The Brewers will be holding a press conference later today to introduce their latest signing: free agent centre fielder Mike Cameron.
After spending the last two years in San Diego, Cameron moves to Milwaukee on an initial one-year deal that guarantees him $6.25 million (£3.2m – or £61,500 a week). It’s a signing that seems to make perfect sense for the Brew Crew as it should have a positive ripple effect throughout their roster. Cameron can take over in centre from Bill Hall, whose bat is much better suited to an infield position. Hall can shift to third base, allowing 2007 NL Rookie of the Year Ryan Braun to switch to left field.
That’s the plan, but the Brewers will have to wait until the end of April before they can put it into action. Cameron’s career in Milwaukee will begin with a twenty-five game suspension after he tested positive for a banned substance.
Let’s take a moment to assess the situation. A ballplayer who gets named in the Mitchell report on the back of little more than circumstantial evidence is hung out to dry. A ballplayer who actually fails a drug test pockets a lucrative new contract while no one bats an eyelid.
Is that right?
Well, this is a great reminder that the ‘drugs issue’ is a moral minefield. There’s a logical argument that says that someone who has failed a test has at least been brought to task for his actions. Cameron has been caught out (although he maintains that the banned substance was taken unknowingly via a ‘tainted’ supplement), formally charged with his crime and issued with the requisite punishment as prescribed by the drug testing policy. Once he has served his suspension, then I guess that is the end of the matter.
Part of the problem with the ‘Mitchell mob’ is that there is so much uncertainty over whether they have done anything wrong or not. That most of them haven’t failed a drug test (as far as we know) should mean they are considered to be ‘innocent’, but we all know the issue isn’t so straightforward. We are all aware of the infamous examples of sportsmen and women who have blatantly cheated the system and it’s natural for there to be a lingering feeling of suspicion and cynicism towards those who are linked with taking PEDs. The only thing worse than a cheat is a cheat who gets a away with it, after all.
But, and it’s a big but, if we don’t accept a negative test as proof of innocence (and Senator Mitchell himself stated that position), how can we exonerate any player? Everyone is guilty by default.
The more you think about, the more you find yourself wrapped up in contradictions. I can’t pretend to have an answer to all this. Cameron’s signing, along with the $36m/3 year contract that the Royals gave to Jose Guillen this off-season, does at least show that baseball’s answer to the uncertainty is to get on with things regardless. Taking an anti-drugs stance is easy. Clearly, it’s not quite so easy to turn down the chance to sign a player who could improve your team just because he has tested positive for a banned substance.
