Thank goodness for track & field. It takes some of the heat off of MLB and Roger Clemens.
Aside from the less-than-shocking announcement that Marion Jones will get 6-months in prison for her web of deceipt, the big new is that Oscar Pistorius, a South African double-amputee sprinter, will most likely be barred from the Beijing Olympic Games.
There are many reasons to applaud this decision with the top one being that it anticipates what will happen in the future.
Pistorius was born without fibulae (the thin bone next to your shin bone) and he had both legs amputated below the knee at age 11. Therefore, he runs using special carbon fiber prosthetic legs called “Cheetah” extensions.
Pistorius is not fighting to run in the Paralympics but rather the regular Olympics.
There is some debate about the data which demonstrated that the “Cheetah” extensions give him a clear advantage over other runners who don’t use that device. What is clear is that regardless of what the numbers show, he should never ever be allowed to run in the regular Olympics.
Why?
There’s something called “precedent”. And once that door is open, it’s almost impossible to shut.
Maybe Pistorius wouldn’t make the South African Olympic team for this upcoming summer. But that’s not the point.
The point is that there is a good reason why no one with prosthetic limbs should ever be allowed to compete with someone who has all of their limbs: advances in the future.
It is just a matter of time before those “Cheetah” extensions give such a tremendous mechanical advantage to its user that regular runners would not be able to compete. Think about it like an Olympic swimmer having to compete against a swimmer with similar upper-body strength and arm technique but who is a double-amputee using fins for prosthetics. It wouldn’t even be a close battle. The double-amputee would win every time.
How about a pitcher with an artificial arm that allows him to throw a baseball 140 miles per hour. It may seem impossible now, but it’s an inevitability.
Suppose that today you allow a baseball player to compete in MLB with an artificial leg (a prosthetic below the knee). Would that player have an advantage? No. The technology hasn't advanced that point yet. But it will. And what if such a player were running to second base and slid and snapped the prosthetic in the same manner that a an athlete without prosthetics would snap a tibia or fibula. Would that player be allowed to go to the dugout and switch the broken prosthetic for a new one? Or would he have to sit out the average time that an able-bodied runner would be out with a similar injury? These are the types of questions that have to be addressed now ahead of the technological advancement. The problem is that once you let such a prosthetic-utilizing player onto the field, it will be very difficult to draw the line at which prosthetics are allowed and which are not.
Therefore, any sport at a high level should have a very simple rule: you must compete using only the same types of equipment as your competitors. If everyone else is running in shorts, shirts, socks, and sneakers, then no one else should be able to use anything else. Period.
My guess is that we’re not too far away from a time when amputees using things like the “Cheetah” extensions will run faster than any able-bodies athlete. How do I know this? Because the last time I checked, if I want to travel a mile as quickly as possible, I’m going to ride a motorcycle over pedaling a bicycle. Technology wins almost every time.
Are people like Pistorius dealt an unfair hand from birth? Yes. But we shouldn’t let our sympathy for his suffering cause us to overcompensate and create a lot of suffering for others. He has a place that he can compete. And one day it’s entirely possible that the top 5 finishers in a Paralympic 400-meter dash will run faster than any Olympian has ever run that distance. But if the goal of banning steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs is to create a level playing field, then there’s no place for limb prosthetics on a field with able-bodied athletes.
Prosthetics have as much legitimacy as steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs: only if everyone gets to use them.
And you wonder how people are getting anabolic steroids so easily?
Just utter the word “steroids” and a thousand knives suddenly appear. Almost every single professional sportswriter (and most amateur ones as well) believes that definitive proof of steroid use should ban a player from the Hall of Fame.
There are also others who think that players like Roger Clemens are guilty based on a preponderance of circumstantial evidence (e.g. Brian McNamee’s testimony, Clemens shocking improvement as he got older) combined with long-standing su####ions that maybe the Rocket was using a different type of fuel than his peers to propel his career.
But there are a few things people should know about steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs), because far too many out there have the wrong perception of them.
Myth 1: steroids or other PEDs can’t make you hit a fastball.
Anabolic steroids have been shown to increase reflex speed in both animal and human studies.
What is probably just as important is that they can dramatically reduce the amount of breakdown (catabolism) that normally occurs when muscles undergo the stress of exercise. Less breakdown means faster recovery. When you consider how many musculoskeletal injuries a ballerina sustains despite the graceful nature of her art, then you can better imagine the damage that occurs in baseball players while violently and repeatedly swinging a bat, especially when they miss.
All of that damage will slow down bat speed. This is where steroids really help. If you recover faster to baseline, you’ll be able to more consistently hit pitches with power.
Myth 2: steroids are inherently bad for you.
There are several studies about people with low testosterone, and the trend is clear: low testosterone levels put you at a significantly increased risk of dying younger.
Now don’t go start shooting up on steroids because of that last sentence. The point is that exogenous steroids may be beneficial for our overall health. One of the problems is that good solid prospective studies are lacking on how a person with normal testosterone levels might use steroids properly to gain benefits and minimize side effects. The reasons for this are administrators being too close-minded.
That situation probably won’t change until people stop immediately associating steroids with former East German women, NFL and MLB players, and weightlifters.
Myth 3: injecting steroids automatically makes a person stronger.
This is completely false. The simple act of injecting steroids will not make you stronger. It’s not like getting bit by a radioactive spider like Spider-man or being injected with Super Soldier Serum like Captain America.
People look at MLB athletes like Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens, and Barry Bonds, and they completely frown on those athletes for using steroids.
But a fact that’s been forgotten in all of the finger-pointing is that each of them was an elite athlete who worked hard. Name me one hitter who worked harder than Mark McGwire or Barry Bonds off the field? Name me one pitcher who had a tougher workout regimen than Roger Clemens? Their workout routines are the stuff of legends, and that was before they took steroids.
But time has a funny way of demonstrating diminishing returns. At first it’s a few days here or there where you just can’t bench as much as usual or your timed sprints are a bit slower or you can’t catch up to the fastball or the radar gun objectively tells you that you’re losing a few mph off your fastball. Then those few days turn into weeks and then months.
Then suddenly, you start seeing younger guys who are not working anywhere nearly as hard as you starting to catch up to you. To maintain the edge, you try steroids. And one way that you justify it to yourself is that the steroids only work because you yourself are putting in a tremendous amount of time and energy to stay in top shape. You reason that the steroids don’t and won’t work for you without you adding your own sweat and commitment. And you know what? You’re right.
Heck, even Captain America needed help (from low-level radiation exposure in his case) to make the injected substance work. People using steroids are similar: energy in the form of exercise is needed to see the true athletic benefits of anabolic steroids.
While people are crucifying Bonds, Clemens, and McGwire, just remember that these guys were already way ahead of the curve in terms of their workout routines. I remember reading a Sports Illustrated article during McGwire’s magical home run season. The thing that impressed me was how much time he spent working out. Also, I remember Clemens’ intense workouts even on non-pitching days while he was with the Red Sox.
Folks, these weren’t guys looking to gain an edge for free. They had been and were willing to continue paying the price in terms of sweat to stay on top.
Does this excuse what they did? No.
But is what they did understandable? Yes.
If we were in their position and stood to make millions of dollars a year playing a game and receive adoration from hundreds of thousands of people, would we not do everything in our power to keep things going?
The general public is sounding like a lynching mob when it comes to stringing up any MLB athlete who used illegal substances like steroids and HGH. Was it 100% illegal? Yes. But it’s become a bit crazy. Trust me, I know union workers who have resorted to outright violence to prevent people (“scabs”) from breaking the picket lines. That violence is also 100% illegal and far more damaging to others, but I don’t hear the general public tearing down the walls to put those violent people out of commission.
If we demand that MLB players or any other athlete open their eyes and minds to the dangers of anabolic agent use, then shouldn’t we try and open our minds a bit as to the reasons why they feel compelled to use such things?
Many of us think, “Heck, I would never inject that junk into me.” But unless we’ve been in a similar situation, it’s tough to tell what we’re capable of doing.
So, MLB players flouted the law and cheated because they thought that following the rules would endanger their continued livelihood in baseball. Funny, wasn’t this country’s independence created by people who flouted authority, because they believed that their livelihoods were being threatened by unfair rules? Didn’t those same revolutionaries also go against the common rules of military engagement and instead “cheat” by using “cowardly” guerilla tactics?
I’m not trying to equate MLB players with the brave revolutionaries that created an independent America. But I’m trying to show you that Americans looking to for some way to better their circumstances is an inherent part of our personalities. It’s impossible to deny this.
The point is that when people are looking at the end of the road (and for an athlete facing the grim realization of retirement, it feels like the end of the road), it’s a terrible time. Are we so completely unable to understand why pro athletes like Andy Pettitte resort to using steroids or other PEDs to prolong their careers, especially when they know that most of the other guys around them are doing it?
In the past, I’ve written several blogs about steroids and the people who use them. I’ve never ridiculed anyone for making the choice to use steroids. It violates federal law (and now MLB rules) and it’s unsportsmanlike. But I can separate those facts from the other fact that we all should try placing ourselves in other people’s shoes.
Yes, they make big money, but for the majority of them, their whole life has been devoted to sports. I can understand why they would try steroids or HGH or other PEDs. I don’t condone it, but I understand where they are mentally to make that choice.
However, I have no problem ridiculing athletes who lied about their use. That’s why I have some respect for a guy like Andy Pettitte and complete disdain for Paul Byrd and his ridiculous story about using HGH that was prescribed by an online dentist for his supposed brain tumor.
As the year comes to a close, here’s a thought. Maybe it’s time to give the illegal drug users a break and let them come forth and confess everything without fear of retribution. Maybe we need an Amnesty Period where players are guaranteed that anything they confess about receiving steroids and other PEDs will not be used against them legally or for Hall of Fame balloting consideration.
In a lot of ways, this steroid saga has wearied me and left me thinking the same thing I thought when my best friend was lost at sea while saving his wife after their boat was obliterated in a destructive storm: regardless of what the truth is, I just want to know the truth.
I would rather let a player confess completely that he used steroids his entire career and then let him walk away unscathed then stay in this limbo where we are all left guessing whether he did it or not.
Also, I don’t believe that it’s all about greedy players just trying to stay on the big high-salary gravy train of the MLB.
A person’s ego and feeling of self-worth is partially tied to their income, but it’s more heavily connected with a feeling of contributing to something greater than himself or herself. Every one of us should try to imagine having a job that we absolutely love; a job where we receive praise and respect from our boss and coworkers. Then imagine how we’d feel if our boss came to us tomorrow and said, “We have to let you go, because there are younger faster people we want to replace you with.” Imagine the sadness and panic that might immediately well up in you.
Then suppose that I come up to you and whisper, “Hey, I have this stuff called Adderall which will allow you perk up, outperform any new person, and allow you to keep your job.” The catch is that it’s illegal to use this drug unless you have medically diagnosed attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. What if I also told you that I could get it to you without a prescription and that there were no real side-effects? Would you try it? Of course you would. It’s as much a part of our DNA as Eve biting from the forbidden apple.
And folks, just an fyi, Adderall abuse is rampant in universities and even amongst competitive high school students. What is Adderall? It’s a type of amphetamine. That’s right, it’s “speed”.
Now, that I’ve shared that true tidbit about Adderall being used illegally by a lot of American university students, are you still not going to try it to keep your job, especially when you most likely will be replaced by someone who is using it?
If you say that you would still not try it, then you are an incredibly moral person, lying to yourself, or you don’t need money and job happiness as much as normal people do.
None of this is to say that we should excuse the guys who cheated. But unless we can find a way to ensure a clean and level playing field, can you really blame guys who are trying it to keep their jobs against other players who very well might also be users?
Sen. Mitchell proposed that we should not focus on punishing those who cheated in the past, but rather focus on the present and the future. I agree, and that’s why MLB steroid users need to catch a break. Let’s wipe the slate clean.
