December 2007 Ethics Dunces

George Mitchell and Bud Selig

Sure enough, a disproportional number of Yankee stars were implicated in Mitchell's report, while no equivalent status Red Sox stars were revealed as steroid or human growth hormone users during their tenure with the team. And sure enough, the sports pages in the Big Apple are full of fans and writers crying "Foul!" They say a Red Sox official used his position to besmirch the hated Yankees, while protecting his own team's steroid-using players. As proof, they offer the fact that while steroid use by prominent Yankees is heavily discussed, the only Red Sox stars implicated are those who began injecting after they abandoned the team for bigger contracts: Mo Vaughn and Roger Clemens.

It's nonsense, of course. The heavy New York contingent on the list was obviously a bi-product of the fact that a steroid-pushing New York Mets clubhouse attendant was Mitchell's main source, and a former Yankee strength coach was another. But this is why "the appearance of impropriety" is an ethical offense, and why conflicts of interest needs to be heeded even when the individual who is conflicted thinks that his record of integrity should be a sufficient antidote. This report is a critical one for baseball, and both Mitchell and Commissioner Bud Selig, who appointed him, should have known that the report's author could not carry any hint of conflict, no matter how attenuated or absurd. Mitchell should have resigned from the Red Sox board, and if he would not, Selig should have appointed someone else. It is too late now, and some Yankee fans will never believe that the Mitchell Report was truly impartial.