Commissioner Rob Manfred Says It's 'Entirely Possible' David Ortiz Did Not Test Positive In 2003
I’ve heard this complaint quite a bit during his retirement tour: “Nobody gets a free pass on PEDs quite like David Ortiz.”
Honestly, he does. He really does. Why do you think that is? Is it because he’s so universally liked for his big smile, infectious laugh, charitable efforts, and endearing personality? Well, yeah. Can it really be as simple as that? I think so. At least, from the standpoint of the general public, I think that it is. Why has he gotten a free pass from me specifically? I mean, all of those aforementioned reasons certainly go a long way, but I had written about this topic in March of last year after Ortiz wrote a piece for the Player’s Tribune where he emphatically said, “In some people’s minds, I will always be considered a cheater. And that’s bullshit.”
In the essay, Ortiz speaks at length about how “nobody in MLB history” has been tested more than him. Of course, skeptics will say, “Well, that’s great and all, but he tested positive in 2003.” You’re right. He did. But that test is what I wrote about when that Player’s Tribune essay came out. I’ll run through it quickly. Keep in mind, the order in which these statements were made is important. On July 30, 2009, the New York Times dropped the dime on both Manny Ramirez and Ortiz for being “among the roughly 100 Major League Baseball players to test positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003, according to lawyers with knowledge of the results.”
In the fallout of this report, Ortiz maintained his innocence by citing supplements as the reason for why he thinks the test came out positive.
I definitely was a little bit careless. I was buying supplements and vitamins over the counter … but I never buy steroids or use steroids.
Again, keep in mind the order of events. Ortiz said that he believed the test came up positive because of supplements that he took, which likely spiked his testosterone, not steroids. A month later in 2009, Major League Baseball released a statement in regards to the 2003 test, which was supposed to remain an anonymous survey to gauge whether or not the league needed PED testing.
“In 2003, legally available nutritional supplements could trigger an initial ‘positive’ test under our program. To account for this, each ‘test’ conducted in 2003 actually consisted of a pair of collections — the first was unannounced and random, the second was approximately seven days later, with the player advised to cease taking supplements during the interim. Under the 2003 program, a test could be initially reported as ‘positive,’ but not treated as such by the bargaining parties on account of the second test.”
Had MLB released this statement, and THEN Ortiz blamed supplements, that doesn’t look great on Ortiz. But Ortiz said supplements first, and then the league confirmed that supplements could have resulted in a positive test. According to Ortiz, he’s been tested more than 80 times since 2004. His entire legacy was built during that window of time. Zero positive tests. Zero. Ortiz has been tested roughly 10 times per season, all at random, including the offseason. They’ve even gone out to his home in the Dominican Republic to test him during the winter without notice.
Advertisement
MLB commissioner Rob Manfred was in Boston for Ortiz’s ceremony at Fenway Park on Sunday, and he spoke about that 2003 test.
“I think that the feeling was, at the time that name was leaked, that it was important to make people understand that even if your name was on that list, that it was entirely possible that you were not a positive,” said Rob Manfred. “I do know that he’s never been a positive at any point under our program.”
It was a flawed test. It’s always been a flawed test. And now you have the COMMISSIONER OF BASEBALL saying that it was a flawed test, essentially saying that you absolutely cannot hold that test against Ortiz. Ortiz’s true track record is that, since Major League Baseball implemented their drug testing policy, the 40-year-old has never failed a test. Not one. Now, I know that skeptics will then turn to the Alex Rodriguez example, and the Barry Bonds example. Neither of them failed a test, yet we all know that they were notorious PED users. Well, we only know that because there was evidence linked to both of them.
Where’s the evidence on Ortiz? What did he test positive for in 2003? We don’t know. Where are the reports about an anonymous source who leaked what Ortiz tested positive for? It didn’t happen. Where’s the tell-all book about Ortiz’s alleged PED use? There isn’t one. Where’s the shocking New York Times story about a big PED scandal involving Ortiz? It was never written. Why do you think that is?