For people who have been arguing that letting such cheaters off the hook sullies the records of many of our MLB sports heroes, here is a sobering fact: Synthetic testosterone was first introduced into sports during the 1940s and 50s. There is no definitive way to know whether or not records achieved since that time are also tainted. So, let’s drop the charade that all players 20 and 40 years ago were clean. Let’s have an Amnesty Period where players can confess everything without fear of retribution and let them know that from that moment on they must stay clean or face being wiped out of all record books.
Let’s do this to save ourselves the time and agony of having to hear a lot of players lie to save themselves because that’s the only option left to them. Let’s do this to save the money we would have used on investigating athletes and devote that money to better testing in the future. Let’s not allow ourselves to get stuck on the idea of punishment and miss the greater good of finally knowing the whole truth.
Finally, let’s give the MLB anabolic steroid and HGH users a break so we can all move forward, because as the saying goes, you can’t advance to second base if you keep your foot on first.
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!!!
P.S. the picture at the top of this post is not Photoshopped. that's an original advertisement found 2 days ago. obviously i didn't include the phone number and web address.
Let’s get some things straight. First, Sen. Mitchell did a fine job with his report. He identified the problem, meticulously worked through the investigation, assigned blame, named players, and proposed some solutions. And he did all of this with no subpoena power.
For all of you conspiracy theorists, forget about his ties to the Red Sox. He implicated former Red Sox players such as Eric Gagne and Mo Vaughn, and he indirectly added former Red Sox utility player Manny Alexander’s name into the mix.
For all of you Bud Selig haters, and that includes me, let’s get off the MLB Commissioner’s back for a bit. It’s not like he hasn’t been pushing hard for stricter drug testing for the past few years. Does he share some blame in this whole mess? Yes, but Sen. Mitchell was refreshingly blunt in his criticism about who is to blame for the current steroid mess.
According to the MLB Player’s Association’s (MLBPA), the owners and management are partly to blame as they looked the other way for a while.
True, but the MLBPA’s assertion that more stringent testing did not occur earlier because the owners didn’t initially push for it is ludicrous. Look at the roadblocks that the MLBPA has put up for current testing. Does anyone think the MLBPA would have acted differently 15 years ago if the owners had wanted tougher testing?
For those who argue that Sen. Mitchell’s report is incomplete, I agree but for different reasons. I watched Sen. Mitchell’s press conference and parts of it were very good, but certain parts of it made no sense, because they seemed to have one goal: hide the Real Drug Issues.
Since this will be a bit lengthy, I’ll break the issues into groups:
Real Drug Issue #1 = severe underestimate of MLB players who used illegal drugs.
Sen. Mitchell said that the percentage of MLB players who had tried or used steroids or HGH was about 5-7%, and that the vast majority of MLB players were clean. He then discussed how HGH couldn’t be detected by urine samples.
Does anyone else see the big problem here? If you can’t detect it, then how can you even guess how many players are clean or dirty?
I would bet a lot of money that if the American public were polled, at least 95% of rational Americans believe that the number of MLB players who have tried an anabolic steroid, HGH, or some other illegal drug is probably closer to 70% or higher.
If you’re a struggling minor league player, aren’t you going to do everything in your power to get that extra edge? This is why the idea of MLB players policing themselves is a joke.
Real Drug Issue #2 = the “Marion Jones Effect”
As many of you know, Marion Jones was a U.S. Olympian in track and field. For years she vehemently denied using performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs). It was easy to believe her because she’s gorgeous, well-spoken, and she passed all of her drug tests. Trust me, the drug tests that track and field athletes take makes the MLB test look like a starter kit.
Also, elite track and field athletes can be tested anytime and anywhere, as opposed to MLB players who are always given some type of advanced notice of a test. You think I’m joking about how strict track & field is about testing? Here is an excerpt from the USATF, the governing body for U.S. Track & Field, regarding out-of-competition drug testing:
“…it is important for athletes to know that out-of-competition drug testing can occur any time and any place--at work, home, the track, the gym, in class, etc.”
