As Shyster noted, this is probably for only the most die-hard steroid news followers (like me)...
Like most things surrounding steroids/PED usage in baseball, nothing will surprise me and no one implicated would surprise me. That said, it came out that it appears that some players who tested positive in 2003 were given advanced notice of when they were to be tested again in 2004.
Selig, Manfred and Fehr offered the committee information about a still-evolving testing program that had begun with anonymous testing of all players in 2003, with no public disclosure of positive tests and no punishments. In 2004, each player was tested once, and players who tested positive were subjected to additional tests. If a player tested positive twice, his name was made public and he was suspended for 15 games.
.......
As a result, players who apparently tested positive in 2003 were not retested in 2004 until the final weeks of the season, and might have been notified beforehand, perhaps skewing the overall test numbers for that year.
Just please no more Congressional hearings! It's clear (no pun intended, I swear) that Selig wanted to impose his will with PED testing but the Players Union was staunchly against it. Two questions:
- Could others in the Commish's office, wanting to keep the league's image prettier than it might have otherwise been, tipped off players they needed to remain "innocent"?
- Could this have done without Selig's knowledge?
Would the answers either of those two questions, if the answers are "yes", surprise you? Not me.
Posts
2 comments:
Nope, but how about this. Selig knows about the steroid situation and wants to keep the league's image pretty, so he tells his underlings to "take care of it" but not to tell him anything. That way when Congress investigates, they can't tie anything to him.
Mark,
That's my first thought, but don't think Bud really wanted to help protect guys
Post a Comment