Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Why no testing? (Oh crap, it's a baseball post.)

I'm listening to the news that there will be testing in the minor leagues for human growth hormone, but the Players' Union in the major leagues is protesting such a move. I think this perplexes some people because they think that they believe the union should be bending over backwards to protect the purity of the game and the majority of players who aren't using performance enhancers of some sort. I have several thoughts on the matter, so here's my guide to .... WHY THE PLAYERS' UNION DOESN'T WANT MORE TESTING! [echo answers "testing"]

1. The cynical reason: They are representing the majority of players, who are all on HGH. Unfortunately, there's little proof otherwise, and we have little reason not to be cynical about the natural state of baseball players nowadays. Anecdotal evidence from players puts the number of players using some kind of performance enhancing drug at about 40%. Yikes. That's not the majority, but what are the odds with that number that some of the users aren't in the upper levels of representation?

2. The lazy reason: The union doesn't want its players to have to do more testing. This does make a little sense. The Players' Union may feel that it's already make a big concession by approving regular, pee-in-a-cup style testing, and a blood test may just be going too far in their minds. That said, if the number above is correct, it's not like Major League Baseball has no reason to require this kind of testing. Management is hardly overstepping its bounds by requesting such a test.

3. The most likely reason: They're the Major League Baseball Players' Union and they don't listen to nobody, nohow. The Players' Union is the most powerful union in the nation, and they have baseball management by the ... well, there's no way to not put it crudely--use your imagination. It could be possible that there is no reason whatsoever and they're just flexing their massive, steroid-enhanced muscles. Face it, some people get off on that.

No comments: