The 2003 MLB drug tests - what to do?

[Sect309Fan]

The New York Times today reported that Manny Rameriz and David Ortiz were on the list of 104 players that tested positive back in 2003. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4366335

Before that, A-Rod and Sosa were linked to that list. It appears that list isn't going to go away, so what should MLB do?

I just wonder if they should just go ahead and reveal the whole list. I guess the main problem with that is MLB would get into serious trouble because they said these tests would be anoyonomous. If someone else leaks the results, MLB isn't in quite as much trouble.

I just hate that lawyers are revealing this piece by piece. It only makes the situation worse.

[Titan723]

I heard someone make the suggestion to announce a date that every name will be announced. That way you give everyone on that list a chance to come out and say they are on the list.

[MillaKilla8]

I figured that David Ortiz was taking something he shouldn't be.

[Parddy]

Why are they not actively pursuing the leak? I have been against the steroid users since day one however, the players on the 2003 list are getting screwed. The union and the government need to show some backbone and find the leak.... Why are these particular guys being singled out for exposure and why are they not filing lawsuits?

[ZachLV27]

The players most likely aren't filing lawsuits because their reputations take a big enough hit just being mentioned. The big names would most likely prefer their names being mentioned with steroids as little as possible and would never want to even try and live down filing a lawsuit over it. The lesser known names, if ever leaked, will be in the same boat as the lesser known names in the Mitchell Report. Can you name most of them? I can't.

Also, remember that the media votes on who gets in the Hall of Fame or not (until it gets to the veterans committee years later). Most media members aren't the biggest fans of "cry babies" (you can bet that they would be labeled something close to this if they filed a lawsuit) nor are they fans of people who silence their sources.

[pookha]

Why are they not actively pursuing the leak? I have been against the steroid users since day one however, the players on the 2003 list are getting screwed. The union and the government need to show some backbone and find the leak.... Why are these particular guys being singled out for exposure and why are they not filing lawsuits?

i suspect it is multiple leaks.
i heard someplace the players on the list knows who else is on it.
and that this may be players settling score with each other .
they need to release them all now instead of this dragging on for years.

[ZachLV27]

As for the players that are the victims of the list being slowly leaked like this. Anyone on that list can come out and out themselves whenever they want. I think the players, and baseball, would be much better off if the entire list was made public, but that's most likely not going to happen. There are too many players that would have to approve it and I just don't see it happening.

You can bet that a player would sue and not be frowned upon if MLB or the Players Association leaks the list.

[Sect309Fan]

As for the players that are the victims of the list being slowly leaked like this. Anyone on that list can come out and out themselves whenever they want.

From David Ortiz's reaction to the story, it sounds like the players don't know if they are on the list or not. Ortiz had to confirm it himself after the names were leaked.

There are plenty of players out there in multiple sports who aren't intentionally using steriods, but have taken stuff like weight loss pills that have banned substances in them.

[Parddy]

As far as I see it, there should have been 100 urine samples numbered 1 thru 100..

NO NAMES should have been associated with those numbers. Period.

The players were scammed from the begining that this test would ever be anonymous. There were people who knew from day one that the list would be leaked in the future. Who?

They should seek the perpetrators of the players trust and nail them to the wall. The list should never become public as was the players understanding in 2003. IMO

[Old Oilers Fan]

I would like to know if the drug that they came positive on was illegal in 2003? I can't remember when this all started on what was legal or not.

[Sect309Fan]

I would like to know if the drug that they came positive on was illegal in 2003? I can't remember when this all started on what was legal or not.

No performance enhancing drugs were illegal in baseball until testing began in 2004.

[Parddy]

No performance enhancing drugs were illegal in baseball until testing began in 2004.


That is exactly why baseball took a random 100 player sample test in 2003. The ANONYMOUS (ahem) test was to determine if baseball would begin testing in 2004. The sample group is getting screwed!

[Old Oilers Fan]

Then I don't see how it could effect the players before 2004 beside the side effect it will have on them in the future. The players that are positive after 2004 should be the ones that should be worried.

[Yvette]

The future = Cooperstown

That's a big side effect.

[ZachLV27]

Then I don't see how it could effect the players before 2004 beside the side effect it will have on them in the future. The players that are positive after 2004 should be the ones that should be worried.

It will only effect them when people are looking back on their careers. Fans of the player will usually forgive. Fans of the game, but not that player, will just treat him like a guy who has done steroids.

The main players from the 2003 list that are worried are the ones that have Hall of Fame aspirations. A lot of writers have gone on record saying that they wont vote in someone who tested positive for steroids.

[Sect309Fan]

Then I don't see how it could effect the players before 2004 beside the side effect it will have on them in the future. The players that are positive after 2004 should be the ones that should be worried.

It affects them because Hall of Fame voters may be reluctant to vote steroid/PED users into the Hall. Some of these players have amazing numbers are HOF candidates.

It also taints some of the accomplishments of these players, like the Red Sox championships.

I admire the players that never took the drugs. But if I found out tomorrow that Chipper Jones or John Smoltz took steroids, I still would want them in the Hall of Fame when they retire.

(Zach beat me to it ;))

[ZachLV27]

I pretty much feel the same way. I've been a lifelong Dodgers fan and at one time Barry Bonds was my favorite player (started liking him when he was a Pirate). If I had a vote and I was asked about Bonds and say Piazza. I'd have absolutely no problems voting them both in. I'd just have more admiration for Piazza.

The part about Piazza could change if I ever found out he took steroids. I'd still find him worthy to be in the Hall of Fame though.

[Old Oilers Fan]

The future = Cooperstown

That's a big side effect.

What I was trying to say is most of these players was doing the drugs to enhance their game. They (I think) didn't know the health issues that could harm them in the future. If it wasn't illegal then then why not try it. They are like most people in this world trying to gain or lose weight or even perform better by doing it the easy way instead of working hard for it. I just think now that the rules are in place no one has the excuse for failing the test but before then I think that it should slide.

[Parddy]

It also taints some of the accomplishments of these players, like the Red Sox championships.



Easy there 309... After 86 years I would have stuck the needle in their ass myself if it meant a World series ring..
:dancegrin