Disclose the names
by slcathena on Jul 30, 2009 1:26 PM CDT
95 comments
We haven't talked about this in fanposts for a while (at least I haven't seen it). With the news that Manny and Ortiz can be added to the list of people on the infamous list of 104 I think it's time to just release the names. I know the testing was done under the assumption that it wouldn't be released originally, but the leaks are just making it worse. Since leaks are inevitable, letting the fans know who the other 97 are so that we can stop prolonging the agony seems to be the only fair thing to do.
I know it wouldn't absolve everyone else, there is still always a risk that our favorite players juiced--but slowly leaking 1 or 2 names every 6 months seems to be death by a thousand cuts. It ensures that we can't get over the scandal because every time it dies down, someone uncovers a new name. Baseball needs to put this behind itself. The only way to do that is release the other names.
Thoughts?
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
3 recs |
95 comments
Email
Print
Comments
What bothers me
What bothers me is it’s become increasingly likely someone at ESPN is covering up for someone or someones.
I really doubt someone is calling them and giving them names one by one.
I had to delete my twitter account. But you can still find me at fanfiction.net under puckish prosecutor.
by cubstoseriesby100 on Jul 30, 2009 1:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
So?
ESPN’s job is to break stories.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 1:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope -- still 97 stories to go
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why ESPN
The Times has been the one working the story and getting names.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Jul 30, 2009 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oops
Meant NY times the once great newspaper which is now just a shadow of its former self.
But still I doubt they’ve only seen these names.
They are protecting someones or someone.
Jayson Blair maybe had the names.
I had to delete my twitter account. But you can still find me at fanfiction.net under puckish prosecutor.
by cubstoseriesby100 on Jul 30, 2009 3:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everyone's got to eat
Especially if your business is dying because you failed to innovate even a tiny bit. 2 names at a time is good for clicks.
Life is parallel to hell but I must maintain
by dr stabbingworth on Jul 30, 2009 8:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no no no no no
This is NOT how the news business works. If any outlet had the whole list, it would be published.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
maybe
or maybe they can keep making a splash each time
Definitive Answers to Impossible Questions What baseball team did A. Lincoln support?
by Andre Fonseca on Jul 30, 2009 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I made this point earlier
If the NY Times, or any other outlet, had the full list, they would write about it — for fear that another media outlet would get the list and do it first. The media isn’t organized well enough for half the conspiracies people suggest.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The media isn’t organized well enough for half the conspiracies people suggest.
Or smart enough, for that matter.
"I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said." ~William F. Buckley, Jr.
by Goodie1969 on Jul 30, 2009 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Leave the names where they are
And the other 97 players’ privacy and right shouldn’t be violated to spare “fan agony”
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 1:44 PM CDT reply actions 2 recs
-1
These players, fairly or not, were sworn to have annonymity. To release any names is an injustice. The true problem is the rat. Our focus should be on weeding him out.
You cant possibly believe we will just move on after the names are released. Not one single person has forgiven Barry yet. People still clamor for an asterisk next to his record.
I'm Buck Melanoma. Moley Russell's wart. Not her wart. Not her wart! I'm... I'm the wart. She's my tumor. My... my growth. My... uh, my pimple. I'm Uncle Wart. Just old Buck "Wart" Russell. That's what they call me, or Melanoma Head. - Uncle Buck
by Andiamo Cuccioli on Jul 31, 2009 6:33 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
If dozens of other players
both those who were great and nobodies are shown to have used…
I think it’d be a huge step towards people getting over it.
by Allie on Jul 31, 2009 5:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a better solution: stop leaking names from a sealed court document
Novitsky’s team has more rats than a New York alley.
by Wreckard on Jul 30, 2009 1:53 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Yes, that is obviously a great idea
However, I think it’s been proven that leaks are INEVITABLE which means we are just dragging out the process. At this rate, in 45 years or so, we’ll know all of the names anyway. I’d rather not be hearing about this when I’m 70. They should amend the agreement, release the names, and get it over with. The active players who have been named, have not been fired and barely been ostracized. There is no benefit to a “sealed” document that has more leaks than old plumbing.
Believe or Leave ~Cubswynn 9/9/2008
by slcathena on Jul 30, 2009 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But what's the benefit to releasing them?
Better to try to plug the leak.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The benefit is
that it’s ONE big story. That stops after a few months, and is then done. At this rate, the scandal will still have stories to break when I’m a grandmother.
Believe or Leave ~Cubswynn 9/9/2008
by slcathena on Jul 30, 2009 4:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And they can sell more Newspaper
If I had the list I would run one name a week. Have a whole series built around it.
