Red Sox Chick/Toeing the Rubber

Because you always need a backup plan

Who propped you up when you were stopped low

Big Papi in 2007.  Photo by Kelly O'Connor/ and used with permission

Big Papi in 2007. Photo by Kelly O'Connor/ and used with permission

I’d love to be one of those people not bothered by finding out that players have used PEDs but I’m not.  There have been times when I could make excuses and understand it but, generally speaking, it depresses the hell out of me that so many players decided to cheat on such a high level, leaving the players who didn’t cheat in the dust.

I’m also not one of those fans who says “never my guy”.  I’ve written before that I have a list of Sox players in my head that, if it became public that they used, wouldn’t surprise me.  Manny Ramirez wasn’t on that list prior to this year…neither was David Ortiz.

So the New York Times is reporting that “multiple lawyers and others connected to the pending litigation” have admitted in interviews that David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez are on the list of players who tested positive for PEDs in 2003.  Call me kooky but I’d like a little more proof than that before we go destroying a man’s reputation.  The fact that I’d like more proof than “some guys told us but we can’t tell you who and we can’t tell you what they tested  positive for” doesn’t mean I’m totally disregarding it.  I’m not.  It’s definitely worthy of being mulled over.  And if it turns out to be true, I won’t lie, I’ll be heartsick.  Saddened that someone I looked up to as a player is in the same group that I look down on for being cheaters.

Nothing, even news like this, will take away my euphoria over 2004 and 2007. (And I should point out that positive tests in 2003 don’t mean users in 2004.)   And if there is a Sox fan out there who didn’t think some of the players on those teams (at the very least the 2004 team or, really, the 2003 team) were using then they’re delusional….but Papi?  Of all the players, Papi?  It’ll really be a tough pill to swallow if it’s true.

Bonds had Fainaru-Wada and Williams showing me proof.  MLB outed Palmeiro.  Giambi, Pettitte and ARod all admitted (somewhat) to what they did.  I’m not happy with a couple of whispers slipped to the New York Times potentially destroying a man’s reputation.  So I wait.  I wait for Papi to give more of a statement than “I’m not talking about that anymore”.  He’s the one who told us he did it “the right way”.  I want him to tell us again.

I also want the list published in its entirety with MLB verifying that it is, indeed, the real list.  Enough of this dropping one name after another like someone slowly ripping off a bandage.  Let us deal with it all at once and finally try to move past it.

I’m a bit of a realist but today I’m going to be a bit of a cynic and wait to see if we get a real story out of this.


July 30, 2009 - Posted by | 2009 | , ,


  1. “Let us deal with it all at once”

    As long as we understand that the 2003 list is not exhaustive–it would have been very easy for steroid users who knew what they were doing to test clean (see Radomski’s book)…

    … and as long as we keep in mind that there are still drugs in the sport, given the range of PEDs (most notably HGH) for which we don’t have urine tests. (Until the players’ union sanctions split-sample blood tests, this is all a little silly.)

    Because of these two issues, as well as the fact that every player taking the 2003 test was assured it was confidential, I’ve been of the opinion that the list should not be released. The risk of folks who don’t really get it thinking that every user had been identified and that the sport was now clean was more than I wanted to take. But I’m starting to think that rather than have something come out every couple of months, we might as well get it over with in a controlled fashion.

    Comment by KellyO | July 30, 2009 | Reply

  2. Nomar’s interview was pretty amazing. Haven’t heard him talk that much…EVER.

    You have to admire how Papi’s handling this. There’s a reason we love him.

    Comment by becks | July 30, 2009 | Reply

  3. I think my want for the release of the list is starting to have more to do with preventing these sneak attacks. Not to ostracize the guys on the list.

    If anyone believes only 104 people in MLB used PEDs…well, then I don’t know what to say about that.

    I haven’t heard Nomar’s interview yet…I look forward to it.

    Comment by Cyn | July 30, 2009 | Reply

  4. How is he handling this any different from any of the others? He was surprised to learn that he was on the list and doesn’t know what he was caught using. He’s apologized and is going to look into it. We’ve heard that from many other players before

    He has repeatedly and publicly denied using PED’s and called for more testing and stricter penalties for those who are caught. Just like A-Rod, and others like him, you can’t publicly deny it, then put the genie back in the bottle when the truth comes out.

    What’s so admirable? Admitting a mistake after you’ve been caught?

    Comment by Walter | July 30, 2009 | Reply

  5. Let’s wait, let Papi look into the situation, and have his say, before we judge. Papi deserves that from us.

    Giant hugs to Nomar. I do think that the way the testing was done (telling the players it was anonymous, when it was not), was completely unfair, and they should look at their own union for that.

    Torri Hunter-shut up.

    Cyn, glad you are looking after your own happiness.

    Comment by Dewey | July 30, 2009 | Reply

  6. Talking about how unfair the testing was is a red herring-reminds me of how everybody jumped on Jose Canseco when he came out with Juiced. Nobody liked what he had to say, so they jumped on the messenger-even though he has been proven right most of the time. In this case, the 2003 testing program is the messenger. I suspect it’s the fact that you don’t like what it tells you more than any concern you have over the leak. If it hadn’t been leaked, you would never know, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

    David Ortiz took some kind of PED. Just because we found out from a report that should not have been made public doesn’t change that or somehow make him more virtuous than any of the other guys who juiced.

    Comment by Lou Dyer Jones | July 30, 2009 | Reply

  7. “I’m not happy with a couple of whispers slipped to the New York Times potentially destroying a man’s reputation.”

    Remember, ARod only admitted after his name from that same report was leaked. If you believed it when he was outed earlier this year, *before* he confirmed it, than you are a bit of a hypocrite.

    Comment by Lou Dyer Jones | July 30, 2009 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: