I'm firmly in the camp that believes every era has their unnatural means by which players had an edge, so while I agree with Schilling in principle (and I'd love nothing more than to see the last decade of Rocket's drama-queenery stricken from the books - if only someone could do the same for my memory), I'm also sure he understands that in practice, what he's calling for is not going to happen. Totally. No matter how long Bonds has been accused, his trainer wasn't the one to come right out and say, "Hey guys, I shot him in the ass with steriods", that was Clemens' trainer. From what I've read and heard, Bonds' trainer, Gary Anderson went to jail on two seperate occassions because he wouldn't talk about if Barry Bonds did or didn't do steroids while Brian McNamee, Clemens' and Andy Pettitte's trainer, came right out and admitted to providing both Clemens and Pettitte with HGH. Warrants some attention, agreed. Though I would suggest that Anderson going to jail instead of testifying is pretty close to an admission of guilt on Bonds part. Some of it is definitely fatigue. I don't think that's an excuse. The most and earliest evidence was against barry. He was, for the lack of a better term, the guinea pig. I mean, this is an early christmas for me. I'd love to post a clemens / steroids link every day. But you know, we've been there already. God knows I've got that. I'm all outraged-out. Or never really was to begin with. But I think it also has to do with Barry being black. I just do. Clemens is, in many ways such a much bigger dick than Barry. If Barry's a sullen jerk, then Rogah's so much worse. At least Barry stuck around the teams he played for that stunk. Isn't that obvious? If it's a bigger dickhead contest - it's not even close. However, I am also of the opinion that Schilling can't wait to jump on the self-righteous wagon. Repeal the Cy Youngs? Gimme a break. He must understand how ludicrous the possibility of that is. It's grandstanding at it's most basic. Just run for office, already.
Barry Bonds was dislikable back when he was just a threat to break the record. As the record loomed and his steroid charges played out, his relationship with all but a few close friends and faraway fans grew predictably unpleasant. I can't blame the man for his reaction to such dissection; I've never felt the pressure or the scrutiny a prodigiously talented athlete feels, so I can't assume I'd be Mr. Niceguy myself. All that said, Bonds is a perfect storm: chasing the record while subject to doping investigation, not merely being an asshole but being a polarizing asshole, and finally getting a slide on the Clear and breaking the record. Why the hell am I going on about Bonds and not Clemens? I just doubt these investigations would have become so popular if their spokesmodel Barry wasn't such a tough guy to either like or ignore. Now we'll see Clemens under the same fire, but it's easier for him: he's got compatriots, he isn't chasing the HR record, and he's an ofay. Sure, race is part of it; race is part of every scene in the American national drama. Training with chemicals has a long history in baseball. The record books may be full of juicers and speed freaks. They may not. But changing the records, erasing history, is never a good idea. Especially not over allegations, which is all the Mitchell Report contains. It's irresponsible to demand retribution before proving guilt.
If it had been me in the same situation, I would have asked them, "Shouldn't you be trying to put an end to the war or poverty or something?" Then I would have dropped trou, crapped on the table and walked out. And you would be my hero for life and I'd have a poster of you doing it on my office wall.
ESPN was talking this morning about how maybe Schilling and his Diamondbacks teammates should have their World Series rings taken away from them since Matt Williams was another player apparently using these drugs to enhance his performance. It's kind of funny to me for some reason how everyone wants to pounce all over the few big names on that Mitchell report, when the vast majority of the players named sucked. I understand why this is done, but it's still funny. Where's the outrage surrounding J.B. Miadich, Paxton Crawford, and Gary Bennett? Take away all their stats and Little League trophies!
Can we retire this? I'm still trying to figure out why people were pissed off at McGwire for not talking to the committee. What answer did he owe them? What the fuck does he owe you? Whether he owes me or not, McGwire chose his words at that House Government Reform subcommittee hearing on the subject of steroid abuse in baseball back in 2005. His evasiveness was a black mark on the game, his accomplishments and his character. When asked by a Congressman if he played with honesty and integrity, McGwire responded, "I'm not going to go into the past or talk about my past." When asked about Jose Canseco's allegations, McGwire said, "My lawyers have advised me that I cannot answer these questions without jeopardizing my friends, my family and myself." You seem to think that if Congress was grandstanding by holding that hearing, McGwire was under no obligation to be candid. Personally, I take McGwire at his word that as he told the committee, "I'm here to make a positive influence on this." But he didn't. McGwire stepped up to the plate and struck out. Just like all of the juiced players who could have been candid when contacted by the authors of the Mitchell Report. Instead, the norm in the game has been to say nothing unless you get caught. That leaves Canseco as the standard bearer for honesty in baseball, which is a hell of an achievement.
