bobbob1313 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 I think B2 is on to something about writers from different generations, too. I've long held that younger fans care less about steroid use than older fans, in a broad/general way. Absolutely. Younger fans also tend to look on spitballs, scuff balls, stealing signs, and other things that older fans see as 'gamesmanship' in a much harsher light. Believe me, I'm not alone in a lot of my opinions. And you're oversimplification of Sheehan's article works both ways: ""I care way too much that Alex Rodriguez used steroids."- Bill Madden. This sums up that article pretty well. So he cares? Plenty of other people don't." Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 For the record, I am not saying one way or the other whether I care about steroids or not. Or whether it tarnishes Bonds or Arod. Just that I don't believe a word out of ARod's mouth. And he gets no points from me for "admitting" what he did only after he was caught red-handed. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 He wasn't caught red handed. It would have been very easy for him to say "Show me the records. All this is is a couple of people who aren't even willing to stake their reputations on their word. Show me my name on a list." He could have fought it like Bonds or Clemens, but he manned up to his mistakes. I think it takes a lot of courage to admit something like this, and certainly shows more class than most people expect out of him. I'm sure most people expected him to deny it. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 Well, for the people who tested positive in 03, they were garaunteed that there would be anonimity and MLB really dropped the ball in regards to that, because there was no reason for them to even label the samples or keep the results. A-Rod may have a lawsuit, and I expect that to be a major sticking point for the PA when the next CBA comes around. So I wouldn't say they are dumb, necessarily for continuing their use into 2003. Just looking to maintain that edge when there were still no penalties for doing so.They did drop the ball and it's un-excusable. I've heard that they held on tom the reacords searching for false positives, but still: no excuse. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 He wasn't caught red handed. It would have been very easy for him to say "Show me the records. All this is is a couple of people who aren't even willing to stake their reputations on their word. Show me my name on a list." He could have fought it like Bonds or Clemens, but he manned up to his mistakes. I think it takes a lot of courage to admit something like this, and certainly shows more class than most people expect out of him. I'm sure most people expected him to deny it.This I do not get. He bald-faced lied when asked if he used PEDs/steroids. Got caught in the lie. And only then, came "clean." How does that take balls? It's the Pete Rose defense and it holds no water in my eyes. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 As for the confidentiality issue, ARod can probably sue the league if he wants, but enough with the sports commentators talking about the 4th Amendment. For chrissakes, the "confidential" steroid testing was an agreement between MLB and the player's union. The 4th amendment is not implicated in the SLIGHTEST by this issue. The government is not subject to an agreement of confidentiality between MLB and the Union. The government can do whatever the heck they want on this count. And frankly, that may be why the league kept the records. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 They did drop the ball and it's un-excusable. I've heard that they held on tom the reacords searching for false positives, but still: no excuse. Yeah, I heard that Fehr was holding onto it to search for false positives, but this should have never seen the light of day, or if anything, it should never have been labelled, since it was anonymous testing. And I just think it does take some courage to own up to your mistakes, even if you were caught. We've seen how easy it is for other guys accused to get wrapped up in their own lies. I like when the guy owns up for what he did. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 And you're oversimplification of Sheehan's article works both ways: ""I care way too much that Alex Rodriguez used steroids."- Bill Madden. This sums up that article pretty well. So he cares? Plenty of other people don't."The oversimplification was my point. It's one guy's take just like Madden's is. From the way these things pan out it seems that Sheehan and his ilk are in the minority. Either way, it affects the players caught cheating negatively. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 As for the confidentiality issue, ARod can probably sue the league if he wants, but enough with the sports commentators talking about the 4th Amendment. For chrissakes, the "confidential" steroid testing was an agreement between MLB and the player's union. The 4th amendment is not implicated in the SLIGHTEST by this issue. The government is not subject to an agreement of confidentiality between MLB and the Union. The government can do whatever the heck they want on this count. And frankly, that may be why the league kept the records. Well, it shouldn't be outside of the BALCO courtroom either. So there's that. I understand it's how these things always work, but the information in that document should never get out of the court if people are doing their jobs. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 And I just think it does take some courage to own up to your mistakes, even if you were caught. We've seen how easy it is for other guys accused to get wrapped up in their own lies. I like when the guy owns up for what he did.I give him credit for copping to it but he was worked into a corner and didn't have much leeway any way. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 The oversimplification was my point. It's one guy's take just like Madden's is. From the way these things pan out it seems that Sheehan and his ilk are in the minority. Either way, it affects the players caught cheating negatively. I'd say among sports writers, Sheehan is definitely in the minority. Amongst the general population, he's not. I would say more people simply don't care that strongly, and just want to see some baseball than either side. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 Amongst the general population, he's not. I would say more people simply don't care that strongly, and just want to see some baseball than either side.I agree that the majority of fans don't care whether or not guys used. Link to post Share on other sites
rareair Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 i am all for tricking people into revealing how big of a cheater they are and then releasing the results. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 i am all for tricking people into revealing how big of a cheater they are and then releasing the results.It is kind of impish, isn't it? Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Well, it shouldn't be outside of the BALCO courtroom either. So there's that. I understand it's how these things always work, but the information in that document should never get out of the court if people are doing their jobs. Leaking grand jury testimony is very different. That is illegal. In my mind Bonds really did get railroaded. If he was relying on the confidentiality of grand jury testimony, that is reasonable (IMO). Any player who relied on the "confidentiality" of an agreement between MLB and the Union was an idiot. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Well, if I understand the case correctly, the document with his name on it was seized as part of the BALCO investigation and that case has, to my knowledge, remained officially closed. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 Selena Roberts (who broke the story) and an SI cohort were compiling a profile on A-Rod when they came across accusations of steroid use. They claim they did due diligence to confirm or deny the accusations and came across with what we now know. They didn't single him out or set out on a witch hunt to make him look bad. They were already working on a piece on him and followed through on a rumor. This is what Roberts claims. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Well, if I understand the case correctly, the document with his name on it was seized as part of the BALCO investigation and that case has, to my knowledge, remained officially closed. I dont know the specifics of the leak all that well. What I do know is that the Bonds testimony before a grand jury is supposed to be sacrosanct. No matter how the ARod leak happened, while it's possible that it leaked inappropriately and/or illegally, the confidentiality of the information was not sacrosanct. In other words, if the government wanted, they could go in and get that info. No player should have ever felt comfortable that MLB "promised" to keep it confidential. This info was always at risk of disclosure whether this particular disclosure was legal or not. Not sure if I am making myself clear. Link to post Share on other sites
rareair Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 one thing is clear from the espn interview: A Rod has a tremendous amount of respect for the game. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I dont know the specifics of the leak all that well. What I do know is that the Bonds testimony before a grand jury is supposed to be sacrosanct. No matter how the ARod leak happened, while it's possible that it leaked inappropriately and/or illegally, the confidentiality of the information was not sacrosanct. In other words, if the government wanted, they could go in and get that info. No player should have ever felt comfortable that MLB "promised" to keep it confidential. This info was always at risk of disclosure whether this particular disclosure was legal or not. Not sure if I am making myself clear. I believe the list is supposed to have been kept closed in the court. It is a sealed document, which is why the full list hasn't come out yet. one thing is clear from the espn interview: A Rod has a tremendous amount of respect for the game. I know this is supposed to be sarcastic, but I can't tell what the hell it's supposed to mean. Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 A-Rod must have a lot of enemies in high places, if four separate people outed him like that. Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Selena Roberts (who broke the story) and an SI cohort were compiling a profile on A-Rod when they came across accusations of steroid use. They claim they did due diligence to confirm or deny the accusations and came across with what we now know. They didn't single him out or set out on a witch hunt to make him look bad. They were already working on a piece on him and followed through on a rumor. This is what Roberts claims. And this is the key to why A-Rod's name is the only one that came out, though I don't think her framing is accurate. It's not that he was the only name that they had access to -- if they knew A-Rod then they likely knew a lot more. But this is pretty good hype for the book she has coming out, eh? Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 I'm thinking that there are no names on the list of 104 players that come even close to A-Rod's in terms of his notability/popularity/pay check/stats/etc. Just a guess.... Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 Yeah, no kidding, but that's because there are no players in the game who compete with him in terms of any of those things. So what? Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 So, she's a journalist who was doing a piece on A-Rod and went to verify some rumors that turned out to be facts. I have no idea if she and her cohort got hold of the entire list but certainly A-Rod, the person she was reporting on, is a big scoop. Let's shoot the messenger, now? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts