Baseball's real steroids problem

Video

More video

Richard Emory, the attorney for Roger Clemens' trainer, shows photos he alleges prove Roger Clemens used steroids. Play video

---

The lawyer for Roger Clemens says the steroid charges against his client by a former trainer are 'fabrications.' Play video

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- This is typically the most hopeful time of the year for baseball fans.

I've long held that the phrase "pitchers and catchers report" is the best that winter has to offer, as the start of spring training offers more joy than "Happy New Year," "Merry Christmas" or even "I love you" on Valentine's Day.

But this year we get pitchers and trainers reporting to Congress. And there is nothing hopeful about seeing Roger Clemens and Andy Pettitte and their former trainer Brian McNamee being sworn in next week to testify before a congressional committee on the use of steroids and human growth hormone.

I say that not because I'm a Yankees fan; I'd feel the same way if it were top Red Sox stars on the hot seat. (OK, maybe not Curt Schilling, but I'd feel bad for any of the rest).

My concern is not that baseball's reputation is being hurt by having the misdeeds of some of its biggest stars exposed and dragged through the mud courtesy of former Sen. George Mitchell's report.

It's because this whole investigation has gotten so far off track from what it should have been doing in order to rid the game of performance enhancing drugs: coming up with a way to keep steroids out of the game.

It shouldn't have come to this.

If baseball really wanted to get a complete picture of the use of performance-enhancing drugs in the past -- and to rid the game of their use in the future -- the sport's owners and labor leaders needed to put their battles behind them.

Problem is, baseball's executives were too worried about punishing players while the union was busy trying to protect those who were obviously cheaters.

Blanket amnesty for all the players who admitted to using steroids and human growth hormone in the past was the only way baseball could have gotten full cooperation in a steroids probe rather than the narrow view of the problem that even Mitchell admits his report produced.

If that amnesty had been granted in advance of the investigation, it's possible, probably even likely, that more than a handful of players would have been willing to talk to investigators about what they did, and what they knew.

The fact that so many of the players identified in the report have since confirmed the allegations made against them is a sign that many who escaped detection probably wanted to come clean as well.

Mitchell wanted 'fresh start' for cheaters

Mitchell understood this. He really didn't want his probe to be a game of "gotcha" which would lead to discipline. The man who negotiated the peace accord in Northern Ireland knew that amnesty for the far more serious crimes that took place there was a key part of ending that conflict.

"From my experience in Northern Ireland, I learned that letting go of the past and looking to the future is a very hard but necessary step to dealing with an ongoing problem," he said when announcing the result of his probe. "That's what baseball now needs. The commissioner should give the players, and everybody else, a chance to make a fresh start."

Commissioner Bud Selig and the other owners didn't want to grant such amnesty going in, perhaps because they were worried they would look like they were again aiding and abetting steroid use, or because they worried about the attacks it might produce on sports talk radio.

Even after Mitchell made his plea, Selig still had not decided whether to discipline players identified by the report. He hasn't done so yet. And it's possible he never will since the two most likely targets of punishment, Clemens and Barry Bonds, have likely played their last games anyway.

But by wanting to keep the threat of discipline, Selig probably missed his chance to have a truly effective steroids probe. Virtually all players refused to talk to Mitchell or his investigators.

Union also at fault

The union has returned to its ill-conceived position: becoming more a defender of cheaters rather than a force that protected members who didn't want to take drugs to keep their jobs.

Even though the union has a duty to represent those guilty of misconduct in disciplinary cases and make sure their rights are represented even when they did wrong, there is no issue I can think of where the Players Association has been more in the wrong than performance enhancing drugs.

Mitchell summed up nicely why the union should be in the leadership on this issue, not an obstacle.

"The players who follow the law and the rules are faced with a painful choice of either being placed at a competitive disadvantage or becoming illegal users themselves," he said. "No one should have to make that choice."

Now, the chance of the union working closely with baseball's management to improve the testing program going forward has taken several large steps back.

Mitchell summed it up best when he said "all efforts should now be directed to the future. Spending more months or even years in contentious disciplinary proceedings will keep everyone mired in the past."

It's too bad no one is listening to him.