mess in the 90's and early 2000's. Testing and penalties are in a good place now, and they should move on.
Word. I still think it was wrong that A-Rod's name was leaked.

Thome25
02-11-2009, 09:27 AM
Word. I still think it was wrong that A-Rod's name was leaked.

This brings up a whole different issue. Arod's name would've been leaked sooner or later. Heck, Canseco was saying he did it a couple of years ago.

If Arod's name had been leaked AFTER he was inducted into the HOF IMO that would've been much worse. He would've been a fraud with a plaque. It's much better that it's out in the open now.

It also makes you wonder about the "what ifs". What if we never found out about all of this? Arod would be in the HOF. It makes you wonder what past players who are in the hall ever cheated and nobody knew about it.

Because of this, the steroid era casts a shadow on all of baseball not just the 1990's and 2000's. All of the players who were involved need to be exposed once and for all. That way baseball can begin to heal hopefully with the players who weren't involved.

My biggest fear is that players who were clean like Frank Thomas will be lumped in with these other players because of what era he played in and subsequently not get inducted into the HOF as a result.

guillensdisciple
02-11-2009, 11:00 AM
Absolutely not. Even though it is wrong, this test was supposed to be a private one, the fact that it leaked is already wrong, so this needs to be erased as fast as possible.

Chez
02-11-2009, 11:06 AM
For those of you who are union members, how would you feel if the results of a confidential drug test, or any other medical test, were leaked to the media and then made public? "I didn't do anything wrong so I've got nothing to hide," misses the point, in my opinion.

Eddo144
02-11-2009, 11:12 AM
Absolutely not. Even though it is wrong, this test was supposed to be a private one, the fact that it leaked is already wrong, so this needs to be erased as fast as possible.
Bingo. Why compound the wrongness of one test being leaked by leaking others?

Uncle_Patrick
02-11-2009, 11:12 AM
No way. They took that test as a survey test. The results were never supposed to become public. Not only that, just because 104 tests were positive doesn't mean the other 1100 players have been fully clean in their careers. Bottom line, baseball was a mess in the 90's and early 2000's. Testing and penalties are in a good place now, and they should move on.

Agreed 100%.

asindc
02-11-2009, 11:20 AM
Absolutely not. I think a better idea is to allow the clean players to release their results to the public, from then and now.

russ99
02-11-2009, 11:23 AM
Absolutely, the league and players association needs to stop this charade and come clean, and fix the situation. The hard line the union is taking makes no sense to me. I'd think the overall membership would like things to be above board and clean, instead of the hiding and favoring of the few star cheaters.

I'd also like to see new tougher regulations and penalties put in place, especially for HGH use, since I have no doubts that the same steroid cheats have moved on to a new substance that currently has no test.

And for those who think that the current policy is making a difference, look at the penalties from the Mitchell Report. Practically none. If no changes take place, we'll be back here 1-3-5 years from now with the same issue.

CashMan
02-11-2009, 11:25 AM
For those of you who are union members, how would you feel if the results of a confidential drug test, or any other medical test, were leaked to the media and then made public? "I didn't do anything wrong so I've got nothing to hide," misses the point, in my opinion.

If those workers were cutting corners at their job, is that right?

I_Liked_Manuel
02-11-2009, 12:58 PM
If those workers were cutting corners at their job, is that right?

That's not the point

Eddo144
02-11-2009, 01:01 PM
If those workers were cutting corners at their job, is that right?
Yes. Legally, these results should have been kept confidential. The players agreed to the tests under that condition.

Sure, I'd love to know who the other 103 are, and I hope that their names come out due to other testing or perfectly legal means. But to release the rest of the list just because one name was leaked is wrong.

SOXPHILE
02-11-2009, 01:03 PM
Release every last one of them. Wash rinse repeat.

soxfanatlanta
02-11-2009, 01:09 PM
No way. They took that test as a survey test. The results were never supposed to become public. Not only that, just because 104 tests were positive doesn't mean the other 1100 players have been fully clean in their careers. Bottom line, baseball was a mess in the 90's and early 2000's. Testing and penalties are in a good place now, and they should move on.

I agree with everything except for your last comment. As long as there is no widely accepted test for HGH, players will continue to take it regardless of the **** storm that is going on right now.

khan
02-11-2009, 01:11 PM
At this point, there is little to be gained on the part of the players' association, nor MLB to try to keep the results confidential.

Despite the agreements between MLB and the players' association, if the Feds decide they want these names, they'll get them. [You can thank Palmeiro and Sosa and McGuire and [EDIT] Tejada and Clemens and Bonds for the Feds wanting to pursue the steroid cheaters.]

If the Feds ask for [and get] these names, the information will become public, and then published by some media outlet or another.

At this point, it is better to admit fault and to come clean. [See the difference between how Bonds/Clemens are treated, compared to Pettitte and A-Rod?] MLB and the players' association would be better-served to release the information on their own before they are forced to do so.

EndemicSox
02-11-2009, 01:15 PM
It's not fair to the players, so no, the cheaters shouldn't be outed.

However, they all will be in time, and it will be a good day.

The MLBPA is killing my love for "watching" professional baseball. Over-grown children playing a game, many of them cheat to get their ridiculous contracts, and then they hide behind their union/subtle media PR machine.

I'll still cheer for the WhiteSox, but these games really are for the kids.

bridgeportcopper
02-11-2009, 01:21 PM
For those of you who are union members, how would you feel if the results of a confidential drug test, or any other medical test, were leaked to the media and then made public? "I didn't do anything wrong so I've got nothing to hide," misses the point, in my opinion.

Union member here, and there is no such thing as a confidential drug test in my line of work. You get called down for drug test and pee hot, you get fired! I know people will say Arod has all the $$$ in the world, and he does, but he should not be made a sole pariah! Release all names, we pay the salaries of these players and should have knowledge of who the cheaters are.

RedHeadPaleHoser
02-11-2009, 01:26 PM
I say no. You can't turn back the clock to 4+ years ago on this. The testing was done under the premise on anonymity; release those names and the sport WILL suffer, not because of names on a list, but the lack of credibililty and trust between the players, their union, and MLB.

khan
02-11-2009, 01:29 PM
I say no. You can't turn back the clock to 4+ years ago on this. The testing was done under the premise on anonymity; release those names and the sport WILL suffer, not because of names on a list, but the lack of credibililty and trust between the players, their union, and MLB.

What do you think is happening to baseball now, with the Rodriguez and Tejada stories? What about when the Bonds and Clemens cases are in court/the media?

This thing isn't going to go away on its own. The steroid issue will continue to plague MLB, the players, and their union for years. To fail to come forward on their own at this point would be a mistake, IMO. Release ALL of the names, I say.

thomas35forever
02-11-2009, 01:43 PM
Yes they should. If they aren't, people aren't going to know who in baseball is clean and who isn't, and probably not after that either. If anybody on the 2005 Sox juiced up, I need to know.

ChiSoxFan81
02-11-2009, 01:53 PM
Yes they should. If they aren't, people aren't going to know who in baseball is clean and who isn't, and probably not after that either. If anybody on the 2005 Sox juiced up, I need to know.

Um, but if anyone on the '05 Sox juiced, you would know. We're talking about testing from 2003 that was supposed to be confidential, without any punishment. If tests were taken on the agreement that the results would not be made public, then there is no moral justification for outing any of the 104 players, including A-Rod, based on the results of these tests.

thomas35forever
02-11-2009, 02:02 PM
Um, but if anyone on the '05 Sox juiced, you would know. We're talking about testing from 2003 that was supposed to be confidential, without any punishment. If tests were taken on the agreement that the results would not be made public, then there is no moral justification for outing any of the 104 players, including A-Rod, based on the results of these tests.
My question is did anyone on the '05 Sox juice up before they got here.

Railsplitter
02-11-2009, 04:31 PM
Big fish, little it shouldn't matter who gets named.

CubKilla
02-11-2009, 06:32 PM
I think the fans that pay the $$$ to see these cheaters deserve to know who the frauds are

Hendu
02-11-2009, 06:41 PM
I think that those players should step up and admit that they failed the test and get it over with. Don't let it leak out one name at a time. Then they should fire their union heads for not destroying the list.

I do not think that MLB, the union or the DOJ should make the list public.

