Unsurprising, Yet Still Depressing, News

The New York Times:

Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz, the sluggers who propelled the Boston Red Sox to end an 86-year World Series championship drought and to capture another title three years later, were among the roughly 100 Major League Baseball players to test positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003, according to lawyers with knowledge of the results. …

The information about Ramirez and Ortiz emerged through interviews with multiple lawyers and others connected to the pending litigation. The lawyers spoke anonymously because the testing information is under seal by a court order. The lawyers did not identify which drugs were detected.

Unlike Ramirez, who recently served a 50-game suspension for violating baseball’s drug policy, Ortiz had not previously been linked to performance-enhancing substances.

Scott Boras, the agent for Ramirez, did not respond to telephone and e-mail messages seeking comment.

Asked about the 2003 drug test on Thursday in Boston, Ortiz shrugged. “I’m not talking about that anymore,” he said. “I have no comment.”

Of course, that's not entirely true. Ortiz has linked himself to performance-enhancing drugs in the past, saying he discontinued use of a Dominican protein shake that may have, unbeknownst to him, contained banned substances.

Still, this sucks.

It's also the first time Ramirez has been tied to PEDs while a member of the Red Sox, though that's not particularly surprising either.

96 comments… add one

  • If you guys need me I’ll be in the bathroom slitting my wrists.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 12:23 pm
  • On the one hand, this will finally end the stupid debate between dumb Red Sox fans and dumb Yankee fans about whose team was worse.
    They both had steroid users, OK? just like every other team in baseball. Awesome.
    But I really hoped Ortiz wasn’t on the list. I still hope the ’03 positive test was what led him to stop using the shake, and that he told the truth when he said over and over again that he’s never done PEDs. I hope. It doesn’t mean I believe.

    Paul SF July 30, 2009, 12:29 pm
  • Sorry wrong thread:
    Ooof. And another one down.
    Does this bury Papi further or free him? Some of you hammered me, but it did seem like he he was trying too hard. Maybe now he can move on?
    It will be interesting to see how WEEI spins this. I’m guessing they turn on Selig.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 12:31 pm
  • “unbeknownst to him”
    I think we can shed some serious doubt on this statement now too.

    sam-YF July 30, 2009, 12:31 pm
  • Oh, come on Ath. Only the most naive would think that the Sox didn’t have users. I have taken a hard line stance about accusing players of steroid use in the absence of evidence beyond statistics, but now that the names are out I have to admit my enduring and full suspicion of the players in question over the past few years.
    Those suspicions are why I never thought that accusing the Yankees of “harboring”, as some snide and stupid Sox fans have done, or sanctimoniously asserting that the Sox were clean, was a reasonable or defensible position.
    Another shitty day in long line of shitty days. Not just for the Sox (though today is primarily about the Sox), but for baseball.

    SF July 30, 2009, 12:33 pm
  • shocker.

    IronHorse July 30, 2009, 12:35 pm
  • I think we can shed some serious doubt on this statement now too.
    Right. All 2003 players knew they had gotten caught. He’s as much a liar as anyone else. Gammons might actually have a stroke on air. Sorry SFs. I feel for you. This is no fun. Welcome to our world.
    No team was unaffected. What is it now, 101 names still unknown – so hard to lose track. All of them, please. Or else we’re going on like this for another decade.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 12:36 pm
  • There is nothing to spin here. Who cares about WEEI?

    SF July 30, 2009, 12:38 pm
  • SF, when did I say I was shocked by this news? I’ve always had suspicions because, frankly, nobody would surprise me at this point.
    After Manny tested positive, I said that only three players would really disappoint me at this point: Jeter, Pujols, and Ortiz. Just because I’m crushed by this news doesn’t mean I’m surprised, or had any misconceptions that the 2004/2007 Sox teams were 100% clean.
    Hell, when Manny tested positive I was the one saying that of course the 2004/2007 teams weren’t completely clean. As I recall you were the one saying “We can’t talk about that!”

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 12:38 pm
  • Not really surprising, but also not really damaging. After A-Rod and Manny were outed, I think people have become numb to it all. I think maybe Pujols, Schilling, or Jeter are the only players that could be outed that would more seriously damage the sport.

    AndrewYF July 30, 2009, 12:38 pm
  • I agree with the above – shocker.

