What's the over-under on this one? 200 posts? 300?

Ya that time you threw the bat at Piazza earned some benefit of the doubt for sure.

LOL! McNamee says he injected Pettitte 2-4 times. Pettitte admits to twice. Clemens, he has much more detailed info about. Clemens denies it all. Now he is Barry Bonds. Let's see if he's crucified or if this is accepted as gospel.

He threw the bat off the field, and Pizza's stupid ass was jogging in that direction.

I blame the Reverse Vampires.

He did not take any banned substances. At the time the stuff he took wasn't banned. Good lawyering.

He did not take any banned substances. At the time the stuff he took wasn't banned. Good lawyering.

RTFA.

For me, you aren't "firing back" unless you step out in the public and defend yourself. If he's never done PEDs, then I'd imagine he'd be absolutely irate. And I'd come out in the public and articulate that as well as possible. This response has the stench of guilt all over it.

Just say you took it twice to recover from injury! Tim Kurijian will believe you!

Snicker.

He did not take any banned substances. At the time the stuff he took wasn't banned. Good lawyering.

Well, he did say he'd never done steroids or HGH earlier in the same sentence.

heh, the rocket fired back. lol.

I plan to publicly answer all of those questions at the appropriate time in the appropriate way. I only ask that in the meantime people not rush to judgment.’’

He sounds pretty darn irate in that quote. And I am, too. You will certainly see an appropriately timed email response if you dare cross me.

RTFA.

#### that, I don;t give a #### about Clemens. Screw him.


He is a liar.

"Read my lips: I did not have gluteal injecting relations with that physical trainer, Brian McNamee."

Brian Roberts also has the "I only took it the one or two times the trainers mentioned." How convenient.

Well, he did say he'd never done steroids or HGH in the preceding sentence.

So he took something else that wasn't banned and he can parse whether or not is was HGH or a steroid.

He did not take any banned substances. At the time the stuff he took wasn't banned. Good lawyering.

Was waiting for someone to try to parse his statement and call him a liar. It only took to post #5.

Every bit of public obloquy heaped on Bonds should be heaped on Clemens.

I am reminded of the classic line by the guy caught by his wife in bed with another woman:

Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?

Every bit of public obloquy heaped on Bonds should be heaped on Clemens.

I will heap my obloquy where I like thank you. :)
Clemens hasn't lied to a grand jury yet. Then again he named his kids with K names to honor his own achievements. OTOH, his dropped cell call commercial made me smile in spite of my dislike for him. Bonds < Clemens, at the moment.

Every bit of public obloquy heaped on Bonds should be heaped on Clemens.

Nice word. Are you studying for the SATs? :)

"I will only admit to the things you have me dead to rights on anyway."

obloquy (ob-le-Kwee)

1. Abusive or defamatory language; CALUMNY

2. The state or condition of being ill spoken of: disgrace or bad repute.

Was waiting for someone to try to parse his statement and call him a liar. It only took to post #5.

So you believe him?

Every bit of public obloquy heaped on Bonds should be heaped on Clemens.

You start.

Well, I guess we've finally got a Grade A white scapegoat. Rev up your speechwriters, Pat Buchanan.

We all know that our 'gut feel' and the word of a guy who had to bring in big names to keep himself out of jail (or at least reduce his time in jail) have to be right eh?

That said, my feeling is Clemens did some PED at some point, as did virtually every last athlete out there trying to make a living from it. However, as has been shown time and time again the worst thing an athlete can do is admit to it after being caught. Heck, even before getting caught. Show me one athlete who confessed who wasn't torn apart by the media and public. Pettite was the best shot at it and he was torn apart. Canseco confessed to everything and was torn apart. Giambi did the best he could legally and was torn to pieces. For non-baseball cases just look at what the IOC did to Ben Johnson (all records torn up after confessing when all he'd have lost otherwise was his final Olympic record) or how things go for anyone who isn't in football (which seems to have its own standard - none).

