Bren there are 2 reasons why players cant come out and take drug tests.
1. Im sure their are quite a few superstars who are more than willing to take drug tests to prove their innocence but they arent allowed to. Its against the Union rules. Just like in football, I remember when a rookie(forget who) a few years ago was holding out but still wanted to practice but couldnt. If its against Union Rules and the collective bargaining agreement, you arent allowed to do it.
2. Its against players "ethics" to come out and take a drug test. If lets say someone like A-rod or Ryan Howard came out and say im taking a drug test right now to prove my innocence. Its basically like rating out other players, because any player who refuses to take a voluntary one after those players do are going to have many fingers pointing at them because even though they have the right not to it makes them look guilty.
Mitchell Report
-
Padres
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4822
- Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 1:00 am
- Location: Wells, Maine
- Name: Jim Berger
I am very familiar with the Collective Bargaining Agreement between MLB and the players union and I can assure all that there is nothing in there prohibiting an individual from taking any medical test he feels is in his best interest. [If you are bored and have a few hours, read it here: http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/cba_english.pdf] Nor is there in the attached MLB Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program Agreement [ http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/jda.pdf ] which went into effect in the Spring of 2006 and is scheduled to terminate at the same time as the current Basic Collective Bargaining Agreement.Brewers wrote:Bren there are 2 reasons why players cant come out and take drug tests.
1. Im sure their are quite a few superstars who are more than willing to take drug tests to prove their innocence but they arent allowed to. Its against the Union rules. Just like in football, I remember when a rookie(forget who) a few years ago was holding out but still wanted to practice but couldnt. If its against Union Rules and the collective bargaining agreement, you arent allowed to do it.
2. Its against players "ethics" to come out and take a drug test. If lets say someone like A-rod or Ryan Howard came out and say im taking a drug test right now to prove my innocence. Its basically like rating out other players, because any player who refuses to take a voluntary one after those players do are going to have many fingers pointing at them because even though they have the right not to it makes them look guilty.
While I have not seen major league baseball players union's written rules yet (thanks - you have provided me a new opportunity) I doubt very much that there is a written rule that prohibits a member from taking any medical test that he feels is in his best interest. I'll let you know for sure as soon as I can secure a copy.
There clearly is an unwritten agreement between individual players fostered by union leadership to not share the results of any tests that are not required under the Collective Bargaining Agreement that almost every player does quietly abide with ...
Last edited by Padres on Fri Dec 14, 2007 9:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Indeed, the letter of the law isn't going to be the issue, it's the perception created. Also, coming out and voluntarily testing yourself is essentially placing the presumption of guilt on yourself, and it's easy from our perspective to say that its no big deal but imagine you worked in a retail store and everyday your boss publicly checked your pockets to make sure you didn't steal from the register. It's the same idea I think, no one likes the feeling that they should have to prove they are innocent.
First, it's not placing the presumption of guilt upon yourself. What you're doing is setting an example, saying that you know there is a problem in the sport at large but your integrity matters and you're willing to go to any lengths to prove it and set an example for others to follow. That's not placing guilt on yourself, that's turning yourself into an icon. Captain Anti-Roid
Second, you're drawing parallels between 16yr old kids working the Gap and MLB players making millions of dollars a year... that's a bit of a reach.
But if you want to go that route, fine. Let's make that store a little more like MLB. It's a store which has had a major problem with employees stealing, not just from the cash register, but also by overcharging customers so that the customers don't trust you or them. You have a pretty good idea of some of the guys doing it, but you're pretty sure others are doing it as well, you just don't know who. You sell a one of a kind product so the customers keep coming to you, but they don't trust you and you have to wonder if the integrity of your business is effecting your bottom line and even if it isn't, the press rips you for it pretty close to daily. Oh and you can't fire the employees.
So what are the employers options?
Second, you're drawing parallels between 16yr old kids working the Gap and MLB players making millions of dollars a year... that's a bit of a reach.
But if you want to go that route, fine. Let's make that store a little more like MLB. It's a store which has had a major problem with employees stealing, not just from the cash register, but also by overcharging customers so that the customers don't trust you or them. You have a pretty good idea of some of the guys doing it, but you're pretty sure others are doing it as well, you just don't know who. You sell a one of a kind product so the customers keep coming to you, but they don't trust you and you have to wonder if the integrity of your business is effecting your bottom line and even if it isn't, the press rips you for it pretty close to daily. Oh and you can't fire the employees.
So what are the employers options?
But your parallel falls apart because you're thinking about it from the store's perspective. The question is why don't the players (who in this example are the employees) volunteer themselves. Your entire challenge to my parallel was asking about what the store could do, but we aren't talking about the store, we're talking about the employees. The only way for them to prove they aren't culpable would be to walk around with their pockets turned outwards, which is not really feasible for a baseball player's urine. It's a great idea in theory but in practice it falls apart. Let's be honest, how many times were all these guys mentioned in the Mitchell report tested (in the minors if not the majors) and how many of them have actually failed a drug test? That means that testing itself isn't foolproof, which means that just because a drug test calls you clean doesn't make you clean.
Jake,
Those last two sentences might be the dumbest I've ever read from you. Anyone with half a brain knows that an absence of a positive test means nothing because MLB isn't testing for everything. The list of products that can't be detected in a urine test is lengthy and starts off with everyone's favorite... HGH.
Those last two sentences might be the dumbest I've ever read from you. Anyone with half a brain knows that an absence of a positive test means nothing because MLB isn't testing for everything. The list of products that can't be detected in a urine test is lengthy and starts off with everyone's favorite... HGH.
That's the point. You set an example and force others into action.Brewers wrote:Bren if superstars started coming out and voluntarily took blood tests for the MLB, and then the media started asking other superstars, "he took one so why dont you" People are still going to point fingers even though hes going to use the answer because I dont have to.
What exactly are they worried that they'll find? Drugs? The next time someone makes a good point on WFAN (or any sports radio station) will e the first time.
Athletes in other sports do blood testing. The first thing you do after winning a tennis tournament or stage in a cycling race, a road race or an Olympic event is take a drug test. Blood and urine.
Olympians and professional cyclists can be tested any time of year on very short notice. If you miss the test, it's treated as a positive. That's the price for competing at the highest level.
Athletes in other sports do blood testing. The first thing you do after winning a tennis tournament or stage in a cycling race, a road race or an Olympic event is take a drug test. Blood and urine.
Olympians and professional cyclists can be tested any time of year on very short notice. If you miss the test, it's treated as a positive. That's the price for competing at the highest level.
This isn't a court of law, it's a matter of perception. Like it or not, the perception is there and the players have to work to reverse it. They're not doing that though and, in fact, the players and union have fought efforts to reverse it at many points in the process.Cardinals wrote:INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
I'm still waiting to hear what Jake is afraid they'll find that's such an invasion of privacy.
You're sounding like a guy that me and JP remember from the Cardinals message board on espn.com. Every time the Cardinals lost, it was "Oh we suck our season is over." You throwing every player under the bus and saying you're guilty until proven innocent is bullshit. You amaze me, you really do. If you're going to act like this, then why don't you pick another sport to follow because if I thought the worst of every single player, I know I wouldn't watch that sport, hence why I don't watch the NBA
No, you guys are saying that I'm saying "Guilty until proven innocent". I'm saying they're all under a shadow of guilt generated by their actionas and inactions and they need to remove that shadow. The only way to do that is to prove their innocence.
They're certainly guilty of allowing things to reach the point that it has.
They're certainly guilty of allowing things to reach the point that it has.
