PDA

View Full Version : Mets' Guillermo Mota suspended for 50 games



BCubb2003
11-01-2006, 04:10 PM
NEW YORK (AP) — Reliever Guillermo Mota was suspended for 50 games Wednesday for violating Major League Baseball's drug policy.

The 33-year-old pitcher finished this season with the New York Mets and filed for free agency Tuesday. His suspension will take effect at the start of next season.

"I have no one to blame but myself," Mota said. "I used extremely poor judgment and deserve to be held accountable.

dougdirt
11-01-2006, 04:35 PM
Well, at least he fessed up to it and didnt try to say its a mistake, or something that was in his vitamins.

paintmered
11-01-2006, 04:44 PM
"I have no one to blame but myself," Mota said. "I used extremely poor judgment and deserve to be held accountable.

Finally a player takes responsibility for his actions. I don't applaud his actions, but I applaud him for owning up to his actions.

KronoRed
11-01-2006, 04:47 PM
Agreed, a player standing up and saying he was wrong? shocking.

westofyou
11-01-2006, 04:48 PM
Pretty vague, maybe it was recreational?

If a vague definition protects the players rights then it will raise future complications in the assumption department. What happens when someone pulls a Rick Leach and gets an AP wire like this? Will everyone assume steroids? or will they even ponder other substances?

Chip R
11-01-2006, 04:51 PM
Pretty vague, maybe it was recreational?

If a vague definition protects the players rights then it will raise future complications in the assumption department. What happens when someone pulls a Rick Leach and gets an AP wire like this? Will everyone assume steroids? or will they even ponder other substances?


If it's not steroids, wouldn't they just go for treatment or something like that? I'm not quite up on the changes they made to the drug agreement but I thought that steroids was an automatic suspension and other drugs just gave you a warning if you went to treatment.

Heath
11-01-2006, 05:11 PM
Well, that's gonna hurt come FA time....Yikes.

OnBaseMachine
11-01-2006, 08:14 PM
With the way he pitched in the playoffs, I'd say he got ripped off.

Wheelhouse
11-01-2006, 09:00 PM
Agreed, a player standing up and saying he was wrong? shocking.

Here here. Put this in contrast with "Big Mac". BTW our congressmen gave him a bit of a pass--had I heard the "I'm here to talk about the future" line as a congressman, I would have said, "No, Mr. McGwire I will TELL you why you are here: you have been subpoenad by the United States Congress to testify about potential criminal activity in Major League Baseball. We will determine and inform you as to your why you are here."

remdog
11-01-2006, 09:27 PM
Pretty vague, maybe it was recreational?

If a vague definition protects the players rights then it will raise future complications in the assumption department. What happens when someone pulls a Rick Leach and gets an AP wire like this?

I'm not really sure what you're referring to here. Could you be more specific?

Professional tennis has a very strong drug policy including random testing at tournaments throughout the year and a two year suspension for anyone testing positive. Rick Leach has won multiple Grand Slam doubles events and was ranked number one in the world in doubles in something like twelve straight years (sometime during the season but not necessarily at the end of the season). I never heard anyone opine that he was on drugs.

Rem

westofyou
11-01-2006, 09:29 PM
Rick Leach

The baseball player and former UM QB

Reds Nd2
11-01-2006, 10:46 PM
Pretty vague, maybe it was recreational?

Drugs of abuse are still only tested for when there is probable cause. A first time positive test for amphetamines requires mandatory evaluation and follow-up testing. Subsequent positive tests for amphetamines will carry suspensions of 25 games, 80 games and up to a lifetime ban.

The fifty game suspension tells us that it was a first time positive for a banned performance enhancing substance.

Chip R
11-01-2006, 11:11 PM
So, would anyone want to sign him for the Reds? He's a cheater, but an honest one.

remdog
11-01-2006, 11:17 PM
The baseball player and former UM QB

Oh. Him. Some of us don't pay much attention to UM football. :evil:

Still don't understand what you mean when you say "....pulls a Rick Leach...".

Rem

Jr's Boy
11-01-2006, 11:18 PM
So can this guy pitch in the minors while he's on suspension?Better yet i'm sure he'll pitch in the Dominican for the time being.

Reds Nd2
11-01-2006, 11:30 PM
So, would anyone want to sign him for the Reds? He's a cheater, but an honest one.

He could room with Alex Sánchez on the road.

westofyou
11-02-2006, 12:01 AM
Oh. Him. Some of us don't pay much attention to UM football. :evil:

Still don't understand what you mean when you say "....pulls a Rick Leach...".

Rem
On August 6, 1990, Leach is suspended for 60 days by then baseball commissioner Fay Vincent following a positive drug test.

GAC
11-02-2006, 07:40 AM
With the way he pitched in the playoffs, I'd say he got ripped off.

Some people in this world also think pot makes you smarter, and that cocaine intensifies your personality.

But as Bill Cosby once said.... "Yeah, but what if you were a A-hole to begin with?" :lol:

I'm no expert on steroids by any means, but all it does it add muscle right? Which I can understand might help you to hit the ball farther, and maybe even throw it harder; but It doesn't add talent/ability that wasn't there to begin with.

It wouldn't have helped Tony Womack. :p:

Hoosier Red
11-02-2006, 07:51 AM
Here here. Put this in contrast with "Big Mac". BTW our congressmen gave him a bit of a pass--had I heard the "I'm here to talk about the future" line as a congressman, I would have said, "No, Mr. McGwire I will TELL you why you are here: you have been subpoenad by the United States Congress to testify about potential criminal activity in Major League Baseball. We will determine and inform you as to your why you are here."

Or they could have said, "No Mr. McGwire, you are here because I'm more worried about grandstanding than actually taking care of problems that matter."

They didn't need to say anything more to him. He's already guilty in 99% of America's eyes.

cincinnati chili
11-02-2006, 08:28 AM
Drugs of abuse are still only tested for when there is probable cause.


I didn't know this, so I looked it up. I was very surprised to see that Ephedra is considered a drug of abuse, rather than a performance enhancer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_drug_policy

That makes zero sense to me. 1. Didn't Ephedra (allegedly) kill Steve Bechler? (unlike, say, marijuana) and 2. Doesn't ephedra give one a competitive advantage if used properly?

Seems like it should be a performance-enhancer.

vaticanplum
11-02-2006, 09:00 AM
Drugs of abuse are still only tested for when there is probable cause.

Ok, at face value, I'm not quite sure what that means. How do they determine it? Is there a list of things that qualify as "probable cause" or can they just say, dude, we think you looked more jacked than you used to? And more to the point...can that ever get hairy? ie. "They told me they had probable cause, but I didn't see any, so they had no reason for this test." (like a search warrant etc.)

Why aren't they allowed to just do random testing? I always thought they were; I guess I never considered any other way. I'm mostly in the dark about this so I apologize if all of the above sounds stupid; I'm just curious.

Chip R
11-02-2006, 09:58 AM
Ok, at face value, I'm not quite sure what that means. How do they determine it? Is there a list of things that qualify as "probable cause" or can they just say, dude, we think you looked more jacked than you used to? And more to the point...can that ever get hairy? ie. "They told me they had probable cause, but I didn't see any, so they had no reason for this test." (like a search warrant etc.)

Why aren't they allowed to just do random testing? I always thought they were; I guess I never considered any other way. I'm mostly in the dark about this so I apologize if all of the above sounds stupid; I'm just curious.


I think what he's saying is that you can only test for drugs of abuse (pot, coke, heroin, greenies, etc.) if you have probable cause. With steroids, you don't need probable cause because they aren't "drugs of abuse" but "performance enhancers". I believe with steroids, they test everyone from Spring Training on and can then test them again at random during the season.

BCubb2003
11-02-2006, 05:52 PM
According to this story, it was a performance-enhancing drug.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2645976

Associated Press

NEW YORK -- Reliever Guillermo Mota was suspended for 50 games Wednesday after testing positive for a performance-enhancing substance, becoming the third player penalized this year for violating Major League Baseball's toughened drug policy.

Guillermo Mota took responsibility for his suspension on Wednesday, saying, "I used extremely poor judgment and deserve to be held accountable."

In announcing the suspension, the commissioner's office did not say why Mota was suspended. His failed drug test was confirmed by a baseball official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the specifics weren't included in the release.

GOOCH
11-03-2006, 10:29 AM
Cheaters never win...

D.GOOCH

Chip R
11-03-2006, 10:51 AM
Cheaters never win...

D.GOOCH

Sammy Sosa won an MVP. Just sayin'.

vaticanplum
11-03-2006, 02:29 PM
Cheaters never win...

D.GOOCH

You are altering the proverbs. cheaters never prosper. but they win all the time.

Reds Nd2
11-07-2006, 03:50 PM
I didn't know this, so I looked it up. I was very surprised to see that Ephedra is considered a drug of abuse, rather than a performance enhancer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_drug_policy

That makes zero sense to me. 1. Didn't Ephedra (allegedly) kill Steve Bechler? (unlike, say, marijuana) and 2. Doesn't ephedra give one a competitive advantage if used properly?

Seems like it should be a performance-enhancer.

Ephedra, or to be more precise, it's ephedrine alkaloids potentially act like a stimulate on the nervous system. The Rand Report (http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/95n-0304-bkg0003-ref07-12-Chapter3.pdf) failed to find any trials on the effects of herbal ephedra and athletic performance. However, ephedrine (an alkaloid of ephedra) combined with caffeine has shown a modest effect on very-short-term (1-2 hours after a single dose) athletic performance in a highly selected physically fit population (http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/EphedraandEphedrine.asp). So while it may be considered a performance enhancer, it isn't an anabolic steroid and would be listed as a drug of abuse.

Reds Nd2
11-07-2006, 04:03 PM
Ok, at face value, I'm not quite sure what that means. How do they determine it? Is there a list of things that qualify as "probable cause" or can they just say, dude, we think you looked more jacked than you used to? And more to the point...can that ever get hairy? ie. "They told me they had probable cause, but I didn't see any, so they had no reason for this test." (like a search warrant etc.)

Thanks to the link provided by Chili, we have our answer. If one of the Health Policy Advisory Committee panel members has evidence that a player has used, possessed, or sold banned substances in the last 12 months, they call a conference and discuss the evidence with the other members. If a majority vote to test the suspected player is reached, then testing will take place immediately, after no later than 48 hours.


Why aren't they allowed to just do random testing? I always thought they were; I guess I never considered any other way. I'm mostly in the dark about this so I apologize if all of the above sounds stupid; I'm just curious.

They do perform random testing for all drugs at the minor league level because players not on the 40 man roster aren't protected by the players association. The reason they don't at the major league level is because of privacy concerns of the Major League Baseball Players Association. Things like testing have to be collectively bargained between the owners and players.

You don't have to appologize for asking. It was a very good question.


You are altering the proverbs.

I hate when that happens.

Joseph
11-08-2006, 06:00 PM
So, would anyone want to sign him for the Reds? He's a cheater, but an honest one.

I'm not up on how all the rules work, but listening to XM yesterday or day before they were discussing Mota.

They said essentially his career was over as a Major Leaguer because a player under this type suspension was not eligible to be replaced on the 25 man roster, so in essence, any team signing him would do so knowing they would play essentially the first two months of the season one man short.

Even the Reds aren't that crazy.

Though we did carry 3 catchers last season....

RedFanAlways1966
11-08-2006, 11:14 PM
Other trouble that Mota had below. Mota took the loss when the REDS beat him and the Dodgers in 11 innings Apr. 24. 2003 (Reggie Taylor game winning single w/ 1 out to score Felipe Lopez). It was his first appearance after the DUI arrest.

July 8, 2004
Dodgers reliever pleads no contest to reckless driving

GLENDALE, Calif. -- Los Angeles Dodgers reliever Guillermo
Mota pleaded no contest Thursday to a misdemeanor reckless driving
charge stemming from his arrest in April 2003.

Superior Court Judge John Doyle ordered Mota to serve three
years probation and pay $1,500 in fines, said Jane Robison of the
Los Angeles County district attorney's office.

Mota, who is from the Dominican Republic, also will perform
Spanish-language public service announcements about the dangers of
drinking and driving, Robison said.

Mota was charged last year with one misdemeanor count each of
DUI and driving while having a .08 percent or higher blood-alcohol
content. Those charges were dismissed as a result of the plea
agreement reached with prosecutors.

Mota was allegedly driving about 85 mph on a freeway in Glendale
when he was stopped by a California Highway Patrol officer.

cincinnati chili
11-12-2006, 02:04 PM
Ephedra, or to be more precise, it's ephedrine alkaloids potentially act like a stimulate on the nervous system. The Rand Report (http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/95n-0304-bkg0003-ref07-12-Chapter3.pdf) failed to find any trials on the effects of herbal ephedra and athletic performance. However, ephedrine (an alkaloid of ephedra) combined with caffeine has shown a modest effect on very-short-term (1-2 hours after a single dose) athletic performance in a highly selected physically fit population (http://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/EphedraandEphedrine.asp). So while it may be considered a performance enhancer, it isn't an anabolic steroid and would be listed as a drug of abuse.

Thanks for this great info. I now see the argument, but I still think there's a good counter-argument. On diet alone, I would argue that ephedra is a performance-enhancer. Players that have trouble keeping the weight off, who use ephedra, stand a much better chance of peak performance than those who don't use ephedra.

Jpup
11-13-2006, 01:16 AM
Thanks for this great info. I now see the argument, but I still think there's a good counter-argument. On diet alone, I would argue that ephedra is a performance-enhancer. Players that have trouble keeping the weight off, who use ephedra, stand a much better chance of peak performance than those who don't use ephedra.

Ephredra isn't going to help you hit or throw a baseball any better than you already could. I used to take Stackers when they contained ephedra when I worked on 3rd shift. They do give you energy, but saying they would enhance your performance on the baseball field is pushing it IMO. They are really nothing different than a caffeine pill.