Comments for Leak Nearly as Bad as Positive PED Test in Ryan Braun Case at http://bizofbaseball.com , comment 1 to 3 out of 3 comments http://bizofbaseball.com Sun, 19 May 2013 22:58:41 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5548:leak-nearly-as-bad-as-positive-ped-test-in-braun-case&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-3854 yes he failed and so has baseballs governing body--they worry more about 14 twams in one league and 16 teams in the other instead of the truth Rose is on the sidelines while MCgwire is in the dugout,Bonds is free instead of banned for life --boy my game is more corrupt than Washington. - ROCKYO8 Wed, 14 Dec 2011 06:49:01 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5548:leak-nearly-as-bad-as-positive-ped-test-in-braun-case&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-3852 Rachel: The point is that initial positive tests can be, and have been, incorrect and/or overturned. Having the test be incorrect and/or overturned means that the player was not guilty in the first place, and there is no wrongdoing to disclose. That is the status of the current situation with Braun. Wrongdoing has not been determined, so it is unfair to disclose to the public. Because of the harm it does in the minds of small-minded 'fans' who rush to judge. And to Maury - Sure some will not take the time to think it through, but I don't see how he could/should be labeled a 'cheater' if it's determined he did not cheat. However unlikely, there are biological and accidental things that can result in a testosterone ratio like that. If it is one of these innocent things than I wouldn't consider it a 'failed drug test' and I wouldn't consider Braun a cheater. - Shelly Mon, 12 Dec 2011 17:00:14 +0100 http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5548:leak-nearly-as-bad-as-positive-ped-test-in-braun-case&catid=26:editorials&Itemid=39#comment-3851 It's naive to think this wouldn't be leaked, certainly for a star of this magnitude. ESPN should have sat on it? That would not have been proper. Initial positive test results held by MLB until the positive is ultimately deemed a positive and otherwise never disclosed? Without transparency how can what they're actually doing be judged? Suppose they're shading the procedures AFTER the lab testing to protect stars. For example, allowing dubious extenuating circumstances. How does anonymity here breed confidence and confirm that the system is honest? "Oh, no, differential treatment for stars on extenuating circumstances, why, that would NEVER happen. We'd NEVER do that. Trust us." We all know how that works. - rachel Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:55:08 +0100