A Double Standard on Privacy?

I've got more thoughts on yesterday's NYT piece about George Mitchell asking for the medical records of players like Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro, which he won't get.

Ever since baseball's steroid problem came to the forefront, there have been a number of sportswriters and such advocating that MLB players, if they are innocent, voluntarily turn over their medical records, etc. to prove it to the general public. Skip Bayless was the latest to advocate this on yesterday's edition of First Take (weird typing that instead of Cold Pizza, isn't it?), and that line of thought deserves an answer. Say what you will about the MLBPA and its obtuseness to the steroid problem; they stand up for the best interests of their members, and the best interest involves keeping certain things private, even when the demands of public opinion dictate otherwise.

No matter your political leanings, the trend over the past few decades has resulted in a lessening of privacy: cell phone companies can sell your phone records; the federal government can monitor those same records for its own ends. Whether you actually are subject to random drug tests at your job or not, the odds are likely that you sign a piece of paper when you're hired that you will subject yourself to them. There are very few ensconced things in law that are truly private. Attorney-client privilege and doctor-patient are a couple of them, and even some aspects of your medical records don't necessarily fall under HIPAA, which is the law intended to keep your medical records private unless released with your consent. Insurance companies already assess your medical information to determine what you pay in coverage, or if you are covered.

Are we comfortable asking athletes to cough up their medical records in order to prove a case against them? We shouldn't be, if only for purely selfish reasons -- if a precedent is established of superstars, the creme de la creme of athletics, being forced by public opinion to open their medical histories to investigators to convict them after they have been convicted in the court of public opinion, then we should take the advice: "Physician, heal thyself." What we ask of the most public in society will eventually be asked of us by our own employers.

Blah Blah Steroid Investigation.

(Apologies to Babes Love Baseball for borrowing their usual title for steroid-related stuff.)

Former Senator George Mitchell's steroid investigation keeps chugging along at the slowest of speeds. Investigators have asked the Baltimore Orioles to send records to players such as Jason Grimsley, David Segui, Fernando Tatis, and oh yeah, these two guys on the left, and ask for them to authorize the release of those records to the investigators, which we all know they won't do.

The investigation is basically a limp-dicked attempt by MLB to try to get to what it believes is still the heart of the problem: rooting out the individual players. However, the whole manner runs up against privacy matters, and never mind the MLBPA's rabid defense of its membership (despite the subject matter, the NFLPA could learn a bit of a lesson in how a union is supposed to represent its members.) With all that in mind, Mitchell's investigation, for now, remains fairly useless, because he has no subpoena power at all. Expect Congress to get involved yet again for another Gross Spectacle when Mitchell hits the wall we all see coming.

Sosa and Palmeiro Cited in Steroid Investigation [New York Times]

(Photo: Baltimore Sun/Lloyd Fox)

Baseball Players Say The Darndest Things.

David Wells is talking ish about Roger Clemens and his non-travel clauses in his contracts that he's had ever since he went to Houston:

"I don't think I would ever do it because of the fact I personally think it would disrespect the team and your teammates," Wells said, according to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel. "You look at the other players. How are they going to respect you? What are they going to think if you're not there pulling for the team?"

Boomer has a tendency to spout off a lot, but that doesn't make him wrong -- and teammate Greg Maddux is backing him up.

"I can't imagine doing that," Maddux said, according to the Sun-Sentinel. "I like the game. I like the atmosphere. I appreciate what it has to offer. I want to play the whole year."

The problem with the Rocket's precedent is that it reeks of the baseball equivalent of Shaq taking about half of the regular season off last year for the Heat, and look how well that turned out. What's worse is the implication, in this Buster Olney piece on how Clemens returned to the Bronx, that making the Clemens exception would have caused trouble if they'd kept Randy Johnson around:

And when the Yankees traded Randy Johnson to the Diamondbacks, they felt as if they were setting themselves up in two ways to lure Clemens: First, by clearing Johnson's $16 million salary from their books, they would have the cash to bid aggressively on Clemens, and secondly, they would no longer have second thoughts about giving Clemens special treatment, like leaving the team on days between his starts. They would not have wanted to create that precedent if Johnson was still on the team.

There will be another 40+ year old pitcher who is dominant enough to use this as a precedent down the line, and it's not a good one to follow.