A. Cavatica
02-11-2009, 07:21 PM
Do I want to know who they were? Yes.

Should the results of tests that were taken under a guarantee of confidentiality be made public? No.

whitesox901
02-11-2009, 07:59 PM
No way. They took that test as a survey test. The results were never supposed to become public. Not only that, just because 104 tests were positive doesn't mean the other 1100 players have been fully clean in their careers. Bottom line, baseball was a mess in the 90's and early 2000's. Testing and penalties are in a good place now, and they should move on.

bravo

Zisk77
02-11-2009, 08:26 PM
For whatever this is worth, I was working a hitting clinic yesterday with a former big leaguer. he was a utility guy that bounced up and down fro AAA to the bigs and team to team. We were discussing the A-rod thing and he believed that there probably weren't going to be many big names on that list. His reasoning was that a lot of players who made the 40 man roster for the first time (and previously were clean) decided to take PED's while they had a free pass (so to speak). This of course caused the test to show that more than 5% tested postive which made a mandatory unannounced test a reality.

Therefore he thinks the majority of the list is marginal players and guys who never made it.

CWSpalehoseCWS
02-11-2009, 09:41 PM
I think you kind of have to at this point. You can't just blame A-Rod because he is one of the bigger names on the list. He was a man about it and admitted it, now you have to let the others deal with it.

EuroSox35
02-11-2009, 10:27 PM
Yes, the fans spend hard earned money and help all these record revenue numbers, the league should eat some legal implications instead of continuing to deceive fans

Frankfan4life
02-11-2009, 11:34 PM
Absolutely not. I think a better idea is to allow the clean players to release their results to the public, from then and now.Great idea!

mjmcend
02-12-2009, 12:07 AM
I think the fans that pay the $$$ to see these cheaters deserve to know who the frauds are

So if someone works for the government, all taxpayers have a right to their private medical records?

The simplest explanation for what I do is make planes. Does that mean every person who flies on an airplane gets to know if I have ever done drugs?

What do you do for a living? I or someone supports your line work monetarily. So fess up, any drugs or other personal medical files you'd like to share?

StillMissOzzie
02-12-2009, 02:19 AM
At this point, there is little to be gained on the part of the players' association, nor MLB to try to keep the results confidential.

Despite the agreements between MLB and the players' association, if the Feds decide they want these names, they'll get them. [You can thank Palmeiro and Sosa and McGuire and [EDIT] Tejada and Clemens and Bonds for the Feds wanting to pursue the steroid cheaters.]

If the Feds ask for [and get] these names, the information will become public, and then published by some media outlet or another.


The Feds already have this list of names. The Feds are the ones now listening to appeals as to whether or not this list gets released to the public or not.

The agreement of confidentiality was between MLB and MLBPA. MLB is no longer calling the shots here, the Feds are, and they are not a party to this confidentiality. Clearly, they owe nothing to the MLBPA.

MLB screwed up by dragging their feet and not destroying the urine samples, test results, etc. immediately, and had to fork it all over to the Feds when they came calling with their subpoena about a week or so after the results initially came out.

Personally, I'd be pleased as punch to have the entire list get released to the public. Superstars, AAAA players, hanger-ons, I don't care - expose all the cheaters for what they are. Sunlight IS the best disinfectant.

SMO
:gulp:

Hendu
02-12-2009, 07:41 AM
MLB screwed up by dragging their feet and not destroying the urine samples, test results, etc. immediately, and had to fork it all over to the Feds when they came calling with their subpoena about a week or so after the results initially came out.


From everything I've read this appears to be Gene Orza and the union's fault, not MLB's.

WhiteSox5187
02-12-2009, 08:38 AM
Inevitably the names are going to get leaked, so I think it's only a matter of time.

I did see where Fehr said that "these tests were supposed to be confidential" and breaking that would be "disturbing." Well, yes, that is true, but subsequent tests were also supposed to be random as well yet Mr. Orza didn't really seem to care about that, that to me is equally disturbing and is the most under reported part of this case.

EndemicSox
02-12-2009, 11:31 AM
Prepare for angry rant directed at everyone involved in this mess. :gulp::angry:


I can't believe that these players can get away with what they say in their "apologies", as everything these cheats say is scripted by the union, or MLB, or some PR agency. Then again, ESPN and many media outlets have an interest in making sure MLB/NFL/etc come out of this steroid(notice the players never say this word for some reason) debacle looking as good as they possibly can, so it doesn't surprise me. The ideal end-game for all parties involved/invested in the game seems to be centered upon getting the fans to forget this even happened, and go on allowing players to take whatever is one-step ahead of the testing curve.

It's time to allow a player to either stick as many needles in his ### as he wishes, or implement olympic-style drug testing. This middle ground is a joke. If Selig or Fehr or some mouth-breathing roider would simply come out and say "We condone the use of steroids, because chicks, err television executives love the longball" or "I used them because they helped make me wealthy beyond my wildest dreams and I'd do it again" I'd have more respect for the cheaters. As it stands, this whole debacle is souring me on the game I played and loved as kid, a teen, and even professionally for a few summers. I'm sure Don Fehr and Bud, or Nike or whoever is telling the players what to say is mostly to blame for how ridiculous these turds look in front of the microphone, but come on...grow a sack. Just one of you, don't hide behind your union, be a freaking man...

Legalize everything, or implement Olympic-style testing, it's up to the owners to push hard for one of the two options, because I'm sick and tired of the in-between. When Don Fehr and his band of small-testicled borthers start to whine, tell them to sit on a stick. The current testing program is a joke, don't let the union, A-Rod, ESPN, or anyone with an interest in the game tell you otherwise. If that is what the owners want, so be it...it's their ball and it's their league.

CashMan
02-12-2009, 11:39 AM
I think you kind of have to at this point. You can't just blame A-Rod because he is one of the bigger names on the list. He was a man about it and admitted it, now you have to let the others deal with it.



I find this funny because you call him a man AFTER he was confronted with the story for saying he took them. If he would of said it without the story then I can see your point.

EndemicSox
02-12-2009, 11:42 AM
I find this funny because you call him a man AFTER he was confronted with the story for saying he took them. If he would of said it without the story then I can see your point.

Agreed, A-Rod isn't man...he is a little boy hiding behind his union.

pearso66
02-12-2009, 12:39 PM
I said yes, but I'm pretty sure that was the year the Sox decided to not take the test so that they would implement a drug test. I don't know if they are in that group of 104 players, but if they are, I think that could bring up negativity to some of our favorites. Maybe they shouldn't, because of the players who refused to take the test were considered positives, so it would be unfair to out them if they did nothing wrong.

khan
02-12-2009, 02:19 PM
So if someone works for the government, all taxpayers have a right to their private medical records?

Using an illegal substance is a crime. [That is, under the law of the US; don't give me this "It wasn't specifically banned by MLB, so its OK" bull****]

Lying to congress is a crime.

None of the actions by [some of] the guilty parties is anywhere in the same galaxy as asking for private medical records.

khan
02-12-2009, 02:27 PM
The Feds already have this list of names. The Feds are the ones now listening to appeals as to whether or not this list gets released to the public or not.
At this point, it is only a matter of time for this information to be publickly-available. Whether it happens today, in a year, or in 20 years from now, or whenever is the only question that remains. MLB and the PA would be better-served to release this information before they are [again] shamed into doing so.

The agreement of confidentiality was between MLB and MLBPA. MLB is no longer calling the shots here, the Feds are, and they are not a party to this confidentiality. Clearly, they owe nothing to the MLBPA.

MLB screwed up by dragging their feet and not destroying the urine samples, test results, etc. immediately, and had to fork it all over to the Feds when they came calling with their subpoena about a week or so after the results initially came out.

Personally, I'd be pleased as punch to have the entire list get released to the public. Superstars, AAAA players, hanger-ons, I don't care - expose all the cheaters for what they are. Sunlight IS the best disinfectant.

SMO
:gulp:

Agreed.

EndemicSox
02-12-2009, 02:49 PM
At this point, it is only a matter of time for this information to be publickly-available. Whether it happens today, in a year, or in 20 years from now, or whenever is the only question that remains. MLB and the PA would be better-served to release this information before they are [again] shamed into doing so.



