This just in: Manny Ramirez Suspended!!!

[Funkee1]

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-manny-ramirez8-2009may08,0,6324894.story?track=rss

 

And in the middle of that awesome home winning streak!

 

 

Manny Ramirez will be suspended 50 games for positive drug test

Kirby Lee / US Presswire

Dodgers left fielder Manny Ramirez prepares to head back into the field during a game against the San Diego Padres on Friday. Ramiez will be suspended 50 games for a positive drug test, The Times has learned.

The suspension, which is expected to begin with tonight's game, makes him the biggest star penalized under baseball's testing program that started in 2003.

By Bill Shaikin and Dylan Hernandez Times Staff Writers

8:35 AM PDT, May 7, 2009

Manny Ramirez has tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs and will be suspended 50 games starting today, The Times has learned.

 

The test result and suspension is expected to be announced later today.

he suspension will cost Ramirez $7.7 million, or roughly 31% of his $25-million salary. Players in violation of baseball's drug policy are not paid during suspensions.

 

Ramirez is expected to attribute the test results to medication received from a doctor for a personal medical issue, according to a source familiar with matter but not authorized to speak publicly.

 

The Dodgers informed triple-A outfielder Xavier Paul this morning that he was being promoted to Los Angeles.

 

With the suspension taking effect with tonight's game against the Washington Nationals at Dodger Stadium, Ramirez will not be eligible to return to the team until July 3.

 

Ramirez would become the biggest star suspended under an oft-criticized major league testing program that started in 2003. He had been a model citizen since arriving in Los Angeles last August, following a stormy tenure with the Boston Red Sox.

 

This is the second drug scandal to rock baseball within four months. In a year in which baseball officials hoped their greatest concern would be the slumping economy, the two highest-paid players in the game have been revealed to have failed a drug test.

 

Alex Rodriguez, the game's highest-paid player, acknowledged during a February news conference that he used steroids from 2001 to 2003. The admission followed a Sports Illustrated report that he failed a drug test in 2003, when players were not subject to suspension.

 

Ramirez did not appear in the clubhouse after the Dodgers' 10-3 victory over the Washington Nationals Wednesday night. After the game, Dodgers General Manager Ned Colletti and Manager Joe Torre said they were unaware of any failed test or pending suspension.

 

As unconfirmed reports circulated around Dodger Stadium on Wednesday night, Scott Boras, the agent for Ramirez, declined to comment.

 

Major League Baseball spokesman Pat Courtney said he could not comment, citing the limitations stipulated in baseball's drug policy.

 

Rob Manfred, baseball's top labor lawyer, and Michael Weiner, general counsel for the players' union, did not return multiple messages.

 

The loss of Ramirez would leave a gaping hole in the Dodgers' lineup. Juan Pierre, the likely replacement for Ramirez in left field, has batted ninth in two of his five starts this season.

 

Ramirez doubled and drove in two runs on Wednesday, as the Dodgers set a major league record with their 13th consecutive home victory at the start of the season. The Dodgers have the best record in the major leagues, at 21-8, and the biggest division lead in the majors, at 6 1/2 games in the National League West.

 

Ramirez leads the Dodgers in batting average (.348), on-base percentage (.492) and slugging percentage (.641), and he is tied for the team lead in home runs with six.

 

He signed a two-year, $45-million contract with the Dodgers in March, with the first year guaranteed at $25 million and the second year at his option at $20 million.

 

In an appearance at USC last month, Jose Canseco said Ramirez's name "is most likely, 90%" on a list of 104 players that failed a drug test in 2003. The players were promised anonymity for taking tests in 2003; Rodriguez is the only player that has been identified among that group.

 

Ramirez laughed when Times columnist Kurt Streeter relayed Canseco's allegation to him.

 

"I got no comment, nothing to say about that," Ramirez told Streeter. "What can I say? I don't even know the guy."

[guitargod0dmw]

Whoa!!!

[Emprov]

Oooops.

[RSBro]

Just heard it on The Jungle.

 

Stoopid, stooopid, stoooopid!

[Funkee1]

See, I don't get it. If someone told me "Look. We're going to pay you an insane amount of money. All you have to do is something you love, and avoid this list of chemicals."

I'd be on overtime trying to make sure nothing even remotely like any of the banned chemicals entered my body. It ain't rocket science, is it?

[WashburnGuy]

Look at the guy! What took them so long to catch up with him in the first place?

[Funkee1]

 

Look at the guy! What took them so long to catch up with him in the first place?

 

:poke:

[RSBro]

 

See, I don't get it. If someone told me "Look. We're going to pay you an insane amount of money. All you have to do is something you love, and avoid this list of chemicals." I'd be on overtime trying to make sure nothing even remotely like any of the banned chemicals entered my body. It ain't rocket science, is it?

 

 

Esp when you know you're gonna get tested!

It's almost as bad as Harvin and that guy from UNC tokin' up at the Combine, but only almost... Manny didn't know the time, place and exact moment it was gonna happen.

[dDigitalPimp]

Look at the guy! What took them so long to catch up with him in the first place?

 

he looks more like an overweight asshole than a ripped body builder

 

you sure you got the right person?

[collinwho]

 

See, I don't get it. If someone told me "Look. We're going to pay you an insane amount of money. All you have to do is something you love, and avoid this list of chemicals." I'd be on overtime trying to make sure nothing even remotely like any of the banned chemicals entered my body. It ain't rocket science, is it?

 

 

While I can understand this to some extent, he is claiming that it is coming from something a doctor prescribed him. If I am a pro athlete who has to stay in a certain shape in order to earn my outrageous salary and my personal doctor tells me "take this to overcome your cold" or whatever it may be, I'm just going to take it. The doctor knows a hell of a lot more about health than I do. I follow his direction. While that doesn't circumvent the suspension and it doesn't make him any less guilty, it does at least make sense.

[Perfessor]

 

Indians fan here.

[guitargod0dmw]

he looks more like an overweight asshole than a ripped body builder you sure you got the right person?

 

I was thinking the same thing

[dert_stylus]

Wow!!!

[bbl]

While I can understand this to some extent, he is claiming that it is coming from something a doctor prescribed him. If I am a pro athlete who has to stay in a certain shape in order to earn my outrageous salary and my personal doctor tells me "take this to overcome your cold" or whatever it may be, I'm just going to take it. The doctor knows a hell of a lot more about health than I do. I follow his direction. While that doesn't circumvent the suspension and it doesn't make him any less guilty, it does at least make sense.

 

It doesn't make sense to me. At all.

 

Knowing that I could lose over $8 million for taking a prescription from my doctor, I'm going to clear that with my employer first.

 

Really, it makes no sense. And therefore I think Manny is full of it. The guy is 37 years old, in the twilight of his career, and still the most productive hitter in baseball. I don't buy it.

 

What is this medication? He can't say right now? Yeah, OK.

 

EDIT: If Manny's NOT one of the 104 players who tested postive in 2003, why doesn't he just say so? All 104 of those players have been informed.

[ThudMaker]

See, I don't get it. If someone told me "Look. We're going to pay you an insane amount of money. All you have to do is something you love, and avoid this list of chemicals."

Perhaps without the chemicals, he's an average major league hitter. Average major league hitters don't make insane amounts of money (well, in regards to their peers). As for his story, we'll have to wait and see how that pans out as to whether or not it was a misunderstanding.

[bbl]

Indians fan here.

 

I paid $1 to see him hit 3 jacks vs. Oakland in 1999. Impressive.

[collinwho]

It doesn't make sense to me. At all. Knowing that I could lose over $8 million for taking a prescription from my doctor, I'm going to clear that first. Really, it makes no sense. And therefore I think Manny is full of it. What is this medication? He can't say right now? Yeah, OK.

 

It makes complete sense. Technically, I am subject to random drug testing where I work. (Granted, they never do it, but they could). I was in a car accident two summers ago. If my doctor prescribed me something that was going to turn up a false positive on a test I would have no clue. If my doctor prescribed me something that was going to turn up a true positive, I would also have no clue. My entire income was at stake. Sure it isn't the same amount, but it is just as important to me. The fact of the matter is, I don't have the time or resources to research prescriptions. That is my doctor's job. That is why I go to them.

[bbl]

Perhaps without the chemicals, he's an average major league hitter.

 

I think he's a great hitter, regardless. But without the chemicals, is he a great hitter at age 37 and beyond? A time when the body doesn't recover as quickly, especially when playing 150+ games per year?

[bbl]

 

It makes complete sense. Technically, I am subject to random drug testing where I work. (Granted, they never do it, but they could). I was in a car accident two summers ago. If my doctor prescribed me something that was going to turn up a false positive on a test I would have no clue. If my doctor prescribed me something that was going to turn up a true positive, I would also have no clue. My entire income was at stake. Sure it isn't the same amount, but it is just as important to me. The fact of the matter is, I don't have the time or resources to research prescriptions. That is my doctor's job. That is why I go to them.

 

 

You know what your doctor prescribes you.

 

You know the list of banned medications.

 

You know that if you take a banned medication, you could lose something that's very important to you.

 

But you don't have the time and the resources to cross-check your prescriptions against the list of banned medications.

 

And you say that that is your doctor's job. Does your doctor know the list of banned medications? Did you ask him if he's cross-checked the prescriptions against that list?

 

Then apply that to Manny's situation, where you KNOW you're going to be tested.

 

You're not helping yourself, here.

 

You're risking something very important to you to "I have no clue, that's not my job."

 

No, that does not make sense. Common sense, anyway. Not to me, it doesn't. To you, sure.

[collinwho]

 

You know what your doctor prescribes you. You know the list of banned medications. You know that if you take a banned medication, you could lose something that's very important to you. But you don't have the time and the resources to cross-check your prescriptions against the list of banned medications. And you say that that is your doctor's job. Does your doctor know the list of banned medications? Did you ask him if he's cross-checked the prescriptions against that list? Then apply that to Manny's situation, where you KNOW you're going to be tested. You're not helping yourself, here. You're risking something very important to you to "I have no clue, that's not my job." No, that does not make sense. Common sense, anyway. Not to me, it doesn't. To you, sure.

 

 

I know that what the doctor prescribes me is some long chemical that I don't really understand. I know that same chemical can probably be listed in about 4 different ways and that the way it is listed on the bottle might not be the same way it is on my list. I also don't know if some random combination of two of the chemicals on the label can create a false positive. I am responsible for my own actions, but in some (maybe even most) situations my best course of action is to trust the professionals that I have hired to take care of me. If it turns out that I end up screwing up in spite of my best efforts, then that is a risk I have to take.

[ThudMaker]

I think he's a great hitter, regardless. But without the chemicals, is he a great hitter at age 37 and beyond? A time when the body doesn't recover as quickly, especially when playing 150+ games per year?

I wouldn't disagree with that. As you suggest, at 37 is he a great hitter? Is a big contract justifiable? Let's say his "story" doesn't pan out. It would be an indication that he personally doesn't believe he is still a great hitter without assistance, which was my point. A .270-.280 hitter at 37 isn't worth a big contract, as the numbers will most likely decline little by little. Unless perhaps they are a defensive wiz, and we know that the player in question could never be confused with the term defensive wiz.

[ThudMaker]

I know that what the doctor prescribes me is some long chemical that I don't really understand. I know that same chemical can probably be listed in about 4 different ways and that the way it is listed on the bottle might not be the same way it is on my list. I also don't know if some random combination of two of the chemicals on the label can create a false positive. I am responsible for my own actions, but in some (maybe even most) situations my best course of action is to trust the professionals that I have hired to take care of me. If it turns out that I end up screwing up in spite of my best efforts, then that is a risk I have to take.

The easiest solution, which bbl is hinting at, is to provide that list of banned substances to the doctor. It can be in the p[atient's medical file. When he prescribes something, the MD will understand if it's on the banned list or not. If it's questionable, the MD can mention that perhaps clarification from the employer is necessary before he would prescribe something.

[collinwho]

 

The easiest solution, which bbl is hinting at, is to provide that list of banned substances to the doctor. It can be in the p[atient's medical file. When he prescribes something, the MD will understand if it's on the banned list or not. If it's questionable, the MD can mention that perhaps clarification from the employer is necessary before he would prescribe something.

 

 

Certainly not a bad idea. Maybe he had done that and the doctor missed it. Who knows? At the same time we all know Manny isn't the most "with it" guy in the world. Maybe he didn't.

[dDigitalPimp]

 

If my doctor prescribed me something that was going to turn up a false positive on a test I would have no clue. If my doctor prescribed me something that was going to turn up a true positive, I would also have no clue.

 

 

if your doctor gave you a script for a pain med and you pissed hot for that pain med in a drug test you would simply show them your pill bottle or copy of the script and you would be fine. i think they even ask you before you take the test if you are on any current medications and they would mark them down at the time of the test. no big deal.

[collinwho]

 

if your doctor gave you a script for a pain med and you pissed hot for that pain med in a drug test you would simply show them your pill bottle or copy of the script and you would be fine. i think they even ask you before you take the test if you are on any current medications and they would mark them down at the time of the test. no big deal.

 

 

This is true for me. Is it true for pro ballplayers?