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Jul 30, 2009 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That argument has been refuted multiple times in this thread.
Believe or Leave ~Cubswynn 9/9/2008
by slcathena on Jul 30, 2009 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way is stopping 1 person from releasing names going to end this
Some else will eventually do it. Too many people have knowledge and secrets never stay that way.
by madcow256 on Jul 30, 2009 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it is better than the drip drip drip of names that has been happening and will continue to happen
Release them all and maybe, just maybe, baseball can finally start to move forward on the PED issue.
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
--Winston Churchill
by lookingdeadred on Jul 31, 2009 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, yes, yes.
The leaks are infuriating.
by owllover711 on Jul 30, 2009 7:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The MLB can't.
Not under this collective bargaining agreement.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
by Cub Style on Jul 30, 2009 2:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
but ESPN
and Yahoo Sports, etc can release all the names “if” they were to receive them from an “undisclosed” person. That is, of course if they do not have the entire list alrady. I am starting to think that the list has been made “unofficially” public to many outlets of journalism, and they are releasing them one at a time when they want to see a spike in ratings or readership.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Jul 30, 2009 2:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Journalism outfits
aren’t exactly air-tight ships. If ESPN or some other outlet had the whole list, then renegade ESPN staffers would be releasing parts of THAT list.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm very shocked by this
I never would have guessed! So, where’s that sarcastic font at…
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
by DTJchris on Jul 30, 2009 2:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Why were they leaked in the first place
I understand the necessity of knowing who cheated or not, but how the heck did the reporter get A-Rod’s name to begin with. Is there any legal action ARod has against the SI reporter that outed him?
by Don't Fear the Reaper on Jul 30, 2009 2:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What legal action?
The story is true. He admitted it. Libel only applies to FALSE stories.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The test was to be done without the results released
so is there legal action against the person who leaked the results (i.e. confidentially agreement) or against the test takers (MLB?)
by Don't Fear the Reaper on Jul 30, 2009 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would depend on who leaked it
if someone under the confidentiality agreement breeched it… maybe. but if it ends up in the hands of a 3rd party (the press) without any active leak from someone obligated to keep it confidential, I don’t think so.
by Allie on Jul 30, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A-Rod's beef
is with whoever gave the info to Selena Roberts. She has the right to publish information she receives.
And he has to prove there is a compelling reason to force Roberts to give up the names. And he ain’t got one.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with Worf on this
the story should be about the leaks not the players
what’s more important some baseball players that used steroids or the fact that our legal system can’t keep “sealed” documents well… sealed
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 30, 2009 3:00 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
+1
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Jul 30, 2009 3:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Both are important
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'm with Bill James on this
in 30 years nearly everyone in society is going to be on some sort of steroids to try to stay younger
i could care less if baseball players are on them
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 30, 2009 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
the parents of kids who died using steroids
might not agree with you.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's an interesting way of putting it
everything i’ve read suggests the people who died didn’t die DIRECTLY from steroid use. Weren’t most of the cases Suicides?
This is like the Judas Priest argument that their music killed people who committed suicide. The people who committed suicide had far deeper issues that may have been made worse by steroid use but certainly didn’t stem from steroid use.
They died from depression. Depression that MAY have been heightened by steroid use, but don’t confuse the two.
Now I will say the effects of steroid use before the body is developed can be long-term and those are worth noting, but steroids for adults and hgh and all the other PED’s haven’t been proven to have significant long-term health risks
In addition saying that professional athletes using steroids is what causes teen athletes to use steroids is a slippery slope argument because it leans on the Athletes being role models argument. We see athletes all the time in good and bad lights and drawing direct connections to their behaviors on youth is overly simplified. Athletes all the time make horrible financial decisions and go broke, should everyone that goes broke blame athletes for providing that example?
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 30, 2009 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
well, I think there's a distinction between behavior ...
and actions to improve performance. Kids might see steroid use as the only way they can be successful athletes — because everyone, from the top down is using.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
What a terribly ignorant post.
Because most steroid use is in secret, all the long term effects are not well known. What is known is that a direct effect of steroids is an increase in cardiovascular disease, including heart attacks and strokes. Some of these have occurred in very young people in their 20s and 30s.
Not to mention potential indirect consequences, such as blood-borne infections from dirty catheter use, embolic disease from improper use of needles, and personal dangers from associating with drug dealers.
DEJESUS!!!
by tomas21 on Jul 30, 2009 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ok...
so which is it?
“long term effects are not well known.”
“What is known is that a direct effect of steroids is an increase in cardiovascular disease, including heart attacks and strokes.”
are you citing anecdotal evidence or actual studies that have shown causation or extreme correlation?
Everything i’ve read suggests what you first state, that at this point the effects aren’t well known, but that yes consequences do exist for people abusing steroids prior to their bodies have been fully developed (which would not be the case for professional athletes)
as for all the “indirect consequences”…. i don’t even know where to begin….
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 30, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I said
ALL the long term effects are not known. It IS known, however, that there is an increase in cardiovascular disease among steroid users. Note that despite that ALL the long term effects have not been elucidated, one can still know that an increase in cardiovascular disease is one of them.
I have seen nothing stating that taking steroids after you’ve reached adulthood is somehow protective of a person developing cardiovascular disease. Again, ALL the long term effects will be difficult to come by, since 1. most people don’t admit to using, and 2. you can;t exactly do a double blind study on this.
If increasing your chance of getting a heart attack or stroke is not enough to dissuade one from using, there is also liver cancer, aseptic necrosis of the hip (bo jackson hip), tendon/ligament rupture, not to mention “shrinkage” and growing boobs.
And why you eye roll over the indirect consequences is beyond me. It is a fact that people you inject drugs illicetly have a much higher incidence of viral hepatitis, HIV as well as endocarditis. Tell me where you’d like to begin to refute that.
DEJESUS!!!
by tomas21 on Jul 30, 2009 9:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are two points here that have to be balanced.
When it comes to secondary effects of steroids, there are contexts in which they matter and those in which they don’t. If we’re talking, generally, about a future where everyone is juicing up legally, then all that stuff doesn’t matter. If it’s in the mainstream we can reasonably figure out whether steroids cause depression or depression causes steroid use, that sort of thing. And research can be done out in the open on cardiovascular risks, what the appropriate age is to take them, that sort of thing. Personally I’m pretty paranoid about putting chemicals in my body, so I’m not necessarily comfortable with this sort of future, but I think we’d at least eliminate the secondary effects in this case.
On the other hand, when baseball players do it now they contribute to an atmosphere where more people are likely to do them dangerously. Although Barry Bonds had really smart trainers working out for him, the high school kid that feels like he needs to bulk up to get a scholarship won’t. Though many MLB players can probably take steroids quite safely and jet-setting executives can probably do cocaine pretty safely, the people they influence mostly can’t.
When we’re talking about policy, the idea of bringing steroid use into the light, we can largely forget about secondary effects. When we talk about players using them in the current culture and under the current framework of regulation, we have to consider them.
by aldimond on Jul 30, 2009 9:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's ridiculous ...
They’re both important (as Worf said below). But finding out whether players CHEATED and BROKE THE LAW is much more important.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No.
The ends don’t justify the means.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Jul 30, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, it may not be what you meant
But it read to me as it’s more important to know who cheated and broke the law than it is to uphold the sanctity of a sealed document.
I don’t fault the media for releasing the information so much as I do whoever leaked the names in the first place.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Jul 30, 2009 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is what I meant
Usually when “sanctity” is invoked to defend anything, I roll my eyes. It’s like using tradition to defend racial segregation. Notice I said “like” not “the same.”
But if we want to use “sanctity” as an arguing point, what about the sanctity of age-old records? What about the sanctity of the game? If you’re saying sanctity is more important for legal documents than it is for baseball, I see your point — but I disagree.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 3:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright, I'll use different wording
Sealed documents are sealed by law.
Essentially, you’re saying that it’s ok for someone to break the law by leaking a story.
I don’t agree with that at all.
This is somewhat analagous to offering someone immunity and then prosecuting, anyway. Aside from moral/legal implications, it doesn’t set a real good precedent for offering immunity, does it?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Jul 30, 2009 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
well ...
these players broke the law (steroids are illegal) to enhance their performance. I happen to think it’s important that we know who used and who broke the law — more important than not breaking the seal (and the law) with the documents.
This is totally my opinion, and I understand how someone (you) would disagree. But I don’t want cheating players protected by a sealed document.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Problem is, the tests were taken with the explicit understanding that names would not be revealed
That sets a nasty precedent, and not just for baseball.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Jul 30, 2009 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure about the precedent business
This is a pretty unique case where the list was supposed to be destroyed and wasn’t. In any case that could be affected by the precedent, I doubt the list would still exist.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 4:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting data is really hard to destroy.
It’s not like the testers wrote the results down in a little black notebook. The data is on computers, and it’s ridiculously easy to copy. If just one interested person does a “cp steroid_test_results /mnt/fd0” it’s all over.
by aldimond on Jul 30, 2009 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I said not just for baseball
Anonymous tips are important in crime solving . . . this is somewhat analogous.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Jul 30, 2009 7:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow....
so you must really not care about personal privacy laws at all….
wow
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 30, 2009 4:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
first of all ...
you can’t make a sweeping statement about anyone based on one opinion. With that kind of logic, I could say you don’t care about cheating at all. But I doubt that’s really true.
by elgato on Jul 30, 2009 4:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nope
you could draw the conclusion that i care about the government breaking the law as much (or moreso) as i care about individuals breaking the law
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jul 30, 2009 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is there any indication that all the players on the list
actually broke the law by obtaining medication which is illegal without a doctor’s prescription, or were some of them using legal substances which are on the banned list from MLB?
"I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said." ~William F. Buckley, Jr.
by Goodie1969 on Jul 30, 2009 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is a good case study for J-school students
But for the sake of answering the post’s author, I believe the list should be made public in its entirety, discipline those on it, and move on.
One day I hope to come up with something worthy of this space.
by chilango2 on Jul 30, 2009 3:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What I'd like to see
I’d love for them to find the person leaking these names and prosecute them.
One of my closest friends happens to work in admitting at a hospital in California a lot of celebrities go to.
If she’s ever found to have leaked some personal info she can be heavily fined.
You sign agreements up and down the whazoo.
I work in an industry with similar constraints. If I see anyone I even slightly no on paperwork I have to pass it on.
For example let’s say I saw the name Al Yellon. Even though I actually never have physically met Al if I screwed something up and they found out I frequent his site no matter how innocent I would be in doo doo up to my ears.
(please note I have never seen Al’s name here. Actually it’s highly unlikely since it involves issues that are 99.9 percent female related)
I had to delete my twitter account. But you can still find me at fanfiction.net under puckish prosecutor.
by cubstoseriesby100 on Jul 30, 2009 3:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Babble babble babble babble
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Jul 30, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
would a player that has had there name released be able to sue
because all the information was supposed to be destroyed?
i agree that the whole steroid issue is a huge black eye for baseball but i think it’s unfair that the 2003 test results are leaked when they were supposed to be destroyed. even if someone used steroids it doesn’t make it okay to breach that agreement. It’s just too bad that the players can’t trust in something that should have been confidential.
Forget the list. No discipline for those on it. That would be enforcing rules ex-post facto (if I remember high school government correctly) which would be messed up. This might be one of the bigger controversies in baseball history but there are plenty of other blemishes on the record. I have been entertained the last ten years and although I am hoping to see baseball free of PED’s in the future, this era will and all who played in it will always be under question, named or unnamed.
"They give each other a kiss after every pitch. He kisses her on the strikes and she kisses him on the balls." - Harry Caray
by Hawk8 on Jul 30, 2009 3:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
on what grounds?
if the allegations are true you can’t sue for defamation or slander. i think that case would be dismissed right away. the only way this is in court is for criminal proceedings.
by burncruisin on Jul 31, 2009 3:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um, how about the 4th Amendment?
Or for that matter, HIPAA?
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Aug 2, 2009 11:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Legally the list shouldn't even exsist
If I was the players, I would storm the MLB headquarters and Players Union headquarters with pitch forks and torchs, raid the files and burn that damn list. I would then start a lawsuit agaisnt the company that performed the tests.
The players agreed to take the test under the guise that no names would exsist and that only the numbers would be released. The company that performed the test sent not just the numbers but the names of the players who failed. How would you like to be told at your job, “Hey we want you to take a urine test so we can see if there is a problem with drugs in the company, but don’t worry no one will know the results and if there is a problem a company wide program will be start to help anyone that wants it.” and then the next week your name is posted on the bulletin board in the lunch room stating that you tested postive for not only Cocaine but also Meth.
The final thing that gets me is that the leak is either from your MLB or MLB players Union. These are your boss or your brothers and one of them is selling you out. That is the worst part of the deal.
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Jul 30, 2009 3:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree 100% with you
it is bull the list had names on it in the first place.
by Don't Fear the Reaper on Jul 30, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't "burn the list".
You can burn a piece of paper that the list is printed on. It won’t stop any leaks.
The leak came from a person. Maybe a person working for MLB or MLBPU, or for a firm they hired. The organizations never made the decision to leak the list, a rogue individual that had access to the list did. Maybe if the firm wasn’t supposed to ever link names to test results they are a legitimate target of anger.
Personally, I have to take anything released with a grain of salt. There’s no way for us to verify that the leaker has the access he claims to have, or that he’s telling the truth. The Times is supposed to be doing that, but the media has been fooled before.
by aldimond on Jul 30, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok then burn the person
We haven’t had a good bonfire in years. Turn it into a pay-per-view thing, sell tickets!
We put the rat on the logs and light’em up!