Correction: I edited my comment to reflect that McGwire was forced to show up, apparently.
His evasiveness was a black mark on the game, his accomplishments and his character. I'm pretty sure it's a bit of a stretch to refer to "no comment" as an answer to questions as "a black mark on the game". Pete Rose? Black mark. Segregation? Black mark. Padres' piss-and-shit jerseys? Black mark. Not answering questions to a grandstanding government committee? Dull and weaselly, but not a black mark on the sport.
Hey, we all piss. We all shit, too. Kudos to the Padres for celebrating the simple joys in life.
NO MCGWIRE DOESN'T OWE ME ANYTHING ACCEPT A DENIAL THAT THESE ALLEGATIONS ARE NOT TRUE AND TO STATE SO UNDER THE PENELTY OF LAW. When did you become more important than the 5th amendment? No. but it sure doesn't look good. He was accused by the same trainer that was right about Petite. Jose Canseco has said A-Rod is juicing too, does that mean he must be?
Grum: You don't think McGwire dodging all those questions was an embarrassment to baseball? Hall of Fame voters sent a message by giving him just 23.5 percent of the vote.
Man ALL or almost ALL these dudes are and were juicing Chick's dig the long ball? Geeeeeez.......
Did McGwire plead the 5th Amendment.....I don't think so and I'm pretty sure the committee asked him if he wanted to invoke his right.
"Why? Because he's been accused? Okay, I accuse you of snorting horse testosterone in your high school locker room. Now give back that state championship you won. Damn, that was easy. posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:32 PM CST on December 20" Do you also agree that Bond's should own his home run record for the time being, without question? The fact is, he also has only been accused. My personal feeling on Bond's is that he either cheated or is a moron for using substances before taking time to figure out what they were.
Any attorneys out there - Can a witness under oath be compelled to answer question about others involved in a particular case? And if yes, what penalities can be invoked. Also, if a witness refuses to answer question does he have to say I pead the 5th amendment? or can he just refuse to answer.
Schilling commended those who've apologized for using performance-enhancing drugs, and called on everyone accused to prove their innocence or apologize for their mistakes Wow! Really, Curt? "Okay boys, the jig is up. We gotta go prove our innocence now. Curt said to." I have no problem with Schilling expressing his opinion. I wish more players would do so. I do wish he'd slow down and think before giving it. It seems that time after time of later explaining himself or retracting comments would teach him the value of discretion. posted by justgary at 2:48 PM CST on December 20 Could not have said it any better, justgary. Thanks. I find it funny that ol' bloody sock thinks it's his place to call players out and for Clemens to return the Cy Youngs. He wants the accused to "prove their innocence". Well, FU Curt and your little blog too. (Cackles echoing)(fade to black)
clemons is a cheat same as bonds.bonds has the best trainer.no snitch there
IANAL, but it would seem to me that the question is, where is the line drawn between withholding testimony and protecting your right not to self-incriminate? If the information falls on the withholding testimy side of the line, the witness could be found in Contempt of Court. But you'd think the 5th amendment would provide pretty broad protection against testifying, especially since they could be charged as an accessory for not reporting the illegal druge use. Of course, the 5th amendment protections become moot if you've been given immunity. In that case, you'd definitely could be found in Contempt of Court.
Grum: You don't think McGwire dodging all those questions was an embarrassment to baseball? Hall of Fame voters sent a message by giving him just 23.5 percent of the vote. What kind of message will it be when he gets over 40% this round of voting? And over 50% the next year? And eventually elected to the HOF?
CaveMan: Do you also agree that Bond's should own his home run record for the time being, without question? Speaking of non sequiturs. What relevance does this have to the point that it's a wee bit fucked up to expect baseball players to relinquish their titles simply because they are accused of using PEDs? Follow the link, it'll help. Or maybe not.
I know the 500 home run mark has been an automatic pass into the Hall, but McGwire is testing that principle. He would've gotten more second-year votes without the Mitchell Report, but now he's the biggest name to come up for the Hall after the report and the Bonds case. I'd be surprised if he gets 30 percent.
Or maybe not. That's probably your better guess.
