Giambi tests positive for amphetamines?

Not many reporters want to address the leaking topic (nor surprisingly) but Ken Rosenthall didn't mind:

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6842546

MLB probably can't suspend him — Giambi didn't say what he did or when he did it. The Yankees probably can't void his contract — they declined to pursue that option after Giambi admitted his steroid use to a federal grand jury, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

But another form of punishment was available, and the headline on the back page of the Daily News said it all:

"Flunked!"

Gotcha, Jason. Gotcha good.

Don't get me wrong. It's a reporter's job to report. I want to know who is cheating. Many of you want to know who is cheating. But individual privacy is being violated, just as it was when grand-jury testimony from the BALCO trial — confidential testimony, according to U.S. law — was leaked to the Chronicle.

It's too high a price.

The first time a player tests positive for amphetamines, the player is not penalized and the information remains confidential, according to MLB's amphetamines policy.

While a number of players surely have tested positive, Giambi and Barry Bonds are the only two we know about, thanks to the New York Daily News.

Giambi and Bonds, two players who MLB wishes would go away.

Coincidence? It hardly seems likely.

 

I just listened to a replay of the interview Quinn did on "Mike and Mike" this morning, and he said his sources are good, which obviously is what he's going to say.

You think something came out after the statements he made last week as Rosenthal is asserting?

 

To me, this says GUILTY:

If you're innocent, you deny. Guilty people say no comment.

 

The reason I said that was because a prominent baseball writer yesterday told me he wouldn't get into the topic because he's dependent on leaks himself and didn't want to contribute to an atmosphere that would inhibit more leaking.

There's no wiggle room or gray area. Nobody should be supportive of an individual breaking the terms of a legal agreement that he/she has a responsibility to uphold in order to "punish" an individual. Assuming the leak is accurate, he/she breached the agreement to damage Giambi but, more importantly, he/she has hindered MLB's ability to make future agreements based on good faith.

Before anyone gets the wrong impression, I'm not saying a reporter shouldn't accept leaks, just that it's despicable on the part of the leaker and highly damaging to the leaker's organization. Assuming it actually happened in this case, the leaker should be fired.

 

Ragu --
Of course management is going to leak the test results. It's what management does. The notion that MLB and the players are in partnership died for me during the collusion days of the mid-1980's, when management reneged on a CBA it had freely negotiated, and then lied about it in public for three years. MLB management has aimed for 30 years to get the control of the players back that it lost in the 1970's. The drug-testing mania is the latest tactic, is all.

 

I wonder if Gammons wasn't given differing information in an attempt to ameliorate the damage of the original leak and bring the situation from "guilty" back to ambiguous. Of course, leaking misinformation would be stupid, too, but these folks do have a track record.

Fenian makes a good point. Trust levels with the union will likely return to the post-collusion days, which is to say non-existent.

 

A possible scenario. Total working theory.

Giambi did test positive for something... a drug he's prescribed. He has to jump thru all sorts of hoops to get a waiver, explain, etc. He gives the interview to USA Today: "Maaan, I get tested more than anybody..."

The Yankees try to void his contract and look bad in the process. How do you tell little Jimmy Yankee fan that what Jason did is tell the truth, and now the Yankees want to get rid of him.

So someone within the Yankees leaks the positive test result.