    Brad July 30, 2009, 12:39 pm
  • I hear you Ath.

    SF July 30, 2009, 12:40 pm
  • Andrew:
    I think the damage was mitigated by Manny, A-Rod. For sure. But this is absolutely damaging. To the Sox, to their fans, and to the game. It is not, perhaps, as damaging as it could have been, but this is not a good day for the sport and one of the storied franchises.
    There is damage.

    SF July 30, 2009, 12:43 pm
  • First Palmiero, then Manny, now Ortiz.
    Untainted heroes left: Nolan Ryan, Pedro Martinez, Julio Franco

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 12:44 pm
  • This is going to sound convenient, coming as it does now, but my ambivalence on steroids and PEDs has really grown over the course of the last year.
    I think a lot of it has to do with the outraged moralization from the sportswriters. It’s so over the top. A lot of it also has to do with the fact that PEDs have been used and abused in baseball since the early 1900s, leading me to believe that there really is no “PED Era,” except insofar as the specific type of PEDs has changed over time. And this has provided me a measure of peace in the fact that this is how it has always been, and probably, to some extent, how it will always be. The records, the HOFers, the great players — they were still great, both in the context of their era and throughout history.
    Would I have enjoyed David Ortiz beating the Yankees in 2004 any more if he had been clean (and maybe he was. Who knows)? No. I still cherish those memories, and I always will. Do I root against A-Rod any harder now because he’s a steroid user? No.
    Ultimately, this sport is something we use to entertain ourselves, divert our minds from the cares and worries of the world. Why do we insist on turning it into something else to worry about? I’m going to enjoy the game, and acknowledge that it’s played by flawed humans who do not live up to our hopes and dreams for them.

    Paul SF July 30, 2009, 12:44 pm
  • Who cares about WEEI?
    A lot of SFs who had their heads in the sand and made it a YF vs. SF. Or all those SFs who have given A-Rod and Manny a lot of venom.
    By the way, Pujols wouldn’t surprise me (nor if he lied about his age). Jeter would.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 12:44 pm
  • Or Mo! But seriously.
    I don’t know if I agree with the “Schilling”, per se. I think it might only affect the Red Sox fans..
    Pujols, Jeter, Mo, and maybe the young ‘uns (Longoria) (though obviously they wouldn’t be on the 2003 list) would suck..

    Lar July 30, 2009, 12:44 pm
  • David Ortiz is one of the most loved players in the game, by all fans of the sport: just like Jeter, just like Pujols.
    This is absolutely damaging to the game.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 12:45 pm
  • Right, I forgot Rivera. That would really suck. But it would explain his ridiculous longevity.

    AndrewYF July 30, 2009, 12:46 pm
  • Of course it’s not surprising. The three thoughts sprung immediately to my mind:
    1. Another nail in the coffin of the Mitchell Report’s credibility.
    2. Does this light a fire under Theo to get a blockbuster deal done to take the spotlight off this story?
    3. I will be interesting to see if A-Rod continues to endure the “You Used Steroids!” chants at Fenway.

    Mark - YF July 30, 2009, 12:46 pm
  • Jeter would actually be surprising to me, only because he’s not a power hitter. Pujols would be shocking/damaging, but not surprising, at this point. Which really sucks.

    Lar July 30, 2009, 12:46 pm
  • Let me ask now: Do you guys think that Papi’s struggles this year are due to this weighing on him?
    The Boston media isn’t going to let him get off like the LA media did Manny. He must know that.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 12:47 pm
  • Paul – I’m pretty sure I said most of the same things when A-Rod was outed. Guys like him, Manny, even Clemens will eventually be elected to the HoF (and I predict Pete Rose will be inducted, but only posthumously), and we can finally put it all behind us and just enjoy the damn game.

    AndrewYF July 30, 2009, 12:48 pm
  • I’m not sure Rob, though it’s certainly a possibility. But why would it suddenly weigh on him now, compared with past years?
    Andrew, I think Rose should be inducted, but I doubt it will ever happen. Shit ain’t fair.
    The other names, please. Let’s get this all over with.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 12:51 pm
  • Point #1 is excellent Mark. A lot of SFs, and other fans, I know used that as a cudgel over my head. And me trying to come back with “But, but, NY trainers” was dismissed out-of-hand. How can they claim it was a comprehensive report when it outed some people but left so many others untouched?
    Congress really needs to make that list public if MLB can’t or won’t. This is awful. And imagine if Bonds isn’t on that list. The media, as usual, doing a half-ass job and years late.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 12:52 pm
  • I think Rose should be inducted but ya, only after he dies.
    In NYT, apparently Sosa was only “outed” in June, though I guess that was the assumption anyhow. It speaks to something that no one here even brought him up in either case..