Did McGwire plead the 5th Amendment.....I don't think so and I'm pretty sure the committee asked him if he wanted to invoke his right 1.) He was subpoenaed, as in not there on his own accord wishing to freely speak on the subject 2.) When the senate panel questioned him what were his answers? "My lawyers have advised me that I cannot answer these questions without jeopardizing my friends, my family and myself." and "I'm not going to go into the past or talk about my past." 3.) I am not sure what your interpretation of the 5th amendment is, but the part about incriminating one's self is pretty easy IMO. It basically means that you do not have to talk about or answer questions about anything that may incriminate yourself in anyway at all. I may be wrong, but I don't think so on this one. His first answer that I put in number 2 above specifically states not wanting to jeopardizing himself! 4.) #3 above is exactly what McGwire did. He just didn't do it in the traditional sense with the old movie line "I plead the 5th." 5.) The biggest mistake he made that day was just as Rcade said above, he has done nothing to help move this whole PED thing in a positive direction. Even after this quote, "I'm here to make a positive influence on this." He has basically disappeared, that is what I am pissed about. In conclusion, even though he still technically spoke to the senate panel, he still took the 5th. McGwire still doesn't OWE anybody anything, no explainations, no nothing. If you paid to watch him play, you got your money's worth. I know I did.
I personally never really considered McGwire worthy of the Hall of Fame, and his issues with (possibly) using PEDs makes him even less worthy. His bulked-up body allowed him to crank homers, which was the only thing he really brought to the game. Bonds was always (especially in his younger years) a great outfielder, baserunner, and all-around player. It's too bad this issue has tarnished his career beyond repair. He would have been a Hall of Famer without even coming close to the home run record.
stay tuned sports fans...Congress could subpoena Clemons***. I'd like to see him seated right next to Canseco*. PRICELESS I can see a Congressional page saying "programs...get your programs". "Congressional Hall of Shame right this way Mr. Clemons***"
McGwire still doesn't OWE anybody anything, no explainations, no nothing. If you paid to watch him play, you got your money's worth. I know I did. posted by jojomfd1 at 12:00 PM CST on December 21 Oh yes he does and I can prove it with his contract, which has many clauses about personal conduct. Most of the contracts have provisions in them for correct behavior and correct behavior defined by me (and probably by the rest of the world) is to answer question asked of legal body. All I require of McGwire is to stay he didn't do illegal drugs (PEDS,with proper M.D.'s perscrition for the inteded purpose defined by the FDA) and I will believe him. Until that time, his testimony will cast a shadow of doubt on his credibility and character. .
Hall of Fame voters sent a message by giving him just 23.5 percent of the vote. I think we've pretty much established in previous threads that many Hall of Fame voters are idiots. I mean, one of them voted for Jay Buhner last year, and a few others didn't vote for Tony Gwynn. As for McGwire, it comes down to whether or not you believe Congress had any right or reason to get involved in this issue. I don't think it did, and apparently neither did McGwire. He politely refused to answer questions. He should have shit in his hat and handed it to them.
Oh yes he does and I can prove it with his contract, which has many clauses about personal conduct. You've viewed Roger Clemens' contract? Do please post it here. Or, at least, post the "many clauses about personal conduct".
Oh yes he does and I can prove it with his contract, which has many clauses about personal conduct. Most of the contracts have provisions in them for correct behavior and correct behavior defined by me (and probably by the rest of the world) is to answer question asked of legal body. All I require of McGwire is to stay he didn't do illegal drugs (PEDS,with proper M.D.'s perscrition for the inteded purpose defined by the FDA) and I will believe him. Wow. Dude. "Correct behaviour" - if such language was a provision in his contract - wouldn't be defined by you or the rest of the world. It would be defined in the contract. Methinks you are not quite sure of what you speak. Besides - lots of guys have said they didn't do Steriods. And they were lying. What makes McGwire so different? (Psst. He definitely used PEDs. You know how you can tell? A slight case of inhuman musculature. The man's forearms are thicker than my torso.)
stay tuned sports fans...Congress could subpoena Clemons***. I'd like to see him seated right next to Canseco*. PRICELESS I can see a Congressional page saying "programs...get your programs". "Congressional Hall of Shame right this way Mr. Clemons***" I'm pretty sure that Mr. Clemons would be surprised to be called before congress. Is it really that hard to spell his name correctly? And what is up with the random asterisks?
He would've gotten more second-year votes without the Mitchell Report, but now he's the biggest name to come up for the Hall after the report and the Bonds case. I'd be surprised if he gets 30 percent. Well, there was talk among those writers who casted votes in last year's HOF election that they were giving McGwire a "one year penalty" for his "performance" in front of Congress. If that is true, then I suspect his votes this year will go up. If people voted for him last year, I doubt they'll drop their vote this year.
As for McGwire, it comes down to whether or not you believe Congress had any right or reason to get involved in this issue. I think baseball has no business complaining about the Congress meddling in its affairs, considering how long it has benefited from and fought to protect its anti-trust exemption. But larger than this, Congress holds hearings all the time on all kinds of subjects, some large and some small. I see nothing exceptional or inappropriate about calling a hearing related to drug abuse in professional sports.
