baseball players and the Mitchell Report

Originally posted by poundlee
i knew you would not see jeter's name on the list. He shows no signs even is often called overrated because he does not have a tejada type growth in power

Bud Selig's address

This is a call to action! We need to move forward, and prompt action.

Nothing is more important than integrity.


3 points:

Embrace all 20 recommendations
Deal with active players named and punish accordingly.
MLB will be pro-active in removing cheating from baseball.

Originally posted by poundlee
Drugs were still against the law and it gives an unfair competitive advantage. Bonds home run record is a joke. I am glad baseball will no longer push it under the rug.

The players cannot claim innocence. Who gets steriods from an on-line perscription perscribed by a dentist? Who lets another guy shoot B-12 into the rear end? The excuses are so stupid it is comical.

Laws banning adult human beings from taking specific drugs are ALL stupid (with the exception of drugs that don't do what they are advertised to do). I would bet that about 90% of the people on this forum have taken a drug that was against the law.

I don't see how taking a drug that is available to others gives you an "unfair competitive advantage". And baseball i.e. the owners had no problem making hundreds of millions of dollars (at least) from the McGwire-Sosa home run chase and from Bonds breaking the all-time record this year. Baseball refused to pass any rules against steroids in the 90's even when most other sports had for either: A)monetary reasons and/or B) because they didn't believe that they were "performance enhancing". This whole episode is a farce.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Laws banning adult human beings from taking specific drugs are ALL stupid (with the exception of drugs that don't do what they are advertised to do). I would bet that about 90% of the people on this forum have taken a drug that was against the law.

I don't see how taking a drug that is available to others gives you an "unfair competitive advan ...[text shortened]... ey didn't believe that they were "performance enhancing". This whole episode is a farce.

Steroids were added to the list in 1991, just like I told you some time ago. I was not able to forward you any info, having heard it on my radio.

Now you can search:

1991 Steroid MLB

and find info on this topic. Keep in mind Steroids were illegal before that.

Needing to add this to the list of rules is stupid anyway, since it was against the law. It's like adding a rule that you can't shoot someone in the foot while they are rounding first. It's against the law, no need for a rule.

As for MLB owners and Bud Selig. Shame on them. They are as much to blame for turning a blind eye as the players who started using the drugs. I wish the report covered more of these people who let the whole thing happen.

Clemens had a 6 and 6 season when he was told he was "In the twilight of his career". The next season when he began his cycles he went 14-0 and also won a few Sy Young awards in the following years. Don't tell us steroids give a player any advantage.

Clemens fraudulently earned millions of dollars by cheating. Some of this is money that may have gone to a player who was better than Clemens had Clemens not gained an unfair advantage.

Now MLB needs to do something about this if they want it to end. Blood tests are needed, and those samples should be held for years in case someone has a masking agent they can't break for years. If you are found to have used or are using... Good Bye! Teams should be free of the contract, and the player should be removed.

P-

Originally posted by no1marauder
[b]Laws banning adult human beings from taking specific drugs are ALL stupid

I don't see how taking a drug that is available to others gives you an "unfair competitive advantage". ]

Guns are avialable to people. You can't use them to shoot other people. Even though baseball has no anti-violence legislation.
Some people wouldn't break laws and get and be a co-conspirator in a fradulent perscription or by HGH from a drug dealer. It obviously makes you better (Clemens, Sheffield, Bonds, McGuire, Sosa to name a few). Baseball may have been negligent in not testing previously. It does not mean that it now should compound the problem and say that steriods are not a big deal because they are. I think at the very least they should say that all named in the report are banned from the Hall of Fame -- we should never honor cheaters.

Originally posted by poundlee
Guns are avialable to people. You can't use them to shoot other people. Even though baseball has no anti-violence legislation.
Some people wouldn't break laws and get and be a co-conspirator in a fradulent perscription or by HGH from a drug dealer. It obviously makes you better (Clemens, Sheffield, Bonds, McGuire, Sosa to name a few). Baseball may ha ...[text shortened]... at all named in the report are banned from the Hall of Fame -- we should never honor cheaters.

If I was Mitchell, I would have told The Roidrocket, "Yeah? All lies? So sue me. (*Long awkward pause) Didn't think so."

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
[b]Bud Selig's address

This is a call to action! We need to move forward, and prompt action.

Nothing is more important than integrity.


3 points:

Embrace all 20 recommendations
Deal with active players named and punish accordingly.
MLB will be pro-active in removing cheating from baseball.[/b]

What a crock!!

