Friday, June 18, 2010

On The Eve of Ramirez' Return To Boston, NYT Craftily Stokes the Steroids Fire

Citing unnamed sources who made anonymous quotes at unclear times about something that happened last year, the New York Times opted to publish a story Thursday on Manny Ramirez and his 50-game suspension for drug violations last year.

Around the time Major League Baseball suspended Manny Ramirez for violating its drug program last season, his representatives told officials in the commissioner’s office that they planned to file for permission to use a banned drug that would boost his testosterone levels.

Ramirez’s representatives, including his agent, Scott Boras, decided not to file for the exemption then, but the idea of seeking one was resurrected in September, two months after Ramirez returned to the field, though he ultimately never received one.

The second time the idea came up, the Dodgers were in a close race in the National League West and Ramirez was struggling at the plate. In that instance, high-ranking Dodgers personnel, including General Manager Ned Colletti, discussed how they could help Ramirez and whether he had enough of a medical problem to obtain an exemption for a testosterone-boosting drug.

Baseball’s independent drug-testing administrator granted 115 exemptions last season to players who proved a medical need to use a banned substance. All but seven of the players received a diagnosis of attention deficit disorder. Two players received exemptions for drugs to boost their testosterone levels.

The accounts of the discussions about Ramirez’s obtaining an exemption were based on interviews with three people in baseball who spoke on condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing medical and drug testing matters.

A spokesman for the Dodgers, Josh Rawitch, said team officials did not look into getting Ramirez an exemption. He declined further comment.

Ramirez declined to discuss the matter in a brief interview at his locker in Los Angeles on June 3.

So let me get this straight: these unnamed sources gave you this information at least prior to June 3, but you're deciding now to publish this non-story about plans to submit something that was never actually submitted? No reason why you'd want to sit on this story for at least two weeks...except for the fact that Ramirez is returning to Boston for the first time since he left for the Dodgers?

Why not just publish a story now that says Manny had plans to take some kid's lunch money in third grade, but never actually did? Or that when he was 18 he parked his car at a busted meter for an hour? Or that he left the toilet seat up in 2005?


photo: Mark Lyons/European Pressphoto Agency


Fred's Brim said...

mmmm the New York Times, America's finest news source! Or is that The Onion. I get the two confused

MR.F said...

Can't blame Boston for being so salty. They just need a tissue and a shoulder to cry on =)

Mr. LA Sports Czar said...

I guess the editor told his reporter to make the New York Times look like the New York Post. Or the New York Post look like the New York Times. I forget which one the good one is.

karen said...

Every shot they take at Manny (or LA in general) is only another pathetic attempt to rile up their fans and to give themselves an imagined edge

rbnlaw said...

You stay classy, NYT.

At least that article wasn't plagerized. . .or was it???

rbnlaw said...