Major league's drug probe could be lengthy
NEW YORK — We may never know exactly what Alex Rodriguez and Ryan Braun are being accused of in Major League Baseball's Biogenesis investigation — if they beat the rap.
That's because details likely will be caught in a tangle of legal gymnastics involving MLB, the players' union and probably an arbitrator, who could rule no discipline is warranted.
Lengthy proceedings make it nearly a certainty most, if not all, suspensions would be served in 2014.
Among the early legal issues: Does the commissioner's office have the right to announce any suspensions before grievances are decided by an arbitrator? Can a player not previously disciplined under the drug agreement be suspended for more than 50 games because of multiple violations?
Two people familiar with the investigation said if management and the union can't agree on the process, arbitrator Fredric Horowitz likely would be asked to decide. The people spoke on condition of anonymity because no public statements were authorized.
MLB has spent most of the year investigating about 20 players for their links to Biogenesis of America, including A-Rod and Braun, both former MVPs. Miami New Times reported in January that the closed Florida anti-aging clinic had distributed banned performance-enhancing drugs to major leaguers.
Lawyers for the commissioner's office have been interviewing players and many, including Braun, have refused to answer questions about their dealings with Biogenesis, the two people said. Braun was interviewed in late June, and Rodriguez is scheduled to be interviewed Friday.
Braun and Rodriguez have said they didn't do anything that merits discipline. The players' refusal to respond to MLB's questions were first reported by ESPN and the New York Daily News.
MLB hopes to complete the player interviews in mid-July but isn't sure whether it will meet that schedule. Management then will have to decide what discipline it intends to impose.
Baseball's joint drug agreement calls for a 50-game suspension for a first offense, 100 games for a second and a lifetime ban for a third. Among the players linked to Biogenesis, Toronto's Melky Cabrera, Oakland's Bartolo Colon and San Diego's Yasmani Grandal have served 50-game penalties following positive testosterone tests.
The drug agreement specifies that if a suspension for a first PED offense is challenged by the union, the violation isn't made public unless the penalty is sustained in arbitration. But discipline for second and third offenses are served while the grievance is litigated.
There also is a provision stating “the commissioner's office may publicly announce the discipline of a player if the allegations relating to a player's violation of the program previously had been made public through a source other than the commissioner's office or a club” or their employees. The sides or the arbitrator will have to decide whether the media accounts of Biogenesis are covered by that clause.
Each player's case probably will be handled in a separate arbitration, which could slow down the process while the sides secure dates before Horowitz or agree to retain other arbitrators. The three players who already have served suspensions also may claim they can't be penalized under a provision prohibiting multiple disciplines for the same use. In addition, they can't be penalized for conduct that took place before they were given notice of their positive drug test.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.