Miguel Tejada Suspended 105 Games by MLB for Amphetamine Use
With Major League Baseball already suspending the likes of Ryan Braun, Nelson Cruz, Jhonny Peralta, Everth Cabrera and Alex Rodriguez, among others this season, it seemed as though the performance-enhancing-drug firestorm had come to an end.
That is not the case, however, as Kansas City Royals utility man Miguel Tejada has been suspended 105 games without pay for amphetamine use, according to a press release from the league:
Pedro Gomez of ESPN has also reported that Tejada had links to the Biogenesis scandal.
UPDATE: Monday, Aug. 19:
ESPN's Pedro Gomez has a major update about Miguel Tejada's suspension and his connection to Biogenesis:
Kansas City Royals infielder Miguel Tejada infielder, suspended for 105 games last week because of positive tests for amphetamine use this season, was also implicated in the Biogenesis investigation, sources familiar with the case confirmed to ESPN.
Major League Baseball had the choice of going after the 2002 American League MVP for the Biogenesis case, as the league did 13 other players earlier this month, or for the amphetamine case. MLB chose to suspend Tejada after he tested positive for a third time in his career for amphetamines.
Tejada, according to a source familiar with the case, was given the choice of either accepting the 105-game suspension for amphetamine use or facing additional punishment for his Biogenesis connection.
Jeff Passan of Yahoo! Sports notes that Tejada tested positive for Adderall and that it will be the third-longest non-lifetime ban in league history.
Tejada later issued a statement, saying that he took medication while applying for a therapeutic use exemption (TUE), via Bob Dutton of the Kansas City Star.
“I apologize to my teammates, the Royals’ organization and to the Kansas City fans,” he said in a statement released through the players’ union. “I have a medical condition that requires medication to treat.
“I took that medication while re-applying for a Therapeutic Use Exemption. Under the requirements of the Joint Drug Program, I made a mistake in doing so.”
Section 3.I of the league's drug prevention policy outlines the guidelines for the TUE, saying the player must have a documented medical need for the prescription.
According to Passan, Tejada's seemingly arbitrary suspension stems from the fact that he has now tested positive a total of three times. He will be serving 25-game and 80-game suspensions one after the other.
Tejada had tested positive once in the past. He tested positive twice recently. Second positive = 25-game suspension. Third = 80 games.— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) August 17, 2013
After sitting out the 2012 season, the Royals signed the 2002 American League MVP this offseason. Tejada has been a valuable bench player for the Royals, hitting .288 with three home runs and 20 RBI while playing multiple positions.
Tejada was recently placed on the 60-day disabled list, per Bob Dutton of the Kansas City Star. According to Passan, he will be able to serve the first 41 games of his suspension while on the DL, but he is more likely to retire than serve the second part of the suspension next year.
Sources: After serving the final 41 games this season while on the DL, Tejada likelier to retire than sit out the first 64 games next year.— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) August 17, 2013
At 39 years of age, Tejada is clearly on the back end of his career. He wasn't going to play for the Royals again this season, so it doesn't affect their pursuit of an AL Wild Card spot, but the suspension may have effectively ended Tejada's career.
According to Passan, Tejada will not appeal the suspension (unlike A-Rod), so he will begin serving it immediately.
If Tejada has, in fact, played his final MLB game, he will retire with a career batting average of .285 along with 307 home runs and 1,302 RBI. Those are great numbers for a guy who played most of his career at shortstop, but there will always be questions about the authenticity of his production.
Follow @MikeChiari on Twitter
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?