Cause for change: the federal investigation of BALCO is drawing attention to the flaws in baseball's steroid policy—and threatening the solidarity of the players union

Sporting News, The, March 15, 2004 by Ken Rosenthal

As the federal investigation of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative (BALCO) continues, TSN Insider Ken Rosenthal answers questions about steroids in baseball.

Q: Is there any chance players will be prosecuted?

A: Yes, but it appears more likely that they would be charged with perjury than drug use. Some of the athletes who testified before a federal grand jury in the BALCO case reportedly received limited immunity. However, the athletes could be charged with perjury if prosecutors believe some of them lied to the grand jury.

It will be difficult to prove a big-name slugger actually used steroids even if he received them; a player can say he was unaware he was taking steroids. As Gary Sheffield's attorney, Paula Canny, told the San Francisco Chronicle, "Gary Sheffield has never knowingly ingested a steroid ... and Gary Sheffield has never knowingly applied an anabolic steroid cream to his body."

Q: If it's proved Barry Bonds indeed used steroids, how much, in your opinion, would his accomplishments be tarnished?

A: Again, I don't think it will ever be proved. But fair or not, Bonds' accomplishments already are tarnished; two of the four men indicted in the BALCO investigation are Greg Anderson, Bonds' personal trainer, and Victor Conte, the head of BALCO, which supplied Bonds with supplements and received his endorsement.

Q: Have the players who tested positive last year been notified?

A: In the first phase, conducted last season, the players who tested positive were not notified. The testing was anonymous, and its purpose was to determine the extent of the problem. Because more than 5 percent of the players tested positive, a second phase will take effect this season. In this phase, players will he notified.

Q: If they test positive again this season, what will happen?

A: Any player who tests positive in the second phase will be placed in a treatment program and will be subject to fines and suspensions if he fails to comply. He also could trigger penalties if he tests positive a second time this season. Major League Baseball then can reveal his identity, announcing he was suspended for a specified number of days for violating its drug program.

A player who tests positive a second time will receive a 15-day suspension or up to a $10,000 fine. A third positive test will result in a 25-day suspension or up to a $25,000 fine; a fourth will result in a 50-day suspension or up to a $50,000 fine; a fifth will result in a one-year suspension or up to a $100,000 fine. All suspensions will be without pay.

The collective bargaining agreement states that the second phase will continue each season until less than 2.5 percent of tested players are positive for steroids in two consecutive seasons combined.

Q: Does MLB's testing include drugs such as marijuana, or is the testing solely for steroids?

A: The testing is solely for steroids. The only exception is if MLB's Health Policy Advisory Committee determines it has reasonable cause to believe a player has engaged in the use, possession, sale or distribution of another prohibited substance. In that event, the player is subject to immediate testing for that substance.

Q: How does the testing work?

A: All players on 40-man rosters were subject to two tests last season--one initial test and one follow-up within five to seven days--at unannounced times. The CBA also gave MLB the right to conduct additional tests on 240 randomly selected players, and MLB exercised that option.

All players will be subject to two tests this season. The tests again will be conducted only during spring training and the regular season. Thus, players can "juice up" during the offseason, then stop in time to beat the tests--an obvious flaw in the program.

Q: What would it take for the drug-testing policy now in effect to be scrapped for a tougher policy?

A: It would take an acknowledgment by both sides that the current program is inadequate. Nothing prevents MLB and the players union from amending the CBA. But one player agent says, "The union isn't likely to do so--ever." Gene Orza, the union's chief operating officer, has indicated the same.

Q: What would happen if a player defied the union and went through a public test of some sort?

A: The player's action would be frowned upon by the union, but he would not face disciplinary action. When Sheffield recently considered taking such a test, Orza told him he was under no obligation to do so; Sheffield's only obligation was to the CBA. The Red Sox's Gabe Kapler took a voluntary test four years ago for HBO's Real Sports, and the test was negative. He remains a member of the union.

Union officials express concern that such individual acts threaten the integrity of the program, putting pressure on other players to volunteer for tests. But the union's solidarity is in question, and recent remarks by John Smoltz, Kenny Rogers and Todd Zeile indicate a growing level of frustration with the program. In the current environment, a player under suspicion likely would draw praise for attempting to "clear his name" by taking a test.