Probably none, unless they perjured themselves before the grand jury. The three players were granted immunity from prosecution in return for truthful testimony. Selig's hands are tied by his sport's collective bargaining agreement; likewise the Yankees may have no legal means to get out of paying Giambi the remainder of his contract.
?Why did Conte give a TV interview while awaiting trial?
His lawyers said they were surprised that their client went on 20/20, but it might have been a step toward a plea bargain. Conte may have shown prosecutors even more of what he knows, and he hinted in the interview that he could help authorities further penetrate the secretive world of performance-enhancing drugs. He is facing the prospect of not only significant prison time but also government confiscation of everything he owns, including his home.
?Will baseball finally get serious about steroids?
"A lot depends on how great the public furor is," Vincent says. For all the ranting on callin radio shows last week, the public--which has been hearing about steroid use in baseball for years--may not be all that outraged. While 93% of the respondents in an SI.com poll said they didn't believe Bonds's claim that he was unaware that the substances he used were steroids, 65% of those queried said the scandal would not affect their interest in the 2005 season.
Bonds's peers were similarly equivocal. Former outfielder Andy Van Slyke, a teammate of Bonds's when both played for the Pittsburgh Pirates, doesn't buy Bonds's contention that he unknowingly took steroids. "That's like Jeff Gordon not knowing what kind of gas he puts in his car." But Van Slyke added, "I'm afraid that if I [had been] introduced to Bonds's trainer, I probably would have done them myself." Florida Marlins reliever Matt Perisho was equally torn, telling The Miami Herald, "As far as I'm concerned [Bonds and Giambi] cheated. Anything they've done in their big league career is tainted ... but Bonds is still the best player in baseball."