In a word? YES.
Look, the only reason that this evidence got out was because someone was out to destroy A-Rod. A-Rod failed the 2003 test, not a 2007 test. The 2003 tests were made to determine HOW MANY players took steroids, not WHO took steroids. A-Rod was supposed to simply be a statistic, helping MLB determine IF they should follow through with steroid testing. The simple fact is that the test was taken under the assumption that those involved would remain anonymous.
The best analogy one can make is to a clinical medical test. In those tests, the patients are always kept anonymous, and it is their results that are used to come up with a conclusion. Likewise, in this example, the names of the players should have remained anonymous. Only their results should have been made public. I don't think this is illegal, but it is extremely unethical to release names of those involved in clinical trials. Whoever is responsible for releasing A-Rod's name should be barred from practicing medicine. You could even make an argument that they acted more unethically than A-Rod in their actions.
One last thing. Jon Heyman of SI writes that the MLB Players Union is to blame for A-Rod's name getting out there. Maybe this is true, but it doesn't change the fact that A-Rod is a victim. If he failed a test in 2007, then his name should have been made public. But the fact that his name was made public when he was essentially part of a clinical study is bullshit. And someone, not A-Rod, should lose their job over this.
Posts
8 comments:
clinical study my ass. its more like the cops putting a camera on a drug dealing corner to see if they need to assign more cops to the area. if one of those drug dealers gets outed for being a drug dealer, isnt it called something else...JUSTICE?
-BH
I don't think A-Rod should lose his job or the right to play baseball, if he comes forward and comments on the matter. His reputation is forever tarnished for the leak of information.
I agree that the results of the study should never have been released - but now that the information IS out there and that mistake has been made - I think to be fair to A-Rod, all 104 names should be released.
The only way to cleanse baseball of the steroid era and brighten its image is to illustrate everyone connected with PEDs in that report. As long as A-Rod is clean now, I think his performance and the current performance of any former using player can still be respected.
BH, drug dealer isn't the best analogy because these guys are users, not dealers. How would you feel if they arrested the guys buying and using the drugs on said corners in your example?
they do arrest those guys. all the time. your analogy to a clinical study implies there are some controls on teh situation and that it is a sanctioned event. steroid use clearly is not.
i dont think arod should get fired, but only because apparently every single every other person in the world used them as well, and there wouldnt be any players left if they all got fired
and the dealer/user distinction in that scenario is irrelevent, they are both criminals under the law. the point of a survaillence would be to see how much criminal activity is going on, using and dealing and the other associated crimes. if there was a lot going on, more police resources would be assigned to the area.
thats essentially what happened with MLB, the threshold was reached to trigger mandatory league-wide testing. But that shouldnt excuse the people that failed tests before league-wide testing was instituted. what they were doing was still illegal and violated league rules at the time.
The SSDP you of '03 would ro-sham-bo you if he met you today, BH.
'03 BH would be too stoned to care.
So BH is like John Mccain according to Howard Dean, "The 2000 John Mccain wouldn't vote for this John Mccain"
Post a Comment