A-Fraud Shit --> Fan

by IcebreakerX on Feb 7, 2009 7:47 AM PST Comment 80 comments

Baseball star Alex Rodriguez tested positive for steroids in 2003, sources tell Sports Illustrated.11 minutes ago from CNN Alert cnnbrk CNN Breaking News

In 2003, when he won the American League home run title and the AL Most Valuable Player award as a shortstop for the Texas Rangers, Alex Rodriguez tested positive for two anabolic steroids, four sources have independently toldSports Illustrated.

Rodriguez's name appears on a list of 104 players who tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs in Major League Baseball's '03 survey testing, SI's sources say. As part of a joint agreement with the MLB Players Association, the testing was conducted to determine if it was necessary to impose mandatory random drug testing across the major leagues in 2004.

When approached by an SI reporter on Thursday at a gym in Miami, Rodriguez declined to discuss his 2003 test results. "You'll have to talk to the union," said Rodriguez, the Yankees' third baseman since his trade to New York in February 2004. When asked if there was an explanation for his positive test, he said, "I'm not saying anything."

http://twitter.com/cnnbrk/statuses/1186482707

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/baseball/mlb/02/07/alex-rodriguez-steroids/index.html?eref=T1

Oh my. Can't wait to see this after the whole Madonna thing too.

0 recs | Comment 80 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

This is just what Baseball needs.

Fear the NPE

by thewyrm on Feb 7, 2009 8:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

yawn

Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Feb 7, 2009 8:47 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Wake me when someone accuses Ichiro.

Then I’ll care

I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE!!! I DRINK IT UP!!

by abender20 on Feb 7, 2009 9:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

just shows how mental baseball was

I disagree with people saying who cares, A-Rod was quite possibly going to be the guy who brought respect back to the all time home run record if and when he breaks it, this just tarnishes him and the entire era from the early mid ninties to earlier this decade.

As a fan of the game this is important to me, and it’s a real shame.

by marinerdan on Feb 7, 2009 9:23 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

of course all of this only applies if he really did take steroids but you know..

evidence doesn’t sound too good.

by marinerdan on Feb 7, 2009 9:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I won't believe

until I hear more about the test results. And the source comes public.

You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.

by bluemax on Feb 7, 2009 9:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Weren't these supposed to be private?

by JI on Feb 7, 2009 9:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I really hope they keep the rest of the list private.

by Robert on Feb 7, 2009 10:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't understand how MLB messed this up

I’m no lawyer, but it seems like the MLBPA would have a case against MLB (or MLB against the labs they contracted to do the testing) if the results ever leak out. I mean, how hard is it to do completely anonymous testing? You have someone pee in a cup, you put a completely generic label on the sample, ship the sample to the lab, re-label the samples with a random number when they get to the lab, and no one—including the lab techs—would ever have any idea who the sample came from, or even which teams had the most positive tests.

by ubelmann on Feb 7, 2009 11:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm willing to bet the Feds figured out and leaked the information

They recently seized samples and had them re-tested as part of the Bonds’ perjury investigation.

From what I read, MLB took good precautions to keep the identities secret. I thought they were supposed to destroy the samples, though.

Maybe the Feds DNA-tested the samples. Maybe they subpoenaed the identity list.

What're ya gonna do with those pies, boys?

by rickpo on Feb 7, 2009 12:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Here's my problem

The identities should never have been linked to the samples in the first place. If it is random sampling and you are only interested in the percentage of users from the overall population, it doesn’t matter if the positive test comes from a particular player so that player’s name should never in any way be linked to the sample he gave at any point during the testing.

The easiest secret to keep is the one that no one knows. If MLB would have honestly kept the testing fully anonymous in the first place, there would be no secrets to keep.

by ubelmann on Feb 7, 2009 12:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

As the CIA says:

“If two people know it, it isn’t a secret.”

I like using semi-colons; they make me feel smart.

by Llewdor on Feb 7, 2009 5:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought names weren't even attached.

Somebody should get fucking sued or go to jail or something. Medical testing I’m pretty sure is protected by laws. Right?

by Edgar for Pres on Feb 7, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well that's not good.

I wonder how he is going to explain this to Jeter.

by Wilder. on Feb 7, 2009 10:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

It was probably his idea.

by ThundaPC on Feb 7, 2009 10:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

God dammit.

by Double06 on Feb 7, 2009 10:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I inhaled. I also snorted. I have never shot up though due to fear of needles.

If I wasn’t afraid of needles I would have shot up too.

by Sec 108 on Feb 7, 2009 10:20 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Aw man

and I thought we all got over the whole player X took steroids thing. They fucking all did it, it was not forbidden, there’s nothing all that wrong with it. Can’t we start shitting on the players who beat their wives or something a little more serious?