Agreed.


Don Fehr would never let one of his lap-dogs step out of line and apologize before being shamed. The union doesn't work that way...:dtroll:

Frontman
02-12-2009, 05:18 PM
I think the list should be buried now. Unless you get some other incredibly important athletes on that list, who will care if they don't compare to star power of Alex?

Also, Bud Selig needs to retire already. He created this mess, he oversaw it get to this point. For him to finally (after Bonds, Palmerio, Clemens, McGuire, Sosa, Giambi, and Pettite) decide to punish someone who came clean?

Hypocritical beyond words. Stop it already. Also, I was one for the asterisk treatment; but now after hearing people point out the dead ball/mound height/greenies/intergration part of baseball's history; I see why they should not remove the records from the record book.

The steroid issue is a part of the game's history, good or bad. We don't remove parts of our own Nation's history, good or bad; so why should baseball do anything different?

turners56
02-12-2009, 06:00 PM
A-Rod's name should have never leaked. I almost feel like he's been victimized. These tests were supposed to be anonymous. They should not be leaked.

mjmcend
02-12-2009, 06:02 PM
Using an illegal substance is a crime. [That is, under the law of the US; don't give me this "It wasn't specifically banned by MLB, so its OK" bull****]

Lying to congress is a crime.

None of the actions by [some of] the guilty parties is anywhere in the same galaxy as asking for private medical records.

You took one quote of mine out of context and you didn't address my point.

If you get busted on a piss test at your job it won't be turned over to the authorities nor will it be released publicly.

Congress and lying have nothing to do with this issue.

Frontman
02-12-2009, 08:29 PM
A-Rod's name should have never leaked. I almost feel like he's been victimized. These tests were supposed to be anonymous. They should not be leaked.

I've begun to agree with this stance. Why is it that A-Rod was the only name out of the 104 to get out? Who gave out this information, why, and how did he or she benefit from it?

I agree with JA Adande's take on it from Around the Horn today. We want clarity when it comes to our athletes, but not sports journalism? How exactly did Selena Roberts get this information without getting any of the other names?

CashMan
02-13-2009, 07:13 AM
You took one quote of mine out of context and you didn't address my point.

If you get busted on a piss test at your job it won't be turned over to the authorities nor will it be released publicly.

Congress and lying have nothing to do with this issue.


Is this person making $30mill a year?

asindc
02-13-2009, 09:09 AM
Is this person making $30mill a year?

How is that relevant to the issue of protecting someone's privacy?

khan
02-13-2009, 09:37 AM
If you get busted on a piss test at your job it won't be turned over to the authorities nor will it be released publicly.
For most people, if you get busted on a piss test, you lose your job. [Unless you 'fess up first, and seek counselling before being caught.] Did A-Rod or any of the other guilty parties lose their jobs? Did any of the steroid cheaters confess to their crimes before being caught?

Again, not even in the same galaxy. Which is why ALL of the names of the known cheaters will eventually be released.

Congress and lying have nothing to do with this issue.
If you take an illegal substance, you've committed a crime. If you lie to congress, you've committed a crime. A lesser crime perhaps, but still it is against the law in this country.

khan
02-13-2009, 09:50 AM
I think the list should be buried now.
Too late. The Feds now have the list. The list should've been buried a long time ago, but that ship has sailed. It is only a matter of time before the list becomes available to the public. So it would be better for MLB and the players' association to pre-emptively release the list. Well, unless there are some ongoing cases [i.e. Bonds/Clemens] that still require this information to be kept confidential.

Also, I was one for the asterisk treatment; but now after hearing people point out the dead ball/mound height/greenies/intergration part of baseball's history; I see why they should not remove the records from the record book.

The steroid issue is a part of the game's history, good or bad. We don't remove parts of our own Nation's history, good or bad; so why should baseball do anything different?
Agreed, but this doesn't change the inevitability that all of the names WILL BE released at some point.

mjmcend
02-13-2009, 10:30 AM
For most people, if you get busted on a piss test, you lose your job. [Unless you 'fess up first, and seek counselling before being caught.] Did A-Rod or any of the other guilty parties lose their jobs? Did any of the steroid cheaters confess to their crimes before being caught?

Again, not even in the same galaxy. Which is why ALL of the names of the known cheaters will eventually be released.

You lose your job because that was a precondition upon taking the job and thus the test in the first place. The preconditions of these 2003 test were that they would be anonymous and that there would be no repercussions. How is this hard to understand? Both sides should uphold their side of the deal and not bow to your jilted sense of outrage.


If you take an illegal substance, you've committed a crime. If you lie to congress, you've committed a crime. A lesser crime perhaps, but still it is against the law in this country.

I never said it wasn't a crime. It has no bearing on whether or not to release these names of failed tests especially since the Congressional testimony happened years after the tests.

mjmcend
02-13-2009, 10:32 AM
Is this person making $30mill a year?

We should treat people differently based on their income? That's an interesting proposition. One that I imagine you would not like if the tables were turned.

khan
02-13-2009, 10:50 AM
Both sides should uphold their side of the deal and not bow to your jilted sense of outrage.
I have no "jilted sense of outrage." Both MLB and MLBPA DID, in fact, "uphold their side of the deal."

However, the information is now in the hands of the Feds. The Feds were not party to this deal. The Feds are not bound to agree to this agreement of confidentiality. And, in most cases [save for active investigations, pending court cases, or national security issues] everything the Feds do is a matter of the public record.

I never said it wasn't a crime. It has no bearing on whether or not to release these names of failed tests especially since the Congressional testimony happened years after the tests.
Ah, but it does: See the criminal case vs. Bonds as an example. If a player is accused of lying to Congress, the Feds can use the failed drug test as evidence to support their case vs. Bonds. Or Tejada. Or [perhaps in the near future] vs. Clemens.

If the Feds are using this info for further investigation or current prosecution, then the other 103 names will remain hidden. [For now.] If not, then the names will be made public, anyway. [Again, reference the Freedom of Information Act.]

CashMan
02-13-2009, 11:24 AM
We should treat people differently based on their income? That's an interesting proposition. One that I imagine you would not like if the tables were turned.



Whoa Whoa Whoa, are you saying people do not get treated differently because of their incomes? If I was making $30mill a year, and my company was drug testing people for cheating, I most certainly would want it made public, even if it was me. The thing I do not understand is, this is illegal in the MLB to take and the USA, yet nothing will happen to him. Bud Selig will do the, I think I might suspend him bull****, but it won't happen. And BTW, Baseball/Football/Basketball is totally different than regular jobs, they are in the public eye.

Frontman
02-13-2009, 05:22 PM
Too late. The Feds now have the list. The list should've been buried a long time ago, but that ship has sailed. It is only a matter of time before the list becomes available to the public. So it would be better for MLB and the players' association to pre-emptively release the list. Well, unless there are some ongoing cases [i.e. Bonds/Clemens] that still require this information to be kept confidential.


Agreed, but this doesn't change the inevitability that all of the names WILL BE released at some point.

Then, once those trials are over; let the list become part of public record and THEN we can start to move beyond the subject. But, if punishments and record removal starts; all 104 players should face the same and equal punishment; not this pick and chose method that Selig applies when he deems he should earn his 18 million....

WSox597
02-14-2009, 05:50 AM
Union member here, and there is no such thing as a confidential drug test in my line of work. You get called down for drug test and pee hot, you get fired! I know people will say Arod has all the $$$ in the world, and he does, but he should not be made a sole pariah! Release all names, we pay the salaries of these players and should have knowledge of who the cheaters are.

In my line of work, it's the same thing. If you test positive, you're a goner. And everybody knows it. It follows you to the next job.

"Have you ever tested positive?" is one of the questions we always face. Working at nuclear plants, like some of us do, the very first day you're given the "whiz quiz". Along with a breathalyzer test, two of them in fact.

If you work for the utility, Edison or whoever, you have the chance for 'counseling'. As a contractor, it's adios for months. And it's well known that so and so blew his test.

Not exactly confidential, although it's supposed to be.

WSox597
02-14-2009, 05:51 AM
We should treat people differently based on their income? That's an interesting proposition. One that I imagine you would not like if the tables were turned.

That already happens. Especially if the person is a "celebrity" of any kind.

