Baseball's Scarlet "S" (For Steroids)

[Wolf Hopper]

See: http://www.netshrine.com/20031116.html

Discussion welcome and appreciated.

[Ytown Tribe fan]

Two quick points:

1) If the ultimate goal is to prevent young athletes from starting a steroid program, because of the detrimental health effects, then it becomes a public health issue and should be dealt with as such. It should be no different than any other illegally-abused drug.

Young athletes whose goals are to make a lot of money as a pro athletes will not be deterred in the least from hooking up if they aren't convinced that such a program would not succeed.

2) If it isn't a public health issue, but a fair-competition issue, then baseball (and the other pro sports) should just slap the offenders on the wrist and look the other way, just as pro wrestling does.

[Wolf Hopper]

pro wrestling is a sport? Never mind, that's a thread all to itself...............

[ronh]

Players who test positive more than once will be publicly identified.

According to Jayson Stark, http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/column...son&id=1661818
" Players who test positive a second time don't have to be suspended. The commissioner has the discretion to fine or suspend them, but not both. And players will be identified only if they're suspended. If they're fined, the same rules of confidentiality apply."

It's up to the commish if the players name becomes public. I don't like this option. It should be automatic.

ronh

[pwdennis]

Originally Posted by ronh

According to Jayson Stark, http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/column...son&id=1661818
" Players who test positive a second time don't have to be suspended. The commissioner has the discretion to fine or suspend them, but not both. And players will be identified only if they're suspended. If they're fined, the same rules of confidentiality apply."

It's up to the commish if the players name becomes public. I don't like this option. It should be automatic.

ronh

I strongly agree - this should be a set procedure, chiseled in stone

[Wolf Hopper]

I wondered how the rule would be applied - suspension or fine - - since the "or" is there. I hoped that the suspension would be automatic - unless the fine was more than the player would lose in the suspension without pay.

Baseball needs to be careful and consistent with this - - if they play favorites, it will blow up in their face real fast.

[KCBOOMER]

The Union has so watered down the steroid program (pun intended) that they ought to just throw it out. A guy makes a conscious decision to cheat, gets caught, and since it is his first offense he is sent to "counseling". That'll teach'em.

If you are going to have the first penalty counseling there is nothing wrong with have the second penalty somewhat flexible. You don't have judges just to tell them what to do.

[Wolf Hopper]

The current system still beats the last system, which was none.

I think the jury is still out on this one. You have to give it a year before dismissing it, and its parameters, right out of the chute.

[Skip]

I dont think so Wolf. This is really weak. When the weasels at the Olympics are calling you weak, either they've set the new standard for duplicity or you are really, really weak.

[Wolf Hopper]

FWIW, the "detractors" (like Dick Pound) won the "Just Shut Up" Award on the Mike & Mike show on ESPN Radio this week - meaning that the show's listeners are tired of hearing their compliants and it's therefore implied that the "people" (in the "Just Shut Up" voting process, or the majority, that is) do not agree with the claim that the system is weak.

http://espnradio.espn.go.com/espnrad...howId=1058226#

[Skip]

From past experience with talk radio, I think that 'vote' actually enhances my position.

[Wolf Hopper]

Saw that coming as soon as I posted it.

But, here's the point - if the fans are happy with the program, for the most part, now, how can it be considered weak or a failure?

[KCBOOMER]

Originally Posted by Skip

From past experience with talk radio, I think that 'vote' actually enhances my position.

I concur with Skip. Sounds like a ringing endorsement of the "no" position.

I also agree the current policy is better than the former policy, but it falls way short of being sensible or reasonable. The Union leadership has failed the fans and their own constituents. In their desire to control the sport they won't even take steps to protect it. We can only hope that the problem is small and restricted to fringe players.

[Wolf Hopper]

FWIW, the NFL plan started with baby steps too. The true test of the MLB plan will be:

1. What happens in the next year, and,
2. How will it evolve in the next CBA?

[Skip]

Originally Posted by Wolf Hopper

But, here's the point - if the fans are happy with the program, for the most part, now, how can it be considered weak or a failure?

So the fans decide what's meaningful? Talk about weak. And to listen to the players association people talk about their concern for the players is (on the surface) ludicrous given the health issues involved.

However, their concern that players are subject to greater invasions of privacy than 'normal' citizens does make sense. And until the players association agrees to such, it is unreasonable to expect their bargaining arm to roll over on the issue.

Tough call as usual. The only given is the the lawyers will all make a bunch more money. As usual. Why did I go to engineering school? Oh yeah, ... pride.