say it ain't so
i was just telling alex belth of sports illustrated how the buzz surrounding ankiel dramatically altered the dynamic of the cardinals' season. talk about buzz kill . . . . let's assume for the moment that ankiel really did take HGH. i have my own reasons for assuming that it's true --- i know two of the writers bylined on the article containing the allegations, quinn and o'keeffe, and they're both excellent journalists and individuals of integrity. if they've signed their names to this, i take it very seriously. a third byline on that story belongs to bill madden, who --- while not my favorite crafter of prose --- has been in this business for 30 years and has a spotless reputation.
but set that aside and just look at the degree of specificity in the article. the daily news names the drugs, the company that shipped them, and the physician who signed the scrips. with that much detail, and that many names named, we're not merely talking about some wild and flimsy allegation. no successful news organization --- and the daily news, for all its sensationalizing, is definitely successful --- can afford to publish that amount of detail without being 100 percent sure of its facts. rupert murdoch didn't build his empire by exposing himself to libel suits for the sake of one splashy headline; that's not a profitable strategy. and murdoch publications are nothing if not profitable.Update [2007-9-7 9:46:44 by lboros]: my bad; this is not a murdoch publication (i never could keep all those nyc newspapers straight). the point stands anyway; the daily news has the 6th-largest circulation of any paper in the u.s.; it has won 10 pulitzer prizes and has been in continuous publication since 1919.[end update]
i'm pretty sure this is true.
the next question is --- so what? he had a prescription for the drugs, and they're legal with a prescription; and he received them in 2004, before mlb instituted its formal prohibition on steroids. therefore, ankiel didn't break any rules or do anything wrong --- right? i might be willing to accept that interpretation if i heard it straight from ankiel's mouth. if he truly did nothing untoward and has nothing to hide, nothing to be ashamed of, then he can kill this story in a single day. if i were his pr advisor, i'd get him out in front of the microphones immediately --- call a press conference and sit rick down to tell his side of the story. i'd have him lay out the facts --- explain why he needed the drugs, what the medical benefit was, and how he didn't break any laws or any mlb rules. i'd have him state publicly that when mlb instituted its formal steroid ban in 2005, he stopped using the drugs. that'd make this story go fizz in a new york minute.
he's got no legal obligation to do this, of course, but he has a selfish reason to do it --- he wants to avoid a swirl of controversy and suspicion. the "innocent-til-proven-guilty" standard doesn't apply here; we're not in a courtroom. we're in the court of public opinion, and in this venue the burden of proof tends to fall upon the accused rather than the accuser. fair? maybe not, but life often isn't. if ankiel just issues a "no comment" or a two-sentence statement written by a boras flunky, it will leave the impression that he's got something to hide, and many will judge him harshly. ankiel can create the opposite impression by facing the story openly and unabashedly.
failing that, suspicion is going to follow him around. blame the messenger if you want to; decry the sins of the evil media. but if ankiel really did this, and he isn't willing to talk about it, then ask yourself: why won't he talk about it? if it's truly no big deal and no code of conduct was breached --- why won't he talk about it? he can stick it to the media and make his accusers look like a bunch of hype-mongering fools simply by standing up to the accusations. yeah, it's true. [shrug] my doctor said hgh would help my rehab along; he said it had been helpful in some other cases that were similar to mine. and it wasn't on the list of banned substances; we checked that out in advance. it was all legal, all above-board.
end of story.
walt jocketty told the daily news: "If it's true, obviously it would be very tragic, along with everything else we've had happen to us this year." i agree wth walt. the steroid-abuse saga has a million hypocrites and scoundrels, from the commissioner down through the general managers, the coaches and on-field managers, the beat writers and broadcasters, the trainers, the agents . . . . . all those guys have their fingerprints on the syringes. and now they're all running away from what they did; nobody wants to talk about it. why won't they talk? if they didn't do anything wrong, why would they choose to give the impression that they did?
i hope ankiel will bat these allegations out of the park as effortlessly as he has been swatting big-league pitches over the wall.
0 recs |
419 comments
Comments
Thank you
by Valatan on Sep 7, 2007 9:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
thanks V
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A season like this one?
by cardsgirl95 on Sep 7, 2007 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the timing is just a coincidence
- have the lawyers signed off on it?
- is there a chance somebody might beat us on the story?
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
by nycbirdo on Sep 7, 2007 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not entirely true...
by TriplePlay on Sep 7, 2007 9:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i disagree with that
the longer the daily news sat on the story, the more likely it was that ankiel would go into a slump and the buzz surrounding him wears off. ankiel became a big story the day he returned to the big leagues, and he has remained a big story ever since.
if ankiel had come back and was hitting .210 with 1 homer and 6 rbi, then they might not have been in such a hurry to get this into print. but i can guarantee you that they didn't sit on this thing for long, if at all --- and to the extent they did sit on it, it was because the lawyers made them.
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm with you Larry...
DATE OPP RESULT AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI
8/31 CIN W 8-5 5 1 2 0 0 1 4
9/1 CIN W 11-3 4 2 3 1 0 0 3
9/2 CIN W 3-2 3 1 1 0 0 1 2
9/3 PIT L 0-11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/4 PIT W 6-2 3 2 1 1 0 0 1
9/5 PIT L 2-8 4 1 1 0 0 1 2
9/6 PIT W 16-4 4 4 3 1 0 2 7
by cardzfanbub on Sep 7, 2007 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree...
by birds 4 life on Sep 7, 2007 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I worked as a reporter for several papers ...
Many nobodies and also-rans have been implicated for PHD use, and nobody was "sitting" on those. As Cardinal fans and Ankiel boosters, it might feel like "the media" is out to get us, but that's a conspiracy theory that doesn't hold water.
by bgodar on Sep 7, 2007 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a case of
by cardsrul on Sep 7, 2007 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually the LA Times has a well documented . . .
by CheapSeats on Sep 7, 2007 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
True
by cardsgirl95 on Sep 7, 2007 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They are in the business of selling papers
It's a much better story when Ankiel has 2HR and 7 RBI day and when the Cards are 1 game back. That gives them their splashy lines of questioning the comeback kid and the surging Card's who are now contenders (they couldn't have done it w/o Ankiel, so the story goes).
