Categorized | Rants

What Part of “Against the Law” Do You Not Understand?

With New York Yankee Alex Rodriguez’s admission to taking performance enhancing drugs, the whole issue of steroids in baseball has entered mainstream discourse again this week. I’m not much of a baseball fan, and frankly, I’m tired of the whole affair. However, there’s one part of the steroid discussion that drives me absolutely crazy.

Athletes, fans, and sports writers frequently argue that since baseball had no rules against steroids during what we now consider the “juiced era” players who fail drug tests cannot be punished. Going forward, these people argue, the league can suspend players who use illegal substances. But we can’t do anything about past transgressions because the collective bargaining agreement didn’t provide penalties.

Admittedly, I’m no lawyer, but when the laws of the country prohibit something, doesn’t it stand to reason that the sport shouldn’t allow it, even if it’s not expressly stated? I know professional sports organizations, owners, and athletes like to think they’re above the law, but they’re not.

In an an article today, FoxSports columnist Ken Rosenthal continues this line of reasoning. For the most part, I agree with Rosenthal’s suggestions. But then he trots out the “there was no rule” idiocy.

“Don’t tell me that steroids were against the law; baseball did not enact its own penalties until 2004,” Rosenthal writes.

What!?!?

So let me get this straight… no matter what you do, if the sport doesn’t outlaw it, then you get to continue earning millions?

Suppose it’s proven that a pitcher, long reverred for his lethal right arm, detonates a nuclear warhead in Des Moines, Iowa and kills 60,000 people. He admits his crime. If, for whatever reason, he isn’t incarcerated, can he still collect a paycheck for throwing fastball strikeouts?

Is Bud Selig, the commissioner of baseball, going to hold a press conference and say nothing could be done? Let’s tweak Selig’s recent statements on the Rodriguez situation to fit this hyperbolic example.

“What Nuke Johnson did was wrong and he will have to live with the damage he has done to his name and reputation,” Selig would say. “While Nuke deserves credit for publicly confronting the issue, there is no valid excuse for using weapons of mass destruction, and those who use them have shamed the game. It is important to remember that these recent revelations relate to pre-program activity. Under our current nuclear program, if you are caught using warheads and/or weaponized plutonomium, you will be punished. Since 2005, every player who has tested positive for such use has been suspended for as much as 50 games.”

Once again, as it’s painfully obvious, I’m not a lawyer. And the Rodriguez scenario is slightly different because he failed a test that was voluntary and supposedly anonymous.

But it seems logical to me that the laws of my country filter down to my place of employment. If you work for Random House, do they have to explicitly instruct that you’re not allowed to murder someone? If you’ve got a publishing contract with Penguin, does it have to state that you will get into trouble if you commit treason? If the rest of our society operates like baseball, then we’ll have to start including the entire federal, state, and local penal code into contracts.

  • http://www.scottmarlowe.com Scott Marlowe

    I’m a huge baseball fan, though I did get a bit sidelined by all of the juicing. It just wasn’t fun to watch anymore when you just knew guys like A-Roid, Bonds, etc. were using PED’s. So, I turned to my second favorite sport… cycling. We all know where that one’s gone.

    A big part of all of this is the power of the baseball player’s union. There’s lots of history, politics, and money there. I think in the long run it’s hurt the sport.

    As far as your point: yeah, these guys may have broken the law, but they didn’t technically break any baseball rules. Some are talking about taking away the stats these guys accumulated for that year if it can be proven they juiced. On one hand, I’m for that idea. On the other, the spitball used to be perfectly legal, until it was made illegal (baseball rules). Do we then go back and wipe out those stats for when the spitball was legal? Or, considering some of these guys are in the Hall of Fame, should they be removed?

    It’s a tough subject. I’m not for any athlete using PED’s, and the more I think about it the more I think stats or awards should be taken away. After all, in cycling, look at what happened to Floyd Landis. A-Rod should have those MVP’s stripped in like fashion.

  • Scott at Slushpile.net

    Good points, Scott.

    Mike Tirico and Scott Van Pelt addressed the idea of the baseball records, asterisks, and all that on their radio show the other day. They pointed out that most sports fans (even ones who don’t particularly follow baseball) know that Hank Aaron’s record for homeruns was 755. It’s an iconic figure for sports fans.

    However, no one can tell you how many homeruns Barry Bonds has. Even though he just recently surpassed the Hammer, and it should be a familiar number, no one knows about it.

    Tirico and Van Pelt argued that fans have already sort of scrubbed Bonds’ record from the sports consciousness. Influenced by the belief he used steroids, fans already discount Bonds’ stats.

    So even though Major League Baseball may not vacate the record books, the fans have already done just that.

    I thought that was an interesting way of looking at the issue.

  • http://www.coffeerama.com Joe

    at this point i can hardly remember whether using steroids in pro sports is illegal or not