There have been several writers/baseball pundits, including Peter Gammons who have commented that they felt that Manny holding the Red Sox hostage by slacking off in order to force a trade was as bad or worse than players who used steroids. Gammons-
Someday, when we really understand the whole 1980-2005 steroids era of which one admitted user says, “The only guys who didn’t do them after 1994 were either stupid or scared,” we might ask the question: Was it worse to take performance-enhancing drugs to perform better and win, or to decline to play and steal money?
The point that I have seen argued several times is that a steroid user is at least trying to win, although they are doing so in a illegal manner, whereas Manny was purposefully trying to damage his team in order to gain personal profit. I think that there is an interesting parallel to the actions of the 1919 Chicago “Black Sox” players who threw the World Series and those of Manny. Granted, Manny wasn’t in the World Series, but I think the Red Sox post season chances were certainly viewed as little more than leverage by Ramirez. In both cases, the players involved sabotaged their teams in order to line their own pockets. The primary difference is that the White Sox ownership was mistreating and underpaying players, which helped prompt the fix, while Manny has been consistently coddled and enabled by his employers.
Are the actions of Ramirez comparable to steroid users or gamblers who throw games? I don’t know, but I do know that Ramirez has made a mockery of the integrity of the game. He stabbed his team in the back and he and his slimeball agent, Scott Boras, have gotten away with it. I would love to see the league punish Manny, but I know that’s not going to happen. Manny will continue to be Manny, and the game will be the worse for it.