And if the reporters were just being professsional, then they should have put pertinent facts into the beginning of the story (like MLB did)--the legal prescription, the pre-ban 2004 date, etc. Rather, they framed the story in terms of his current performance and bury the context in the middle of the sory. It's a professional decision to present the story in a way that can easily mislead a reader who is skimming.
At least from my perspective--having to put up with the a lot of sensationalist BS from New York papers--I'm surprised by what seems like some people's naive sense of reporters motivations and choices about when and how to report a big story.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
since i've worked in a newsroom
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well perhaps you haven't worked in all newsrooms
Looking at the page, how can one not think the story is presented in a sensatinalist way? Just look at its presentation.
What I think is naive is if someone believes reporters are not driven by motivations, whether they commercial, or having the biggest story they can have, or with the intent to smear someone's reputation and gain an edge over an opponent (politics remember). This is always a possibility. It's not always a reality. But it's a possibility.
I wasn't directing the comment to you but to readers in general. I don't know what you think about that.
To me it's naive to have ucritical faith in the purity of journalist's motives. But maybe that comes from my line of work and stories I've heard from journalists I know.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
of course it's sensationalized
but it's not the only motive ---- their motives are complex, and they are often at odds with the motives of the publishers, ad salesmen, circulation folks, branding consultants, legal consultants, and other professionals who make up the newspaper enterprise. it is a real tug of war with a lot of motivations, often cross-cutting ones.
there is a simplistic argument afoot that the ny daily news' editorial staff cooked up a little scheme to tear down rick ankiel just when his story reached the height of its feel-goodness. i'm saying that newspaper decisions are far more complex than that.
the motives are rarely "pure," but even if a story is driven by raw greed or by the publisher's personal animus against a powerful interest, it still doesn't discredit the story as long as it's properly reported and sourced.
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another thing
by TurdFerguson on Sep 7, 2007 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I work
by DCGreg on Sep 7, 2007 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just to throw my hat in the ring
The SBNation's Atlanta Falcons Blog
by Dave the Falconer on Sep 7, 2007 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And let's not forget,
by MdRedbirdFreak on Sep 7, 2007 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have people not watched elections?
Many New York reporters run in rougher political circles than other parts of the country and some definitely use information in a messy sensationalist way according to their interests and timeline.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a little naive
So if the writing itself is sensationalized, take a look at the reporter. But if you have a quibble with the timing, either look at the editor or understand that it's always a race to the finish in the news business.
The SBNation's Atlanta Falcons Blog
by Dave the Falconer on Sep 7, 2007 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I take issue with how the information
Initially, HGH is mentioned in terms of Rick's recent comeback; then it links Rick to a company being investigated for illegal drug distribution. They choose not to state early on that Rick had a prescription for this in 2004 before it was banned and that he was recovering from an injury. Unless you read the whole story, someone could easily think he is taking the drug now and that his behavior is clearly illegal.
They wait until the middle of the story to give the pertinent facts. That was clearly a choice, not an accident. And it is a choice that differs from the MLB presentation. The NY story is set up to draw readers in by being scintillating. Only later do you realize that the story is not so sensationalist as it first seemed.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i don't think it's distorted
don't you wonder why was he doing business with that sort of outfit? i do.
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
they set it solely in the context of his recent
If they had been upfront with all the information like MLB was, I would have no complaint. There story was very good. But they chose not to do that.
I'm sure our experience predisposes us to see news stories more or less skeptically. If you worked in a newsroom with reporters and editors as colleagues and I've worked in the area of politics and public policy, with all the infighting that involves (and that includes journalists), it's natural that we would probably view the structuring of a story like this differently.
We should just agree to disagree.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i've worked in politics / policy too
but this isn't shoddy journalism.
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
as I said, we'll have to agree to disagree
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shoddy vs Sensationalist?
However, I also agree that it clearly appears to be intentionally sensationalized journalism, no doubt in part by the editors' "contributions" to the story, layout, headline, etc.
Both of those can be true.
by Mr Clean on Sep 7, 2007 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Location
That's my story and I'm stickin' with it.
by kemime on Sep 7, 2007 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i can assert
i cannot however, do the same for the editor or publishers of the daily news...
by sdesserman on Sep 7, 2007 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree V
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree 100 percent.
My concern is that Ankiel is later going to pushed to take it a step further and rat out some other people. How did he find out about this doctor and his clinic? Probably was steered there by another player. Let's hope he keeps his mouth shut in that respect (unless he really found this doctor by perusing the Yellow Pages).
by MdRedbirdFreak on Sep 7, 2007 9:06 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
Yes. Simple as that.
Actually, have MLB and George Mitchell look into the matter if both parties are serious about investigating performance enhancing drug use in the sport.
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 9:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
if i hear that straight from ankiel's mouth
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It isn't as simple as that
Who is to say he didn't go doctor shopping once MLB banned the substance?
I'd like to give Rick the benefit of the doubt. He'd brought me great joy over this last month and brought forth a great deal of emotion over what he was able to acheive. But, as a fan of baseball who has lived through the last 15 years, you can't give ANY player the benefit of the doubt.
The Cardinals and Rick will go into 'bunker' mentality, again, like they do with every story. This story won't go away.
Another fantastic turn in the season from hell.
by Hardcore Legend on Sep 7, 2007 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope.
I'm basing my opinion on what I know from several published reports including the NYDN article. I'm not "assuming" anything.
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a very
by Hardcore Legend on Sep 7, 2007 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right, But More Like The Opposite.
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 9:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do you assume this is Rick's only
by Hardcore Legend on Sep 7, 2007 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but you're assuming
by gthedamned on Sep 7, 2007 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
3rd hand knowlege
by Eckstreem on Sep 7, 2007 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
at least for now
by gthedamned on Sep 7, 2007 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rabid.
by Eckstreem on Sep 7, 2007 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you should not be spreading rumors
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it is a
by cards4life on Sep 7, 2007 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
while true
by gthedamned on Sep 7, 2007 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, stay with the known facts
We can deal with future information if it comes out; it's unfair to saddle Ankiel with the worst when we have no evidence to base that on. We should just stay with what we now. And that's not being overprotective or being too much of a fan or sticking our head in the sand. That's simply being fair and judicious.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Prove.