Next we’re going to hear that Andrew Wiles was taking ritalin and isn’t all that smart after all.

by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 7, 2009 10:53 AM PST reply actions 2 recs

Amen

by Graham on Feb 7, 2009 11:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

If they did it when it wasn't illegal then I don't care.

by JI on Feb 7, 2009 12:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's a Schedule III since 1990, but just not against the rules of baseball in 2003.

Favor the Bold

by IcebreakerX on Feb 7, 2009 2:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not that I'm doubting you,

but I’d love to read this if you have a link.

by Double06 on Feb 7, 2009 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Technically incorrect.

Baseball has had a rule against all illegal substances (marijuana, steroids, etc.) since the early ’90s.

by Rollo Tomasi on Feb 7, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

True. Since 1991 you needed a valid prescription, though there was no testing and no penalties.

Bonds got around even this rule by taking things that weren’t technically steroids. A-Rod wasn’t so lucky.

I like using semi-colons; they make me feel smart.

by Llewdor on Feb 7, 2009 5:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think he looks like he juices.

And I don’t think he was in the major leagues until 2006.

by Fin on Feb 7, 2009 12:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You can't balance a baseball on the bill of your cap without chemical help.

by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 7, 2009 12:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I wonder if we could teach him to talk.

by JI on Feb 7, 2009 12:50 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs

This guy got kicked off Rabobank for juicing...

by Vatinius on Feb 7, 2009 10:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This guy never failed a test

He just lied to and broke cyclings extremely tough doping regulations.

by Peen on Feb 8, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The only thing Brandon Fahey juices is wheatgrass.

by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 7, 2009 12:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Cal Ripken would be hilarious

by Robert on Feb 7, 2009 2:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It wouldn't be a surprise at all

by Graham on Feb 7, 2009 2:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd actually be somewhat surprised if he didn't but I really don't give a shit at all.

by acblue on Feb 7, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Neither would I

I would argue that it would help people the hell over others using it.

by Robert on Feb 7, 2009 3:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

This sucks. Just because it's clear, like Bonds, that Rodriguez was a great player without them.

This just tarnishes all great things he has accomplished. I don’t know if that’s fair or not but the perception will stick forever and it’s a shame.

I fucking hate you Mariners

by kentroyals5 on Feb 7, 2009 12:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

This is the fallacy

for all you know A-Rod has been on steroid since he was in high school.

by JI on Feb 7, 2009 12:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I just think there is a fallacy that steroids actually make you a good athlete to most people.

Regardless of when he started, it’s safe to say he would have been a great player regardless when he started using (if he did…I still want some more evidence/proof)

I fucking hate you Mariners

by kentroyals5 on Feb 7, 2009 12:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm hiding in Honduras

I’m a desperate man
Send lawyers, guns and money
The shit has hit the fan!

by DCMariner on Feb 7, 2009 12:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Any time is the right time for some Warren Zevon

Patriotism, Pepper, Professionalism

by esoteric on Feb 7, 2009 4:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The main problem: MLB pre-empted all it's Randy Johnson coverage to show FIVE HOURS of this A-Rod coverage.

Fuck this, I had to dig around the guide to find the times to record again. Fuck you, MLB Network

Yesterday's Pants
A blog-thingy about the Mariners and stuff.

by BrettJMiller on Feb 7, 2009 12:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Is anyone at all upset about greenies?

Because I personally find that far more upsetting (yet far less upsetting than, say, when my coffee gets cold before I finish it).

by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 7, 2009 12:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I consider the use of greenies unfortunate but somewhat inevitable.

Playing five or six days a week for six months seems insanely grueling to me. I imagine there are a lot of players with the talent to be in the bigs but not the stamina to endure it without a little help.

by Teej on Feb 8, 2009 9:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Chock another one up for

Jose Canseco

by Matthew on Feb 7, 2009 1:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

It's fucking crazy that he is credible all of a sudden.

by acblue on Feb 7, 2009 1:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Didn't Canseco date Madonna too?

by JI on Feb 7, 2009 1:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Someone needs to get Guy Ritchie and Vanilla Ice to submit urine samples ASAP.

by acblue on Feb 7, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The real question is

could randomly picking names do better than Canseco?

by Edgar for Pres on Feb 7, 2009 1:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yahtzee!

by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 7, 2009 1:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

*chalk

because you’re supposed to set the example for everyone.

by Bearskin Rugburn on Feb 7, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah know, I can remember saying alot of shit about Canseco when his book came out.

How he was probably full of shit, doing it for money, is an ass, ect.

You can't hide from the omnipresent eye.

by Goose on Feb 7, 2009 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, at least two of those things are still most likely true.

by acblue on Feb 7, 2009 2:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Whatever, I just dont care all that much.

I still love baseball and I still can’t wait for opening day.

by MFAN on Feb 7, 2009 1:01 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I second this sentiment.

Yawn.
I wish the media would turn these gun sights on football for awhile. For some reason all those pious arbiters of righteousness haven’t noticed how much bigger and faster the NFL has gotten in the last 15 years. It seems more blatant than it ever was in baseball but none of the self appointed guardians of sporting morality seem to care.

Spring training is right around the corner!

Whiskey: The other bio fuel!

by Big Jared on Feb 7, 2009 2:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What are you talking about?!?

So a 6’8", 303 lbs. man can run a sub-five second forty yard dash! What’s so wrong with that?!? BTW, not saying Joe Thomas is on ‘roids, but that’s damn quick for a man of his size.

And amen to spring training being a week or so away.

You're trying to kidnap what I've rightfully stolen.

by Sentinel on Feb 7, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Here is a question for lawyers out there (its not quite the same situation)

I’m a movie star and I go to the doctor to get tested for HIV because I’m a whore. The test comes back positive. The doctor tells some friends. One of the friends tells a reporter and CNN runs the story announcing to the world my condition.

I’m pretty sure the doctor gets sued, loses his license and maybe even goes to jail. Is the friend who told CNN also in trouble? Does CNN get in trouble?

(I am neither a movie star or have HIV)

by Edgar for Pres on Feb 7, 2009 3:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I am not a lawyer or anything.

So I couldn’t answer that, but I am sure the doctor could sell his story and make a nice retirement if he was the one that broke the news to the world that someone like Madonna had HIV.

by Fin on Feb 7, 2009 3:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You haven't stated whether or not you are, in fact, a whore.

You're trying to kidnap what I've rightfully stolen.

by Sentinel on Feb 7, 2009 3:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

To boil it down to the simple answer: CNN is off the hook

There are a number of invasion of privacy torts you could sue OTHERS under (for example, you can pwn the doctor brutally under a “public disclosure of private facts” common law claim, but you don’t even need to rely on the common law since it’s written into federal statutory law under HIPAA). But the rule is that HIPAA does not regulate what the press can report. As long as CNN’s info was obtained from the FRIEND and not from the DOCTOR or a health-related agency, it can be published or broadcast freely.

Patriotism, Pepper, Professionalism

by esoteric on Feb 7, 2009 4:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

To clarify some things:

The doctor would be subject to both civil claims (from you, the movie star whore) and criminal ones (for violating HIPAA, which governs the privacy of medical records).

That’s the end of the chain, though. Neither the friend nor the press are in any serious trouble. You could TRY to sue CNN personally for publicly disclosing this embarrasing private fact, but you’re going to lose under any sane reading of precedents. Success or failure in these cases usually turns on whether the “fact” in question was of “legitimate concern” to the public, and although you might think your HIV test isn’t of “legit” concern, courts historically have given a WIIIDE latitude to the press (due to 1st Amendment considerations) when it comes to defining that concept. The fact that you’re a famous movie star alone — and are thus a public figure — is pretty much all they need to get over this hump anyway.

Patriotism, Pepper, Professionalism

by esoteric on Feb 7, 2009 4:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Interesting

So what if CNN got the info from the doctor instead?

by Edgar for Pres on Feb 7, 2009 4:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Still off the hook. HIPAA only applies to the doctor/agency with responsibility for keeping the medical information private.

Patriotism, Pepper, Professionalism

by esoteric on Feb 7, 2009 5:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The reason for the distinction I made above, FYI, is because news agencies usually have strict internal rules about publishing medical info and the like if they can only source it from an agency...they want to get independent sourcing instead

Patriotism, Pepper, Professionalism

by esoteric on Feb 7, 2009 5:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

So according to my girlfriend

there are only 11 labs in the country that could produce these results. Including the one she works for and they didn’t work on anything related to A-Rod.

This means there are only 10 possible outlets where this info could have come from, I’m assuming this shit is gonna get sorted out awfully quick.

You know what? Fuck you Sports Gods, fuck you.

by bluemax on Feb 7, 2009 4:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Hopefully its not the FBI

If they can’t keep a drug test result a secret then they should probably quit trying to do whatever they do because they suck at it.

by Edgar for Pres on Feb 7, 2009 4:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know where to stand on this.

On one had I find it amusing as I’m not an ARod fan, but the fact they’re digging in the past for dirt isn’t doing much for the game.

Or perhaps it’s doing great things for the game? Maybe players look at what’s happening to ARod, Bonds, and Clemens and think to themselves, “this clearly isn’t worth it.”

61/755: KGJ's homer totals, or Rosie O'Donnell's age/weight in 2019?

by kevin_ess on Feb 7, 2009 4:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

It's on

A-Rod is going to enter full-on martyr mode now.

by katal on Feb 7, 2009 4:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Does this mean we can stop demonizing Bonds now?

I mean I get why the media is doing this to him, because he’s an asshole, but I think it is unnecessary to do it to a point where the league colludes to not sign a competent hitter, even though there were many other roiders back at that time too. I don’t know, maybe I am just angry because I want the Mariners to sign him, but I know they wouldn’t.

by Fin on Feb 7, 2009 4:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs