Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Players could terminate steroid policy

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Centerville,OH
    Posts
    666

    Players could terminate steroid policy

    I found this story earlier. Looks like there could be some serious negotiations in the future. I couldn't imagine that the players would want to scrap the steroid policy. But at the same time I don't think they are happy about having amphetimines included and if the Steroid Probe becomes far to invasive they could push the issue just to make it know that they are a very strong union.

    http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5591744

    Baseball's union could scrap new drug policy

    Associated Press
    Posted: 57 minutes ago

    NEW YORK (AP) - Major league players can scrap the sport's toughened drug rules if they don't have a new labor contract by August, a provision drawing attention from congressmen who pushed for the strengthened policy.

    If players and owners don't agree to a new labor contract by Aug. 1, the union has until Aug. 15 to unilaterally end the new drug policy as of Dec. 19, when the current collective bargaining agreement expires.

    If players terminate the new policy and the sides play 2007 without a labor contract, the 2005 drug rules would be in effect.

    After being contacted Tuesday about that provision by The Associated Press, House Government Reform Committee chairman Tom Davis sent a letter to baseball commissioner Bud Selig and union head Donald Fehr saying it "raises congressional concern."

    Davis asked Major League Baseball and the union "to reassure the Committee, in writing" that the clause "does not leave open the possibility, under any circumstances, that the 2007 season will be played subject to the 2005 drug testing policy."

    Davis' committee held a steroids hearing in March 2005, when the witnesses included Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro and Jose Canseco. Davis was one of a handful of representatives and senators who sponsored bills last year proposing to mandate stronger steroid testing and penalties for U.S. pro sports.

    Spurred by that threat of legislation, baseball players and owners agreed in November to tougher penalties for steroid use starting this season, including 50 games for a first offense, 100 games for a second, and a lifetime ban for a third, plus testing for amphetamines. The previous steroid penalties were a 10-day suspension for a first offense, 30 days for a second offense and 60 days for a third. There was no testing or punishment for amphetamine use.

    "Obviously, the chairman is looking for reassurances that this clause will not result in baseball returning to the bad old days of a weak drug testing policy," Davis spokesman Robert White wrote in an e-mail to the AP.

    "Baseball has come too far to lose ground now," White added.

    Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the ranking Democrat on Government Reform, figures the players wouldn't exercise their right to revert back to the old steroids rules.

    "Congress will be closely monitoring any changes to baseball's steroid policy and it is inconceivable to me that baseball or the union would weaken the policy they adopted last year," Waxman said in a statement e-mailed to the AP.

    Fehr said the reason for the provision was to allow players to put all topics, including drug-testing, on the bargaining table in the event a labor deal isn't agreed to by August. The sides have had preliminary discussions prior to bargaining.

    "Obviously, we carved out one issue from the Basic Agreement, and dealt with it early in the context of a renegotiation," said Rob Manfred, baseball's executive vice president for labor relations. "I think the provision was an effort to restore the balance that would have naturally existed if we had addressed all the issues at the same time."

    Baseball played most of the 2002 season without a labor contract before reaching an agreement on Aug. 30, hours before players were set to strike.

    Sen. Jim Bunning, a Hall of Famer pitcher, sponsored a bill on steroid testing and said legislation remains an option.

    "Sen. Bunning has no reason to believe anybody wants to go back on this deal. ... But if there is any sort of backsliding, his bill remains on the calendar and could be brought back at any time," spokesman Mike Reynard said.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    saboforthird
    Guest

    Re: Players could terminate steroid policy

    I think that anyone that tries to go back to the 2005 drug policy doesn't have the best interests of the sport at heart. Wonder if Selig gives a dump.

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Centerville,OH
    Posts
    666

    Re: Players could terminate steroid policy

    The players will use this leverage to get more money out of the owners. They probably will try to get revenue sharing reduced and the luxury tax limit increased to small market teams can't just let the Yankees millions roll into their pockets.

  5. #4
    Hisssssssss Yachtzee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Land of the Lost
    Posts
    7,254

    Re: Players could terminate steroid policy

    I think that's a dangerous tactic if the Players' Union takes it. The owners can always use Congress as a fall back position. If Congress sets the steroid policy, it could very well include criminal penalties.
    Burn down the disco. Hang the blessed DJ. Because the music that he constantly plays, it says nothing to me about my life.

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    580

    Re: Players could terminate steroid policy

    Yeah if I was the Owners i would dare the players to try that. No chance of that happening. Congress would be all over that in a heartbeat.... And the new penalty from congress would be no less than 2 years on the first positive test and like Yachtzee said look for criminal penalties.

  7. #6
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,763

    Re: Players could terminate steroid policy

    Quote Originally Posted by Shaknb8k
    Yeah if I was the Owners i would dare the players to try that. No chance of that happening. Congress would be all over that in a heartbeat.... And the new penalty from congress would be no less than 2 years on the first positive test and like Yachtzee said look for criminal penalties.
    Yep. This is the very rare issue where the owners could probably take a "go ahead, make my day" position.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25