I see nothing exceptional or inappropriate about calling a hearing related to drug abuse in professional sports. Well, it's supposedly "for the children", since these pro athletes are setting a "bad example". How come they haven't brought a bunch of movie stars up in front of congress for using drugs? Or musicians? Why does this select branch of entertainment get a congressional hearing, but none of the other ones?
Oh yes he does and I can prove it with his contract, which has many clauses about personal conduct. Most of the contracts have provisions in them for correct behavior and correct behavior defined by me (and probably by the rest of the world) is to answer question asked of legal body. All I require of McGwire is to stay he didn't do illegal drugs (PEDS,with proper M.D.'s perscrition for the inteded purpose defined by the FDA) and I will believe him. Until that time, his testimony will cast a shadow of doubt on his credibility and character. I know I am, and I am sure others are too, waiting for you to provide us with a link to this proof you have of McGwire's contract. Don't forget to link us to the "many clauses about personal conduct." I will applaud you on one thing though, some contracts do have Personal conduct clauses in them, I don't know about most, so you got a half a point there. Other than that the rest of your post is pretty much laughable at best. As I highly doubt the league checks with you on their level of tolerance for player conduct. Plus, I'll lay 1,000,000 to 1 odds that McGwire could care less what you or any legal body would like him to answer. He doesn't have to. Are you sure you are not required to take some medicine several times a day that you may have missed? Last time I checked McGwire is retired and is no longer under any contract anyways! So, that would shoot this whole thing to shit, especially this one: All I require of McGwire is to stay he didn't do illegal drugs (PEDS,with proper M.D.'s perscrition for the inteded purpose defined by the FDA) and I will believe him. As was said above He doesn't Owe you or me or anyone else a damn thing.
As for McGwire, it comes down to whether or not you believe Congress had any right or reason to get involved in this issue. I don't think it did, and apparently neither did McGwire. He politely refused to answer questions. He should have shit in his hat and handed it to them. What's bad Fraze is had he done that, they probably would have voted him in on the first ballot. Then his memoribilia would have tripled, and he would be a mayor somewhere by now! I see nothing exceptional or inappropriate about calling a hearing related to drug abuse in professional sports. I would have seen nothing wrong with it either had there been representatives from some other professional sports in there also. However there was not, it was just MLB players. I have yet to see the government step in to the NFL, NHL, or NBA. How about Pro wrestling, I know I am pushing it as far as it being a sport or entertainment, but there was an article just 2 months ago in Maxim Showing how many wrestlers have died in the last decade. The number was 64, they all were from some sort of steroid or drug related death, or Alcohol or Suicide. Even some of the suicides were tied in with the steroids. Sixty-four wrestlers since 1997, and no congressional panel looking in to that? How many baseball players have died due to PED's?
Why does this select branch of entertainment get a congressional hearing, but none of the other ones? Why is baseball the national pastime? Why did the nation's capitol get a team after striking out twice with past franchises? Why do presidents throw out the first ball each season? The sport's a big deal in DC and a big deal to politicians since they are an older crowd. In 20 years, maybe baseball won't get this special attention. The chance my kids would sit down to watch a four-hour game on the tube, or listen on the radio, are around the same as them asking Santa for sweaters.
Posting about contract provisions was a dumb. It was a weak arguement at best, and all the others that called me on it made me see the light. Obviously I don't have contracts for McGwire or Clemems for your inspection. I'll stay adamant about some explaination why McGwire basically said nothing to clear his name at the Senate hearing. It was my hope that he would be forthcoming and go on the record to stop all the spectulation about his alleged steroid use. Maybe I'm from the old school-if you did no wrong, you state so, with no reservations and emphatically. Others did state their denials and I believe them. jojomfd1- in the future, if so inclined to correct somebody spelling, I suggest you make sure to do for all, not just someboby you disagree with, unless of course you like felling superior to other opinion other than you own.
I think baseball has no business complaining about the Congress meddling in its affairs, considering how long it has benefited from and fought to protect its anti-trust exemption. But larger than this, Congress holds hearings all the time on all kinds of subjects, some large and some small. I see nothing exceptional or inappropriate about calling a hearing related to drug abuse in professional sports. On the one hand, I see your point that an organization that seeks protections like its anti-trust exemption must accept Congressional meddling in other areas. However, I must agree with Fraze. Congress has something an like an 11% approval rating because it has simply been unwilling or unable to deal with the major issues of the day (an out of control administration, a "pre-emptive war", global warming, and on and on) wasting precious time on a steroids hearing seems like a frivolous thing to do. That fact that it has hearings on other small subjects just shows how horribly out of touch it is with the real problems in this country. The only thing congressmen care about is getting re-elected, and the steroids in baseball hearings are a good opportunity to be seen on TV without getting their hands dirty with any of the real and difficult issues that face us.
Maybe I'm from the old school-if you did no wrong, you state so, with no reservations and emphatically. Others did state their denials and I believe them. Do you still believe Palmeiro? As far as correcting your spelling, I was wondering what word you were meaning to use. Plus, that was in a different thread.
Do you still believe Palmeiro? No, not now, however I did at the time. McGwire never gave me the opportunity to believe or not, based on his public statements. Your explanation on the misspelled word is weak, however I believe you.
This isn't worthy of a new front page post, but -- Roger speaks out via the Youtube. Apparently he'll be on 60 Minutes in the new year, and unless Mike Wallace can swear people in under oath now, it won't really solve anything. The video is totally not edited together and he sounds convincing, sincere and un-coached. Also, not.
Maybe I'm from the old school-if you did no wrong, you state so, with no reservations and emphatically. That's not "old school". Old school is where you first consider whether the "wrong" that you supposedly did was any of the accuser's god damned business.
How about Pro wrestling, I know I am pushing it as far as it being a sport or entertainment jojomfd1, as far as I know, pro wrestling is called sports-entertainment for a reason. How about you try doing the things that these athletes do in the squared circle. Granted, it has it share of soap opera moments but the truth remains is that these athletes put their bodies and lives on the line in order to entertain the millions of viewers that tune in every week which is more than some actual pro sport.
BornIcon, can you explain how pro wrestlers are putting their "lives on the line" more so than competitors in some other sport? I'm not a fan of pro wrestling, so perhaps I'm missing something -- do the rules of pro wrestling allow for the infliction of lethal injuries? If not, then any lethal injury would be incidental, no? And, if that's the case, how would pro wrestling be any different from many other sports?
BornIcon, come back and talk to me when you find out that the world series has been scripted. Or that the superbowl has been rehearsed the night before. Otherwise, the only reason those guys take any PED's are to get bigger than the next guy, so they can be on TV too. Go to Maximonline.com and read the article yourself. I only mentioned it because if congress wants to poke their noses into something kids watch, and love, then this would be one you'd think they would want to look into. 64 wrestlers dead in 10 years! Thats a lot of bodies for one profession to have, especially with their limited rank and file. Nakeman, don't ever tell anyone in here that their explanatioon is weak, especially after your contract shit, and at least get the right thread!
That's not "old school". Old school is where you first consider whether the "wrong" that you supposedly did was any of the accuser's god damned business. You define "old school" your way and I'll choose my way. It's a matter of opinion without bringing God's name into. Which by the way is tacky and doesn't really help emphasize your point that well. I didn't say McGwire or Clemens was wrong for alleged use of steroids. I don't know if they used them or not. Clemens said he didn't and I believe him (based on denials), so if I was in his shoes, I'd sue my accuser. Of course, if that happens he'll have to take the stand and raise his hand and swear he didn't partake in PED's. As far as McGwire is concerned, he probably will continue to give non- answers and everyone, including me, will have to be content with status quo. Which is his right to do, but there will be cloud over him (as far as I'm concerned) until he states one way or the other. Whether it's none of my business or not, I'll take issue as I'm a baseball fan and care about the game. You telling me it's not, has no affect on me whatsoever. If you don't feel slighted by McGwire refusal to state one way or the other its ok with me, but please don't chastise me if I disagree with you.
Nakeman, don't ever tell anyone in here that their explanatioon is weak, especially after your contract shit, and at least get the right thread! Well, I did state I was wrong about the contract shit (as you call it) and stated so in a previous post, however you seem not to have humility to state you were wrong. Reason I put in this post because it was directed at you. I was wrong and I'm sorry to other contributors. As far as stating "don't you ever....". I suggest you learn some manners and don't dictate to me what I should or should write on this blog, besides I wasn't telling anyone. My comments were directed at you.
Reason I put in this post because it was directed at you. The reason you put it in here is you were hoping someone would jump in and help you out. As far as manners go how high up on the list is lying? If you have anything else to say my email is in my profile, keep it off the FPP's Lou! Sorry everyone, Lou has no Email address listed to send this, or the last to.
I would like to add that I really never need to hear anything from Rusty Hardin ever again. He's not helping the national steroid discussion, and he's not helping his client.