And most of us don't like the double or triple standards in place.

asindc
02-14-2009, 10:28 AM
That already happens. Especially if the person is a "celebrity" of any kind.

And most of us don't like the double or triple standards in place.

Yes, because celebrity athletes get their "anonymous" drug tests released without authorization, while unknown amateur athletes don't. Clearly a double standard here.

While we are at it, whenever a celebrity athlete goes through a divorce, for instance, we learn much more about his private life than we should. Unknown amateur athlete? His/her privacy is maintained.

Yes, there are double standards. I would agree that they are mostly unfair to the celebrity athlete. So making $25 million dollars a year should have no bearing on this issue, IMO.

Frontman
02-14-2009, 02:49 PM
Yes, because celebrity athletes get their "anonymous" drug tests released without authorization, while unknown amateur athletes don't. Clearly a double standard here.

While we are at it, whenever a celebrity athlete goes through a divorce, for instance, we learn much more about his private life than we should. Unknown amateur athlete? His/her privacy is maintained.

Yes, there are double standards. I would agree that they are mostly unfair to the celebrity athlete. So making $25 million dollars a year should have no bearing on this issue, IMO.

I agree with that. Some say its fine, as these people made money off of their popularity; they should sacrifice in the privacy department. In my book, what A-Rod did with Madonna shouldn't be public. If any one of us cheated on our spouses; and then it was broadcast to millions? We would screaming bloody murder about our privacy.

But, as some have pointed out, those names are already in the Feds hands. Just get it all out in the open and over already.

Rohan
02-14-2009, 05:07 PM
It would be nice if they would be released to even the playing field.
But because they're legally confidential, they should not be released. It would be very convenient if they were to be released though.

fox23
02-15-2009, 12:41 PM
This brings up a whole different issue. Arod's name would've been leaked sooner or later. Heck, Canseco was saying he did it a couple of years ago.

If Arod's name had been leaked AFTER he was inducted into the HOF IMO that would've been much worse. He would've been a fraud with a plaque. It's much better that it's out in the open now.

It also makes you wonder about the "what ifs". What if we never found out about all of this? Arod would be in the HOF. It makes you wonder what past players who are in the hall ever cheated and nobody knew about it.

Because of this, the steroid era casts a shadow on all of baseball not just the 1990's and 2000's. All of the players who were involved need to be exposed once and for all. That way baseball can begin to heal hopefully with the players who weren't involved.

My biggest fear is that players who were clean like Frank Thomas will be lumped in with these other players because of what era he played in and subsequently not get inducted into the HOF as a result.


How do you know Big Frank, or anyone else for that matter, was clean? I personally don't think that he used anything either, but I don't know that for sure. Most people thought that A Rod was clean up until last week...

Madscout
02-15-2009, 01:16 PM
How do you know Big Frank, or anyone else for that matter, was clean? I personally don't think that he used anything either, but I don't know that for sure. Most people thought that A Rod was clean up until last week...
Because he has spoken out on this issue for years, before most if not all sports writers and mediots cared about it. He was probably pissed off about this in the 90s.

fox23
02-15-2009, 01:56 PM
Because he has spoken out on this issue for years, before most if not all sports writers and mediots cared about it. He was probably pissed off about this in the 90s.


And Palmeiro shook his finger at everyone and said he didn't do it either. I still agree that Frank probably didn't take anything, however just because he spoke out about it doesn't prove he is clean.

Madscout
02-15-2009, 03:38 PM
And Palmeiro shook his finger at everyone and said he didn't do it either. I still agree that Frank probably didn't take anything, however just because he spoke out about it doesn't prove he is clean.
Frank did a little more than "shake his finger" at everyone.

chisox77
02-15-2009, 06:50 PM
No, the names of the 103 should not be released.


:cool:

RockyMtnSoxFan
02-16-2009, 01:39 PM
How do you know Big Frank, or anyone else for that matter, was clean? I personally don't think that he used anything either, but I don't know that for sure. Most people thought that A Rod was clean up until last week...

This is how I feel about it too. Frank is my favorite player, and the main reason I'm a Sox fan or even a baseball fan, but at this point I'm positive that he remained clean. I think he was definitely against steroids, but I could see how he might have become disillusioned with fairness in baseball, and seeing his career in jeopardy, tried something to overcome injuries. Now, I really hope that's not true, and I believe Frank is clean more than any other player, but now I would not be surprised by anything.

One_Dog
02-20-2009, 03:34 PM
Recently Jim Thome (and other MLB players) commented that we need to move past the steroid scandals and just look forward. Sorry Jimmy, I disagree.

As a FAN:
First, its sucks that we bought into all of the juiced stats hoopla for so many years. Baseball has over a 100 year history with records that have stood for decades. That's part of the beauty of the game, that despite all our changes in technology, health sciences, standards of living, etc. we still had records that modern day giants couldn't reach... until of course meat head boppers (mcgwire, sosa, pudge rodgriguez, tejada etc..) and pitchers (prior, wood, zumaya, clemens, pettite, Randy Johnson, etc.) cheated their way to inflated numbers.

Second, a case could be made that as stats exploded, contracts went sky high and ticket prices followed along. I'm sorry, but 30 bucks a ticket, 20 bucks of parking and 6 dollar hot dogs and drinks can add up quickly to a $200 outing for a family of 4.

So sorry Thome, I want to know who the scammers are before I can start to forgive.

As a player:
If I was clean, I would want to know who doing/did it. Dimish the accomplishments of these cheaters, make them suffer humiliation. In the end, the fans paid for it anyway as did the past players that grinded out their careers the clean way. I went to a competitive school, so when I saw people half as intelligent as me getting better grades because they cheated on tests, it was super frustrating. I would think most clean players feels this way, and if they don't then I would suspect its because they probably experimented with this in the past.


As a white sox fan:

Its bitter sweet. How many times did our beloved hide in the shadows as these roid heads ate up all of the national attention, can you say Sosa? I'm proud that my team tried to sabotage the steroid tests a few years back. Imagine the national Love Frank Thomas who'd of received if he didn't have to compete with these cheaters; I'm sure part of his downfall with the media was due to the frustration he felt knowing his clean numbers were being over shadowed by dirty ones. The big hurt days were some of my fondest memories as a white sox fan, it just stinks he competed against cheaters while he was in his prime.:angry:

spawn
02-20-2009, 03:41 PM
I sure hope kittle42 doesn't read this. It's a grammatical hot mess.

Madvora
02-20-2009, 04:02 PM
Wood, Prior, Randy Johnson?

areilly
02-20-2009, 04:04 PM
Wood, Prior, Randy Johnson?

My first questions too - and where did Zumaya come from?

spawn
02-20-2009, 04:07 PM
Wood, Prior, Randy Johnson?
"Forget it, he's rolling."

Frontman
02-20-2009, 05:00 PM
You know, just another side of this whole mess I want to throw out there.

I keep hearing those talking heads on the radio now spout how voracious the New York media is, that they aren't going to give up until they get the truth, that all journalists will flip over every rock to get the story, etc.

Excuse me, oh ye at ESPN and elsewhere. You all turned a blind eye for YEARS as this stuff was happening. You joked about it, you did the "air quotes" (yeah, I'm looking at you Jay Marriotti) when discussing players 'working out.' You then claim that you couldn't speak the truth, or noone would be honest.

Which is it? Are you true journalists interested in the truth and won't stop until you get it, or is it that you know that you are just as culpable as the MLBPA, Selig, and the rest? That you had enough to start digging for the truth, but because ratings were up, you didn't WANT the truth.

I agree with Thome in at least one thing, its time to move on past this. When we get information from the same sources that didn't bother to uncover the truth 7 years ago; I'm thinking they'll never uncover EVERYTHING when it comes to steroids.

Nellie_Fox
02-21-2009, 01:16 AM
I sure hope kittle42 doesn't read this. It's a grammatical hot mess.Can't be. He went to a "competitive school." :o:

spawn
02-21-2009, 09:58 AM
Can't be. He went to a "competitive school." :o:
What were they competing for? Best in Show?

JC24
02-25-2009, 02:35 PM
As Twins fan, I hope they release the rest of the list. As long as Griffey Jr isn't on the list. He is my all-time favorite player, not Named, Puckett, Carew or Oliva.