Saturday, February 7, 2009

A-Rod & 'Roids - 3B not the only "bad guy" here

First of all I want to make one thing perfectly clear:

Assuming this story about A-Rod's positive steroids test is true, he's an idiot who deserves every ounce of scrutiny and/or criticism he will receive. He deserves every last line of type, every bile-filled epithet from fans and every bit of the doubt that is certain to come his way.

There's another side of this story that I'd like to touch on, however.

The leak.

These tests were meant to be confidental and non-punitive per the agreement between Major League Baseball and the MLPBA. Now, some of these tests were looked at because of the BALCO trial and I presume the sources for this latest story are from the U.S. Attorney's office.

Maybe that's wrong on my part but neither the union nor MLB want to see a guy like A-Rod "outed" so I think I'm pretty safe in assuming the leak is coming from someone prosecuting the Bonds and/or BALCO cases.

Keep in mind that these records are supposed SEALED UNDER COURT ORDER, meaning that it is illegal to disclose the contents of said records.

In other words, somebody broke the law just to throw A-Rod under the bus.

Maybe Rodriguez deserves to be dashed under a Greyhound but that doesn't change the fact that someone leaked sealed information to reporters from Sports Illustrated.

The reporters aren't to blame, nor do I believe they're doing anything wrong in reporting what they've been told.

I do have a problem, however, with government officials leaking sealed information for the sole purpose of providing someone with a juicy story.

If you're leaking sealed/confidential information to uncover corporate fraud, government waste or any other activity that could harm the general public in any way, shape or form then I'm all for it.

I'm not okay with it when all you're trying to do is push a juicy story about a star athlete.

Even if that athlete deserves to have his name dragged through the mud.

KW

3 comments:

  1. Hey Kevin.
    Pretty much agree with you completely: there's a reason why this needed to be confidential at the time of the tests, and leaking those names is a violation of a player's rights (no matter how slimy he may be) and, even more importantly, the law.
    I do think there's got to be something more behind a prosecution's motives for the leaks, though, than just getting a juicy story out there. Maybe things weren't going so well with the Bonds case-- the public was getting ready to move on, case was in danger of being dropped, I don't know-- but this does seem to pump up public sentiment against baseball, and, maybe indirectly, give new wind to the sails of the Bonds prosecution.
    Odd that the only name leaked of the 104 was A-Rod...
    Todd

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, imagine that. The only name put out there belongs to the biggest star in the game.

    Why not leak 10-12 names? Why not leak the whole damn list while you're at it?

    Someone has an agenda beyond just "doing the right thing" and that's the crappy part. I don't feel sorry for A-Rod in the least - nobody has ever forced him to do anything - but I do feel sorry for the rest of us.

    I'm tired of people ignoring the law to fit their own agenda. Whoever leaked this information should be prosecuted.

    And it's okay w/ me if A-Rod is persecuted.

    Thanks Todd.

    KW

    ReplyDelete
  3. On the topic of bad guys, how about the MLBPA?

    As far as I understood, the only purpose for the 2003 tests was to check the overall level of PED use in MLB on a percentage basis. At the time, players were given repeated assurances that there would be no individual consquences to a negative test result, because nothing that could personally identify a player would be kept.

    That being the case, why did a list exist linking players to their samples/results?

    Honestly, I have my doubts about the timeline of the Gov't subpoena for the test results, and how much time had elapsed from when the samples/results should have been destroyed. Reading MLB's statement, this part seems a little vague, and given that the statement was clearly worked over by a team of lawyers, I doubt the vagueness was an accident.

    Even putting that aside, the one that blows my mind was the fact that the results and samples were linked to the player's identity in a way that could be reconstituted.

    If I were a player, I'd be furious. Obviously, this relates to players cheating, so it's hard to feel all that much sympathy, but still. I see it as a massive betrayal by an organization that exists to protect its constituents.

    ReplyDelete