Now, we get to a much more controversial name -- two Red Sox players have now chipped in on the whole Barry Bonds/steroids/breaking the HR record bit. David Ortiz isn't really convinced that Bonds took steroids, mostly on the grounds of not knowing whether that actually affects the hand-eye coordination necessary to hit like Bonds does, and to an extent, Ortiz does. However, Ortiz isn't crazy about commissioner Bud Selig possibly skipping out on #756:

"He's just making things worse," Ortiz told the Herald. "He's the commissioner, there's nothing you can do about it. You can't be saying that. What are people going to think about the game? They'll be like, 'This game is a joke.' He should come, even if he doesn't want to."

Bosox pitcher Curt Schilling also weighed in to WEEI radio:

"Hank Aaron not being there. [Selig] trying to figure out where to be. It's sad," Schilling said, according to the [Boston Globe]. "And I don't care that [Bonds is] black, or green, or purple, or yellow, or whatever. It's unfortunate ... there's good people and bad people. It's unfortunate that it's happening the way it's happening."

Didn't end there, though, as #38 ripped Bonds for being an admitted tax cheat, adulterer, and steroid user -- even though Bonds has never admitted to that in public, I believe.

Selig has to live with the mess he's made. Any concrete proof we have on Barry is limited to leaked grand jury testimony, which he hasn't been charged or convicted on yet. Baseball can't and shouldn't be allowed to think that ignoring Bonds will make him the easy scapegoat, letting it off the hook.

that's another way to handle the contract year.

Now that I've got some time to follow up on yesterday's steroid madness, let's flesh out the original update -- implicated in the steroid investigation are, again, Angels CF (and big free agent signing) Gary Matthews, Jr, along with a physician for the Pittsburgh Steelers. (NFL Adam, rightfully so, is already saying "told you so.")

The newspaper said investigators found evidence that testosterone and other performance-enhancing drugs may have been fraudulently prescribed over the Internet to current and former Major League Baseball and NFL players, college athletes, high school coaches, a former Mr. Olympia champion and another top contender in the bodybuilding competition.

Sketchy, yes. Still problematic. Fuck yeah. Not just because it involves baseball, but possibly football and it runs across states and on the internet. Methods of obtaining supplements, steroids, and illegal narcotics are constantly updating to avoid the law that keeps chasing them, and it highlights the problems with every sport's drug policy if the accusations pan out. Determined cheaters will always find ways to beat the system. What do you do, in that case? Couldn't tell you -- we're probably going to have start admitting that sport isn't pure, and never has been. Those well-versed in history know the exclusion practiced back in the day; fans of college basketball and football are used to shaking off implications of NCAA violations.

Once fans finally cross the barrier, we may all be better off for it.

let's see if Gary Sheffield floats.

Tigers DH/OF Gary Sheffield says he won't cooperate with MLB's steroid investigation:

"The [players'] association told us this is just a witch hunt," Sheffield told USA Today. "They don't want us to talk to them. This is all about getting [Bonds].

"If this was legitimate and they did it the right way, it would be different. But this a witch hunt. They're just trying to collect a lot of stuff that doesn't make any sense and throw the [expletive] against the wall."

Earlier this month, the MLBPA challenged the positive samples with names that MLB got from a testing firm, claiming that was an overreach outside of the original margins of the investigation. So maybe this is what Sheffield was referring to -- but most likely, it has to do with the fact that baseball just turned a blind eye to it until it became very, very public. A witch hunt it isn't, though, Gary -- you want to see a witch hunt, wait until Congress decides to get involved again.

STEROID UPDATE: Via With Leather, we have an investigation into an Orlando pharmacy that may be part of a Internet drug ring, and the steroid targets here may run from MLB players to NFLers. Biggest name: new Angels CF Gary Matthews, Jr.

know your rights.

The MLBPA has petitioned the 9th Circut Court of Appeals to review its 2-1 decision that allowed baseball investigators to use the names and piss test results of over 100 players who tested positive for performance enhancing drugs. Investigators are using this to get further into the steroid investigation, and some of those involved, if an appeals court does not overturn the 9th Circuit, could be called before a grand jury to testify.

The standing issue was when investigators grabbed those over-100 results from an investigation into 10 players, which, at face value, would look like an overreach.

"If the majority's decision is allowed to stand, it will create circuit law giving the government carte blanche to use a warrant for some piece of data on a computer as the pretext for seizing the entire computer and perusing its contents," attorneys for the union and lab wrote.

The sticking point is that the union and MLB negotiated that the names would remain private, and circumnavigating the agreement constitutes a breach in the union's eyes. The MLBPA faces a PR problem, though -- with every fight (correct or not legally) they put up against the testing, the more it will be blamed for impeding progress. It's a conundrum, but it seems Don Fehr and crew have decided to fight it out. Any legally-minded (or employed) readers who can assess this better?

getting on top of an issue.

You can complain about the unbalanced relationship between the NFL and its players' union (and I have regarding the disability payment plan for veterans), but you can't knock the league and the NFLPA for reacting appropriately to the bizarre situation Shawne Merriman's positive steroid test put them in this season, and it looks like players who test positive for steroids won't be eligible for individual awards or Pro Bowl honors come next year.

Now, the baseball folk like to slag on responses like this -- it makes them feel better about the comparative slug-like response by Selig and Fehr -- but, if true, the league is getting out in front of this, and as Roger Goodell talked about in his big presser pre-Super Bowl (which largely becomes a defense of league policy, bad zebra calls, etc.) , at least they're trying. Until we get a good blood doping test for HGH, it'll be tough, but at least the NFL is being reasonably proactive for pro sports, which is by its very nature, reactive and conservative. It probably has to do a lot with players like Jason Taylor and Champ Bailey talking about it out in the open, though -- you don't get that kind of unanimous reaction from sports with better unions.

priorities, please.

Interesting New York Times bit on the veiled threat that MLB hack in charge Bud Selig and appointed investigator George Mitchell have put in place with their investigation into the steroid scandal: apparently, it's akin to, "If you don't talk to us, then Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) will be all over your ass."

Now, being a proper political junkie, I follow Waxman's exploits not only because I'm originally from the L.A. area -- it's also because Waxman is a certified ball-buster who happens to reflect my political leanings. But I think the players would be wise to call the bluff on this one; Waxman's made no statements on what he will do on the issue with the chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee (which is apparently what sports with anti-trust exemptions fall under), and regardless of my personal hope and confidence that the Democrats can walk and chew gum when it comes to legislation and oversight regarding the war in Iraq, I bet he's got higher priorities than steroid investigations. However, that's what I said to myself the last time I heard or read rumors about Congressional investigation and testimony, and we wound up with several days of the stuff on ESPN.

Congressman, hold off on the steroids right now -- let the leagues work on it, and take care of the other stuff first. And if you're gonna take on big league sports, take on the NFL and MLB on selling Sunday Ticket and Extra Innings to DirecTV.

crying over spilt ink.

The Mighty MJD has a great post about the myth of the steroid double standard re: football -- he caught a snippet of Royals 1B/DH Mike Sweeney complaining about how the NFL and football fans don't care about Shawne Merriman's doping since he's headed to the Pro Bowl, and rightly declared it utter crap.

Personally, I don't want Merriman in the Pro Bowl and I was happy he didn't win Defensive Player of the Year, but by the NFL's standards, he is a Pro Bowl player. He served his four-game suspension and came back, and if he plays at the level he did prior to steroids, in a couple years this will be a footnote.

One of MJD's commenters nailed the reason why football gets accused of sweeping it under the rug: baseball writers spilled a lot of ink on Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa during their Maris chase, romanticizing The Chase as the revitalization of the sport after the wasteland of the '94 strike, endemic of the flowery prose regularly lathed on baseball by writers as a poetic game, the thinking man's sport and still national pastime, despite the NFL's severe domination of the sporting world. The rug then got pulled out from under them.

The contempt for baseball's cheaters and the institution that protected them for decades gets foisted off onto other sports, despite the NFL's steroid and drug policies already in place to handle Merriman, never mind what MJD notes as the elite pseudo-intellectualism of baseball (the epitome of this is George Will) looking down on the crass, lower-class football nation and scolding them for imaginary willful ignorance. Since they cannot nail the past cheaters because they've retired or manage to evade official punishment while suffering in the court of public opinion (i.e., Bonds), they need someone to take it out on.

"Nothing on earth is more depressing than an old baseball writer." - Dan Jenkins, modifying the old Ring Lardner quote (“There isn't anything on earth as depressing as an old sportswriter.”)

Barry Bonds, model teammate.

Apologies to NFL Adam for swiping his usual header for these sorts of things, but I can't think of anything more fitting, really, as the New York Daily News is reporting that the Giants slugger failed a test for greenies last season, and then tried to put it on 1B Mark Sweeney.

Dude, it's much, much less lame if you say you just didn't know what you were taking like before rather than trying to pawn it off as something you picked up out of your teammate's locker (which begs the question why Bonds was grabbing stuff out of anyone else's locker to begin with.)

His next excuse will be something along the lines of the Ted Haggard defense: "I just bought it to get it off the streets! I had no intention whatsoever of actually using it."

Update, 8:18 PM - Bonds now denies Sweeney's involvement. The problem with Bonds is that even if he denies throwing Sweeney under the bus, I don't buy it for a second.