    Lar July 30, 2009, 12:53 pm
  • One more point on Mitchell – of course he saw the 2003 list and didn’t include it. How could he not have?
    These people are scumbags. I’m really very angry. I love this sport and they made their money and turned their heads to history.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 12:54 pm
  • Rose?
    Never. Apples and oranges.

    SF July 30, 2009, 12:54 pm
  • *beat, beat, beat*
    Another one bites the dust. And another one gone, and another one gone. Another one bites the dust.

    Devine July 30, 2009, 12:57 pm
  • Rob, I was under the impression that leaking information from the 2003 report is illegal, which is why a figure like Mitchell wasn’t allowed to do that. Lawyers, however, are scum and don’t care.
    You’re right SF, it is apples and oranges: PED users cheated. Pete Rose did not.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 12:57 pm
  • Rose violated a rule posted in every clubhouse, Ath. And then lied about it.
    Rose is scum.

    SF July 30, 2009, 12:59 pm
  • As argued here earlier this year, Ortiz was high on my list of suspects because of the spike in his performance from MN to Boston. I suspect A-Rod probably used for a long time because he did not have that overnight juicer-jump during his mlb career. Whether it’s fair or not, the two things that are exceedingly fishy to me are: incredibly high (and even increasing) performance past one’s mid-thirties and major jumps in power performance.

    IronHorse July 30, 2009, 12:59 pm
  • I’m actually fairly certain that Mitchell didn’t see the list since it was sealed, he had NO subpoena power at all.
    Also, not a single person I have ever spoken to is, or ever was, under the impression the Mitchell report was comprehensive. Again, he had no power to make anyone speak to him, he could only go on voluntary testimony.
    This is a sad day, but not surprising.
    Incidentally, I think the fact that Papi is so widely loved will help him, right or wrong, the masses might believe his accidental story if that’s what he sticks with.
    Arod got so much more attention simply because people don’t like him.

    LocklandSF July 30, 2009, 1:01 pm
  • You’re right, Atheose, but a courageous commissioner would have said “Screw it. We need to come clean on everything.”
    Of course, Selig isn’t that guy.
    I want people looking at their testimonies in front of Congress. As I remember they really pushed how comprehensive the Report was. If they’re going to witch hunt the players they damn well need to be turning over every stone to go after management.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 1:03 pm
  • I don’t know if I buy the “suddenly weighing on him” hypothesis, but one thing that might make it plausible is that the ’03 list was, until this past pre-season, under wraps. Post A-Rod, everyone on it must have felt that it was only a matter of time. Whether this explains anything vis-a-vis Ortiz, who knows.

    IronHorse July 30, 2009, 1:04 pm
  • You’re right, Lockland, on the subpoenas. But they really did try to use the Report to stop the inquiries and move on. And
    Nice work from the Car Salesman. He really saved the game.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 1:05 pm
  • I agree completely Rob. But that’s not Mitchell’s fault.
    Lockland, ARod got more attention and hate because he’s arguably the best player in the game. Ortiz isn’t. I do expect Ortiz to be extremely vocal about everything though, compared to Manny. At least I hope he’s vocal about what happened.
    SF, I guess there’s a generational disconnect regarding Rose, since I’ve grown up in the steroid age. Steroids to me seem like a far worse offense, but again that’s probably because I wasn’t around to remember Rose getting banned.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 1:06 pm
  • It will be interesting to see how WEEI spins this.
    Here’s how: Only Red Sox players named by the NEW YORK Times.
    Which is hilariously stupid, given that A-Rod and Sosa have already been outed from the exact same list, never mind that the source being from NY has zero relevance in the veracity of the report. But yeah, that’s what it’s going to be.
    I am curious as to the reaction to Ortiz when he steps into the batter’s box tonight. I’d give him a standing ovation.