The point is that if Marion Jones can consistently beat such a tough detection system, then so can MLB players. That is the “Marion Jones Effect”.
Therefore, the fact that Roger Clemens never had a positive urine test does not prove his innocence. In short, a positive urine test means that someone is definitely doing steroids (assuming a very very low false-positive ratio). A negative urine test only means that the sample wasn’t definitively positive. Think “Marion Jones”.
Real Drug Issue #3 = wimping out on addressing banned substances
The Mitchell Report talks about the use of testing that “maximizes detection”. But what it really is saying is that measures should be used to maximize the detection of currently banned substances. Although this is a step in the right direction, it misses the major point that the current list of substances banned by MLB is woefully inadequate.
Let’s look closely at what the list of banned substances really is. MLB has divided the list into two categories: a) Drugs of Abuse, and b) Steroids.
acetazolamide, amiloride, bumetanide, canrenone, chlortalidone, etacrynic acid, furosemide, indapamide, metolazone, spironolactone, thiazides (e.g. bendroflumethiazide, chlorothiazide, hydrochlorothiazide), triamterene, and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological effect(s).
Prohibited Methods
M1. Enhancement Of Oxygen Transfer
The following are prohibited:
a. Blood doping, including the use of autologous, homologous or heterologous blood or red blood cell products of any origin, other than for medical treatment.
b. Artificially enhancing the uptake, transport or delivery of oxygen, including but not limited to perfluorochemicals, efaproxiral (RSR13) and modified haemoglobin products (e.g. haemoglobin-based blood substitutes, microencapsulated haemoglobin products).
Prohibited Substances
S6. Stimulants
The following stimulants are prohibited, including both their optical (D- and L-) isomers where relevant:
Adrafinil, amfepramone, amiphenazole, amphetamine, amphetaminil, benzphetamine, bromantan, carphedon, cathine * , clobenzorex, cocaine, dimethylamphetamine, ephedrine ** , etilamphetamine, etilefrine, famprofazone, fencamfamin, fencamine, fenetylline, fenfluramine, fenproporex, furfenorex, mefenorex, mephentermine, mesocarb, methamphetamine, methylamphetamine, methylenedioxyamphetamine, methylenedioxymethamphetamine, methylephedrine ** , methylphenidate, modafinil, nikethamide, norfenfluramine, parahydroxyamphetamine, pemoline, phendimetrazine, phenmetrazine, phentermine, prolintane, selegiline, strychnine, and other substances with a similar chemical structure or similar biological effect(s) *** .
S7. Narcotics
buprenorphine, dextromoramide, diamorphine (heroin), fentanyl and its derivatives, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, pentazocine, pethidine.
S8. Cannabinoids
Cannabinoids (e.g. hashish, marijuana) are prohibited.
S9. Glucocortocosteriods
All glucocorticosteroids are prohibited when administered orally, rectally, intravenously or intramuscularly. Their use requires a Therapeutic Use Exemption approval.
Specified Substances*
Ephedrine, L-methylamphetamine, methylephedrine; Cannabinoids; All inhaled Beta-2 Agonists, except clenbuterol; Probenecid; All Glucocorticosteroids; All Beta Blockers; Alcohol.
See a difference?
Some of you may think that WADA seems like a foreign organization, so you may be a little su####ious of it. Okay, let’s bring it closer to home. Here is a list of substances banned by the NCAA:
(d) Street Drugs: heroin THC, marijuana3 (tetrahydrocannabinol)3
(e) Peptide Hormones and Analogues chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG human chorionic gonadotrophin), corticotrophin (ACTH), growth hormone (HGH, somatotrophin)
(f) others: erythropoietin (EPO), sermorelin
When you compare the list of banned substances by MLB, WADA and the NCAA, there are a few things which are notable
1. the MLB list lags far behind the WADA and NCAA list. If the real goal of MLB is to clean up its house, then how can it have such dramatically lower standards than WADA and the NCAA? For the NCAA to have such stricter drug policies than MLB is reminiscent of the fact that for years minor league baseball had a much stiffer drug policy than MLB.
