Bat Boy + Steroids = ??

In the news today is this New York Times piece reporting that a federal judge has decided to keep sealed a list of twenty-three names of baseball players who reportedly used performance-enhancing drugs.

The judge denied a request by two major news organizations who wanted to see and, I assume, report on those names. The names were provided by a former bat boy, Kirk Radomski, who worked a plea deal for money laundering and distribution of performance-enhancing drugs in exchange for helping Representative George Mitchell in his Congressional investigation into the use of performance-enhancing drugs in baseball.

The story reminded me of the earlier Dog and Pony Show held in Congress just before the 2005 season. The hearings were called "Restoring Faith in America's Pastime" and subpoenaed witnesses included Jose Canseco, Mark McGwire, Frank Thomas, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa, and Curt Schilling. Commissioner Bud Selig and a handful of other MLB officials also answered questions.

What most people remember, of course, is Mark McGwire peering over his reading glasses and saying, "I'm not here to talk about the past."

And they hated him for it. How could the man who we all cheered for as he broke one of the most sacred single-season records in the game not simply answer as to whether or not he did so using steroids?

I was disappointed, too, but not only in McGwire. The whole process was a sham. We were deeply involved in two wars, Iraqis were showing us their purple fingers, North Korea was giving us the nuclear finger, and Terry Schiavo's feeding tube commanded the talk shows.

And Congress is questioning major league baseball players about using steroids. Dog and Pony.

If they are going to ask whether or not players are using steroids, are they going to ask why they are using them? Jose Canseco gave them the answer without being asked.

“Why did I take steroids? The answer is simple. Because myself and others had no choice if we wanted to continue playing. Because MLB did nothing to take it out of the sport. ...

“Baseball owners and the players union have been very much aware of the undeniable fact that as a nation we will do anything to win. They turned a blind eye to the clear evidence of steroid use in baseball. Why? Because it sold tickets and resurrected a game that had recently suffered a black eye from a player strike [in 1994]. The result was an intentional act by baseball to promote, condone and encourage the players to do whatever they had to do to win games, bring back the fans, and answer the bottom line.”

Why would Congressmen not pursue Canseco's line of reasoning? Was it their promised sky boxes at RFK Stadium where the Nationals would open play in less than a month? Possibly, but this is Congress, so one must look to politics to find most of the answers.

Canseco's explanation could not be taken as the truth for more than the simple reason that it might require Congress to shift the blame to baseball owners-- a group who regularly make campaign donations. No, Canseco could not be seen as a credible witness because of another allegation he made. In his book, Juiced: Wild Times, Rampant ’Roids, Smash Hits, and How Baseball Got Big, the former Texas Ranger mentioned that one of the part-owners of that team must have known about the rampant steroid use by the players.

And that is one place a Congressional committee was not going to go less than two months after his second inauguration.

Certainly this does not alleviate blame or shame on the players who did use substances. We must, however, remember that players in any sport play by the rules.

Some rules are just unwritten.

Your thoughts? Click on comment.