    Paul SF July 30, 2009, 1:08 pm
  • That was my point earlier in the season, IH. A-Rod getting named showed how leaky that dam was. It was a matter of time. Now how long before the rest get named? You know, cause Selena Roberts is such a comprehensive reporter.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 1:08 pm
  • A guy in my office is already using the “New York Times is completely unreliable” angle, although I doubt he actually believes that.
    Paul – a sarcastic standing ovation?

    AndrewYF July 30, 2009, 1:11 pm
  • Tonight? He’s stepping in to the batters box in less than an hour. This should be interesting…

    LocklandSF July 30, 2009, 1:11 pm
  • Actually, he’s been scratched, Lowell to DH today. Funny how that works…

    LocklandSF July 30, 2009, 1:13 pm
  • Only Red Sox players named by the NEW YORK Times.
    Part-owner of the Sox. And George Mitchell as a minority owner. Good luck with that WEEI.
    I’d give him a standing ovation.
    Care to reconcile that feeling with how Manny and A-Rod are treated in Beantown?

    Rob July 30, 2009, 1:13 pm
  • Oh shit we have a day game, Lockland? That means I get to watch it.
    I think he’ll get a standing ovation. He’s our Papi, and we stick with him no matter what.
    By the way: today is Selig’s 75 birthday.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 1:14 pm
  • IBM, the lineup on MLB.com shows Ortiz as the DH, Lowell at 3B.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 1:15 pm
  • Sorry, meant to say Lockland, not IBM.
    Rob, check out SOSH. Many of the comments are like the one below:
    Fuck him. If he cheated, which it appears he did, he’s no better than any of the others.
    He deserves to be ridiculed just like all the rest.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 1:18 pm
  • Anyone else bothered that a list that was supposed to be confidential per an agreement between a union and management is not being kept that way?

    Nick-YF July 30, 2009, 1:18 pm
  • Re: The Mitchell Report – the fact remains that:
    1. Selig in his extremely finite wisdom saw fit to put a senior officer of he Red Sox in charge of the investigation. We were fed a steady of stream about how this man of impeccable character who single-handedly brought peace to Northern Ireland would never let that influence his findings, even after the report named and shamed several high profile Yankees and only a few former an “fallen out of favor” Sox. Whether or not Mitchell was impartial, the decision to place him in charge of the commission in the first place looked poor at the time, and absolutely egregious now, in context of what has come out since then. To me, it’s one of the biggest missteps of Selig’s atrocious tenure.
    2. Reporters who don’t have a fraction of the resources or power that Mitchell had at his disposal have done a better job of getting to the truth.

    Mark - YF July 30, 2009, 1:19 pm
  • “And George Mitchell as a minority owner.”
    FALSE. He holds what amounts to be a ceremonial title as “Director” and nothing more.

    LocklandSF July 30, 2009, 1:20 pm
  • Rob:
    funny that you crapped on the EEIers for maybe going after Selig considering the gist of most of your comments!
    Irony is not dead!

    SF July 30, 2009, 1:21 pm
  • Care to reconcile that feeling with how Manny and A-Rod are treated in Beantown?
    This isn’t a serious question, is it?
    Manny forced his way out of town by threatening to sit out the rest of a pennant race so he could get more money on the free agent market. I would still give him a standing O because of what he did for the Sox, but I no longer like him and I no longer root for him, and I totally understand the view of those who would not applaud him in a return at-bat.
    And A-Rod is the best player for the Yankees, who also has said and done a number of incredibly stupid things, and been the focal point of two memorable rivalry moments — the fight with Varitek, and the slap at Arroyo’s glove. He was not exactly well received in Fenway before the PED usage became public.
    Neither was ever as loved as Ortiz, and neither would receive a warm reception in Fenway, regardless of the PED allegations (at least A-Rod wouldn’t. Manny’s would probably have been mixed).

    Paul SF July 30, 2009, 1:21 pm
  • SF, I was projecting?
    The difference of course is I’m directing my anger as I always have – at the weak man most responsible for doing nothing. I don’t think the same is true of WEEI.
    Now I seem to remember some folks here going pretty hard on me for airing my thoughts…
    Mark – so sad, but true.
    Haul these fools in front of Congress again.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 1:27 pm
  • This is the least surprising “breaking news” of the day. You’d have to have your head in the sand not to think that these two guys were using. Not to mention all of baseball.

    Real Fake Sports July 30, 2009, 1:32 pm
  • It’s a serious question, Paul, because Manny was treated differently than his friend, Ortiz, because he didn’t play nice with the press. Aren’t you a reporter? Should how a source treats you affect your coverage?
    If Manny felt he got a raw deal, of course he’d try to get the hell out of town. And after he was caught this year there was even more venom about him, even here. Just because Papi has a fun smile doesn’t mean he should be immune.
    The mistake was associating the nice guy with clean play.
    As for “A-Roid”, he’s just as flawed as anyone, including Papi. Let’s recall how A-Rod had to serve public penance on ESPN and in front of the NY media.
    The differences in public justice (and witch hunts) really gall me. I’m not immune, but Bonds (!) is now a sympathetic character to me.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 1:33 pm
  • Rob, I don’t really disagree with anything you say there (except the part about Manny’s reasons for leaving town), but your question is about fan reaction. Fan reaction to A-Rod and Manny at Fenway would have been negative regardless of PED revelations. There’s not an inconsistency if Ortiz is cheered while these two are booed. The three are perceived very differently, regardless of the reasons for that.

    Paul SF July 30, 2009, 1:40 pm
  • I was fairly shocked to hear that A-Rod used, not because he is a Yankee, but because he’s been an all world talent since he was a teenager. Today I am not shocked in the least. Skill sets are skill sets and David Ortiz not only stepped out of his skill set, but stepped into a whole other galaxy of skill sets. Remember all that talk of how he changed his approach, he learned to hit the inside pitch, it was Manny’s protection in the lineup yada yada yada…
    It’s sad that baseball keeps getting kicked in the privates, but I am not sad in the least for a grown man who made a decision to cheat.
    Also, is David Ortiz really a beloved baseball figure? Outside of Boston do people really love David Ortiz? I live in NJ and the only people I know that love Big Papi are Red Sox fans. Help me out here…

    John - YF July 30, 2009, 1:44 pm
  • Lots of random thoughts:
    -Yeah, so what? The Babe was a drunk, too.
    -Assholes. Thanks a lot.
    -I’m not surprised.
    -I AM, however, pissed off.
    -When can we get the rest of the names?
    -Just don’t say Rickey. Rickey would be very hurt if Rickey heard Rickey’s name.
    -The magic number is 755. Period. Paragraph.
    -I still care.
    -At least Roger’s implicated, too.
    -Will Henry and Werner take back that stupid “greatest clutch hitter” plaque now?
    -Papi cheered in his first at-bat. They must not know.

    I'mBillMcNeal July 30, 2009, 1:56 pm
  • Ortiz doubled off the wall in his first at-bat.

    I'mBillMcNeal July 30, 2009, 1:57 pm
  • “Let’s recall how A-Rod had to serve public penance on ESPN and in front of the NY media.”
    Oh, give me a break, Rob. That was a circus and a joke. And he continued to lie, then, too.

    I'mBillMcNeal July 30, 2009, 1:58 pm
  • “Anyone else bothered that a list that was supposed to be confidential per an agreement between a union and management is not being kept that way?”
    Very much so, Nick, but I’m also past it. Just reveal the whole damn list and get it over with.

    I'mBillMcNeal July 30, 2009, 2:00 pm
  • Okay, Bill, Manny didn’t get that. Do you think Papi will?
    The guy was crucified. Yeah, that was fair…cause you don’t like him.
    Give me a break. There is injustice all around and the press gets to play judge, jury, and executioner.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 2:02 pm
  • -Just don’t say Rickey. Rickey would be very hurt if Rickey heard Rickey’s name.
    I didn’t think I’d be able to laugh today. Thanks IBM.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 2:05 pm
  • Rob, ARod was the best player in baseball. The man who was going to return the homerun title to a clean player. He was the chosen one. THAT’S why the media came down harder on ARod.
    It’s unfair that all of that gets stacked on ARod, but it makes sense.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 2:07 pm
  • THAT’S why the media came down harder on ARod.
    And that’s why they reported on him cheating on his wife?
    Bull. The press doesn’t like him and they made him get on his knees. Even then they ripped him to shreds.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 2:25 pm
  • ” ARod was the best player in baseball. The man who was going to return the homerun title to a clean player”
    and Papi was the one who returned the world series to the Sox after 83 years…also a big deal no?

    sam-YF July 30, 2009, 2:26 pm
  • And that’s why they reported on him cheating on his wife?
    He’s a celebrity. So you’re saying that if ARod was nice to the media they would have completely ignored the story?
    He’s the best player playing for the New York Yankees. Plain and simple.

    Atheose July 30, 2009, 2:29 pm
  • What’s funny is I wouldn’t be surprised if Rickey used either.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 2:30 pm
  • So you’re saying that if ARod was nice to the media they would have completely ignored the story?
    That’s exactly what I’m saying. I’ve read Abraham rip A-Rod for every little thing he does. I have little doubt that’s just the tip of what happens in press box. They thought he was a “phony” and so he was fair game.
    More importantly though, if they liked him he would have been treated with kid gloves – as Papi was this Spring. Because Papi is “authentic”.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 2:34 pm
  • A-Rod is all over the tabloids – he’s in US Magazine (why I know this I cannot disclose) now regularly, dating Kate Hudson, in high profile fashion. He’s Aaron’s heir apparent, or was, since Bonds was such a louse. He’s a lightning rod, he was involved in the Yanks/Sox rivalry even before he officially joined either team, and has had a hand in a number of high-profile on-field happenings.
    Ortiz is a big figure, inarguably, and was involved in a momentous accomplishment.
    But they aren’t equal. A-Rod really, until very recently, had no equal, if he even has one now. A-Rod has been the center of attention since Texas, and “252″. It didn’t start with the Yankees. It’s not always about the Yankees. I don’t understand why there seems to be an agenda on this.

    SF July 30, 2009, 2:39 pm
  • That’s exactly what I’m saying
    But that’s facetious. He’s incapable of this. He’s not Jeter. He’s not a cipher like Jeter – a smart, savvy, confident, and clearly intelligent guy. Rodriguez can’t just erase years of his arrogance and silliness by “being nice to the media”. He’s made his bed.

    SF July 30, 2009, 2:42 pm
  • Bonds was his equal in the sport. Look how he treated the press and how they treated him in return.
    None of us know any of these people. We know projections on screens and in print. So let’s not label them.
    By the way, you’re all missing one guy that’s bigger than A-Rod and in NYC – Jeter. How’s his coverage?

    Rob July 30, 2009, 2:44 pm
  • I’m totally bummed. I knew the 2004 team couldn’t be clean, and always said it wouldn’t break my heart unless it was Papi or Pedro. I can’t say it’s shocking – certainly his jump in production hinted at it – but it still makes me real sad.

    Jackie (SF) July 30, 2009, 2:45 pm
  • SF – His bed should be irrelevant. The press crucified the guy, with the rags leading the way. How’s that compare to Manny’s treatment? That’s not surprising given that the LA media just snaps photos.
    But now, let’s contrast how the Boston media will handle this story and Papi. They crucified A-Roid too. Nah, but Papi’s likeable. So he didn’t get the direct question in Feb. Good work!

    Rob July 30, 2009, 2:52 pm
  • Seriously, going down the road of “the Boston media has kid gloves with ballplayers” is not a very strong move and shows little sense of history.
    Will Papi be treated more softly than Rodriguez? I am guessing yes. And that is probably because he has been a better interview, a nicer person, a likeable guy. He doesn’t date Madonna while still married, and seat her ostentatiously up front(calling attention to himself, not her), he doesn’t give press conferences to announce he saved a kid crossing Newbury Street (calling attention to himself), he doesn’t pose for GQ (calling attention to himself), etc., etc., etc.
    I am not going to defend the press, their lack of curiosity about certain issues, etc. But to act as if this is a vacuum, that you can’t possibly understand why Rodriguez gets more attention, or why he faced greater scrutiny over steroid use (my cousin did it! I didn’t know what it was! blah blah blah!), to me that’s merely posturing, antagonizing, trying to pick a fight over an issue that is just about as clear cut as you can get. If you can’t figure out why Rodriguez faced greater scrutiny, why a combination of talent, selfishness, ego, etc., conspired to make A-Rod a lightning Rod, then I doubt the sincerity of your positions. This one isn’t that hard to figure out.

    SF July 30, 2009, 3:13 pm
  • Hall of Fame?
    A-rod, Manny, and Bonds are in the hall of fame no matter what.
    I can’t see Ortiz getting a whiff of the hall after this.
    What do you guys think?

