Frank the Tank 35 Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 (edited) http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp...sdate=2/27/2007 The Times Union has learned that investigators in the year-old case, which has been kept quiet until now, uncovered evidence that testosterone and other performance-enhancing drugs may have been fraudulently prescribed over the Internet to current and former Major League Baseball players, National Football League players, college athletes, high school coaches, and a former Mr. Olympia champion and another top contender in the bodybuilding competition. The customers include Los Angeles Angels center fielder Gary Matthews Jr., according to sources with knowledge of the investigation. More names coming? EDIT: Jeez, I misspelled MatThews' name in the description. Can someone fix that? Edited February 28, 2007 by aboz56 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 Nice contract Mathews Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo's Drinker Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 See Brady Anderson for comparision to Matthews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ginger Kid Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 Or Brett Boone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Middle Buffalo Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 If this is true, the Angels should be able to void Matthews' contract for misrepresenting himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 QUOTE(Middle Buffalo @ Feb 27, 2007 -> 07:37 PM) If this is true, the Angels should be able to void Matthews' contract for misrepresenting himself. Hopefully, teams are smart enough to include steroid-related out clauses in newer contracts after the whole Giambi mess. But then again, who knows if the union would even tolerate that, I doubt it honestly. I bet that the Angels are on the hook unless he winds up in jail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 Anyone still upset about not signing this guy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 08:42 AM) Anyone still upset about not signing this guy? Can we get Podsednik on some of the same stuff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 Does that mean his spectacular catch last year was "tainted"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo's Drinker Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 11:23 AM) Does that mean his spectacular catch last year was "tainted"? No that was just raw talent. The homeruns and power, yeah!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 By virtue of it being an actual contract they signed, wouldn't his covering up of steroid use constitute fraud? Unless there is some special clause for UNION contracts, the team should be able to get out of it if he misrepresented himself in the contract negotiations to the point of lying about steroid use. Either way, the club should do it just to punish the jackass. If he did it, that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 Fraud is a very specific legal term. Mathews would have had to take actions to induce the Angels to sign him, and the Angels would have to prove that if not for those inducements they would not have signed him. This is highly unlikely because I just cant see the question: "Oh Mr. Mathews are you taking steriods?" Coming up in a contract negotation. I doubt that the contract is voidable, but I would have to see the contract before I could say that with any sort of certainty. The bottom line is this, Mathews was in a very good position to negotiate the contract as multiple teams were looking at him. It is doubtful that in such a circumstance that the player would take a contract with a bunch of hidden "void" clauses. Also he has an agent/attorney so they were most likely looking for things. Since other players have violated the substance abuse policy before and none have had their contracts voided, it would be hard to imagine that this one is substantially different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 I believe a behavior clause exsists in all MLB contracts. That is exactly how the Rockies got rid of Denny Naegle and the O's dumped Ponson after their misadventures with the law. I think Mathews actions could fall under the same vein, if they are indeed true. It would be mail fraud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 Another interesting name supposedly a customer of this place,Evander "the maybe not so real deal" Holyfield. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Sometimes it's nice when stories are leaky. SI has more on what exactly the documents may show about Matthews. It doesnt' look pretty, or surprising given his year last year. SI.com: Gary Matthews, Jr., who had a career year in 2006 and signed a $50 million deal with the Angels this offseason, has already been linked to a customer list of a raided pharmacy. Do you have more information on him? Llosa/Wertheim: Yes. According to law enforcement documents we've reviewed, Matthews is not just on a customer list, as was reported Tuesday. In August 2004, he was allegedly sent Genotropin -- a brand of synthetic human growth hormone typically prescribed to children suffering from growth failure -- at an address in Mansfield, Texas. We traced the address and it is the residence of a former minor league teammate of Matthews', who told us that he is friends with Matthews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 If there is some sort of behavior clause than yes the contract could be voided. I dont know the specifics of the contract, Im sure its a few pages and quite a few clauses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RME JICO Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Matthews talks a little about it here: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20...sp&c_id=mlb Asked if he knew how his name got involved, Matthews said: "I don't. That's exactly what we're working on right now. Gathering information. I will address the matter again at the appropriate time, and I just wanted to just express that I will come out and talk to you guys about it when the appropriate time comes. I want you guys to respect my position and I don't want to become a distraction for my team and my teammates." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 He wants us to 'respect his position'? Is that position bent over and f*cked up the ass whether he's guilty or not because of his name association with this pharmacy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Feb 28, 2007 -> 08:11 PM) If there is some sort of behavior clause than yes the contract could be voided. I dont know the specifics of the contract, Im sure its a few pages and quite a few clauses. As I understood it, it is a part of the standard baseball contract. It is an MLB thing. I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that from when Ponson got released. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 1, 2007 -> 05:47 AM) As I understood it, it is a part of the standard baseball contract. It is an MLB thing. I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that from when Ponson got released. I believe you're right that a behavior clause is sort of a standard out built into almost every contract, but I think it's also worth noting that the Yankees would have had a similar clause for Giambi, and despite the size of his contract and the 1.5 years or so worth of complete suckiness related to coming off of the steroids, it seems they didn't think they had a strong enough case to use it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 1, 2007 -> 10:40 AM) I believe you're right that a behavior clause is sort of a standard out built into almost every contract, but I think it's also worth noting that the Yankees would have had a similar clause for Giambi, and despite the size of his contract and the 1.5 years or so worth of complete suckiness related to coming off of the steroids, it seems they didn't think they had a strong enough case to use it. In the cases of "good" players, its not worth it to the teams to use it. Also they didn't have the 100% proof of an arrest, guilty plea, positive test, etc to give them an open and shut case for Giambi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.