The sun will shine in '69
by gaclaudy on Jul 31, 2009 9:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i was hoping sosa and his translator would be the person to do this
Arod won’t ever do it because he’s too afraid of what people will think.
All they need is one career AAA player that had a cup of coffee in the bigs in 2003 to get named and then I think there will be a lawsuit
"They give each other a kiss after every pitch. He kisses her on the strikes and she kisses him on the balls." - Harry Caray
by Hawk8 on Jul 30, 2009 3:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Names
What we know of the list of 103….
Mark McGwire
Rafael Palmiero
Jason Giambi
Sammy Sosa
Manny Ramirez
David Ortiz
Barry Bonds
7 names, 96 to go…
Cubs will win 79 to 83 games. Season has been over for weeks. St. Louis will eventually run away with this division. And you can print it. BLou (7/21/09)
by BLou on Jul 30, 2009 3:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Oops, make that 8 names
Miguel Tejada
Cubs will win 79 to 83 games. Season has been over for weeks. St. Louis will eventually run away with this division. And you can print it. BLou (7/21/09)
by BLou on Jul 30, 2009 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As usual you are wrong.
McGwire, Giambi, Tejada and Palmiero have never been linked to the 2003 list. The players known to be on the list are Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, Sammy Sosa, Jason Grimsley and David Segui.
The others are suspected of steroid use based on other reasons.
by Wreckard on Jul 30, 2009 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Palmiero wasn't on the list
he just failed a test after the change in drug testing policies took place
by Don't Fear the Reaper on Jul 30, 2009 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The steroid apologists are starting to surface
Why? Because their favorite ballplayer(s) are showing up on these lists. Case in point is Sam-ME “Corky” Steroid in Chicago. For some, now steroids are viewed as overrated and not so bad.
Pass the barf bag.
Cubs will win 79 to 83 games. Season has been over for weeks. St. Louis will eventually run away with this division. And you can print it. BLou (7/21/09)
by BLou on Jul 30, 2009 3:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Where does this fit into this discussion, exactly?
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Jul 30, 2009 4:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pass the barf bag.
Too late.
"I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said." ~William F. Buckley, Jr.
by Goodie1969 on Jul 30, 2009 5:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For the record
I agree that in a perfect world there would be no leaks and legal confidentiality would mean something. However, it seems crystal clear that that is not going to happen. Since leaks are inevitable, I figure one big push is better than death by a thousand cuts.
Believe or Leave ~Cubswynn 9/9/2008
by slcathena on Jul 30, 2009 4:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't disagree
I’d be inclined to take your position if I were in the union in 2003 – especially if I knew that I was clean.
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Jul 30, 2009 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If anyone had the true list
it would be online somewhere.
If the names are going to come out, I’d like for them to come out all at once, just so we can start dealing with it. The slow leak (someone called it Chinese water torture earlier… and its not far off) is really making it worse.
I understand the legal issues around it…but selfishly, I’d like for it to just be over.
by Allie on Jul 30, 2009 4:09 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Lawyers have the true list
You must mean journalists and shady internet-types (like us)
by madcow256 on Jul 30, 2009 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is what I meant
if anyone inclined to release it actually had the whole list… it’d be out by now.
by Allie on Jul 30, 2009 4:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I personally think there is some dude out there with it
who is selling a name or two at a time to newspapers for a fee. Every time he needs some cash, a new name comes out.
I’m only half kidding.
Believe or Leave ~Cubswynn 9/9/2008
by slcathena on Jul 30, 2009 5:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except only the NYT is getting names
I’m willing to concede that perhaps the NYT itself isn’t sitting on the list, but certainly their source is. I’ll bet the NYT phone rings once a month with that “name of the month”
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Jul 30, 2009 7:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now THAT I would believe.
Believe or Leave ~Cubswynn 9/9/2008
by slcathena on Jul 30, 2009 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ESPN is reporting
a quote from Donald Fehr basically saying that the NYT’s source is a lawyer
by burncruisin on Jul 31, 2009 3:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah I think at this point they know its a lawyer in the case
But that lawyer is probably covering his ass and making sure he won’t get caught. I suppose if they wanted to find the source they could make the writer give up his source and threaten him with jail time if he doesn’t give the guy up.
The best chance to get the whole list is if the investiagtion into the leak gets really close to finding the guy, and he just says screw it and gives up the whole list.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Jul 31, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
,,,,,,,,,,,,
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Jul 30, 2009 4:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
the occasional dropping of a name from the tested positive list
is baseball’s version of Chinese water torture
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
--Winston Churchill
by lookingdeadred on Jul 31, 2009 9:30 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