    JJhammer31 July 30, 2009, 3:20 pm
  • And to add: if you think that Rodriguez getting more airtime for his issues than, say, Papi, is just plain unfair, then what of Pettitte, who probably lied through his teeth (I used one time!). He’s gotten off as a relative saint, despite what seems like an implausible story under ridiculous circumstances (best friends following each other from club to club and all) Or Giambi, who got off in NYC on a vaguely apologetic press conference and a “pituitary issue”, or Bonds himself (criminal charges aside, or maybe not) who is the villain of all villains, the most vilified guy of all. Why the fixation on Papi and on the Boston media, which has no reputation for being at all soft on ballplayers?

    SF July 30, 2009, 3:21 pm
  • From the same guy who called me out for saying Papi was struggling because he used PEDs and knew it was going to come out.
    It’s not the press’ job to moralize based on who these people might be and how they’re treated by them. But they do. And we buy into it. Like you talking about the guy’s personal life. Why? Because the press makes a story of it. Except it has nothing at all to do with what their job is – to report the results of games.
    Papi is a cheat. And it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if he cheats on his wife too. And you’re willfully naive if you think differently just because you haven’t read the story in the Herald.
    A-Roid was crucified because he was one name of 103. If you don’t see something seriously wrong with that, then I doubt the sincerity of your interest and your love of the game.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 3:28 pm
  • Why the fixation on Papi and on the Boston media, which has no reputation for being at all soft on ballplayers?
    Pay attention. You’re about to see it in real time.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 3:29 pm
  • As for Giambi and Pettitte, you’ve just proved my point. Likeable, you get a pass. Not, we’re going to make you beg.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 3:32 pm
  • Why? Because the press makes a story of it
    Again, a gross generalization. With Rodriguez it is not just the press. Certainly the press can be complicit, but Rodriguez seems to be one of the all-time great enablers. Would you argue this?
    And fine, go ahead and doubt my sincerity and love for the game, over your own ill-advised misinterpretation of my attitude about the sports press and how I think they treat two very different players under very different circumstances. Can I call you out for some hypocritical ad hominem there, your favorite thing to do, for passively calling me insincere and a baseball-hater, with no reasonable evidence?

    SF July 30, 2009, 3:40 pm
  • I didn’t passively call you anything. I questioned it quite overtly in fact.
    If you can’t tell, I’m pissed by the injustice. Is A-Rod complicit? I don’t care. Do your job and no more. Instead, they made him walk the plank. He had no choice. And they still crucified him afterwards. I believe in social justice. That was a witch hunt. They did it to Bonds too. But then he deserved it because he’s a “louse” (your word)?
    There are still close to 100 names that haven’t been revealed. That’s the story. Any thing else is a side show. Including your twisted logic.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 3:50 pm
  • The media didn’t particularly like Manny, but they didn’t make him beg. So what’s the reason for that, Rob? It couldn’t be because he wasn’t the most famous name in the sport, previously hailed as the future “clean home run champ,” could it?

    Paul SF July 30, 2009, 3:53 pm
  • But then he deserved it because he’s a “louse” (your word)?
    Did they make him lie under oath?
    And A-Rod was “crucified”? I think maybe you are venturing into hyperbole here, for your own arguments’ sake. Has he been crucified? Has he had to give back money, has he had to stop playing the game? What has he sacrificed, to take the Christ analogy further? On whose cross has he been nailed? The fans? Is Rodriguez really a martyr? Are you seriously claiming that A-Rod is any worse off now than he was before because he had to give a press conference?
    Last thing: I wouldn’t look to the sports media covering a legalized monopoly that has its own rules, along with players making stratospheric amounts of money as a place for “social justice”. That is, to put it bluntly, idiotic.

