pete@umcp-cs.UUCP (Pete Cottrell) (05/19/85)
Well, I've been quiet lately because of finals, but I thought
that there would surely be some discussion of Ueberroth's drug
scheme by the time I caught up with this newsgroup. But I see
nary a comment, so let me start.
I think that Ueberroth's plan to test everyone connected with
baseball (front-office personnel, scouts, minor-leaguers, etc.)
is patently ridiculous and frightening. I can *maybe* understand
someone saying that the players should be tested (they can't be now
because of their contract with the owners), but I draw the line
there. The statements about 'the integrity of baseball' are easily
dismissable when we are dealing with the abridgement of people's
rights. Image of a game or a business should not take precedence
over the rights of the individual (this includes you and me, because
I can see this as a dangerous precendent that is even now creeping
into the private sector). I see this as an issue that transcends
the world of sports and instead becomes a legal, moral and ethical
question. Such a policy presumes a person guilty until he proves
himself innocent and violates the individuals' right to privacy
and protection from unlawful search.
Boy, this issue really hits home with me. If I hear the argument
"If you don't have anything to hide, why not take the test?" again,
I think I'll scream....
--
Call-Me: Pete Cottrell, Univ. of Md. Comp. Sci. Dept.
UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!pete
CSNet: pete@umcp-cs
ARPA: pete@marylandsamuels@h-sc1.UUCP (ronald samuels) (05/19/85)
> I can *maybe* understand > someone saying that the players should be tested (they can't be now > because of their contract with the owners), but I draw the line > there. One of the arguements that has been presented against testing is that testing JUST the players would be selective search (also a wrong-o) I CAN'T see the point of JUST testing the players (though testing the front office without the players seems blatently to be a power play) > rights. Image of a game or a business should not take precedence > over the rights of the individual (this includes you and me, because > I can see this as a dangerous precendent that is even now creeping > into the private sector). I agree one hundred percent. However, unfortunately our laws don't say a whole lot about what a person can do in a private company in hiring firing situations (with certain exceptions) > I see this as an issue that transcends > the world of sports and instead becomes a legal, moral and ethical > question. Such a policy presumes a person guilty until he proves > himself innocent and violates the individuals' right to privacy > and protection from unlawful search. Again, I agree, but unfortunately the courts don't. However, I think that it makes a lot of difference HOW the tests are used as to whether or not it really is the problem that you present. I'm unwilling to close my eyes to the problem, but also unwilling to just punish people for what is basically a disease. IF 1) the testing is kept completely confidental and the only requirements are the a positive test requires a player to check into a treatment program than I can't complain too much. It's too bad but the commisioner is right that drug problems leave the game open to scandles (and not just like the kind we have now, but like the Black Sox problem) > Boy, this issue really hits home with me. If I hear the argument > "If you don't have anything to hide, why not take the test?" again, > I think I'll scream.... > -- Scream, I just heard it on the tube AGAIN. > Call-Me: Pete Cottrell, Univ. of Md. Comp. Sci. Dept. > UUCP: {seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!pete > CSNet: pete@umcp-cs > ARPA: pete@maryland -- Ron Samuels Harvard University Science Center ...harvard!h-sc1!samuels (or better yet) ...harvard!h-sc4!samuels_b
woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods) (05/21/85)
I think Uberroth is expecting something damaging and controversial
to come out of the current investigation into alleged cocaine dealing by
members of the Pittsburgh Pirates. He is just trying to cover his own
butt by making it look like he is doing something about it. Personally,
I think it's a joke. It looks pretty fascist to me. I think it's
worse than what it is trying to prevent.
--Greg
--
{ucbvax!hplabs | allegra!nbires | decvax!noao | harpo!seismo | ihnp4!noao}
!hao!woods
CSNET: woods@NCAR ARPA: woods%ncar@CSNET-RELAY
"...I may not be right but I've never been wrong
It seldom turns out the way it does in the song..."wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (05/23/85)
Sigh. I can not for the life of me understand why so many netters are jumping up and down on Uberoth's head over the drug issue. Some twit even called it a fascist plot. Sigh. I guess these folks would like to see baseball games played by a bunch of zonked out nose nibblers. The main reason the commish laid down the law for everyone else in baseball was to counter the Union's argument about "Why not Everyone." Can't you just see Gooden pitching after doing 4 lines? The damn games would last all day. Phooey on all you folks trying to justify the melting of brain cells in the athletic sports. The athletes need all they can get. T. C. Wheeler
david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (05/24/85)
> ............................ Phooey on all you folks > trying to justify the melting of brain cells in the > athletic sports. The athletes need all they can get. > T. C. Wheeler So do you, T.C. Would you have no objections to spot urinalysis for you? How about a spot polygraph, too? We wouldn't want to let atheletes and civvies corrupt themselves by lying, would we? More to the point, the players and owners reached an agreement on how to treat players doped up in one way or another. What the Commish is now doing is trying to use P.R. to circumvent that agreement. Thus he violates the two fundamental principles of the Republic: (1) due process and (2) the sanctity of contracts. I happen to think Ueberroth's actions in this matter are a poorer example to apparently infinitely impressionable youth than the excesses of some atheletes. The latter implicitly endorse hedonism; the former tyranny. This is not an endorsement of drug use. It is an assertion that Ueberroth's attitudes on individual rights and legal contracts are inconsistent with our highest principles. (Dare I say it?) It is even downright un-American. We can count ourselves fortunate that he is the Commissioner of Baseball, where such attitudes can be discounted as the actions of a take-charge guy, rather than Senator from California. David Rubin {allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david
woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods) (06/03/85)
> Can't you just see Gooden pitching after doing 4 lines? The > damn games would last all day. Phooey on all you folks > trying to justify the melting of brain cells in the > athletic sports. The athletes need all they can get. > T. C. Wheeler As one of those "twits" who is opposed to testing for drugs, I strongly resent your implication that opposing the testing is equivalent to supporting the use of drugs by athletes. I do *not* support drug use by athletes, but I *do* oppose such fascist policies as forcing people to undergo drug tests. Big Brother is alive and well, and his name is Uberroth... (or Wheeler...) --Greg -- {ucbvax!hplabs | allegra!nbires | decvax!noao | harpo!seismo | ihnp4!noao} !hao!woods CSNET: woods@NCAR ARPA: woods%ncar@CSNET-RELAY "...I may not be right but I've never been wrong It seldom turns out the way it does in the song..."