The No-Win question

[ragecage]

Surely the players themselves were notified...wern't they?

I thought that was why A-rod was 'tested 9 or so times' in 2004...as Arod himself said once.

I cant help it. lol.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZPVw-Vl1ow

[StreetMedic]

Surely the players themselves were notified...wern't they?

I thought that was why A-rod was 'tested 9 or so times' in 2004...as Arod himself said once.

I think you may be at least partly right, here, Pavel.

Doesn't the CBA (assuming that's where the testing language actually lives) stipulate two tests, per player, per year? And, I think, 600 players randomly chosen for a third test?

One would imagine if A-Rod was, in fact, "tested 9 or so times" in one year, he would have at least been suspicious that they were nosing around because they caught a whiff of something banned.

[Pavelb1]

Yep. He's just upset that he traded away A-Rod and basically got nothing back for him while paying him to play for the Yankees. Maybe if Texas could've put some halfway decent pitching in front of the teams A-Rod was on, they would've won something.

I'm very much reminded of the owner in North Dallas Forty:

"We paid you! We paid you damn well!...you've betrayed me, you've betrayed my brother. You've hurt yourself and you've hurt the game"

[JayC]

One would imagine if A-Rod was, in fact, "tested 9 or so times" in one year, he would have at least been suspicious that they were nosing around because they caught a whiff of something banned.

He also later said he was jokingly exaggerating when he said nine times in a year, and he was obviously not tested that often. It doesn't happen, and never has.

[JayC]

I'm pretty sure they do that with tests NOW. With the test that A-Rod failed, according to the agreement, the samples were supposed to be destroyed.

Weren't the samples destroyed? I haven't heard either way specifically on that. What was seized by the feds in the BALCO raid (the basis of this report) was a record of the results, not the actual samples as far as I've read.

[HoustonGM]

Weren't the samples destroyed? I haven't heard either way specifically on that. What was seized by the feds in the BALCO raid (the basis of this report) was a record of the results, not the actual samples as far as I've read.

The only way that the Bonds sample could have been retested is if the samples weren't destroyed.

What I've gathered from reading multiple sources, is that this was the "plan" for anonymity. Each sample would contain a code on it. Held in a separate state was a master list that matched up codes with player names. The Feds confiscated both as part of the BALCO investigation, but only had a warrant to look at the info of the BALCO players (which, they obviously did not follow).

It's really foggy, but we know for a fact that the test was not conducted in the manner it was agreed upon. If it was, we would not be having this conversation.

[JayC]

The only way that the Bonds sample could have been retested is if the samples weren't destroyed.

But the Bonds sample is different; that's not information taken from this "list of 104 players."

Just saw this: "The union moved in April to quash the subpoena, and federal investigators obtained a search warrant and seized records from Comprehensive Drug Testing and samples from Quest Diagnostics.

Although the search warrant sought records of 10 players, the government found a spreadsheet with a list of 104 players who had tested positive; it then obtained additional search warrants and seized all records."

So the data on the 104 who failed the test comes from a spreadsheet, not from samples.

A lot of other detail here on what happened, including why the records weren't destroyed:
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/s...=ESPNHeadlines

[HoustonGM]

But the Bonds sample is different; that's not information taken from this "list of 104 players."

The sample that was retested was the sample Bonds gave for the anonymous survey test. He passed that test, and the sample was later retested as part of his investigation.

[JayC]

Here we go: "The federal agents who raided Quest Diagnostics in Las Vegas, armed with the code numbers obtained at Comprehensive Drug Testing, seized the matching urine samples for the 10 players. A month later, agents went back and took the urine samples for all the players who tested positive in 2003."

Bonds, of course, would have been among that first ten (that refers to the ten players who testified before the grand jury investigating Balco). But they do apparently have the samples to match up to the 104 names. That list and the actual samples were stored at two different facilities.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/04/sp...tml?ref=sports

[HoustonGM]

Yep. Storing the names and coded samples separately was their method of "anonymity."

[gRYFYN1]

Yep. Storing the names and coded samples separately was their method of "anonymity."

Its almost enough to make you think the league and/or players union held this information intentionally, to be used later.

[JayC]

Its almost enough to make you think the league and/or players union held this information intentionally, to be used later.

The union, not the league, had control of the information. Their explanation was in an article I linked to earlier. According to Donald Fehr, they received the results on November 11, "finalized" them (whatever that means) on the 13th, and notified players of the results on Novermber 14. Then they began the "first steps" of the "process of destruction of the testing materials and records." But on November 19 they learned the records were subject to subpoena, so it would be illegal to destroy them. So... they didn't do it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/s...=ESPNHeadlines

[Pavelb1]

The union, not the league, had control of the information. Their explanation was in an article I linked to earlier. According to Donald Fehr, they received the results on November 11, "finalized" them (whatever that means) on the 13th, and notified players of the results on Novermber 14. Then they began the "first steps" of the "process of destruction of the testing materials and records." But on November 19 they learned the records were subject to subpoena, so it would be illegal to destroy them. So... they didn't do it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/s...=ESPNHeadlines

1. Well that answers part of original question, 'were the players notified'. And again how in the world can Posada answer "I hope not"?

2. Arn't ALL non-national security records subject to subpeona? Does that mean it's illegal to destroy my grocery list?

[HoustonGM]

And it still begs the question as to why the anonymous test wasn't anonymous.

[Jeffy25]

Interview on MLB network...Okay I need an answer to a question here:

When a player failed/fails a drug test..HIS TEAM is notified as well as the player...right? I mean how can Tom Hicks say he's 'shocked and betrayed' when he should know Arod failed a steroids test.

I don't believe any of the players or teams knew what players failed the tests in question about A-Rod. It was used for numbers sake only....or so I thought.