Point 1. The recommendations are not binding to baseball, and there are too many missing components to make this thing work. First of all, they have no (as in none, zero, nada) positive test results on any of the athletes mentioned, because if they did, they would have already prosecuted the punishment under the collective bargaining agreement.

Second, there are no agreements on HGH and they have no stick against the players even if they were taking them until they ratify it in the collective bargaining agreement.

Third, the management was very well aware that this was going on and turned a deaf ear to it because it was boosting ticket sales and lining the pockets of both sides. The reason you can prove management's knowledge is in the 24 hour notices PRIOR to testing being administered which allowed those to be tested to utilize a masking agent to pass the screen.

Fourth, they are attempting to lump together all use of steroids by players as being cheats or guilty when steroid use did not become a part of the collective bargaining agreement prior to 2003 regardless of what anyone thought they heard on the radio or otherwise. Since 2003 if a transgression occurred, MLB would have a leg to stand on in taking action.

Point 2. MLB can deal with this problem within the confines of the NLRB citations of the collective bargaining agreement only. They will get blown out of the water overwhelmingly if it went to the Supreme Court because of several factors, such as...

a. The burden of proof will be on MLB to prove the guilt of a player(s) based on the agreement in hand or as to Federal law. It is not against any Federal law to take steroids or HGH. The only area where there are Federal teeth in play is in the administering, sale or purchasing of prescription drugs (which these are) without a doctor's prescription. This means the McNemee, the Balco people and the idots who purchased the stuff with checks that provided paper trails are the only ones that could fall under Federal prosecution.

b. MLB would lose on the "cheating" context as well since there is already are several precedents where cheating occured and was not enforced. Some of these are as follows: stealing opposing teams signals through the use of outside aids such as hidden video cameras; utilization of a doctored substance on a pitched baseball (a.k.a. throwing a "spitter" or "loaded ball" ); utilizing illegally loaded baseball bats; utilizing pine tar too far up the bat handle; adjusting the level of watering of the home field dirt and grass areas to the detriment of the visiting team; altering the pitching mound construction to the detriment of the visiting team; adjusting the levels at which the grass areas are mowed to the detriment of the visiting team; I can go on with these, and they are all clearly infractions of the rules and guidelines of MLB and are sporadically enforced, if at all, and would serve as tremendous proof of selective enforcement of the law which would get the charges dismissed.

c. The fact that the players would countersue through the union to protect their reputations and their livelihood which would cause MLB to be dragged through the mud in a major scandal that would cost both sides far more in monetary losses than either side can afford to risk.


Point 3. MLB will be proactive in trying to slap some hands, perform some lip service, and gloss this thing over as best as it can. Do not expect the Federal Government to step in and do anything unilaterally for two reasons:

a. They would be overstepping their rights and they know it. Just like they could order the MLB strike to end a few years ago. George Mitchell, nor the rest of Congress has no stick in this matter. Sure they can attempt to drum up Federal laws that can govern these activities in the future, but they will not do that because there is far too much stroke among the ownership of MLB, the advertisers and the players union. The politicians will run like the scared rats they are because they don't want to face opposition in their elections that will be impossible for them to overcome.

b. The taxe payments that are generated by the MLB through income taxes, sales taxes, franchise taxes, and the many other taxes that are in play would be jeopardized if the MLB ceased to exist. The government cannot and will not allow that to happen...period.


So, veryone get yourselves all calmed down and watch the beauty of the whitewashing that will occur. There will be some who will take the fall. Barry Bonds will probably get some jailtime, but not for use of steroids or HGH. He would get it for perjury to a Federal grand jury. The folks at Balco will get busted for administration and distribution of a controlled substance and for perjury and interfering in a federal investigation. Several of the trainers and clubhouse personnel will also take the fall as well for a combination of the reasons listed above. Some players may get some light suspensions to give the appearance that MLB is acting tough on this. That is about all you can expect to come out of this. Bet on it.

And in closing, I would like to address the lousiest form of hippocrits on the face of this earth...the sportswriters who are so dirty it stinks when they use their votes as a sword for things like college poll position, HOF balloting and the like. They all should be shot and run out on a rail for all of the propoganda and lies that they regularly propose in their columns to the public. Some are much worse that others, but they all deal in two faces constantly schmoozing or lying to get a story or smearing someone because they rebuff them. The HOF is supposed to be about greatness in the play of the sport. Pro Footballers have been getting tanked up to play games for years. Basketballers and hockey players as well. Many of them are cheaters on their spouses or girlfriends, alcoholics, spouse abusers, etc.... The HOF is not a house built on morals and character. If it was Ruth, Cobb, Mantle, Mays, Ford, Cepeda (this list could go on for a long while) would not be in. It is a travesty that Joe Jackson isn't in. Likewise, Pete Rose should be in as well. And any writer that would seek to blackball a player from admittance to the HOF should have his/her credentials revoked immediately and be brought up on Federal racketeering charges, collusion charges, blackmail charges and be made to stand trial for all of them. That would stop all of the egg sucking and baloney being rifled around in their respective rags these days.

Originally posted by Phlabibit
Steroids were added to the list in 1991, just like I told you some time ago. I was not able to forward you any info, having heard it on my radio.

Now you can search:

1991 Steroid MLB

and find info on this topic. Keep in mind Steroids were illegal before that.

Needing to add this to the list of rules is stupid anyway, since it was against th Good Bye! Teams should be free of the contract, and the player should be removed.

P-

Vincent's memo is here: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/format/memos20051109?memo=1991&num=1

It says nothing about steroids being "performance enhancing"; quite the opposite, on the first page it says :

illegal drug use can cause injuries on the field, diminished job performance.......

It must be really gratifying for Red Sox fans to now have a farcial reason to defend their team's grevious error in dumping Clemens after he had one so-so year. Even in that year, 1996, he struck out more than a batter an inning (257 K's in 242 IP) and had an ERA almost a point and a half lower than the average league ERA (3.63 v. 5.05). http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/clemero02.shtml

Originally posted by no1marauder
Vincent's memo is here: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/format/memos20051109?memo=1991&num=1

It says nothing about steroids being "performance enhancing"; quite the opposite, on the first page it says :

illegal drug use can cause injuries on the field, [b] diminished job performance.......

It must be really gratify ...[text shortened]... the average league ERA (3.63 v. 5.05). http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/clemero02.shtml[/b]

You see what you want, don't you? It says NOT TO DO THEM. That is the important point. I don't care about their ignorance on the subject in 1991, that has nothing to do with the request.

Don't Do Illegal Drugs!

As for your last stupid little dig, Clemens cheated. Why do you feel the need to bring that up? Do you think the drugs didn't help based on the fine print of the 1991 memo? What makes your brain tick, because it certainly isn't brain cells.

P-

Originally posted by leepound
The 1991 memo which you quote states "the sale or use of illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players and personnel is strictly prohibited" I think getting a bogus perscription for a steriod or HGH would be an illegal use and all players named in the Mitchell report violated baseball's rule as of 1991.
Clemens is druggie (just like Dwight ...[text shortened]... ourage others to do the same); the Red Sox are hypocrats (Damon, Gagne, Manny Alexander etc).

Explain what makes Red Sox 'hypocrats' (whatever that is). Every team in MLB ended up with a few players.

Also, where did you get these names Damon and Manny Alexander? Neither were named in the Mitchell report.

Please advise... I'm interested in their 'perscription for steriod'.

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
You see what you want, don't you? It says NOT TO DO THEM. That is the important point. I don't care about their ignorance on the subject in 1991, that has nothing to do with the request.

Don't Do Illegal Drugs!

As for your last stupid little dig, Clemens cheated. Why do you feel the need to bring that up? Do you think the drugs didn't help based ...[text shortened]... f the 1991 memo? What makes your brain tick, because it certainly isn't brain cells.

P-

The point is whether the use of illegal drugs is "cheating" or not. To be "cheating" the drugs must be recognized by the sport as performance enhancing for that sport. You wouldn't call someone who smoked pot or did a few lines a "cheater", would you?

Baseball did not classify the use of steroids as "cheating" until 2002. That is a FACT.

Originally posted by no1marauder
The point is whether the use of illegal drugs is "cheating" or not. To be "cheating" the drugs must be recognized by the sport as performance enhancing for that sport. You wouldn't call someone who smoked pot or did a few lines a "cheater", would you?

Baseball did not classify the use of steroids as "cheating" until 2002. That is a FACT.

Read the last line, dummy. They banned ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS!

Are you a grocery bagger for a living?

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
Read the last line, dummy. They banned ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS!

Are you a grocery bagger for a living?

P-

Apparently you have a severe reading comprehension problem.

Have someone who isn't an idiot explain my last post to you. Here's the short version: The fact that someone used a banned drug doesn't mean they "cheated".

Here's the key part:

To be "cheating" the drugs must be recognized by the sport as performance enhancing for that sport. You wouldn't call someone who smoked pot or did a few lines a "cheater", would you?

EDIT: According to your "logic", Babe Ruth was a "cheater" because he used a drug that was illegal during the 20's i.e. alcohol.