MLB Steroid scandal discussion thread (merged) (1 Viewer)

[Joseph S]

We do know there are no positive tests. My guess is there are no video or audio tapes either.

 

[Robert Crawford]

If you have two witnesses to testify against him and refute what he said under oath, you might not need any of those things to bring charges of perjury against him. Also, the IRS is involved in this thing too, so they might be going after him on tax issues. Like I said, it's all speculation until the second shoe drops.





Crawdaddy

 

[Holadem]

Exactly. The guy clearly listened to his lawyer rather than his PR person. I think that was wise of him...

--
H

 

[Jim Sentry]

Why does'nt MLB come forward and say if you've taken illegal performance enhancing substances then your out of the game and your records expunged.

 

[Joseph S]

1) The drugs most in question were not illegal in the US or elsewhere when claimed to have been used. The standard steroids are not illegal in US as they are medications for treating various conditions. In the countries where many of the MLB players come from and train these medications are legal and available to use without Rx. At the same time, they were not banned from MLB.

2) How exactly do you expunge the records? What about the guy on second who scored the run? What about the pitcher now wanting his ERA lowered? What about the reliever that blew out his arm because he had to throw extra pitches to get out of a jam because a suspected steroid user got a hit? You can't just pull stats, they're all intertwined. They are statistics, evidence of what has happened, not theory.

 

[Patrick Sun]

PR nightmare, and lawsuits aplenty waiting on MLB if they did that.

 

[Sami Kallio]

The drugs might not have been illegal but it is illegal to possess prescription drugs without a prescription. Getting a prescription for non-medical reason will make the RX invalid, so again you're possessing RX drugs without a valid RX. Illegal.

If there are any lawyers out there with experience with this issue, correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Joseph S]

The most talked about drugs "Cream" and "Clear" were not illegal at the time in question in USA. As I said before, if it's not banned in MLB there's nothing they can do because not everyone involved lives and trains in the USA/Canada. In their countries you don't need a Rx for steroids anabolic or otherwise.

 

[Sami Kallio]

There might be nothing that the MLB can do, other than to act to prevent the future use (or at least try). Even those not living in the US in the off-season, they were breaking the law in reality as they were possessing RX drugs illegally while in the US. To prove that is a different thing.

Here is an interesting article: http://www.steroid.com/steroidandlaws.php

"Unfortunately our society has been educated to believe that if you use steroids, you’re no different from the guy with crack cocaine, and there is a big difference."

 

[Phil L]

The non-US players could easily do their cycles while in their own countries (where juice is legal and OTC) in the off season and be clean during the season.

 

[Lew Crippen]

You could not be more wrong Joseph. Steroids are Schedule 3 drugs (in the same class as amphetamines and morphine and such) and they are, in fact, illegal to possess without a doctor’s prescription. IIRC, it was mentioned several times in the hearings that it was a criminal matter. Possession without a prescription is not only illegal, but it is a Federal crime.

You may have heard a part of the testimony that I did not, but I don’t recall any of the discussion in the hearings even mentioning Cream or Clear. Of course I was also watching NCAA tourneys at the same time, so this could account for not hearing everything.

 

[Joseph S]

The whole thing was a farce. If they mentioned any steroid or precursor it was probably a mistake because they wanted non-incriminating but lenghty questions to show back home to show they were "tough on steroids" and "against dying babies." If they wanted answers, they would have granted immunity to key figures involved.

 

[Doug Miller]

With Bonds official announcement today, the one where he announces he may miss the season and people are speculating whether he will retire, ala Mark McGuire, I started thinking... I know, dangerous.

Does anyone here think we might be seeing an unofficial suspension? I bring this up because it seems similar, in a way, to the way that Michael Jordan suddenly "retired" from basketball -- a retirement that coincided with gambling rumblings and a sudden/unexpected/mysterious-circumstances death of his father.

I think it just seems a little odd that he's having this sudden need for season ending surgeries right after his Balco testimonies where he alledgedly acknowledges using steroids (unknowingly of course). It also seems like convenient timing given that his mistress also just testified for the Balco grand jury. And last, but certainly not least, I heard someone speculate on the radio today that maybe Bonds is learning from Giambi's mistake -- that coming off the juice results in a really shitty season, and that it takes a year to get back in condition to play the game.

Whether it was Bonds choice or not makes me wonder. Do you think that MLB might have gone to Barry with what a public relations nightmare it would be for Barry Bonds, allegeded steroid user, to break one of the most glorified records in the game -- to not only pass Babe Ruth, but Hank Aaron in the same season, all under the shadow of steroids? People have speculated for years that the NBA went to Jordan and recommended (strongly) that he retire for a year and then come back, so that the game could avoid the pitfalls of it's greatest player being involved in a gambling probe. Is it really "out there" to think that this might have happened here as well, but with Barry Bonds?

Doug

 

[D. Scott MacDonald]

But it is my understanding that there is currently no test for "Clear" or GHB, so all this talk about "not testing positive" is completely irrelevant.

 

[Patrick_S]

This probably should have been put in the steroids thread that we have but what the heck I'll answer.

It's a ridiculous idea.

 

[Joseph S]

There is a test now. Being a designer drug, it was previously unknown and therefore not tested by other agencies. In baseball, there was no steroid testing so anything done to players would have no basis in fact.

 

[Jim Sentry]

What about the spirit of the game or Sportsmanship.

It's just not right to use foreign substances. Would you or rather why don't you, if you have kids, recommend they use whatever performance enhancers they can find.

 

[Lew Crippen]

With respect Joseph, the drugs in question were steroids that were placed under Schedule 3 in the 80s. Further to argue that newer versions should be considered OK, simply because of a slight change to what had been placed in Schedule 3 is a nice legal, technical argument, but one that very most certainly subverts the intent of the actions.

To make that argument after the fact does nothing to absolve what happened.

As to the hearing being a farce, it is very clear that some Members were playing to the grandstand. But none of them did anything as farcical as players who claimed that they were only here to talk about the future, not the past, or the owners and union reps who represented that baseball was well on the way to fixing itself.

And by the way, if it had all been so legal, Mark would not have had to repeatedly invoke the 5th.

I never said that Schedule 3 drugs were banned from use—but they are to be used only under specific conditions, none of which the players in question met.

 

[Carl Miller]

The whole legality issue is a farce.

Bottom line is that the players who used steroids did so knowing full well it was cheating. Had they been unconcerned about the ramifications of using steroids with regards to possibly being seen as cheaters, the use and taking of steroids would have been fully out in the open...Not done in bathroom stalls and empty locker rooms, and certainly not denied.

Legal or not, the argument that it wasn't against baseball rules is a red herring. Cheating is a concept often understood by first graders on a school playground, and I don't see anything wrong with expecting a professional athlete to understand what is and isn't cheating...The same way a 1st grader can figure it out while playing tee ball in little league.

 

[Joseph S]

That's not true. It wasn't until 2004 that this was done by the Steroid Control Act.