Hank Aaron, etc.

The topic that's burning up everyone up lately is the issue of the 2003 steroid user list. Some people want it revealed, some don't.

I think context is a little important. Back in 2003, the Player's Association, headed by the soon-to-be-retried Donald Fehr, agreed to have random drug testing. If 7% or more of the players tested positive, then mandatory, regulated drug testing would be enacted the following year. It was also agreed that, no matter what, the results of the test would be absolutely secret and would not be revealed to anyone.

Well, I think we know how that worked out.

Now, Hank Aaron is giving his opinion on the matter. In an interview with the AP: "I wish for once and forever that we could come out and say we have 100 and some names, name them all and get it over and let baseball go on," Aaron said. "I don't know how they keep leaking out. I just wish that they would name them all and get it over with." Link to the story here.

So what to do? Release the list? Destroy it forever? Release the list - and punish the players on it?

I had a very spirited argument with a fellow baseball fan for whom I have a deep respect, and he argued that the list should not be released on the grounds that it would be illegal. There was a contract agreement between the PA and the MLB front offices, and releasing it would violate the letter of the law.

And...he's right. It would be illegal if the list were revealed, as the players who consented to the tests in 2003 did it on the condition of absolute anonimity. Some have pointed out how a lot of players (most notably Albert Pujols) have been extremely vocal in their condemnation of steroids and would likely support the revelation of the complete list; and, after all, if the players themselves (or a large portion) want the list revealed, how can the Association say no? The problem, of course, is that so many of the players who were tested in 2003, whether they tested positive or negative for steroids, are no longer playing and the Association no longer represents their interests.

The elephant-in-the-room for the PA is that the front offices can do whatever they feel like, and they know it. The front offices of the NFL, MLB, and other pro sports leagues have routinely been empowered by the US legal system to police themselves and do whatever they feel like. The MLB is a legal monopoly, and if Selig and company decide that releasing the list is the way to go, then the list is going to get released. Maybe they won't just come out and say "This is what we're doing, anyone who doesn't like it can jump off a cliff"; there will probably be some business with 'anonymous sources', but in the end the list will get revealed.

Regardless of whether or not you like the hazy ethical standards employed, I think most people feel that the publication of the hundred or so remaining names would be good for baseball. There is a huge amount of cynicism surrounding baseball, and rightly so: The game turned a blind eye to performance-enhancing drugs for a decade. There are Hall of Fame voters who didn't vote for Tony Gwynn or Cal Ripken, Jr. because 'everyone from that era is tainted'; and, while that is idiotic logic, I think it reflects the intense disillusionment that has been sweeping over baseball for a long time.

We live in an era in which there are no suprises. Mark McGwire was one of the most popular players to ever put on a uniform and hit well over 500 home runs; as I write this, he has failed three times to reach the Hall of Fame. Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz, the Lennon and McCartney of Boston, each test positive and we shrug. For God's sake, every one on the planet is convinced Barry Bonds took steroids and he's the all-time home run king!

If we really want to write the epilogue for The Steroid Era and then close the book, letting us see the lists will allow us to finally get a real handle on the situation. After all these years, we can lay all the paranoia and suspicion to rest and see just who was using.

Of course, the PA may still vehemently oppose the release of the list. There job is not to appease fans, but to protect the players, and allowing the list to reach the public eye, while good for the careers of many, would likely be ruinous in some form or another. Some might disagree with me, and point to Manny Ramirez's sustained popularity in Los Angeles in spite of his fifty-game suspension; I would refer them to McGwire, and remind them that most players would be devastated if they knew they were never going to reach the Hall of Fame, even if no other punishment was meted out.

Anyone with an eye for history knows that the eventual leaking of the complete list is likely inevitable. The PA can sit on their hands (I'll let you guess where their thumbs will be) and pretend the bell can be un-rung, or they can make sure that when the list is released, the players named aren't utterly trampled over. A lot of sportswriters and fans have been calling for lifetime bans of any player that tests positive for steroids; while this is a horrible idea that clearly hasn't been well thought through (someone explain to me how banning Alex Rodriguez or Manny Ramirez for life from the game is good for baseball), anything can happen when people convince themselves of the righteousness of their cause. If the PA embraced the publication of the list instead of fighting it, they could help guide the raging flood.

And yet...even if they did, my statement that it would 'write the epilogue' for the Steroid Era is really just a pipe dream. We won't really be able to put it behind us until twenty years have gone by since the last known PED user has retired, and those that were associated with steroids have either seen themselves elected to Cooperstown or snubbed fifteen times in a row and had their names fallen off the ballot.

Either way, we're paying for the sins of the past.