Skip navigation
Sign up to follow your favorites on all your devices.
Sign up

Yet another writer accuses Jose Bautista of PED use

Bob Frantz of the San Francisco Examiner wrote an odious little column today in which he accused Jose Bautista of using performance enhancing drugs.

Well, he didn’t directly accuse him of doing so. No, he’s far too savvy for that. He merely wrote that “questions remain” regarding Bautista. Said that “normal men don’t go from 13 home runs as a part-time utility player one year to 52 home runs.” He merely suggested that Bautista submit to urine and blood tests and then have the results released to the public. He then blamed his suspicion and subtle character assassination on Jose Canseco, Rafael Palmiero, Roger Clemens and other people who presumably do not have editorial control over Frantz’s columns at the Examiner.

Of course, the fact that he blames Canseco et al, for his own cynical and evidence-free suspicions of Bautista is intellectual dishonesty at its finest. He clearly suspects Bautista of using PEDs. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t have been inspired to write this piece. Well, he wouldn’t have unless the piece itself is a cynical exercise in filling column inches and stirring the pot by peddling crap that the author does not himself believe, but let’s save that for another time.

For now let us merely note that if Frantz has the guts to make an actual accusation, he should make it. To state, in plain language, that he doubts that Bautista’s accomplishments are genuine. To do otherwise -- to make oblique reference to the mere possibility that Bautista cheated and to blame figures who haven’t played baseball for several years for “the questions that remain” -- is cowardly.

And that goes not only for Frantz, but for anyone who wishes to join in the increasingly popular pastime of trashing Jose Bautista. Ladies and gentlemen: if you have evidence, or even reasonable suspicion that Bautista -- a player who has had at least two PED tests this season -- has used PEDs, come out and say it. If you don’t, please spare us your insinuations to the contrary.