2. the MLB list only bans known steroids or agents which are almost completely identical to known banned steroids. It does not make a general statement that bans ALL anabolic steroids. Therefore, MLB players can use “designer steroids” which can be manufactured to avoid being classified with one of the known steroids.
This is exactly what happened with BALCO and its Tetrahydrogenstrinone (aka THG or The Clear). THG was not detectable previously because it was a designer drug created to avoid detection. Although THG is related to the banned anabolic steroids trenbolone and gestrinone, it had enough differences that made it undetectable to standard tests for these two illegal drugs.
Unless MLB includes a blanket statement that “all anabolic steroids are forbidden”, it’s only a matter of time before we have our next BALCO-type scandal
3. the MLB list demonstrates ignorance. Growth Hormone is a peptide. It’s not a steroid.
4. the MLB list demonstrates how it’s leaving the door open for continued abuse. To ban Growth Hormone but not IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor-1), its analogues or Growth Hormone Releasing Factor is ridiculous.
This requires a bit of explanation.
Growth Hormone itself can cause changes, but in the liver it causes the production and secretion of another important anabolic growth factor called IGF-1. IGF-1 is banned by WADA because various labs have clearly demonstrated that both unaltered IGF-1 and slightly modified IGF-1 can result in significant muscle mass gains.
The goal of using injectable (exogenous) Growth Hormone is to increase the amount of Growth Hormone in a person’s bloodstream. To get the same result of increased Growth Hormone in your blood without actually adding/injecting it into your body, one could use Growth Hormone Releasing Factors (GHRFs). These drugs stimulate cells in a person’s anterior pituitary to make and release more Growth Hormone. The end result of using these GHRFs is the same as using injected HGH.
5. the MLB list does not account for steroid masking agents. These drugs are used by steroid users to evade detection during urine tests.
Real Drug Issue #4: the Mitchell Report does not discuss blood testing.
One of the real problems with the MLB drug testing policy is that it does not allow for blood testing. In a normal individual without a lot of resources, banned substances can be readily detected in the urine. However, in a person with money (e.g. an MLB player), there are all sorts of ways to make the urine look “clean” of steroids.
The simplest way is to carry a packet of “clean” urine into the bathroom during a drug test and dump it into the urine collection jar.
More complex ways involve the use of masking agents such as Propecia.
If MLB really wants to show that they’re serious about cleaning up the sport, then blood tests should also be done. MLB players and the MLBPA may argue that it’s dangerous, but if track and field athletes can do it, then so can MLB players.
Real Drug Issue #5: the Mitchell Report does not address the MLB’s ridiculous difference in policy between “Drugs of Abuse” and “Steroids”.
This is an issue that I have yet to see discussed anywhere.
Under the current drug/steroid testing policy which expires in 2008, “Drugs of Abuse” and “Steroids” are considered completely different entities for drug testing. A player can be randomly tested for steroids at any time (both in-season and out-of-season). However, a player cannot be randomly tested for “drugs of abuse”
Huh? Don’t believe me?
According to “Major League Baseball’s Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program” rules, “Except as set forth in Section 3.C, Players shall not be subject to testing for the use of any Drug of Abuse.”
In case you’re wondering, Section 3.C states that a player cannot be tested for a “drug of abuse” unless there is reasonable cause (non-random) presented to the oversight committee and that committee votes by a majority to test the player.
If you wonder why more MLB players aren’t caught using illegal drugs like cocaine, PCP and ecstasy, it’s because the vast majority of them never get tested for it during their careers.
All of this brings me to a final ominous conclusion: NO ONE REALLY WANTS TO CATCH ANYONE.
What could possibly be an impetus for cleaning up the game? Attendance is at an all-time high. TV contracts are through the roof. And the Yankees are still spending money like it grows on trees and contributing mightily to the luxury tax.
So, let’s look at the participants in this charade of "getting tough on drugs":
1) MLB and the Commissioner’s Office
If they were serious, they would use the same testing procedures as the USATF. If they are worried about the MLBPA, then at least they should release to the public a list of what they are pushing for in a strong new drug testing policy. If the MLBPA doesn’t like it, then they will have to face the public and explain the reasons for their opposition.
The fact that this hasn’t been done yet is either because it’s all talk and no action, or the owners and Commissioner Selig are afraid of angering the MLBPA and inciting a strike.
2) MLBPA
Their perceived job is to protect ALL of their players. The last thing they really want is a tougher drug policy. Why? A tougher drug policy means that the MLBPA would be put in the negative situation of having to spend more of its time and resources defending cheaters.
3) MLB Players
This is the part that is the toughest to acknowledge. To date, only a couple of currently active players have publicly spoken out against steroids and HGH. If Sen. Mitchell’s estimates of 5-7% of ballplayers using illegal substances is correct, and if the number one thing that really angers clean players is that the cheaters are gaining an unfair advantage, then it makes complete sense that a lot of players should be coming out and publicly blasting the cheaters.
This hasn’t happened.
Why?
There are three possible answers:
1) no “clean” player wants to look like a goody-two-shoes
2) player apathy
3) the number of dirty players is much much higher than Sen. Mitchell’s estimate
If Sen. Mitchell is correct that “clean” players are really angry about the cheaters, we can put #1 and #2 aside.
So, where is the yelling? The silence is a bit overwhelming.
Why might the number of dirty players be incredibly high?
Baseball is not like basketball or football. For most pro baseball players, it takes years of playing in the minors to get a chance in the majors. An early injury, perceived lack of strength/power, and whispers about a person not having enough “pop” in their bat can destroy a once-promising career.
The money waiting for baseball players in the majors has gotten ridiculous. It’s probably the most ridiculous salaries of any major pro sport. For example, Yankees Alex Rodriguez, a guy who has done nothing in the postseason and never won a World Series Championship, will be paid $30 million a year to play baseball, while Tom Brady of the New England Patriots who has won 3 Super Bowl Championships and is on his way to a fourth will be paid $6 million a year to play football.
Many people (not athletes) have said that they would use illegal PEDs in a heartbeat if offered that kind of money to play baseball. It’s understandable and also a telling statement.
If we as individuals without the necessary talent set to even get to the minor leagues would be willing to break the law and use such drugs, then how much greater must the temptation be for players who have the talent, but just need a small boost to get into the majors?
Then once a player gets to the majors and tastes the lifestyle, the thought of being sent back down to the minors or having to leave the game due to injury can be devastating.
In such a context, it’s easy to understand why a lot of players probably used or at least tried anabolic steroids and HGH.
And it’s also easy to understand why there has not been a bigger outcry about the steroids scandal from current MLB players: there are very very few players who have never tried steroids or HGH.
My guess is that as Sen. Mitchell and his team dug deeper, they realized that illegal drug use was far more rampant than anyone could have ever guessed. But he decided to do what was “in the best interest of baseball” and provide only the names of players that he was sure had cheated. Had we been provided a list of players under investigation…
Also, for those who think that Radomski and McNamee lied about which players they had assisted in using steroids and HGH, guess again. If you read the Mitchell Report carefully, you’ll see that their immunity is valid only if their testimony is truthful. As much pressure as they were under to give up names, they were also under greater pressure not to lie.
Some say that the Mitchell Report is a good start to solving the problem. I disagree. Without proposing things like following the WADA guidelines for illegal substances, allowing random blood and urine tests, and figuring out a way to convince the MLBPA that it’s in their best interest to push for much stricter test parameters, the currently proposed changes – if instituted – will catch a few more players, but nothing substantial is going to change.
People will try to deflect everyone’s focus by concentrating on things like stiffer sentences handed out to players caught because of the system that’s currently in place. But this is a smokescreen.
If the ultimate goal is to clean up the game, then stricter sentences for an inadequate system that only catches less than 1% of the total number of cheaters is just a drop in the bucket. The focus now should not be on punishment but rather on detection.
Until we have a better and more comprehensive detection system in place for MLB, we’re just avoiding the Real Drug Issues.
