Should MLB Give Cheaters a Lifetime Ban?

Why are we worried about the athletes using steroids when I saw a report that said steroid use is running rampant in our law enforcement all over the country. Officials said "We don't usually test for steroids". The officers here said they feel they need them to maintain the EDGE over the bad guys. Maybe that is why abuse of power exists nationwide. Is it ok for cops and not athletes? If it is banned for athletes it should be banned for ALL! What about pro wrestlers? Think they get that big by eating their wheaties? I think not!

Reply

As one who has interviewed jim Bouton over the years, like his predecessor Jim Brosnan, he knows what he's talking about. I would only add, that the owners be banned or suffer whatever consequences the players do for turnig a blind eye...or like Marge Schott and George Steinbrenner,be banned, along with their family members, from running their teams anymore. That includes General Managers and team trainers. Make the teams find new ones that can be monitered for their transactions and running of the ballclubs from square 1. No free passes for turning a blind eye. If Billy Bean knew about Miquel Tejada in Oakland, then out goes Billy Bean, for example. (Ironic, isn't it that McGwire, Canseco, Giambi, Tejada, and many more suspected and admitted users, started or played in Oakland???? Take a good look at just the list of players named and see how many were once in an Oakland uniform??? Hmmm. Even McGwire and baseball's biggest blind-eyed manager, Tony LaRussa, was the manager for years in......Oakland.) There are blatant turn-a-blind-eye mangement, administrative personnel, and owners, as well as blatant users.

Reply

Everyone wants to point the finger at the owners, but the real culprit in the steroids mess is the players union. This is unconscionable, as the first priority of a union is to protect the health and welfare of its members. Yet, here, management wishes to take steps, which would have the effect of protecting the players from being coerced into using harmful drugs, and it is the players' own union that is seeking to prevent these protections from being put in place. Maybe Marvin Miller belongs in the Hall of Fame, but Donald Fehr better not be counting on making it.

Reply

Martin, you're full of hooey. There's blame to toss around here in every direction. If you think management didn't know about steroid use among players, I'll be happy to sell you a nice bridge in Brooklyn for a tidy sum.

There are several good reasons why the Players' Union likely resisted implementing drug testing, including:

1. renegotiating a still-running contract sets a bad precedent.

2. the union had concerns about privacy issues. For example, how did they know samples wouldn't get surreptitiously tested for something other than steroids, if it's just steroids that are being banned?

3. the union had sufficient distrust for management that they can't imagine there isn't a catch here somewhere -- especially since it's not unlikely that management knew about steroid use among ballplayers for years and did nothing about. Particularly when owners (as well as players) reaped the financial benefit of possible steroid use during home run record chases. Particularly when management only started squawking about steroids when congressmen with, one supposes, nothing better to do began to pressure owners on the topic. Particularly when use of greenies by players had been widespread since the 1960s and management looked the other way. Given the long and contentious history between management and players, I wouldn't trust management either if I were a player or union official.

Reply

if baseball is going to have rules on steriod use and drug use then let them enforce the rules. i believe that those mentioned in the report although alledged should be given a minimum 30 day suspension and another charge should be automatically banned from baseball. just stop kidding around with these spoiled brats and lets get on with the game.

Reply

Sorry bachslunch, but none of your rationalizations hold water. I'm not talking about renegotiations, I'm talking about the negotiations that took place before each contract with the union was agreed to. As for privacy, rules could be established to protect the privacy of the players while still having testing.

Reply

Martin--

Let's stop speculating and start talking specifics. Here's what happened in 2002, the last time a new contract was agreed on (it runs until 2008):

2002

• Before 2002, Major League Baseball had no official policy on steroid use among players. As part of a collective bargaining agreement, players and owners agree to hold survey testing in 2003. If more than 5% of results from the anonymous tests are positive, formal testing and penalties will be put into place the next year.

2003

• Baseball announces after the season that 5% to 7% of test results were positive, triggering the new policy in 2004.

2004

• Each player is tested once a year in season. A first positive test results in treatment, followed by a 15-day suspension for a second positive and up to a year suspension for a fifth positive. The result is no player is suspended for steroid use.

2005

• Baseball agrees to a new policy. Banned substances include steroids, steroid precursors, designer steroids, masking agents and diuretics. There will be one unannounced mandatory test of each player during the season. In addition, there will be testing of randomly selected players, with no maximum number. And there will be random testing during the offseason. The penalties for a positive result are, first positive, 10 days; second, 30 days; third, 60 days; fourth, one year, and all without pay.

Source: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2005-01-12-steroid-policy_x.htm

Assuming this statement is true,

"Before 2002, Major League Baseball had no official policy on steroid use among players."

this suggests that no contract negotiated prior to that year is relevant to this discussion. According to the article referenced, the above agreement was worked out after several months of negotiation and implemented when the 2002 contract
took force.

I'll say it again, Martin -- you're full of anti-unionist hooey. Everybody involved screwed up here, not just the Players Association.

Reply