Not once in the article is it said that Ankiel broke a single MLB policy. Not one. Don't you think the writers of the piece would have mentioned that if they had a shred of proof that Ankiel was in violation of MLB rules? I do. Then again, that's just my assumption.
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
just because
by cards4life on Sep 7, 2007 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thorny
What I mean is, why would the charitable interpretation seem more plausible coming from Ankiel's own mouth? We all know that it's in his interest to spin this story as LB prescribes, so why wouldn't that story seem just as suspect?
Once we turn our attention from the facts of the case and their moral/legal implications to the question of how to best handle this from a PR standpoint, we very easily slip into this critical/cynical mindset: if his response seems canned, it's because he's hiding something. If his response seems candid, it's canned candor--he's received some good advice. And so on. There's no way out; no way of really knowing what's true and what's mere calculation.
I'm not exempting myself from this way of thinking, and I'm absolutely not rushing to judge Ankiel. I'm just saying that once we get into this discussion--the one about how to manage public perception--the bullshit can get very deep, very fast. I'm not sure how to cut through it without invoking potentially cheesy words like Trust and Faith. What a mess.
by Hummingbird on Sep 7, 2007 9:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
those are fair points
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 9:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Understood
I'm with you, I really am. I'm not an especially cynical person; I think we're in cynical times.
by Hummingbird on Sep 7, 2007 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but
No integrity, no ethics. He should be lambasted.
by bukowski on Sep 7, 2007 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
I want to trust Ankiel. If he says what LB prescribes, I want to believe him. I'm just saying that as a critically functional 21st-century human, it's hard to do.
by Hummingbird on Sep 7, 2007 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Understand and Agree.
by bukowski on Sep 7, 2007 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If there's a way out
by Hummingbird on Sep 7, 2007 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hummingbird is right
Also, Bernie made a good point in his blog entry on the subject. The fact that there is no reliable test for HGH allows the cheaters to continue to cheat if they wish, but the lack of testing also denies a clean player the chance to clear his name.
What a mess indeed.
by cardsgirl95 on Sep 7, 2007 9:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The best approach
In fact, if I really wanted to paint a sympathetic picture of him, I would have him talk about other past drug use as he hit rock bottom when trying to rebuild his pitching career -- too much too soon. He stopped using other drugs, he stopped HGH, and used this new opportunity to change his life. Now THAT is a made for TV movie at the least.
Of course, if he is still using, well, all bets are off...
by jimstllax on Sep 7, 2007 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Medical Reason
That being said I agree with the post that he MUST come out and talk about this. This story only becomes a monkey on his back if he hides behind a "no comment". It was before the ban on substances and from what I've heard he did not receive another prescription after the ban.
This does not change my perception of him or what he has accomplished one bit.
by indakind on Sep 7, 2007 9:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Murdoch
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 9:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
thanks for pointing that out
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another quick thing
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ankiel's not good with the media
With that said, my view is similar to lboros' -- this happened more than two years ago, with a doctor's prescription. So what? It's a big stretch to use this story to claim that Ankiel's current success is attributable to drugs, especially since he's shown great promise as a hitter from high school onward.
BTW -- Rupert Murdoch doesn't own The Daily News. He owns the New York Post. Mort Zuckerman owns The Daily News.
by Dexter Westbrook on Sep 7, 2007 9:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
One other point about Murdoch
by Dexter Westbrook on Sep 7, 2007 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Always a bridesmaid
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yea, I was embarrassed
by Dexter Westbrook on Sep 7, 2007 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he had a prescription for all shipments ...
Issue: If what we are talking about is a doctor prescribing for Rick HGH that was not medically necessary nor advisable but Rick only used that which was prescribed and stopped when MLB banned the stuff, then I don't see how Rick has done something he get suspended for by MLB. Nor is he in legal peril. It's a PR hit and nothing more. Agree with LB that the best way to deal with a PR issue is head on immediately.
by jjray on Sep 7, 2007 9:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
If you start thinking like Johnnie Cochran
"If the address doesn't fit you must acquit"
Seriously though, I agree that Rick and the Cardinals organization need to get in front of this fast.
by Big Mike on Sep 7, 2007 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well..
As others have said, a strong public play to make sure everyone knows the story and understands the situation by Ankiel would be a smart move.
What concerns me the most is the firestorm of publicity this will create. How will Ankiel respond to the intense scrutiny? Will he struggle at the plate, something the Cards can ill-afford at this point in the season? We all know Ankiel has had trouble in the past dealing with such high-pressure situations.
by JMedwick on Sep 7, 2007 9:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I completely agree, Larry.
by birdjam on Sep 7, 2007 9:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bunker
by awpierce on Sep 7, 2007 9:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Matthews, Jr.
by awpierce on Sep 7, 2007 9:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Natural
by indakind on Sep 7, 2007 9:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
interesting
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
According to Google Earth
In other news, I'm looking up how far a hypothetical Rick Ankiel home run would go on Google Earth to test for parallels to The Natural at 9 in the morning. I think it's time for a girlfriend.
by joker24 on Sep 7, 2007 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
will it end like the book or the movie?
by texbird on Sep 7, 2007 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no kidding
by enoscountry on Sep 7, 2007 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Book right now
The only thing missing is a young boy asking Rick if this is true and then the book ending (from how I gather the plot without actually reading it). Since this is real life then life will go on regardless.
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Difference?
by indakind on Sep 7, 2007 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
From Wikipedia
Book ends with Hobbs taking a bribe and striking out and having to face his fans beaten and broken down, movie ends with him triumphantly overcoming a bleeding stomach and everything turns out all right (hollywood loves happy endings authors prefer better literature)
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The
by redbirdnation8206 on Sep 7, 2007 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you know what
and you know what, i don't give a damn.
i feel this way because even if he did take it it was THREE YEARS AGO UNDER COMPLETLY LEGAL CIRCUMSTANCES. this is just another classic example of the east coast media trying to undertake a star of the nl central. anyone with a brain should know that after the story "breaks" after ankiel hits two bombs and has 7 RBIs yesterday. would they write this if he was still in AAA, i think not.
by stlcardinalsfang on Sep 7, 2007 9:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You think
by awpierce on Sep 7, 2007 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry for the snark
by awpierce on Sep 7, 2007 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you're right
by texbird on Sep 7, 2007 9:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
if he really is on the juice
by lboros on Sep 7, 2007 10:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
by indakind on Sep 7, 2007 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
legitimate use
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
by Valatan on Sep 7, 2007 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
good article
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/515665
"The FDA has approved GH only for GH deficiency-related syndromes causing short stature in children, adult GH deficiency caused by rare pituitary tumors and their treatment, and muscle-wasting disease associated with HIV and AIDS. Most GH prescriptions should therefore be for children, but 74% of human GH (HGH) prescriptions in 2004 were for adults aged 20 years and older, and 44% were for adults aged 40 to 59 years, suggesting to the authors that a large proportion of GH sales are for illegal uses."