You start.

He cheated. Badly. And knowingly. His records were almost certainly obtained through cheating. He did what he had to as a man and an earner, but as a sportsman he leaves a lot to be desired.

Through all the overheated kerfluffle about this, that's all I've ever really said about BB.

My initial reaction is that Clemens's public lies at this late date are more insulting than BB's. I'm still trying to figure out why that's my reaction.

So you believe him?

As I said in another thread, I'd classify the evidence against Clemens (as presented in the Mitchell report) as being somewhere in the neighborhood of probable cause. His two statements since the report serve to lessen that classification slightly. The short answer is that I'm willing to wait and see.

And this really isn't a binary thing ("believe him or not believe him"); it's more a question of assessing the information we have and coming to a conclusion of how strong the evidence against him is. But none of us have firsthand knowledge of what occurred, nor is the case against Clemens unassailable, so the only thing I feel comfortable concluding is that the people claiming to know for sure one way or the other are full of what makes the grass grow green.

And this really isn't a binary thing ("believe him or not believe him"); it's more a question of assessing the information we have and coming to a conclusion of how strong the evidence against him is. But none of us have firsthand knowledge of what occurred, nor is the case against Clemens unassailable, so the only thing I feel comfortable concluding is that the people claiming to know for sure one way or the other are full of what makes the grass grow green.

So do you believe him or not?

so the only thing I feel comfortable concluding is that the people claiming to know for sure one way or the other are full of what makes the grass grow green

Chlorophyll?

And this really isn't a binary thing ("believe him or not believe him"); it's more a question of assessing the information we have and coming to a conclusion of how strong the evidence against him is. But none of us have firsthand knowledge of what occurred, nor is the case against Clemens unassailable, so the only thing I feel comfortable concluding is that the people claiming to know for sure one way or the other are full of what makes the grass grow green.

I know where I stand on the merits, but as an appeal to fairness, I actually agree with a lot of this. It has to be pointed out though, again, that the witness against him DOES purport to have "firsthand knowledge."

Before CSI and DNA testing warped everyone's mind, eyewitness testimony was always seen as among the most reliable methods of telling fact from fiction. And it still is.

Random internet speculation is the perfect free market. Hey, let's all speculate on the tubes about things we can't know about. The cost and the value are equal. Zero.

Every bit of public obloquy heaped on Bonds should be heaped on Clemens.

Nice word. Are you studying for the SATs? :)

Yes. I'm learning the various meanings of "on"...

I shall withhold judgement until there is a laboratory test capable of detecting chlorophyll, obloquy, or #######.

So McNamee told the truth about Pettitte yet le lied about Clemens? Why would he do that?

Brian Roberts also has the "I only took it the one or two times the trainers mentioned." How convenient.

Steroid bastards! First they steal Hank Aaron's home run record! Then they steal his PED alibi!

So do you believe him or not?

What standard of proof am I using?

Forget it, you aren't going to answer without covering yourself either way. Your gut, go with your gut, you still have that after law school don;t you?

Standard of proof, go with what you think. This isn;t a ###### courtroom here, you don't have to convince a jury. If you think he is lying say so, if you don;t say that. Don't cover your ass 15 different ways, take a ####### stand on the matter. Grow a pair.

eyewitness testimony was always seen as among the most reliable methods of telling fact from fiction. And it still is

I think McNamee's testimony is a step above mere "eyewitness" testimony. He didn't say that he saw Clemens inject stuff in his ass. McNamee said that HE, McNamee, injected stuff in Clemens's ass. There's basically no way that McNamee could have forgotten or misinterpreted what he said. He's either a bald-faced liar or Clemens is. And as Bernal points out in #40, Pettitte acknowledges that McNamee's account of his use is pretty much accurate.

Why does everyone just assume that everything Radomski, etc. says is 100% true while everything the players say is a lie? It's really startling to me how eager fans are to bash the players that they presumably pay to see. We see it time and time again. Squabble between a player and management, and the fans want the player shipped out. Squabble between players and owners, and fans want the owners to stick it to those greedy dirtbags. Players are accused of using steroids, and they are automatically guilty....

I just don't get it. Why so quick to hate on these guys. I love these guys.

Oh and for the record, I just posted this in the lounge:

"I just was reminded why I don;t post on the mainsite much anymore, those people are ####### ninnies."

I think Clemens is lying. He knows that he did steroids. That's what I believe.
I think Pettitte's apology was weak. I also believe that he used hgh more than twice.
I believe that Barry Bonds has been lying about his steroid use all along. I also think that a huge number of people unfairly singled him out as the example of steroid user in baseball, when ample evidence existed suggesting others.
I would have no problem with players who used steroids, hgh, genetic manipulation or any other performance enhancer if they simply admitted it without qualification.
I have used creatine, lsd, marijuana, and probably some over the counter things that are illegal in the NFL.

Why does everyone just assume that everything Radomski, etc. says is 100% true while everything the players say is a lie?

For me, one of the biggest reasons is because on this issue, the players have erected an almost complete stone wall of silence that all but screams out guilt, like the kind you see in a dirty police department or something. "What happens in the clubhouse stays there" is practically a blood oath amongst these guys that gets foisted on every poor rookie who comes through the door, which was proven again by the fact that the players pretty much without exception refused to so much as talk to George Mitchell. In the rare cases of the guys who violated the oath of Omerta like Jose Canseco, virtually everything they said has come to pass.

When you combine that with the general entitlement mentality of highly skilled athletes and their general propensity to believe that they're above the rules, that seals the deal for me. Being young, pampered, and rich beyond most people's wildest dreams is almost always a dangerous combination.

McNamee has no reason or motive to lie. He has just lost a friend and client for life in Clemens (plus other players). His payoff for lying is what? A book deal? A movie? I don't get it.

Clemens can clear this all up, though. Just sue McNamee for libel. Show in the court system that McNamee has defamed and lied about Clemens and PEDs. I doubt it happens, though. No libel suit from Clemens will be forthcoming......and that will be more telling than all the denials Clemens could utter, in my opinion.

One other point: Clemens had ample opportunity to speak to Mitchell to give his side of the story in reaction to the allegations, and chose not to. None of the mentioned players responded or agreed to meet with Mitchell. And yet he expects us to listen to his public denials NOW?? He must think the public is really stupid......and he's probably right.

He did not take any banned substances. At the time the stuff he took wasn't banned. Good lawyering.

What should Clemens say, then, if he really didn't take anything?

I believe in rainbows and puppy dogs and fairy tales.
And I believe in the family - Mom and Dad and Grandma.. and Uncle Tom, waving his penis.
I believe 8 of the 10 Commandments.
I believe in going to church every Sunday, unless there's a game on.
I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, wholesome and natural things.. that money can buy.
I believe it's derogatory to refer to a woman's breasts as "boobs", "jugs", "winnebagos" or "golden bozos".. and that you should only refer to them as "hooters".
I believe you should put a woman on a pedestal.. high enough so you can look up her dress.
I believe in equality, equality for everyone.. no matter how stupid they are, or how much better I am than they are.
And, people say I'm crazy for believing this, but I believe that robots are stealing my luggage.
I believe I made a mistake when I bought a 30-story 1-bedroom apartment.
I believe the Battle of the Network Stars should be fought with guns.
I believe that Ronald Reagan can make this country what it once was - an arctic region covered with ice.
And, lastly, I believe that of all the evils on this earth, there is nothing worse than the music you're listening to right now. That's what I believe.

What should Clemens say, then, if he really didn't take anything?

Nothing. Sue.

I believe...

You left out my favourite part of that routine: "I believe we should allow all foreigners into this country, provided they can speak our native language...Apache."

BTW, I'm reading Steve Martin's memoir, "Born Standing Up". Highly recommended.

In the rare cases of the guys who violated the oath of Omerta like Jose Canseco, virtually everything they said has come to pass.

How ironic is it that the one person whose integrity has grown during this whole kerfluffle is Conseco; Joey is spot-on about this.

Wow. I never thought I'd say THAT in a post.

Also, I have ripped Kevin and other for Bonds comments, but at least they are attacking Clemens with the same (for the most part) ferocity that they went after BLB.

Brian Roberts also has the "I only took it the one or two times the trainers mentioned." How convenient.

Not quite. Brian Roberts has the "I only took it the one or two times I had previously told Larry Bigbie about".

Yeah, suing would sure earn everyone's affection. No way would Clemens get blasted for doing something like that.

"I just was reminded why I don;t post on the mainsite much anymore, those people are ####### ninnies."

Too bad, Bernal. I really miss you.

Too bad, Bernal. I really miss you.

You know where to find me.

sugarbear

if you REALLY believe that eyewitness testimony is better than DNA you just might could go check out the innocence project.

i just blows me away you really REALLY think people never lie (or even are mistaken)

- as for me, i want actual REAL evidence, like pics/checks to a drug dealer, positive drug tests.

there is no way and i mean NO way i would EVER vote to convict someone if there wasn't not one bit of evidence besides what someone says they saw/did.


bernal -

cmon, we BOTH know this entire mitchell thingy was about trying to out big stars and show how the poor owners never knew/were powerless in front of the union blahblahblah

me i got exactly ZERO trouble believing that mcnamee told the feds about injecting pettitte and the feds lean on him to roll on clemens or else. mcnamee KNOWS that clemens can not PROVE it didn't happen so he don't have to worry about the feds getting him. what, you don't think a person will tell the feds what they tell them to tell them or else? cmon

just like can't none of you PROVE you never raped a grrl you had a date with some years ago and yall were alone. what would you do if she accuse you 5 years later, says she was too afraid/intimidated to go get a rape kit? you can't sue her for libel because you have to prove you DIDN'T rape her and she don't have to prove you DID.

- it NEVER stops surprising me that so many of all yall believe that IF a person is accused of anything, then he IS guilty. you just can't imagine that people LIE. that innicent people spend their life in freaking PRISON because someone lied. (or was mistaken). now funny you don't have no problem believing that someone who is ACCUSED would lie. just the accusER

all yall best pray it never happen to you

just like can't none of you PROVE you never raped a grrl you had a date with some years ago and yall were alone.

She was asking for it, wearing that short skirt and all.....

obloquy (ob-le-Kwee)

1. Abusive or defamatory language; CALUMNY

Well, why didn't you just SAY calumny in the first place? Sheesh.

- laughing

ah LUUUUUVVVVVVV that bernal

That jerk Clemens, he should come out and refute these charges! What--he put out something through his lawyer? Oh that's lame, it proves he's guilty! Oh, he said it himself now? Just further proof that he's guilty! What happened? God came down and pronounced him innocent? Man, Clemens sure does have good connections--he even got God to lie for him!

Why does everyone just assume that everything Radomski, etc. says is 100% true while everything the players say is a lie?

Well, for starters you can ask Pettitte whether "etc." was lying about him, and then try to think of any logical reason why "etc." would tell the truth about Pettitte and lie about Clemens.

There are plenty of logical reasons. You're smart enough that you don't need them spelled out for you Andy.

andy -

like i said, just because he told the truth about pettitte does not mean he told the truth about clemens. and he had VERY good motive to lie about clemens - revenge (he'd been let go) or the feds put a lot of pressure on him to say what they wanted to hear

ain't real too many guys like greg anderson who will tell the feds to suck this

Also, I have ripped Kevin and other for Bonds comments, but at least they are attacking Clemens with the same (for the most part) ferocity that they went after BLB.

kevin has never needed much of an excuse to attack Clemens.

I believe in rainbows and puppy dogs and fairy tales.

I believe in example
I believe the truth hurts
And example is the checker to the key

[and I also believe in coyotes, and yes the foolish sent my fool away, but I managed to track him down]

me i got exactly ZERO trouble believing that mcnamee told the feds about injecting pettitte and the feds lean on him to roll on clemens or else.

Are you kidding? This guy Clemens introduced to Pettitte, who'd been with Clemens since 1998 and followed him from Toronto to NY to Houston, and is a big-time drug dealer wanted by the feds - a fact to which Clemens is apparently oblivious - had the occasion to inject Pettitte exactly twice, but Clemens never, because Clemens doesn't believe in that sort of thing. Sort of strains credulity.

Mark McGwire has a good tactic, shut up and go away.

Good to see Clemens use the "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" defense.

Sure Rog, everyone becomes heaps better in their mid 30's at any physical endeavor. I know I can spank myself much better now then when I was 25. Keep spanking Roger...

however

nope not kidding.

mcnamee is sure nuff a big time drug dealer (and rapist too - i'm not exactly forgetting that)

clemens got rid of mcnamee a few years back. ever hear of revenge?

you think a drug dealer and rapist is an honest kind of witness?

- exactly WHAT kind of defense is it that you expect clemens to use? how do you expect him to PROVE that mcnamee is lying? this i gotta hear

clemens got rid of mcnamee a few years back.

No he didn't. He got rid of him last season after Grimsley fingered McNamee and Clemens was shocked - shocked! - to find that performance enhancing was going on.

I find it very hard to believe that a good Christian man such as Andy Pettitte would knowingly consort with a rapist and drug dealer let alone allow him to inject illegal drugs into his ass.

into his ass

.

It's a good thing that most guys apparently don't get injected in their arms. That would detract from a lot of good anti-juice rants.

Is there a reason that HGH is injected into the ass and not anywhere else?

however,
clemens is not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed.
but i will most definitely believe that he didn't give a shtt what mcnamee did anywhere else so long as he did what clemens wanted when he as with clemens
- and that is not exactly the story i heard - i heard it had to do with the rape charges

bernal,
i hear good christian andy pettitte left NY for the first time because he was, um, knowing - yeh, that's the word, a woman who was not his wife. why on earth would someone shoot HGH into their ass? you shoot it into the arm or stomach skin in kidz

Stippers are ehnanced, the Rocketts are enhanced, Playmates are enhanced, Wrestlers and NFL players are enhanced, my food is enhanced, my TV, music, computer, video and books are enhanced, actresses are enhanced.

Just get up and say I juiced and get it over with Roger, sheesh!!!!

I really dont care as long as my kids (4 LH boys) dont; until poverty, racial inequity, et al is fixed. I could care less if a bunch of entertainers stuck each other in the ass

I could care less if a bunch of entertainers stuck each other in the ass

See? It was even used here in a pro-juice rant. bbc will change her view on a lot of this if Morris Chestnut starts juicing.

I want to state clearly and without qualification

I love how ballplayers' syntax gets all high-falutin' when they're facing calumny. It's like a big wind-up for the mendacity to follow.

Here's a sample Dennis Rodman apology from 1991:

"You are a great player and I'm glad you weren't hurt by the incident," wrote Rodman, the league's defensive player of the year. "It was merely one of frustration."

I plan to publicly answer all of those questions at the appropriate time in the appropriate way.

Lets see....

Asked by Senator Mitchell to comment.....nope
The day the Mitchell report comes out.....no
The day Petitte admits to "trying" HGH....not yet
Five days after the report comes out.........getting closer

tick, tick, tick, tick

After all of Andy's "look at the spikes! Look at the Spikes!", I think we had a Clemens disussion a while back, where people said about Clemens, to which it was replied "No, he performed that way before".

Really, we're seeing that taking PEDs doesn't mean "spikes". Spikes occur and PEDs are taken. Correlation is not causation.

Mark McGwire has a good tactic, shut up and go away.

I couldn't agree with this sentiment more, and I would be more than satisfied to get this from Bonds, Clemens, and the rest of the dirtbags. Shut up, go away, take your rather mild punishment like a man, and enjoy the millions of dollars you've made. Then we can put the focus where it really belongs: on trying to create a cleaner and better game for the future.

hen we can put the focus where it really belongs: on trying to create a cleaner and better game for the future.

And why should we care about tarnished reputations in the meantime?

Can the government witnesses get book deals?

well joey b

the teams they are signing the roiders/cheats and i sure don't hear the fans complaining

people don't care. unless it is clemens/bonds. they just do NOT care

Singers get better in our mid-to-late thirties.

Standard of proof, go with what you think. This isn;t a ###### courtroom here, you don't have to convince a jury. If you think he is lying say so, if you don;t say that. Don't cover your ass 15 different ways, take a ####### stand on the matter. Grow a pair.

You're right; this isn't a courtroom. That means you don't have to "take a stand." A jury has to say guilty or not guilty; it can't say, "Wait; we want to hear more before we decide." But we can. There are no prizes for making a decision fast.

people don't care. unless it is clemens/bonds. they just do NOT care

For not caring there sure are quite a few posts no matter how many steroid threads are posted. If you want to find some action around here, go to a steroids thread.

Also to knock the NFL off the front page in the middle of what has been a very interesting season(Pats, Phins, All Day, Sean Taylor) it appears quite a few people care.

As far as Clemens it really couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

Singers get better in our mid-to-late thirties.


So there's still hope for Britney?

There are no prizes for making a decision fast.

And there is no penalty for having an opinion. Either you think he is lying or not. Not that hard.

No prizes for making a decision fast

Tell that to Dan Duquette. 'Roid decisions cost him millions.

Let's assume for the moment Clemens didn't take steroids or HGH. Exactly how does appearing before Mitchell advance his position. It changes the postscript to the Clemens section to "and Clemens vigorously denies everything". That's what he's done now. I mean I can't imagine any way to actually refute the allegations, can you?

As for a lawsuit, what are the odds of winning a he said lawsuit given US laws? To my knowledge Lance Armstrong has never bothered in the US (and there are similar allegations against Armstrong). He's launched more than a dozen lawsuits (and been sued a few times himself), but always in jurisdictions like the UK.

Seriously, I'd appreciate the opinions of the lawyers out there. What are the chances that Clemens could prevail?

Tell that to Dan Duquette. 'Roid decisions cost him millions.

As I am sure you know I meant in this thread. There is no harm in stating your opinion in this or any thread.

I'm agreeing with you Bernal, not fukking with you. I agree with your position---have enough testicular fortitude to take a stand and don't be a pansyass.

Steve it's a Trachsel Posted: December 18, 2007 at 10:28 PM (#2649545)

people don't care. unless it is clemens/bonds. they just do NOT care

For not caring there sure are quite a few posts no matter how many steroid threads are posted. If you want to find some action around here, go to a steroids thread.

- yeh and i keep promising my husband to stay out of em

and count up the number of posts about gary bennett, evil confessed to drug using human vs roger clemens/barry lamar/sammy sosa/mcgwire evil ACCUSED of drug using humans

got any idea as to why it just might could be that almost no one posts on the ryan franklin/brian roberts/alex sanchez/jc romero threads?

- and like i keep saying, the fans don't care. the sports radio all FULL of hating on bonds for using roids - hardly a WORD about the astros signing known drug cheat miggy tejada. hardly a WORD against tejada in the papers on the blogs. in fact, just the exact opposite. oh goody he is gonna hit a lot of hits!!! who cares about the drugs?

RonJohn,

At least one person had their entire steroid record redacted from the Mitchell report after talking to Mitchell. His excuse, yeah I bought the HGH, but I didn't use it. That is worse than the "I tried it once, but I didn't inhale" shite that we are getting these days.

Most of the juicelovers have had fun skewering Mitch, but it looks like Mitch has been pretty fair. The rallying point of him being a hitter was Brian Roberts, and that is now backfiring on the juicelovers. I'm waiting to see if Gammons has the same level of integrity as Plahske. Will he do an "I'm wrong" column after his diatribe about Roberts.

With Roger it might have been tough b/c the evidence was pretty deep. It would have been hard to believe that Roger did not have ANY knowledge of juice considering his long term relationship with McNamee. But based on Mitch's MO, all he would have had to do is impeach one instance of assinjecting. Showing he was somewhere else; showing some medical record during those times (and for an MLB player in rehab, there are likely records aplenty) that would make shot to the ass highly unlikely. An amusing one would be McNamee's inability to identy a birthmark on Clemens' ass or something similar.

Likewise, I linked the Murphy case in an early thread, and its still a good road map for a libel case. What you really need is one lie or gross exagerration ("She needs to get over it" to "Tell her to get over it") and some spoilation ("I lost those notes") and you get the jury thinking the person is a liar. When you win that battle, the law can fall into place.

If you really have an untrue statement, its easier to win (albeit not collect any judgment) against the liar, than the reporter that repeats it. The reporter has too many outs and the people and the law really don't want to chill the press. The more specific the statement, the easier it will be to outline the false portions with alternative evidence

bbc,

Wasn't there an article where McClain seemed pissed b/c Miggy was a juicer. Didn't he claim he didn't know, etc.

The Mitchell Report isn't crap because it slams the cheating players, the Mitchell Report is crap because it tiptoes daintily around the cheating owners. It's as if the army killed Qusay Hussein but let Uday walk.

Wasn't there an article where McClain seemed pissed b/c Miggy was a juicer. Didn't he claim he didn't know, etc.

Yup. Drayton McLain on Miguel Tejada's shock appearance in the report, one day after the Tejada trade:

"I was certainly disappointed. We certainly did not [anticipate this]. None of the owners had any knowledge. It was a surprise. We knew there was a problem. I'm disappointed, but we then need to sit down and understand with each player we have a responsibility which is to see how this can be solved. If we knew, certainly we would have looked at it totally different. We didn't have any of that knowledge at that time."

The Mitchell Report isn't crap because it slams the cheating players, the Mitchell Report is crap because it tiptoes daintily around the cheating owners. It's as if the army killed Qusay Hussein but let Uday walk.

I kind of agree with you there, but while you're up can you tell us which one was which?

As I am sure you know I meant in this thread. There is no harm in stating your opinion in this or any thread.

There's also no benefit to it. As I said, no prize for being fast. Unless one thinks being able to say, "Ha ha I said it first" is actually a prize.

I kind of agree with you there, but while you're up can you tell us which one was which?

Whichever one had the worse haircut was Selig.

Unless one thinks being able to say "Ha ha I said it first" is actually a prize.

I'd take that over "We beat 38 pitches in an internet poll". If you look at that thread, many of the people here take more stock in that than the 3rd Order Pythogarian Percentage Pennant

Sure Rog, everyone becomes heaps better in their mid 30's at any physical endeavor. .

Agreed. "Everyone" obviously doesn't sustain their performance into their 30s. Then again, "everyone" isn't arguably the greatest pitcher who ever lived.

I'm as amused at this logic as I was when it was applied to Bonds. Clemens and Bonds are possibly the greatest players ever; so why should it be surprising that normal aging patterns did not apply to them?

There's basically no way that McNamee could have forgotten or misinterpreted what he said. He's either a bald-faced liar or Clemens is.

Or he's mentally instable. Like it appears some people in this thread are.