"That's ignorance of the facts," Manfred said. "The owners don't collect urine. An independent party does. The owners don't do the testing. An independent party does. And both [independent parties] are employed jointly by the union and the commissioner's office."
Manfred also refuted Damon's contention, made in an interview earlier this week, that major league owners had not objected to steroid use because it increased the number of home runs, which triggered a boost in attendance.
"Not once has it been suggested by the owners or the institution of baseball that we should be soft on steroids because we like home runs," Manfred said. "That theory is not accurate."
DuPuy said commissioner Bud Selig wants to strengthen the drug-testing plan that was approved as part of the collective bargaining agreement struck in August 2002.
"The world has changed dramatically over the last 18 months," DuPuy said, "and the commissioner is attempting to change or react to those changes and get to a zero-tolerance policy, much like we have in the minor leagues, as soon as possible."
He rejected Schilling's contention that the distrust that historically has existed between the players and owners is the primary obstacle to a consensus on the issue.
"It's preposterous to call this an issue of owner-player distrust," DuPuy said.
Schilling, reached last night by telephone, said that while he was not misquoted about MLB's testing of players, he was misconstrued.
"I know Mr. Henry [Sox owner John W. Henry] is not going to be in a lab coat doing testing," Schilling said. "If guys like Mr. Henry were the norm, there would be a lot fewer issues."
But Schilling insisted that distrust of the testing process remains a major obstacle. One of his foremost concerns is the fact that federal investigators have issued subpoenas seeking results of the drug testing done last year by MLB, tests that were supposed to be anonymous.
