In light of recent made-for-TV athlete confessions, it’s hard to take Baltimore Ravens future Hall of Fame linebacker Ray Lewis at his word.
In a story featured on SI.com, Sports Illustrated is reporting that Ray Lewis requested products (specifically, deer-antler spray which contains an NFL banned substance called IGF-1) from a small health supplements company based in Alabama.
Naturally, this story surfaced the morning of Super Bowl XLVII’s Media Day. When asked about the story, Lewis dismissed the report while team executives made interesting statements such as:
“Ray has been randomly tested for banned substances and has never failed a test.” (Kevin Byrne, vice president of communications for the Ravens).
Two problems with this statement. First, we’ve seen from the Lance Armstrong saga that never failing a test is not necessarily equivalent to never having used banned substances. Second, has Mr. Lewis been tested since sustaining his triceps injury on October 14, 2012?
On the one hand, I couldn’t care less whether Ray Lewis used deer-antler spray to accelerate his recovery so that he could play a few final games before retirement. And I’m not knowledgeable enough about IGF-1 to have an opinion regarding whether it should or should not be a banned substance.
On the other hand, there are two issues that are troubling about these developments regarding fairness in sport and truthfulness as a role model.
Ray Lewis, coming off injury and at age 37, is just one tackle shy of setting the all-time record for most tackles in a post-season after missing nearly 2 months of action. This smells of past scenarios where aging stars from another spoke (baseball’s Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds) found the fountain of youth late in their careers…many believe it was tainted or chemically enhanced youth.
If Lewis has been using IGF-1 over the last few months to recuperate, and if it is a banned substance (which it is), then he has cheated the system…and should not be allowed to compete in Super Bowl XLVII.
Within the last month we have just witnessed what happens when high-profile athletes are less than truthful about their behaviour. In Lance Armstrong’s case, the consequences of dishonesty equate to hundreds of millions of dollars lost in future earnings streams and likely legal settlements.
I understand why Ray Lewis, if guilty of wrong-doing, would delay the truth until after Super Bowl XLVII. He wants to play in the game, he wants to ride out his career under the glory of a second championship, and he wants to minimise the distraction for his teammates.
But if there is indeed more to this story, and if Lewis has been less than forthcoming, then he better be prepared to sit on somebody’s talk-show couch in the near future to address lingering issues. Until he does, this could hurt his post-career earnings potential from endorsements, speaking engagements, or a lucrative career in television.