    SF July 30, 2009, 3:58 pm
  • When does the LA media investigate its stars? They’re even more complicit because they’re more interested in access. Like the Washington press corps.
    Plus, Manny is Zen in his ability to ignore them. That’s how he got through his in time in Boston.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 3:59 pm
  • I’m also guessing Papi will be treated more nicely by the Boston press than Manny or A-Rod because he’s (still) on the freakin Red Sox. He may be a bum now, but he’s still our bum. The national media will probably be less kind.
    I know that doesn’t jibe completely with how A-Rod was treated by the NY press, but they’ve loved to hate him pretty much since he joined the team, and for reasons wholly unrelated to PED use (ranging from the ridiculous personal stuff to his ‘failure to bring home a ring’). And I still argue that A-Rod’s position as the ‘great clean hope’ made his PED use a much bigger deal than it was or is for other players.
    I do see your point, Rob – it’s not really fair that guys like Papi and Manny get off easier than A-Rod because they’re relatively genial and he’s kinda smarmy and loathsome. But it’s human nature.

    Jackie (SF) July 30, 2009, 4:02 pm
  • Oh, no, someone lied under oath! With the feds grandstanding on a perjury charge (even as they still haven’t gotten a conviction). Noooooooo!
    A-Rod gets off now because of how he handled it. He put himself at their mercy and they tore off the flesh. The level of detail they went into to investigate that story – imagine if they had been interested in the other 100 names. Go back and read all Abraham had to say on the topic. Now read his coverage today.
    That’s the justice I’ve talking about. The Mitchell Report was 409 pages. And we’re still finding out about this shit? Growing up I used to calculate every summer how close players were to 61. My kids will never do that. It’s been rendered meaningless.
    We knew McGwire was using andro in 1998. It’s now 2009. Who is not doing their jobs? But A-Rod’s cousin’s name. Thank goodness we have that!

    Rob July 30, 2009, 4:06 pm
  • The national media will probably be less kind.
    I doubt that assumption too. Will there be a sit down with Gammons tonight?

    Rob July 30, 2009, 4:08 pm
  • “Will there be a sit down with Gammons tonight?”
    But there is a problem with your argument right here because most people agree that Gammons was soft, even sympathetic to A-Rod in the interview.

    Nick-YF July 30, 2009, 4:12 pm
  • Damn, I’m angry. I’m going to go now. I like you guys and this site. You shouldn’t be the outlet for my anger. It’s just this fucking story won’t die and the press helps to keep it alive rather than truly uncover what’s not known. I mean, how many baseball writers do we have in this country?
    The other names, please. I want memos. I want Selig’s head. I want Fehr’s role. Everything. Do your jobs.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 4:14 pm
  • Rob, how did this turn into a “Rob’s state of the game” harangue?
    Oh, right, I forgot, that’s always your goal with these things.
    Your statements are actually full of venom and hyperbole, tinged with naivete even as you act as if you are the only realist in this bunch. It’s really quite tiresome.

    SF July 30, 2009, 4:16 pm
  • Gammons just opened the door and allowed him to walk through first. He was polite but it wasn’t the end of that. It was the beginning and they both knew it.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 4:18 pm
  • And your goal seems to be to call me out even when you’re obviously wrong, even well after the fact.
    I won’t wait for an apology. But I was right. And you’re still tap dancing.
    Peace.

    Rob July 30, 2009, 4:20 pm
  • There are approximately 20,000 people who honestly care about who used steroids at some point in baseball. 10,000 of them are professional mediots, lawyers, and book agents with a monetary interest. The other 10,000 are blog writers and commenters.
    Everyone else on the planet does not give a shit, and they are right.

    attackgerbil July 30, 2009, 4:35 pm
  • http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/massarotti/2009/07/big_papi_a_big_disappointment.html
    Hey, it took two hours.
    Now, Rob, you can predictably complain that it isn’t harsh enough, or make some reference to Gammons, or some other goalpost-moving bullshit.
    Back to trade discussion about a game I don’t love and have totally insincere feelings for, so insincere I have spent six years devoted to writing a blog about it.

    SF July 30, 2009, 4:42 pm
  • SMH

    doug YF July 30, 2009, 7:31 pm
  • As far as that list of 100+ names goes, I’m torn.
    As a legal matter, MLB has no business leaking it; indeed, it would appear they had no business retaining names in relation to results.
    As a practical matter, it is now clear that all of the names are going to eventually come out, at least all of the names that anyone cares about.
    So MLB has a choice: Keep a lid on the names, and suffer the steroids story being kept alive for the next 4-5 years as names come out 1-2 at a time; or get it over with and find a way to get it all out at once.

    Hudson July 30, 2009, 8:24 pm

Leave a Comment

Next post:

Previous post: