Comments on: News of the Day – 2/19/09 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/ Development site for Bronx Banter Blog's upcoming look and feel Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:14:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: The Hawk http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155049 The Hawk Fri, 20 Feb 2009 04:19:16 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155049 [27][28] Well it totally depends on who was on the list. It seems unlikely that someone even NEAR the same class of fame as A Rod is on it ... Well maybe it's hard to say, but I figure the biggest story by far is out. If there was anything close, that would be a huge story too and I assume would have leaked as well. I'm not buying this vendetta against A Rod business. The simplest explanation for why his name was leaked is that his is by far the biggest. It's funny because it supports his "amateur hour" story. I don't know why people are so skeptical that he was juicing in such a haphazard way, but don't question the fact that he didn't stop for the test. Seems to me those two things actually compliment each other. If he was truly the superhuman professional control freak, he would have known what he was taking, sure, but he also would have knocked it off when the time came. [27][28] Well it totally depends on who was on the list. It seems unlikely that someone even NEAR the same class of fame as A Rod is on it … Well maybe it’s hard to say, but I figure the biggest story by far is out. If there was anything close, that would be a huge story too and I assume would have leaked as well. I’m not buying this vendetta against A Rod business. The simplest explanation for why his name was leaked is that his is by far the biggest.

It’s funny because it supports his “amateur hour” story. I don’t know why people are so skeptical that he was juicing in such a haphazard way, but don’t question the fact that he didn’t stop for the test. Seems to me those two things actually compliment each other. If he was truly the superhuman professional control freak, he would have known what he was taking, sure, but he also would have knocked it off when the time came.

]]> By: 3rd gen yankee fan http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155048 3rd gen yankee fan Fri, 20 Feb 2009 02:28:15 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155048 Bernie was at camp! Bernie was at camp! :-D Bernie was at camp! Bernie was at camp! :-D

]]> By: Chyll Will http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155047 Chyll Will Thu, 19 Feb 2009 22:58:11 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155047 [27] <b> My interest is in how this would be spinning if 104 guys had been named. (And I am NOT saying it would even be ‘better’ if that had happened, just different in a big way, and a LOT less about Rodriguez.)</b> <i>MLB is reeling today as the names of 104 major league ball players who had failed a major drug screening test conducted in 2003 before MLB mandated steroid testing were published in the current issue of Sports Illustrated. Among the over one-hundred names were several well-known players; the biggest name by far being arguably the best player in baseball, third baseman <b>Alex Rodriguez</b> of the New York Yankees...</i> That, or some variation with "Alex Rodriguez..." leading off. {/cynicism} [27] My interest is in how this would be spinning if 104 guys had been named. (And I am NOT saying it would even be ‘better’ if that had happened, just different in a big way, and a LOT less about Rodriguez.)

MLB is reeling today as the names of 104 major league ball players who had failed a major drug screening test conducted in 2003 before MLB mandated steroid testing were published in the current issue of Sports Illustrated. Among the over one-hundred names were several well-known players; the biggest name by far being arguably the best player in baseball, third baseman Alex Rodriguez of the New York Yankees…

That, or some variation with “Alex Rodriguez…” leading off.

{/cynicism}

]]> By: Horace Clarke Era http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155046 Horace Clarke Era Thu, 19 Feb 2009 22:30:31 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155046 I hope I'm not sounding as if I believe Selena Roberts should be 'in trouble' for this piece, as if she committed a crime. No. And I agree with JL (thanks for the data) that throwing a reporter in jail is a pretty major 'statement' and needs equally major reasons. I think whomever leaked the 104 names did commit (best I can tell) a criminal act. RECEIVING that info (Roberts, the NY Times people maybe, though they haven't actually said that, have they) isn't, as I understand it, a crime. She chased a story, was priming her book, and got lucky in a big way. The single name leaked certainly helps her a lot. My interest is in how this would be spinning if 104 guys had been named. (And I am NOT saying it would even be 'better' if that had happened, just different in a big way, and a LOT less about Rodriguez.) I hope I’m not sounding as if I believe Selena Roberts should be ‘in trouble’ for this piece, as if she committed a crime. No. And I agree with JL (thanks for the data) that throwing a reporter in jail is a pretty major ‘statement’ and needs equally major reasons. I think whomever leaked the 104 names did commit (best I can tell) a criminal act. RECEIVING that info (Roberts, the NY Times people maybe, though they haven’t actually said that, have they) isn’t, as I understand it, a crime. She chased a story, was priming her book, and got lucky in a big way. The single name leaked certainly helps her a lot.

My interest is in how this would be spinning if 104 guys had been named. (And I am NOT saying it would even be ‘better’ if that had happened, just different in a big way, and a LOT less about Rodriguez.)

]]> By: JL25and3 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155045 JL25and3 Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:09:01 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155045 Despite what happened with Fainura-Wada and Williams, I think they'd have trouble compelling Roberts to reveal her sources. There aren't any federal shield laws, but the Supreme Court did set a fairly high standard in Branzburg v. Hayes: the government has to "convincingly show a substantial relation between the information sought and a subject of overriding and compelling state interest." I have trouble seeing that here. Of course, I have trouble seeing it with Fainura-Wada and Williams, and the standard is ambiguous, so who knows? But because the standard is ambiguous, the fact that it held there doesn't mean it will hold here. (There's also a whole lot less information that was revealed, isn't there?) Finally, the change from Bush to Obama might make a big difference. The government might well be less likely to seek a subpoena, and Holder might well be more likely to heed the protests and appeals that Gonzalez ignored. I don't see this as anywhere near important enough to warrant that drastic an action. Despite what happened with Fainura-Wada and Williams, I think they’d have trouble compelling Roberts to reveal her sources.

There aren’t any federal shield laws, but the Supreme Court did set a fairly high standard in Branzburg v. Hayes: the government has to “convincingly show a substantial relation between the information sought and a subject of overriding and compelling state interest.”

I have trouble seeing that here. Of course, I have trouble seeing it with Fainura-Wada and Williams, and the standard is ambiguous, so who knows?

But because the standard is ambiguous, the fact that it held there doesn’t mean it will hold here. (There’s also a whole lot less information that was revealed, isn’t there?)

Finally, the change from Bush to Obama might make a big difference. The government might well be less likely to seek a subpoena, and Holder might well be more likely to heed the protests and appeals that Gonzalez ignored.

I don’t see this as anywhere near important enough to warrant that drastic an action.

]]> By: Diane Firstman http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155044 Diane Firstman Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:48:52 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155044 [24] Comment of the day nominee .... [24]

Comment of the day nominee ….

]]> By: Chyll Will http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155043 Chyll Will Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:45:02 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155043 [19] I question how the information they obtained by illegal means is even helpful or important. It's one thing if its government info that has an effect on society in general, but baseball does not have the same reach, regardless of it's popularity. What are reporters, and by extension government officials prosecuting; if not the use of questionable enhancements before they were declared illegal in MLB, then the actual trading of banned substances? They'd also have to excoriate certain countries that either don't consider them illegal, or turn a blind eye to their use. After all, certain countries have a trade embargo imposed on them for ostensibly political reasons (others to allegedly marginalize competition). Where do reporters stand on this? [19] I question how the information they obtained by illegal means is even helpful or important. It’s one thing if its government info that has an effect on society in general, but baseball does not have the same reach, regardless of it’s popularity. What are reporters, and by extension government officials prosecuting; if not the use of questionable enhancements before they were declared illegal in MLB, then the actual trading of banned substances? They’d also have to excoriate certain countries that either don’t consider them illegal, or turn a blind eye to their use. After all, certain countries have a trade embargo imposed on them for ostensibly political reasons (others to allegedly marginalize competition). Where do reporters stand on this?

]]> By: Dimelo http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155042 Dimelo Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:38:57 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155042 [17] Here is the link: http://tinyurl.com/bvpxkt . And here's the part I'm referring to: <i>The Times had been chasing the A-Rod story. “We were working on it for many weeks,” said Tom Jolly, the paper’s sports editor. “It’s a story whenever there’s smoke around A-Rod for a period of time, and we were chasing that smoke.” </i> Again, I don't see how Roberts is the problem here. She was given information, which apparently was being shared amongst her other peers, and she just beat them to the punch. I am not defending Roberts the person, I just don't understand how her professionalism comes into question in this instance. In the Duke case, I understand and agree fully. But just cause she botched that up doesn't mean she did the same here. The other thing is this, if they find Roberts is guilty and they throw her in jail for the rest of her life, does all of this go away? Does ARod admitting to PED usage automatically mean he no longer did it? It doesn't, it's just noise. ARod admitted to it, he said he got no gain whatsoever, [17] Here is the link: http://tinyurl.com/bvpxkt . And here’s the part I’m referring to:
The Times had been chasing the A-Rod story. “We were working on it for many weeks,” said Tom Jolly, the paper’s sports editor. “It’s a story whenever there’s smoke around A-Rod for a period of time, and we were chasing that smoke.”

Again, I don’t see how Roberts is the problem here. She was given information, which apparently was being shared amongst her other peers, and she just beat them to the punch. I am not defending Roberts the person, I just don’t understand how her professionalism comes into question in this instance. In the Duke case, I understand and agree fully. But just cause she botched that up doesn’t mean she did the same here.

The other thing is this, if they find Roberts is guilty and they throw her in jail for the rest of her life, does all of this go away? Does ARod admitting to PED usage automatically mean he no longer did it? It doesn’t, it’s just noise. ARod admitted to it, he said he got no gain whatsoever,

]]> By: PJ http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155041 PJ Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:20:39 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155041 [20] Maybe she'd have better stats if she huffed Liquid Paper in cycles. At least then, she would be able to relate to being "young and stupid"... ;) [20] Maybe she’d have better stats if she huffed Liquid Paper in cycles. At least then, she would be able to relate to being “young and stupid”…
;)

]]> By: hoppystone http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155040 hoppystone Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:20:15 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155040 I know this is idealistic, but: What if her book came out, and nobody bought it? Wouldn't that send the right message? I know this is idealistic, but:
What if her book came out, and nobody bought it?
Wouldn’t that send the right message?

]]> By: rbj http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155039 rbj Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:49:20 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155039 If Selena did give up the names, she'd be finished as a reporter. No future source would ever confide in her again. I think a lot of her colleagues wouldn't be happy with her either. She could become the A--Rod of the newsroom! (minus all those good stats). If Selena did give up the names, she’d be finished as a reporter. No future source would ever confide in her again. I think a lot of her colleagues wouldn’t be happy with her either. She could become the A–Rod of the newsroom! (minus all those good stats).

]]> By: Shaun P. http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155038 Shaun P. Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:42:18 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155038 [17] [18] IIRC, Mark Fainura-Wada and Lance Williams, the guys who wrote Game of Shadows, did not name their source, almost spent time in jail, and neither they nor their publisher lost any profits. (I would have supported such a remedy though, h-c-e.) Oh, and their colleagues in the journalism world rallied around them in support when they looked to be facing jail time. I'm sure the same would happen here, and I can't blame them. I understand that reporters need sources, and need to be able to protect them, but this isn't government wrongdoing we're talking about here, its baseball. When it comes to protecting a source who leaked sealed evidence/grand jury testimony vs protecting that sealed evidence/grand jury testimony, unless the evidence/testimony has to do with government wrongdoing, the source should lose. [17] [18] IIRC, Mark Fainura-Wada and Lance Williams, the guys who wrote Game of Shadows, did not name their source, almost spent time in jail, and neither they nor their publisher lost any profits. (I would have supported such a remedy though, h-c-e.) Oh, and their colleagues in the journalism world rallied around them in support when they looked to be facing jail time. I’m sure the same would happen here, and I can’t blame them.

