Why didn't MLB discipline the 104 players who tested positive in '03?
Why does MLB have a PED policy but hardly enforces it?
The league enforced what the union collectively bargained to allow them to enforce.
This was the only way the union would agree to any kind of testing back then. Like salsa said, it was kind of a trial in that if a certain threshold wasn't reached, there would be no more testing. The agreement at the time was that names would not be released, just the number of players who tested positive.
This was all the union would agree to back then, nothing more.
Not sure how Sports Illustrated found the names, but they've proven to be very good at investigative journalism. And very credible. I don't feel sorry for A-Rod or any other player whose name is released, even if they thought the results would be sealed. Serves them all right for lying to us for so long.
It wasn't until congress became involved that Gene Orza was forced to concede to more testing with names being released, etc. Congress made some veiled threats to MLB's anti-trust status.
The union has been dragged into every bit of testing kicking and screaming. If I was a clean baseball player (assuming there are a few), I would be furious my union is making me decide if I have to take illegal and harmful drugs to keep up with the players who are taking it, who they're protecting.
I wonder how Gene Orza is going to feel if there is a Lyle Alzado down the road, a player who dies because he took steroids.
Why doesn't the league test for HGH right now? The union won't agree to it. As far as we know, each and every player in the league may be taking HGH. There is no way to know. We're finding out the best thing to do is probably assume all are guilty.
And if it's true Orza was tipping off players back then as to when they'd be 'randomly' tested...well that's just criminal.
Sandra