April 13, 2006

BASEBALL STEROID COMMISSION SET UP TO BE EFFECTIVE TIMEWASTER

       When Ol’ Bud Selig did what he does best, react rather then act, and set up this commission to look at steroids in baseball he did so with the knowledge that nothing would come of it.  Nothing, that is, but some positive (he thought) public relations.  Oh, how wrong he was.  His appointment of George Mitchell to lead an investigation into steroid use in baseball has been tantamount to putting Ted Bundy in charge of a committee looking into serial killing.  Ol’ Bud just can’t figure out how putting one foot in front of the other allows a person to walk.

       Ol’ Bud insists that Mitchell is the best candidate to lead this investigation.  He believes that he has hired a Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis (brought in to clean up baseball after the 1919 Black Sox scandal) type who is eager to ferret out all wrongdoers.  While Mitchell has had a rather distinguished career in politics and in law—he was Senate majority leader and was on the board of the Iran-contra affair going face-to-face with Oliver North—he has major conflict of interest issues taking place.  He is a director of the Boston Red Sox and is on the board of Walt Disney that—ironically-- owns ESPN, which, ironically again, is producing a ‘somewhat’, reality show with Barry Bonds. 

       The questions are obvious—how can someone with deep-rooted interests in baseball ownership and baseball marketing be objective as he investigates something as serious as performance enhancing drugs?  Will he be able to make the proper accusation against Barry Bonds, or will he simply attack those players now out of the game—Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa etc.  He can’t go afterMark McGwire since his credo is to look for cheaters since baseball introduces legislation against PED in 2002.  Anything, or anyone, who used and abused before baseball outlawed steroids cannot be targeted. 

       His conflicts are plain to see—as a director for a large market organization he cannot possibly want to effect any major changes in the sport for fear of damaging his position with the team.  And as a member of Disney he has even more of a financial involvement as ESPN is a major producer of baseball television and is slated to earn millions in the Brry Bonds production.  Since this entire committee was set up as a response to Game of Shadows, a book written by two San Francisco sports writers about Bonds involvement with steroids, any negative publicity or any evidence uncovered and reported supporting the writers claim that Bonds is a serious steroid user would severely undermine the reality show and seriously affect the financial draw of the game for the television network.

       There are those, however, who think that Mitchell’s conflict if interest will not come into play.  “It would be hard for them to duplicate his combination of baseball knowledge and interests, and his experience with criminal investigations and prosecutions,” said Harold Pachios, a Maine attorney who has known Mitchell for nearly half a century.  “The guy has investigated and prosecuted dozens and dozens of crimes. I never met a bigger straight arrow.” 

      Now, that quote came from an Associated Press release and was obviously put forth by baseball in its attempt to garner support for its choice.  I was surprised that there wasn’t a quote from his eighth-grade teacher describing in intimate detail the day he found and returned her stolen apple.

       So, what can Mitchell’s investigation do?  He can, and likely will, discover that Bonds has been using performance-enhancing drugs since 2002—if two writers can find this out then an official committee should be able to—and he will discover that several other players have done so as well.  Then will come the true test of character—does Mitchell report to baseball, and then to the public, his findings?  Does he accuse Bonds of cheating?  Does he cast a sizeable shadow over the game of baseball by indicting its biggest star?  Does he do so knowing that Bonds, in retaliation, will use the race card and accuse baseball of selecting him because of his skin colour?  Does baseball want to have to deal with that issue as well?

       The answer to most, if not all, of the above questions is a resounding NO.  Mitchell will likely hide behind that 2002 edict and report that there may have been abuses before that time but he discovered nothing afterward.  He will hold up several minor players as proof that he was actually on the job, and he will utilize his skills as a politician to circumvent any questions surrounding the committee’s viability.  To accuse Bonds would be to have every record the Giant outfielder attained be called into question—and to wit every record ever held in baseball.

       Baseball, like most large corporations and political entities—will publicly choose to glide along in the middle of the issue, not giving in to one side or the other.  Privately, however, there will be serious warnings and threats given out to assure that the entity of baseball will never have to appoint another committee like this ever again.