I understand that reporters need sources, and need to be able to protect them, but this isn’t government wrongdoing we’re talking about here, its baseball. When it comes to protecting a source who leaked sealed evidence/grand jury testimony vs protecting that sealed evidence/grand jury testimony, unless the evidence/testimony has to do with government wrongdoing, the source should lose.

]]> By: Chyll Will http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155037 Chyll Will Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:33:44 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155037 [17] Gotta wonder who'd be on her side if she did name the sources. Do her colleagues come to her defense if she made a stand and then gave them up, or if she refused and went to jail? How does that jibe with the moral scourging they've been giving certain athletes? What happens if she just gives them up without a fight? I'm not taking sides on it, but I think fair is fair; if the Crusaders go after the athletes, they can't ignore the reason they even got that info. Interesting... [17] Gotta wonder who’d be on her side if she did name the sources. Do her colleagues come to her defense if she made a stand and then gave them up, or if she refused and went to jail? How does that jibe with the moral scourging they’ve been giving certain athletes? What happens if she just gives them up without a fight?

I’m not taking sides on it, but I think fair is fair; if the Crusaders go after the athletes, they can’t ignore the reason they even got that info. Interesting…

]]> By: Horace Clarke Era http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155036 Horace Clarke Era Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:20:52 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155036 [15] As I recall it was Canseco who hinted at A Rod, but I don't know if Radomski did, as well. I agree that Rodriguez is very probably taking pains NOT to name anyone else. It is entirely plausible that in the loosey-goosey culture there was some open or quiet talk about the drugs and he may not have been as discreet (cousin to cousin) as he said he was. I can bet that users were looking to find other users, to make themselves feel better about it (or, I suppose, to make the team better?). Dimelo, it may well be that the Times was going to leak it too (please give some links to this) but just as A Rod stands alone right now, so does Selena! And she has a book coming, and pushed up in release date. She benefits hugely (not illegally yet, until asked under oath to name her source) from this chaos and from Rodriguez being the only target. Anyone know if her profits from a 'crime' can be impounded if she's guilty of contempt of court in refusing to name a source she uses for the book? My bet is no, but remedies have been growing lately... [15] As I recall it was Canseco who hinted at A Rod, but I don’t know if Radomski did, as well. I agree that Rodriguez is very probably taking pains NOT to name anyone else. It is entirely plausible that in the loosey-goosey culture there was some open or quiet talk about the drugs and he may not have been as discreet (cousin to cousin) as he said he was. I can bet that users were looking to find other users, to make themselves feel better about it (or, I suppose, to make the team better?).

Dimelo, it may well be that the Times was going to leak it too (please give some links to this) but just as A Rod stands alone right now, so does Selena! And she has a book coming, and pushed up in release date. She benefits hugely (not illegally yet, until asked under oath to name her source) from this chaos and from Rodriguez being the only target.

Anyone know if her profits from a ‘crime’ can be impounded if she’s guilty of contempt of court in refusing to name a source she uses for the book? My bet is no, but remedies have been growing lately…

]]> By: Chyll Will http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155035 Chyll Will Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:18:00 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155035 [15] Conspiracy theory #346: Tom Hicks. Maybe he's not as stupid as he usually sounds... But Canseco coyly claimed he knew, and cryptically noted to wait and see. Hmm... If I was a player, I'd be ready to string up Orza and Fehr at the next meeting, regardless of the money. Money isn't fixing this issue, so was it worth it? [15] Conspiracy theory #346: Tom Hicks. Maybe he’s not as stupid as he usually sounds…

But Canseco coyly claimed he knew, and cryptically noted to wait and see. Hmm…

If I was a player, I’d be ready to string up Orza and Fehr at the next meeting, regardless of the money. Money isn’t fixing this issue, so was it worth it?

]]> By: rbj http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155034 rbj Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:08:50 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155034 [14] The Radomski hint is plausible. I'm sure A-Rod knows more than what he's said, but that if he says more he's going to have name names & he doesn't want to do that. But that still leaves the question of how others knew of his positive test. Do they know of other players' positive tests too? If so, why only name Alex (aside from just hating the guy). Or were the four horsemen only given Alex's name, in order to leak it. If so, who & why leaked it to them? This just keeps getting stranger and stranger. A-Rod at least confessed to his sin and gave some details. There are a lot of others out there who need to do so as well. And not just players who used PEDs. [14] The Radomski hint is plausible. I’m sure A-Rod knows more than what he’s said, but that if he says more he’s going to have name names & he doesn’t want to do that. But that still leaves the question of how others knew of his positive test. Do they know of other players’ positive tests too? If so, why only name Alex (aside from just hating the guy). Or were the four horsemen only given Alex’s name, in order to leak it. If so, who & why leaked it to them?

This just keeps getting stranger and stranger. A-Rod at least confessed to his sin and gave some details. There are a lot of others out there who need to do so as well. And not just players who used PEDs.

]]> By: Dimelo http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155033 Dimelo Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:18:13 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155033 [13] Everything you state makes perfect sense, but Radomski (I thought) hinted in his book that ARod was juicing. So maybe he knows a lot more than any of us. I thought it was really interesting and maybe a few players did know of ARod's positive test. [13] Everything you state makes perfect sense, but Radomski (I thought) hinted in his book that ARod was juicing. So maybe he knows a lot more than any of us. I thought it was really interesting and maybe a few players did know of ARod’s positive test.

]]> By: rbj http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155032 rbj Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:10:51 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155032 [11] How would other players know if someone turned up on that list. I don't get that. The test was supposed to be anonymous, with the results to be destroyed. Now I could see Orza and maybe a couple others in MLBPA management knowing who tested positive, and warning them, hopefully to get the positivers to stop using PEDs. But how would other players get a hold of the names on the list. Roberts was specific that A-Rod was on that list, it wasn't that he was alleged to have steroids but rather that he was on the list. And if Alex stopped by 2004, why leak it out now if you want to wreck his career/reputation. Heck if it were Yankees who had done it, the time to leak would be right after he opted out, to ensure that he would not come back. [11] How would other players know if someone turned up on that list. I don’t get that. The test was supposed to be anonymous, with the results to be destroyed. Now I could see Orza and maybe a couple others in MLBPA management knowing who tested positive, and warning them, hopefully to get the positivers to stop using PEDs. But how would other players get a hold of the names on the list. Roberts was specific that A-Rod was on that list, it wasn’t that he was alleged to have steroids but rather that he was on the list.

And if Alex stopped by 2004, why leak it out now if you want to wreck his career/reputation. Heck if it were Yankees who had done it, the time to leak would be right after he opted out, to ensure that he would not come back.

]]> By: Chyll Will http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155031 Chyll Will Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:10:29 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155031 [10] I've said it before and I'll say it again... I wouldn't even wipe my <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQrv6-viEUk" rel="nofollow">aspercreme</a> with the Post >:' [10] I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again… I wouldn’t even wipe my aspercreme with the Post >:’

]]> By: Dimelo http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/2009/02/19/news-of-the-day-21909/#comment-155030 Dimelo Thu, 19 Feb 2009 15:58:36 +0000 http://www.bronxbanterblog.com/?p=8150#comment-155030 [10] "insensitive" that's putting it mildly, they should issue a retraction and a huge apology. I can't believe they did that, what were they thinking? [4] One question though, I still don't get why Roberts is being mentioned so much about the leak. Apparently the NY Times was only days away from publishing the same story. Also, I am still amazed at the little attention that has been paid to what Kirk Radomski on WFAN that it was four former teammates of ARod that outed him. [10] “insensitive” that’s putting it mildly, they should issue a retraction and a huge apology. I can’t believe they did that, what were they thinking?

[4] One question though, I still don’t get why Roberts is being mentioned so much about the leak. Apparently the NY Times was only days away from publishing the same story. Also, I am still amazed at the little attention that has been paid to what Kirk Radomski on WFAN that it was four former teammates of ARod that outed him.

]]>