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
FDA Approval
by bdub78 on Sep 7, 2007 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not in the case of HGH
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
true
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Clarification
There are important differences between HGH and Steriods and it doesn't seem we're partitioning those right now. That is, HGH certainly help one recover from ailments and be healthy but aren't that much of a power booster. I still think HGH is bad for baseball but I don't think Ricks power numbers are a fluke.
That said, I think Bernie is right. There is no way this is getting figured out. Thankfully, Pujols remains a childlike hero for me, for now.
by enoscountry on Sep 7, 2007 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that it's relevant but you seem
by sdrone on Sep 7, 2007 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
HGH promotes growth
by Valatan on Sep 7, 2007 10:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, not to be picky
Of course, he's in his prime, so my point may not be relevant.
by sdrone on Sep 7, 2007 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
how do
by cards4life on Sep 7, 2007 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Coupla points
- Even if he did have a doctor's prescription and it was for rehab purposes, he's going to get hounded. And increased pressure could cause him to crack again? Think: Outfield, Wrigley Field.
- There was an aside in the ESPN article about "eerie similarities" to McGwire. Completely different stories. I hope to god that this story doesn't bring up that skeleton in the closet of Cardinals fans again. McGwire is basically without balls - and not standing up for himself has caused most people to assume guilt. The shadow of McGwire is now bad for baseball.
- Completely agree, Rick needs to face this head on. But the Cardinals aren't the most upfront organization.
- If I were Rick, I'd never say "sorry." It wasn't cheating at the time of the incident in question, end of story.
- I'd like to see his teammates, especially Rolen, and Carpenter come out in support - loudly. In a team that appears at time to be lifeless, this can band them together.
- Tony and Walt should stand behind Rick in a press conference and say to the media in effect "this is our guy. We support him 100%, and this has no impact on his success" That may defray the cracking of Ankiel's psyche.
by bukowski on Sep 7, 2007 9:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i believe raining frogs is next
by texbird on Sep 7, 2007 9:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Heh
Mass hysteria!
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ghostbusters...
by GOOCH24 on Sep 7, 2007 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Joke
by jimstllax on Sep 7, 2007 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
oh no
by JMedwick on Sep 7, 2007 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OUR PETS HEADS ARE FALLING OFF!
by TriplePlay on Sep 7, 2007 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've been joking
by nybirdgirl on Sep 7, 2007 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like most of you
If the story is true then, and he did stop when they say. They it was before the implosion in spring training where he retired and then returned as an outfielder. If... then the feel good story is still a feel good story. It doesn't change things for me.
If...
by paCardsFan on Sep 7, 2007 10:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It's important to note
This, of course, doesn't matter to Bud and the powers that be w/ MLB, but do not let anyone fool you into thinking that Ankiel's hitting homers b/c he took HGH 3 years ago. If it was 3 days ago, it's not why he's hitting homers. Players may think that it will help them, but studies indicate it doesn't...period!
by chuckb on Sep 7, 2007 10:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Honestly,
by Valatan on Sep 7, 2007 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
does it matter if it helps him hit homeruns?
"HGH is an abbreviation for Human Growth Hormone that is produced by the pituitary gland in the brain. This hormone stimulates growth and cell production in human beings.The main property of HGH is to increase height, and the other important benefits are that it increases muscle mass, helps in calcium retention in our body, helps in keeping bones healthy, reduces fat in the body, helps in controlling sugar and insulin levels, helps with immunity and several more important functions that keep us healthy when we are young."
he was taking hgh before he sustained that injury in 2005 spring training. it helps him indirectly and taking hgh gives him an advantage over other ballplayers that dont take it, so it is cheating no matter how you look at it.
by cards4life on Sep 7, 2007 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is cheating
by chuckb on Sep 7, 2007 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
even if he did use HGH under shady
by erik on Sep 7, 2007 10:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
That's what the rotoworld blurb says.
by CardFaninVA on Sep 7, 2007 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sweet
As far as this never-ending saga goes, there's little to no point in trying to prove the legality from our limited set of facts. I find it mildly ironic that after people lambaste Bonds, they can perform the proper contortions to vindicate Ankiel (I'm not pointing fingers at anyone -- but we all know there's a Cardinal fan doing this somewhere). They can both do steroids and it isn't going to bother me a lick. It was a problem endemic to major league baseball and crucifying individuals for the sin of the system is pointless, imo. I like watching players be at the top of their game -- shoot them all up for as much as I care.
Enjoy what Ankiel is doing. HGH may provide some level of assistance but he's hit 40 or so HRs this year. That's talent, not some pill. I've never understood the Ankiel-mania; I never invested myself in his comeback story for whatever reason. But I understand that it's really inspiring to some people, and they shouldn't let this get in the way of that inspiration.
by azruavatar on Sep 7, 2007 10:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bonds
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with you
I'd much prefer we talk about the game of baseball. There's a lot to talk about with this cardinal team right now.
by cardsfaninmass on Sep 7, 2007 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but if thats
by cards4life on Sep 7, 2007 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Has baseball been damaged by
I don't enjoy watching the game or analyzing stats any less than I did before the steroids mess.
by azruavatar on Sep 7, 2007 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
to say nothing of the fact
by chuckb on Sep 7, 2007 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"crucifying individuals for the sin
That's brilliant and sums up how I felt/feel.
If you think steroids don't help you hit home runs you're purposely being obtuse.
If you don't think people like Bonds, Sosa, Mac, etc were juicing, you're completely naive.
Just like pro-wrestling, body building, everything else, everybody was doing it, everybody knew, and nobody said a word. Through the blind eye they encouraged it. They probably even used quotation fingers when talking about it...sure it's "illegal" wink.
You know that San Fran was begging Bonds to juice up after 98. You know MLB knew but didn't care. It was accepted and expected back then.
Now, the Ankiel thing, it's even less of big deal because of things already stated. Not steroids and not banned by the mlb at the time of the offense. That would be like getting mad Walter Johnson for using a spit ball.
by rocKStark5 on Sep 7, 2007 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess
It doesn't really surprise me -- I still assume at least 50% of guys in MLB were using something -- and as long as he's not using now or when it went on the banned list, then I just don't really care.
I think I've been desensitized from this season.
by Alxfritz on Sep 7, 2007 10:19 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree
by Ray Lankford on Sep 7, 2007 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keeping things in perspective
Worse: The media reporting that you took PEDs to treat impotence. (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/stories/090707dnspowilson.2b0ac0a.html)
by birdjam on Sep 7, 2007 10:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I that case, screw the media
by sdrone on Sep 7, 2007 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that won't help the cause any...
by gthedamned on Sep 7, 2007 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That suggestion
by RedbirdRay on Sep 7, 2007 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
People pay attention!
by sdrone on Sep 7, 2007 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not only that
by chuckb on Sep 7, 2007 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
elbow surgery
Good, balanced perspective as usual, Larry. Like you, I'll reserve judgment. If he took HGH during 2004, and only 2004, as a desperate attempt to get his career back on track, I won't judge him too harshly.
by DCGreg on Sep 7, 2007 10:26 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
HGH
- By the rules of the game, he didn't do anything wrong. HGH wasn't banned when he took it, and according to the SI report I read, he stopped receiving shipments of HGH shortly before the ban. If you think this is a cookie-cutter defense, like how people defend players from the '90s by saying that steroid use wasn't banned by the MLB in the '90s, then how about this,
- There is no proof that HGH enhances performance and there is some proof that it doesn't. This might seem like I'm trying to prove a negative, but here: http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/124/8/708?ijkey=4d4f3cb946f5eb5a6021d2bea4ac47cadb30310c
This leaves
3) Ankiel thought that the HGH would enhance his performance when it would do no such thing. Some people would argue that even if HGH does not help one cheat, the intent to cheat is still there. So what? Are the thought police gonna throw Ankiel in the clink?
Unfortunately, many people and many Cards fans are going to accuse Ankiel of all kinds of Bondsian things, and I think that reflects how poorly educated we all are on the nuances of HGH, etc. I don't even want to imagine what Cubs fans will use as catcalls, but I'm sure it will equal the homophobic things they scream at Jimmy Edmonds.
I'm still pulling for Rick Ankiel, and given how early we are in the process, I hope most everyone else here is, too.
by joepo on Sep 7, 2007 10:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Did anyone else hear the reporter...
by birds 4 life on Sep 7, 2007 10:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Great, levelheaded post today
by Alxfritz on Sep 7, 2007 10:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
As usual
by player2bnamedl8r on Sep 7, 2007 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Will's take was excellent
by birdjam on Sep 7, 2007 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They're both great
by player2bnamedl8r on Sep 7, 2007 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the slate story
by DCGreg on Sep 7, 2007 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But what' sad is that Ankiel
And now we look at what we made of Ankiel and say that he has somehow sullied the innocence we longed for--he brought down the hero image we yearned for, he's not the symbolic redemed that we thought he was.
Well we shouldn't have put him up in that position in the first place. He didn't want us to. And I think he knew the dangers of such inflated expectations. We as fans, and the media, put him someplace he didn't want to go; and now we feel entitled to complain about a "loss of innocence" and the "fading of the fairy tale" and the fact that there are no more "heroes".
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not Me.
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I completely agree about not sullying his name
I do think people should examine the sadder personal side of this for Rick. Other people wanted the fairy tale story, the come back kid story, the redemption story because it made them feel good about the world, about possibilities, about sports, or whatever.
Ankiel wanted to be left in peace so that he could develop his talents without a media circus. He refused to talk to the media. He asked them not to write those stories. He told them he didn't trust them in what they would do with those stories. And he was right.
With the evidence we have, I wonder if some people are primarily thinking about themselves--about their own disappointments, their own suspicions, their own moral judgments. I think we should be focusing more of our attention on Ankiel's welfare.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is easy...
by Red Blazer on Sep 7, 2007 10:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
elsewhere, in feel good land
by erik on Sep 7, 2007 10:34 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And QC lost a heartbreaker
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm feeling torn
by nybirdgirl on Sep 7, 2007 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The thing I find difficult
Assuming it's true, it seems as though he should've discussed this with Cardinals management (Jocketty, LaRussa, DeWitt) when (if not before) he was called up and explained why he was taking it, again assuming it was for a medical reason.
The fact that Jocketty seems taken aback by this, doesn't leave me with a good feeling, if for no other reason than the Cardinals never gave up on Rick and continued to resuscitate and nuture his career.
I hope that Rick, his management team, and the Cardinals will explain this soon.
by player2bnamedl8r on Sep 7, 2007 10:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Really?
Also, what would you expect Jocketty to say? "Oh, yeah, we actually knew about this a long time ago but we decided to call up Rick anyway in the hopes that no one would find out. In fact, we are surprised it took you so long for the media to pick this up." Even if he told Jocketty and DeWitt, they wouldn't say that it was something they had been concealing.
I'm just sick of over reactions to things like this. Am I worried about Rick's bad press? Sure. Is the bad press warranted? Prob. not, which is why I don't like all of the "sky is falling" reactions.
by Ray Lankford on Sep 7, 2007 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't expect
But minor or not, and apparently opinions vary, it puts the organization in a bad light, as well as Rick.
The Cardinals were clearly unprepared for a situation such as this. Now we'll see how they react.
I don't know who's over-reacting...I certainly didn't feel like I did or have. Just wondering how the organization could've been caught unaware. I don't think it's over-reacting to wonder about something like that.
And, bad press warranted or not, it is what it is. The general public will think he cheated, whether or not it has anything to do with him hitting home runs 3 years after he allegedly took HGH. That's the 24-hour news-cycle society we live in.
by player2bnamedl8r on Sep 7, 2007 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is what they're saying at Bleed Cubbie Blue
Obviously, they have forgotten that Sammy Sosa was a Cub.
F'ing jerkoffs.
by bukowski on Sep 7, 2007 10:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is what they're saying at Bleed Cubbie Blue
Obviously, they have forgotten that Sammy Sosa was a Cub.
F'ing jerkoffs.
by bukowski on Sep 7, 2007 10:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What about Derrek Lee's complete drop off...
by TriplePlay on Sep 7, 2007 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
HGH
I expect that at some point in the near future, a lot more names are going to be listed....and I'm sure that Cubs players and Cards players will be among them.
by Fitz on Sep 7, 2007 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excerpt from BCB
Who knows...
... what will come of the current investigations and if we'll ever see the results, but folks, lets not kid ourselves in thinking that Ankiel is a rarity. We may laugh at him, but in all likelyhood, many of the players we root for may currently use or may have used in the past HGH and other illegal substances. So Cub fans can insinuate about Ankiel, but who knows why several Cub pitchers went down the toilet after MLB went after steroids. Or perhaps there is a reason why several Cub players are seeing their home run totals fall as their long drives fall short of the wall.
I want MLB to go after everyone and anyone who used and/or uses, but we need to be prepared to see some of our own fall.
DmL
by dmlichte on Friday, September 7, 2007 at 1:16 AM CT
by yer dog first on Sep 7, 2007 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My Take
Of course, no matter what Rick does at this point, he's screwed in the court of public opinion. He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. He can come out and be honest, and then people will be pissed that he cheated. He can come out and say he didn't, and he's a liar. Once something is published, it pretty much becomes gospel in the public eye (in psychology they call it the primacy effect, the first or last things you hear generally get remembered more, and of the two the first is most powerful generally). It will certainly be interesting to see how this plays out over the next few days, weeks, or whatever.
by redbirdnation8206 on Sep 7, 2007 10:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
its
I admit to no objectivity on this but for crying out loud, unless you have something on him that proves he's breaking the rules now or even then, let the poor kid have his day in the sun. he friggin deserves it.
by satori21 on Sep 7, 2007 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i'm not assuming that you didn't
by sdesserman on Sep 7, 2007 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is evidence in how they wrote the story
They bury the more "sympathetic" information that gives context to the possible usage in the middle of the story.
MLB did the opposite. And those are deliberate choices writers make and they are making them for a reason. The first way of doing it is a more sensationalist story, especially given his recent surge in HR and RBI's.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
huh?
seems pretty straightforward to me.
by sdesserman on Sep 7, 2007 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lame complaints
by Dexter Westbrook on Sep 7, 2007 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
People are also ignoring the fact that Rick
The liklihood that this is all on the up and up is very slim. We can always hope for slim but in reality we will all see what we want to see.
by Hardcore Legend on Sep 7, 2007 10:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
and it appears...
by TriplePlay on Sep 7, 2007 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I want reality
Mark McGwire was one of the greatest power hitters of all-time. He did remarkable things for the Cardinals, restored order to a franchise that was pretty terrible. He got guys like Edmonds (and subsequently Rolen) to sign hometown discounts to ensure high level of play in this town. The statues out front of the stadium, the miniture ones, they created one for McGwire. Yet where does it sit? In a warehouse in somepart of the town, far away from the ballpark. You mention the name McGwire and Cardinals fans just duck their heads.
Yet, here we are faced with another instance of a guy we cheered so hard for using a substance he had no business taking and we are once again quick to rally around him.
I'm going to continue to cheer for Ankiel, I'm going to continue to hope for his success whether he is on our team or leaves in 2 years. But after 15 years of having the best players be 'tainted' with disappointing revelation after revelation, I'm not going to assume that this isn't just another case.
by Hardcore Legend on Sep 7, 2007 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Big Mac
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well said, Hardcore
by cardzfan24 on Sep 7, 2007 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Belief
Just one...
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
by Ray Lankford on Sep 7, 2007 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you want reality then
Trying to grasp the future before we have any solid evidence for what that might be is not "reality". I understand the sentiment. But I don't think it's fair to Ankiel. And it does risk perpetuating a feeding frenzy.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
110 comments
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 10:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How to handle the story
Ankiel been assualted by the media before and was traumatized by that. He can get the facts out in other ways.
And Ankiel doesn't trust the media--he said that outright to a P-D reporter who was trying to write a feel-good story about him. He said in a totally honest way "I don't trust you guys" and "I don't want to be the story". He never asked for those "come back kid" labels to be attached to him and tried to slow them down. I think he was suspicious of what the media would do--build him up and then tear him down.
I'm most concerned about Ankiel's psychological stability. As long as there is no use after the ban, I'd like him to state the facts clearly (and a written statement is fine with me) and get on with his life.
I'm glad he has great teammates to help him, like Edmonds. I'm also glad he has TLR. He's fiercely supportive of his players and will protect him from any sensationalist snooping. I know some won't like that. But I'm glad Tony protects his players when the media goes into a feeding frenzy.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 11:00 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
TLR? He turns positively
by MdRedbirdFreak on Sep 7, 2007 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think TLR should handle the story
What Tony will give Ankiel is unwavering support. Tony sees the media as Rick does and so Rick will have someone backing him who has experienced the media in the same way. And Tony has a fighting spirit and a LOT of grit--that can help Rick deal with this whirlwind and go out and play hard on the field. Tony's duty is to manage Rick and to look out for his welfare. Tony's had a lot of practice with rallying the team in the face of adversity.
Not many people seem sufficiently concerned about Ankiel's welfare here. Since we don't have evidence that he did anything illega, I would think we should be most concerned about him. If other evidence comes out that indicates illegal use, we have plenty of time to condemn him.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I just thought it was...
by templetown on Sep 7, 2007 11:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
So many users
Lee
by tiger337 on Sep 7, 2007 11:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Did Walt speak to soon?
by cardsfaninmass on Sep 7, 2007 11:13 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It is tragic...
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well...
If Ankiel hasn't been using HGH since 2005, and there's been no evidence so far that he has, then this is such a non issue it's laughable.
If Ankiel hasn't used HGH since the 2005 MLB ban then he should challenge those NYDN writers to provide evidence that he has. He should do so on camera in front of the world. The burden of proof is on those making the accusations.
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"tragic"
by DCGreg on Sep 7, 2007 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, with the info we know
If this blows over, that may be remembered by Ankiel as an act of disloyalty and he may be less inclined to stay with the Cards in the future, even though they gave him his chance to come back. The Cards have to be careful how to handle this. If there is nothing more to the story, they don't want to shoot themselves in the foot by trying to look all high and mighty on the issue.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
by Ray Lankford on Sep 7, 2007 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
actually, it's a more appropriate use of 'tragic'
by Valatan on Sep 7, 2007 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
whether it is rhetorically correct or not,
If they are interested in Ankiel's psychological stability, they shouldn't be labeling him as a "tragic" figure. That is what he has been trying to get away from for all these years. And now it's the Card's organization itself that has reintroduced a label that Ankiel has long dreaded.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
one last point
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you want to, replace 'hero' with 'protagonist'
by Valatan on Sep 7, 2007 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't trying to be snarky
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but if that was his point
The quote also suggests the team has suffered other ``tragedies'' this year. The things that happened to Hancock and Encarnacion don't fit your definition but they do square with the more common use of "tragedy" as a disastrous event.
I understand what you're saying in a Shakespearean sense, but I don't think that was Jocketty's point.
by DCGreg on Sep 7, 2007 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
time to think here and now
does ankiel struggle?
does he get the whole weekend off?
does he not start until he talks?
by stlcardinalsfang on Sep 7, 2007 11:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
does he get booed?
by TriplePlay on Sep 7, 2007 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In Arizona?
by player2bnamedl8r on Sep 7, 2007 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well actually
I considered going to these games, but being busy with work, decided not to.
by player2bnamedl8r on Sep 7, 2007 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
knowing TLR
In any case, I would think in his resistance he will continue to play Ankiel as much as he has over the last few weeks.
by cardsfaninmass on Sep 7, 2007 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would assume
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm assuming that the team
I also can imagine that this has made the team mad--I think a lot of players hold a similar view of the media as TLR. And if you've ever noticed Wainwright pitch when he's mad, it seems like it makes him that much tougher. He watched his face closely once when he kept getting terrible calls, and it just seemed to harden his face and harden his resolve.
I hope the whole team focuses their energy into hitting the ball that much harder and pitching that much stronger. That in itself would be a great statment of support of Ankiel.
by nycardfan on Sep 7, 2007 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
by Dexter Westbrook on Sep 7, 2007 8:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Truth
-K
by Lawless on Sep 7, 2007 11:27 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Of Course
by Lawless on Sep 7, 2007 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Question.
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not my point
by Lawless on Sep 7, 2007 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They couldn't wait til the end
And Rick has been reluctant to be the object of this great story, perhaps in part because he knew what past might come to surface.
And if all was legal, and part of rehab, then why would management get quoted first with a line like "If I'ts true..."
I appreciate the level headed articles from lb, bernie, and leitch. But for Rick, the pressure won't quit. If the next chapter has him defeating the journalists and winning public opinion, I'll be more shocked that watching last nights on field performance.
But one last thing; if they were really serious about the drug issues, they would ban the use of steroids and hormones that end up in all the hot dogs served to our kids at the ballpark! But then, that isn't what this is about.
by Birds on the Bat on Sep 7, 2007 11:33 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Somehow this new adversity
If the Cardinal brass, Ankiel and Boras stood up and answered the bell via an honest and open press conference it would surprise us all. Most likely we'll see their collective shrugs followed by the "it is what it is" press release.
by Handsome Jimmy on Sep 7, 2007 11:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Most likely
by Cardinal70 on Sep 7, 2007 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Buzz kill is right
Anyway, I said, Ankiel is the feel-good story out of St. Louis this year. He concurred.
Five minutes later, he yells at me, He's taking HGH! I laughed. He says, Seriously, it's on ESPN!
Good gawd. Following sports can really put you through the wringer. It cuts both ways. We had the miracle World Series last year. So I'm not whining. But what a boomerang this is.
by Youneverknow on Sep 7, 2007 11:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It's very much a case of these days
by Hardcore Legend on Sep 7, 2007 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another good article on HGH
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 11:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
there seem
by DCGreg on Sep 7, 2007 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
HGH
Even on this forum, I keep seeing the word "cheating" thrown around. HGH wasn't cheating then, per the rules, and by the gist of these articles I'm not sure it would even be cheating now, in the sense that it would boost performance.
It's frustrating and a real shame that this - the reputation of a great ballplayer - is essentially going to come down to how much people choose to inform themselves.
by naterz on Sep 7, 2007 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rick's stats
Before this season, Rick Ankiel had 32 HRs in 451 minor league at-bats. This season in the PCL, he had 32 HRs in 389 ABs. Before this year, he had a HR in every 14 at-bats. This year, he had a HR in every 12 at-bats.
Which again, makes his use of this stuff all the more frustrating.
by Hardcore Legend on Sep 7, 2007 11:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
i don't think that proves much
by erik on Sep 7, 2007 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reread the post erik
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
sigh
you invest such emotion into these players and teams, and stuff like this happens.
MLB cant guarantee these players are clean because they dont blood test, so i am about to give up on the sport. it is a joke. bud selig is a douchebag of the highest order. get rid of him, and start over with a commissioner who has some balls to stand up to the players union and protect us, the fans, from this bullshit happening anymore.
steroids werent even banned by baseball until 2005, that is ludicrous. unacceptable. fuck major league baseball.
we need baseball cleaned up now, for good, or just inject them during the anthem before the game. as it stands now it is ridiculous.
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 11:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Umm, there is no test for HGH anywhere
by bailorg on Sep 7, 2007 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hmm
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
p.s.
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And their "test" is total BS
Yes, there is a blood test for HGH. But because antibodies necessary for the process are in such short supply, virtually no HGH testing is conducted. In addition, the test only detects HGH right after injection so it's impractical for in-competition testing. As a result, there never has been an HGH positive."
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/nl/2006-06-09-hgh-testing_x.htm
by bailorg on Sep 7, 2007 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
umm ok
you sound like a player
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
facts
by gdowdy3 on Sep 7, 2007 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what facts?
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
With this team's
by cardsrul on Sep 7, 2007 12:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Judging by the reactions
I'm sorry but this whole thing to me still reeks of having an ax to grind by somebody or a collected group of people looking to prove something to either the Cardinals origanization and/or their pasionate fans.
I may be wrong... it might just be reporters doing their job but it's my gut feeling on this right now.
But I do agree that the Cardinals origanization needs to try and clear this up ASAP (if possible), before this "sucker punch" turns into a knockout blow.
by KYCards on Sep 7, 2007 12:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
ok, so no reliable HGH test then?
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 12:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The key
by rockin redbird on Sep 7, 2007 12:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
That's the point I've been making all morning...
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good lord, what's the issue?
by sdrone on Sep 7, 2007 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong Premise.
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The "issue", RR
by cardsrul on Sep 7, 2007 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well--
by rockin redbird on Sep 7, 2007 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Question...
by champion on Sep 7, 2007 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
my take
by truemun12 on Sep 7, 2007 12:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
sorry
wasn't attacking any of you, i am just frustrated in MLB.
if they cant detect HGH, then why is rodney harrison suspended from the NFL?
it just seems like the NFL is farther ahead in these issues than MLB, and the NFL is an infant compared to MLB in terms of how long they have been around.
the difference in the leagues to me, is that the NFL commissioner is the boss of footbnall, and in baseball the player's union is. i just dont see baseball getting any better until this changes.
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 12:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Rodney
by paCardsFan on Sep 7, 2007 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The difference
by Valatan on Sep 7, 2007 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
because the NFL is filled...
by TriplePlay on Sep 7, 2007 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Merriman
Why is this such a big deal in Baseball but not in Hockey or NFL or anywhere else?(Except cycling)
by Calhoun on Sep 7, 2007 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wasn't he also
by chuckb on Sep 7, 2007 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The NFL is farther ahead?
The NFL lost all their perspective in that case, by even giving a damn what Wade Wilson did to improve his sex life. Bud's a moron but Roger Goodell proved to me that he, at least, wants to make it a competition.
by chuckb on Sep 7, 2007 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
makes me wonder...
if the problem has been as widespread as i've been led to believe in the last few years by all of these stories, well, i'm equally tempted to just put my fingers in my ears and hum loudly until it goes away, or to become even more cynical than i naturally am as a modern 23 year old and say "whatever, f*** it".
whatever ankiel did (and at this point i think it's reasonable to believe it was something at least a little shady) i'd be willing to forgive if he just explained himself, and made it clear that it was in the past. until there is some real action taken to solve the problem, what else can we as fans do? major league baseball in general has really been dropping the ball on us for years, and it pisses me off that i grew up as a fan in an era dominated by such hypocrisy.
by mattybobo on Sep 7, 2007 1:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
rockin redbird
no matter what happens, ankiel cant say, test my blood and im clean? there is no test to even clear him? so what does the story do but damage him without any way to defend himself if he is clean now. not to mention the points you already made.
this stuff makes my head spin.
i would like to see rick ankiel give a sample of his blood to a lab, and when we do have a test for hgh someday, he can have it tested and clear himself.
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 1:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
likely
by gthedamned on Sep 7, 2007 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If there
by rockin redbird on Sep 7, 2007 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
First Take on espn2
also, they are talking about MLB suspending him, but if he was taking it before it was banned, how can they? honestly, this is about it for me for baseball..
oh, and, you guys accuse me of attacking someone for saying they sound like a player, yet a lot of you are like "Umm" and "good lord" in snarky snidey sarcastic ways in your replies..baiting? um, good lord..
by Rentboy on Sep 7, 2007 1:14 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
They have tests
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lets lighten the mood
http://www.mamalogues.com/2007/09/what_i_know_about_sports_could.html
One quick teaser:
I know this about local sports:
1) Tony La Russa is the most hardcore man in St. Louis. One of my favorite things to do is watch the press try to conduct a post-game conference when he's all ticked off.
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 1:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Still waiting.....
Walt and company could use this as an opportunity to get ahead of the story. We all know that ain't gonna happen and the story is growing by the hour.
by Handsome Jimmy on Sep 7, 2007 1:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The Real Topic for Debate
Is it wrong for an athlete to take HGH even if his sport's administration has not banned it and he takes the legal steps to aquire the hormones?
To help cover our cardinal loyalty, ask yourself this question:
How would I feel if Adam Dunn was found to have taken HGH in 2003, but only in 2003, and he took the appropiate legal steps to aquire the hormone?
Leave out the assumptions that he may have taken the drug even after it was banned and other questions that the reporters will ask him multiple times.
by stl3bagger on Sep 7, 2007 1:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
agree
Knowing the facts so far I see it as a non issue. Did Ankiel know HGH was going to be seen as an evil drug when he took it? who knows. It was not illegal at the time.
I have no problem with Ankiel experimenting with HGH but I really hope he has not touched the stuff since the start of the 2005 season.
It was not illegal at the time. It would be like creatine becoming illegal later. A lot of people took it but they did not know it would be considered illegal. You can buy it legally over the counter. It sounds like Ankiel got his HGH legally.
by ICbirdfan on Sep 7, 2007 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Anyone have ESPN Insider?
by saladdays on Sep 7, 2007 2:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It was posted on the stltoday forums
You can read the full post in the link but here is the best part of his blog:
"Hmm, let's see here ... he stopped receiving the banned substance before it was banned? And if true, "obviously it would be very tragic"? Gosh, I don't know. Unfortunate, sure. Inconvenient, absolutely. But it's very tragic when a professional athlete gains the same edge that so many of his colleagues have gained? And probably won't be punished?
No, today the Rick Ankiel Story isn't nearly as spiffy as it was just yesterday. But I have to tell you, I've got a really hard time getting worked up over this news."
by StLHugo on Sep 7, 2007 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
MLB requests to meet with Ankiel
by Calhoun on Sep 7, 2007 2:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
This is good news
by KYCards on Sep 7, 2007 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I'm glad
by chuckb on Sep 7, 2007 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Though I'm a non-fan of Boras,
by MdRedbirdFreak on Sep 7, 2007 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not only that
by chuckb on Sep 7, 2007 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

