PDA

View Full Version : MLB Announces new Roids "Deal"


ode to veeck
01-13-2005, 09:03 AM
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=545&ncid=716&e=10&u=/ap/20050113/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bbo_steroids

short suspension for first positive test is a slight improvement, but only went to one year suspension after fourth positive test (was previously after fifth), not sure about off season testing

wdelaney72
01-13-2005, 09:22 AM
This is still a joke. A second positive test should result in a year unpaid suspensions. Third should be a lifetime ban from baseball.

They're obviously not that serious about removing steroids from baseball. If they were, they would make it completely untolerable.

Nick@Nite
01-13-2005, 09:25 AM
Steroids are one thing, human growth hormone is another. I wonder if MLB has anything in place for monitoring HGH?

ode to veeck
01-13-2005, 09:43 AM
No other real details that I can find anywhere yet, but I'd have to report it at this point with a headline like:

"MLB Steps up to the Plate and ... Checks Swing to Take One Low and Away"

Be interesting to see how McCain, et al responds

idseer
01-13-2005, 10:57 AM
This is still a joke. A second positive test should result in a year unpaid suspensions. Third should be a lifetime ban from baseball.

They're obviously not that serious about removing steroids from baseball. If they were, they would make it completely untolerable.
you are completely right. they didn't give a damn before and they don't give a damn now. this is just another tribute to lip service.

StillMissOzzie
01-13-2005, 12:27 PM
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=545&ncid=716&e=10&u=/ap/20050113/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bbo_steroids

short suspension for first positive test is a slight improvement, but only went to one year suspension after fourth positive test (was previously after fifth), not sure about off season testing
While a 10 game suspension for the first positive test may seem mild, the player will be condemned in the court of public opinion FOREVER. They will FOREVER be branded as a juicer and a cheater. A stiffer penalty, IMHO.

SMO
:gulp:
It's only barley juice!

Mickster
01-13-2005, 12:41 PM
Steroids are one thing, human growth hormone is another. I wonder if MLB has anything in place for monitoring HGH?
Correct me if I am wrong, but do they even have a test in place that can detect the presence of HGH? I don't think so...

jackbrohamer
01-13-2005, 12:43 PM
So who gets tested, and how often? I agree that both sides want to sweep the issue under the carpet and pretend it never happened, this is a good way for them to pretend to do something but really do nothing

idseer
01-13-2005, 02:08 PM
While a 10 game suspension for the first positive test may seem mild, the player will be condemned in the court of public opinion FOREVER. They will FOREVER be branded as a juicer and a cheater. A stiffer penalty, IMHO.

SMO
:gulp:
It's only barley juice!
i seriously doubt that this possible consequence would stop many players. i doubt they'd care much at all.

Ol' No. 2
01-13-2005, 02:17 PM
i seriously doubt that this possible consequence would stop many players. i doubt they'd care much at all.They might care if they weren't already signed to a long-term contract. Prospective bidders would be leery of someone who might have to spend an extended time on the suspended list.

Flight #24
01-13-2005, 02:21 PM
What would be great is if teams now start adding clauses pertaining to steroid usage in contracts. Something like "multiple violations are grounds for termination". I doubt the MLBPA would let that go without a fight, but I'd like to see it at least tried.

Ol' No. 2
01-13-2005, 02:25 PM
What would be great is if teams now start adding clauses pertaining to steroid usage in contracts. Something like "multiple violations are grounds for termination". I doubt the MLBPA would let that go without a fight, but I'd like to see it at least tried.The interesting thing about this is that it's the rank-and-file players who now seem to be driving this. I think if it was left up to MLB and the MLBPA, they'd still be dragging their feet.

Flight #24
01-13-2005, 02:27 PM
The interesting thing about this is that it's the rank-and-file players who now seem to be driving this. I think if it was left up to MLB and the MLBPA, they'd still be dragging their feet.
It's just IMO, but based on the system in place in the minors, I think left to themselves, MLB would have put in something stronger a long time ago. MLBPA (read Fehr/Orza) are the ones who've been stonewalling on this, until a near-revolt at the meeting in Arizona.

Heck - as recently as 2 years ago, there was enough griping about it that the Sox were going to refuse the test en masse. But MLBPA STILL resisted.

Nick@Nite
01-13-2005, 02:35 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but do they even have a test in place that can detect the presence of HGH? I don't think so...That's what I was wondering about. Also, as far as I know, there is no policy toward eliminating stimulants. Players can get jacked to the moon on greenies and no one would be the wiser.

Ol' No. 2
01-13-2005, 02:40 PM
It's just IMO, but based on the system in place in the minors, I think left to themselves, MLB would have put in something stronger a long time ago. MLBPA (read Fehr/Orza) are the ones who've been stonewalling on this, until a near-revolt at the meeting in Arizona.

