Comments on: MLB, players agree on Joint Drug Agreement

By: Joseph P.

Joseph P. — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:16:10 +0000

3 for 3 on responses to this thread

In this one, I note that I thought the exact same thing. Gee, wonder what I’m doing tonight.

By: Joseph P.

Joseph P. — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:15:46 +0000

That relates to amphetamines. And from what I’m reading, the rules haven’t changed there.

By: Joseph P.

Joseph P. — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:15:13 +0000

Yeah. The term “top prospect” is the height of ambiguity.

By: Mike A.

Mike A. — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:11:24 +0000

Wow, expanding testing to include top prospects is HUGE. Those players aren’t in the union yet, why should they be subject to testing? Why stop at top prospects? It’s bad if David Price takes steriods, but not if Ben Revere does? Why should Andrew Brackman take a test if Adam Olbrychowski doesn’t?

MLB overstepped it’s bounds here. What those players do as amateurs is none of MLB’s business. If you think a kid a using, then don’t draft him.

Why don’t they just tap their phones and read their email too? Holy crap. Ridiculous.

By: ceciguante

ceciguante — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:51:54 +0000

the program summary mentions “increased transparency” as reporting more “key statistics related to the program,” but is there no increase in enforcement / penalties for individual players testing positive?

meaning, is the rule that a first offense is anonymous — and without penalty — going to remain in place?

tell me it’s not so.

By: Count Zero

Count Zero — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:31:30 +0000

One has to wonder…why would MLB publicly refer to a “Drug Agreement” using the term “Joint”? Somebody in PR needs to think more clearly…