PDA

View Full Version : Ozzie calls for releasing all 104 names on PED list


voodoochile
07-31-2009, 10:33 AM
Says it's ridiculous to have it come out in dribs and drabs and to have to constantly field questions about it, so get it over with.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/chi-31-white-sox-brite-chicago-jul31,0,6656134.story

Eddo144
07-31-2009, 10:48 AM
As a fan, I agree that I'd like to know all the names. I'm also willing to be that news agencies aren't even asking for all the names at once, as they can sell more papers if they release a name or two every month.

That said, the lawyers leaking this information are doing something illegal, so I can't really say anyone should release all the names.

PatK
07-31-2009, 11:00 AM
Ozzie is 100% correct.

They should release the whole list, and every name at the same time. I find it odd that every couple of weeks, a name slips out. And of course, none of them are nobodies, they are big names.

Release it, get it over with, and move on.

BleacherBandit
07-31-2009, 11:08 AM
When I saw the dugout interview, I was laughing so much, because as soon as I heard about the allogations, I knew Ozzie would say something about them that day. I totally agree with him. The public needs to know to move on. Every time you think the game has moved on from steroids, another player's name gets released. For the sake of the game, MLB needs to release those names.

Madvora
07-31-2009, 11:13 AM
He says this after every name gets released. I agree, but this was an agreement between MLB and the players union. It's not like the players union is going to agree with this.

What bothers me a lot is how much Konerko is speaking out against these names getting released and how these aren't reliable sources.

pearso66
07-31-2009, 11:23 AM
I think it they either have to release all the names at once, or burn every copy of them and erase memories so that none of the names are released. It's annoying with 1 or 2 names released a month.

voodoochile
07-31-2009, 11:30 AM
I think it they either have to release all the names at once, or burn every copy of them and erase memories so that none of the names are released. It's annoying with 1 or 2 names released a month.

The feds have the list and it's part of their ongoing investigation into the steroid scandal. I highly doubt it's getting destroyed anytime soon...

AJRoxMyWhiteSox
07-31-2009, 12:10 PM
This is pretty much like ripping off a Band-Aid: the longer it takes to release the names, the more it hurts the fans and the game. Don't let the game suffer more than it has to. Just release it so we can move on.

I_Liked_Manuel
07-31-2009, 12:16 PM
What bothers me a lot is how much Konerko is speaking out against these names getting released and how these aren't reliable sources.

Despite what we're all thinking when a player takes this stance, he's got a point.

And in the worst case scenario where he's speaking out for personal reasons, it's naive to think that some Sox won't be on that list of 104. It'd be pretty impressive to not have anybody on that list from a club that's usually built around power.

Zisk77
07-31-2009, 12:52 PM
He says this after every name gets released. I agree, but this was an agreement between MLB and the players union. It's not like the players union is going to agree with this.

What bothers me a lot is how much Konerko is speaking out against these names getting released and how these aren't reliable sources.


He's a players rep, no?

InKennyWeTrust
07-31-2009, 12:54 PM
Despite what we're all thinking when a player takes this stance, he's got a point.

And in the worst case scenario where he's speaking out for personal reasons, it's naive to think that some Sox won't be on that list of 104. It'd be pretty impressive to not have anybody on that list from a club that's usually built around power.
Didn't the Sox as a team decide to refuse to test? If so, this could be a great thing, where no Sox from that team will be on the list, no matter what they may have been doing.

Or..... would ALL of them be on the list?

voodoochile
07-31-2009, 12:59 PM
Didn't the Sox as a team decide to refuse to test? If so, this could be a great thing, where no Sox from that team will be on the list, no matter what they may have been doing.

Or..... would ALL of them be on the list?
They tried to but after talking with union reps they were asked to go through with the testing.

I assume they all would have been listed.

g0g0
07-31-2009, 01:36 PM
I'd like to see the names, but I'd also like the players union and the league to actually DO something about it. I'm tired of seeing this kind of thing happening. But honestly, when everyone was breaking records and looked jacked-up on roids was anyone surprised? Mark McGuire especially...

khan
07-31-2009, 03:02 PM
That said, the lawyers leaking this information are doing something illegal, so I can't really say anyone should release all the names.
Actually, the agreement was between MLB and the MLBPA. Therefore, unless the lawyer who is apparently releasing the information is an affiliated person or employee of MLB or Players' Union, they are not bound to any agreement. There is therefore nothing illegal being done.

EDIT: I too am bothered by Konerko's dismissal of the testing. It stinks, and I REALLY hope he isn't one of the cheats on that list. Of course, Ortiz also spoke out against those that were caught. I also support exposing all of the names on the list.

Madvora
07-31-2009, 03:17 PM
Despite what we're all thinking when a player takes this stance, he's got a point.

And in the worst case scenario where he's speaking out for personal reasons, it's naive to think that some Sox won't be on that list of 104. It'd be pretty impressive to not have anybody on that list from a club that's usually built around power.
I just disagree with his stance, because I want all these idiots paraded out in the street and strung up from the bridges. Konkero has doubted the validity of the last two names that came out because it was from a newspaper. Come on PK! Sure, when any newspaper prints something it doesn't necessarily make it true, but don't act like Sammy Sosa being on steroids is complete bull****.

SoxNation05
07-31-2009, 03:58 PM
Agreed.

Eddo144
07-31-2009, 04:14 PM
Actually, the agreement was between MLB and the MLBPA. Therefore, unless the lawyer who is apparently releasing the information is an affiliated person or employee of MLB or Players' Union, they are not bound to any agreement. There is therefore nothing illegal being done.
According to Craig Calceterra, who is indeed a lawyer (and a practicing one, I believe), the people doing the leaking are indeed breaking the law. His take (http://bases.newsvine.com/_news/2009/07/31/3098326-why-the-rest-of-the-names-cannot-be-released?category=sports) is a good, I suggest anyone commenting on this topic read it.

SoxandtheCityTee
07-31-2009, 04:15 PM
My recollection is that Frank Thomas took the lead -- he wanted as many as possible to refuse testing in order to trigger tougher terms under the testing agreement. The deal was that if some percentage of all players refused to be tested (I think it was 5%) then there would be more testing. Frank, who was clean, wanted some other folks tested more often and caught, so he tried to persuade other Sox to refuse, to get the number up over the trigger point. However, MLBPA hated this idea and eventually their view prevailed. So the talked-of refusal that never was, at least as reported, had exactly the opposite motive: exposing steroid use, not hiding it.

khan
07-31-2009, 10:10 PM
According to Craig Calceterra, who is indeed a lawyer (and a practicing one, I believe), the people doing the leaking are indeed breaking the law. His take (http://bases.newsvine.com/_news/2009/07/31/3098326-why-the-rest-of-the-names-cannot-be-released?category=sports) is a good, I suggest anyone commenting on this topic read it.

I also know a few attorneys as well, and their opinions differ greatly from his. Without getting into details, their opinions: Craig is wrong with respect to HIPPA and with respect to the 4th Amendment as it pertains to this case.

Craig is right with respect to the violation of contractural responsibilities on the part of MLB and the lab. He is also right about the violation of fiduciary responsibilities on the part of the MLBPA.

As an aside, I'm told that the MLBPA was incredibly dumb to specifically speak to the positive 104 about their results. The Feds don't take on too many cases they can't win, regardless of the opponent.