Heck - as recently as 2 years ago, there was enough griping about it that the Sox were going to refuse the test en masse. But MLBPA STILL resisted.For the most part, IMO, the MLBPA is dominated by the few superstars and the average player doesn't have much of a say. Look at what's been happening with salaries over the last few years: the AVERAGE has been going up, but the MEDIAN has been going down. The mid-level player is worse off (not that you're going to have to pass the hat for any of them). The superstar players weren't interested in steroid testing (I'll leave you to surmise the reasons), but I think the average players were in favor of it all along because they felt that they were being forced into it to try to compete. They've finally got the momentum on their side.

But I don't think the league was very interested in steroid testing, either, so their hands aren't exactly clean. Owners LOVED all those home runs and the fan interest it generated.

idseer
01-13-2005, 03:13 PM
For the most part, IMO, the MLBPA is dominated by the few superstars and the average player doesn't have much of a say. Look at what's been happening with salaries over the last few years: the AVERAGE has been going up, but the MEDIAN has been going down. The mid-level player is worse off (not that you're going to have to pass the hat for any of them). The superstar players weren't interested in steroid testing (I'll leave you to surmise the reasons), but I think the average players were in favor of it all along because they felt that they were being forced into it to try to compete. They've finally got the momentum on their side.

But I don't think the league was very interested in steroid testing, either, so their hands aren't exactly clean. Owners LOVED all those home runs and the fan interest it generated.
i wonder what they think of the 'interest' it has drawn lately? :?:

ode to veeck
01-13-2005, 06:39 PM
http://post.polls.yahoo.com/quiz/quizresults.php

The Yahoo poll has readers voting 4:1 the new rules "lack teeth"

buehrle4cy05
01-13-2005, 06:54 PM
It's a step in the right direction, but it still is pretty weak. Steve Phillips was just on Sportscenter and said the biggest deterrent to using the roids is that the players will be identified when they are found to be using them.

ode to veeck
01-13-2005, 07:27 PM
McCain chimes in support for the agreement, but does criticize the details. However, as a result of the new agreement he won't be sponsoring any "forcing" legislation in the near future.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/10638040.htm?1c

Lip Man 1
01-13-2005, 08:01 PM
I think you'll find this interesting:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-bbo-steroids-miller,1,1844651.story?coll=sns-ap-sports-headlines

Lip

wassagstdu
01-13-2005, 08:13 PM
How many teams might be stuck with huge, worthless contracts ("One, two, many Giambi's") if juicing suddenly stopped? On the other hand, it seems to me that avoiding such things (overpaid "stars" who suddenly stop taking their supplements and collapse back into $15 MM per year mediocrity) is a stronger incentive to MLB to crack down than the love of HRs is an incentive to look the other way. BIG problem, tiny attempt to look like they are trying to solve it.

ode to veeck
01-13-2005, 08:19 PM
Humorous Lip ..., loved this quote from Marv:

If you tell me it will help someone become governor of California_ maybe," he said. "But hitting major league pitching more often and farther? You've got to have more evidence than I've seen."
Not that I can say I agree with him however, especially on the count steroids aren't yet proven to be hazardous

Ol' No. 2
01-13-2005, 10:13 PM
I think you'll find this interesting:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-bbo-steroids-miller,1,1844651.story?coll=sns-ap-sports-headlines

LipHere's a quarter, Marv:

http://courses.lib.odu.edu/eci/cfleener/eci361fall2001/danamelissak/quarter.jpg

Buy a frikkin' clue, already. This is happening mostly because it's the PLAYERS pushing it.

Nick@Nite
01-14-2005, 02:57 PM
Just heard an interview of one Dr. Gary Wadler by Jim Rome. Wadler is an internist and sports medicine doctor and a member of the World Anti-Doping Agency.

Rome asked him if the new policy has any teeth. Wadler's response was "baby teeth", citing that the devil was in the details. For example, HGH is now on the list of banned substances, but there will be no testing for it. In case anyone didn't already know, steroids (well, those that are known to exist) are detected via urine test. HGH can only be detected via blood test.

Another point Wadler brought up was amphetamines (greenies). He explained that greenies are derived from the illegal stimulant ephedra, but falls outside the policy.

Lastly, he reiterated a belabored point; for any drug policy to be truly effective, it must be comprehensive and players must be tested 24/7 - 365 days a year.

jackbrohamer
01-14-2005, 03:03 PM
I think you'll find this interesting:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-bbo-steroids-miller,1,1844651.story?coll=sns-ap-sports-headlines

Lip
Interesting, Marvin Miller sounds like a man who's never lost a fight with MLB. Which is what he is. But his position is idiotic and I'm glad he's the minority