Apparently, a 4 person panel convened to decide on John Hamilton's future will require a yet to be named 5th person. MLB and the MLBPA each selected an attorney and physician to decide on the player's fate and are deadlocked. According to the linked article, there is issue over whether to suspend him or send him to rehab. My question is, why can't they do both?
The additional question, if they suspend him, is whether he is a first time offender or possibly up to a fourth time offender. How the Hell can they not figure this out. is it really that difficult to determine if he was on a 40 man roster at the time of failed drug tests (6 of them) in the minors?
I am all for second chances and for a while Hamilton seemed to be making the most of his. But, when it gets into third, fourth, and beyond chances, at some point don't more punitive measures need to be taken? If the number of failed drug tests are supposed to result in a suspension, then what is the problem? Suspend him. If the CBA stipulates mandated rehab, then do it. If there is a gray area, why can't they do both?
Suspend, Rehab, or both? - (
New Window )
I believe that when he was reinstated, he worked out something with the league that provides different terms for him than under mlb's drug policy.
Yeah, why should he get special treatment above the rest of the players?
Quote:
Thanks for that. I didn't know that. I also wonder how/why the league would agree to that. Why a different and seemingly more lenient set of rules for a known offender?
Yeah, why should he get special treatment above the rest of the players?
His punishment was always particularized anyway, and it predated the new CBA. That's why he should get special treatment.
I think doing so would encourage others to consider doing the same. If players were encouraged to immediately seek help instead of trying to cover up their drug use it would be a healthier approach.
But again not saying no punishment but IMO it should be much less than someone with no remorse and trying to hide it but gets caught.
Addiction is an illness, and relapses are common. Do severe financial punishments help deal with the underlying illness? Of course not. I feel differently when a player takes them in a manner that endangers others, such as DUI, whether booze or hard drugs.
On the other hand, to the extent that a relapse reduces the effectiveness or availability of a player, the team should be able to get some compensation--or, as noted above, preferably it should reduce the player's compensation but go into an alternate fund.
An awful lot of variables in a situation like this.
I think "recreational" drugs do fit a different category. But, they also have an impact on his ability to play and his team. He absolutely should get rehab and I have no problem with the league and/or union providing that. But, I also think some form of punishment is in order, for a repeat offender.