1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Giambi tests positive for amphetamines?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by sportschick, May 23, 2007.

  1. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    Not many reporters want to address the leaking topic (nor surprisingly) but Ken Rosenthall didn't mind:


    MLB probably can't suspend him — Giambi didn't say what he did or when he did it. The Yankees probably can't void his contract — they declined to pursue that option after Giambi admitted his steroid use to a federal grand jury, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

    But another form of punishment was available, and the headline on the back page of the Daily News said it all:


    Gotcha, Jason. Gotcha good.

    Don't get me wrong. It's a reporter's job to report. I want to know who is cheating. Many of you want to know who is cheating. But individual privacy is being violated, just as it was when grand-jury testimony from the BALCO trial — confidential testimony, according to U.S. law — was leaked to the Chronicle.

    It's too high a price.

    The first time a player tests positive for amphetamines, the player is not penalized and the information remains confidential, according to MLB's amphetamines policy.

    While a number of players surely have tested positive, Giambi and Barry Bonds are the only two we know about, thanks to the New York Daily News.

    Giambi and Bonds, two players who MLB wishes would go away.

    Coincidence? It hardly seems likely.
  2. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    I just listened to a replay of the interview Quinn did on "Mike and Mike" this morning, and he said his sources are good, which obviously is what he's going to say.

    You think something came out after the statements he made last week as Rosenthal is asserting?
  3. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    cran, Not sure why you'd think no one (reporters) want to address it. It's fairly obvious. I heard, saw and talked to several people yesterday suggesting that based on the timing of it and the circumstances, it was almost certainly mlb trying to punish Giambi. If he failed a test within the last year, it was at the least curious that a little birdy decided to whisper about it now--right after he pissed people off--and violate their confidentiality rules. Among the places I saw and heard that discussed: ESPN on the air and by Buster Olney. From what I know personally, there were a lot of people at mlb saying, "Who the F is this guy? He hit the lottery with a $120 million contract based on inflated steroid numbers. He needs to shut up." I'm not saying I entirely agree with that, but that was a common sentiment and if they wanted to make a threatening statement to him, leaking that info if it's true was a pointed way to do it. Hell, making it into a story even if it is total BS is an interesting way to screw with the guy if they are that annoyed by him.
  4. farmerjerome

    farmerjerome Active Member

    To me, this says GUILTY:

    If you're innocent, you deny. Guilty people say no comment.
  5. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    The reason I said that was because a prominent baseball writer yesterday told me he wouldn't get into the topic because he's dependent on leaks himself and didn't want to contribute to an atmosphere that would inhibit more leaking.

    There's no wiggle room or gray area. Nobody should be supportive of an individual breaking the terms of a legal agreement that he/she has a responsibility to uphold in order to "punish" an individual. Assuming the leak is accurate, he/she breached the agreement to damage Giambi but, more importantly, he/she has hindered MLB's ability to make future agreements based on good faith.

    Before anyone gets the wrong impression, I'm not saying a reporter shouldn't accept leaks, just that it's despicable on the part of the leaker and highly damaging to the leaker's organization. Assuming it actually happened in this case, the leaker should be fired.
  6. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    cran, We are in relatively rare agreement. mlb is acted slimy--and probably stupidly if its intent really is to reach more union concessions on testing--if it was the source of a leak. It was dirty pool. I really don't think they care. It's obvious that if the report is true, it was leaked by mlb. Whoever leaked it knew it would be an obvious case of retribution.

    A reporter who can ferret out a leak that like that is just doing his or her job. So I agree with you there too. You should be trying to get stories like those.

    What I am confused about most is what to believe. The Daily News is standing by what they reported, but they didn't cite any sources. I have a lot more faith in Peter Gammons, although he questioned the report in a way that didn't call it total bullshit. It's kind of interesting to me and still leaves too much unclear before making a guess about what the truth is.
  7. Ragu --
    Of course management is going to leak the test results. It's what management does. The notion that MLB and the players are in partnership died for me during the collusion days of the mid-1980's, when management reneged on a CBA it had freely negotiated, and then lied about it in public for three years. MLB management has aimed for 30 years to get the control of the players back that it lost in the 1970's. The drug-testing mania is the latest tactic, is all.
  8. cranberry

    cranberry Well-Known Member

    I wonder if Gammons wasn't given differing information in an attempt to ameliorate the damage of the original leak and bring the situation from "guilty" back to ambiguous. Of course, leaking misinformation would be stupid, too, but these folks do have a track record.

    Fenian makes a good point. Trust levels with the union will likely return to the post-collusion days, which is to say non-existent.
  9. Lugnuts

    Lugnuts Well-Known Member

    A possible scenario. Total working theory.

    Giambi did test positive for something... a drug he's prescribed. He has to jump thru all sorts of hoops to get a waiver, explain, etc. He gives the interview to USA Today: "Maaan, I get tested more than anybody..."

    The Yankees try to void his contract and look bad in the process. How do you tell little Jimmy Yankee fan that what Jason did is tell the truth, and now the Yankees want to get rid of him.

    So someone within the Yankees leaks the positive test result.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page