And while A-Rod’s at it…shouldn’t he also be calling Clarence Grimm (father at Irving Klaw trial) to assure him all this stuff they’re saying he did ain’t so?
If A-Rod truly is a victim here, his reputation smeared, his career in such jeopardy, then why is he in hiding? Why isn’t he shouting to the world he is innocent? Why isn’t he calling his teammates, assuring them all these damning things they’ve been reading about him — purchasing HGH and testosterone from Bosch’s clinic, receiving house calls for personal injections from Bosch — are all B.S., made up by forces out to destroy him? Why hasn’t he reached out to the commissioner of baseball, Bud Selig, to tell him the same thing?
“I’m sayin’ it ain’t so, Bud. You gotta believe me.”
And what about Don Hooton, whose foundation signed A-Rod to educate students, parents and coaches about the dangers of steroids, an attempt at penance after his own admission of steroid use back in 2009?
What about those kids he addressed on behalf of Hooton?
If he’s so innocent, don’t you think he owes those kids a personal assurance that he’s still everything he portrayed himself to be?
Shouldn’t he also be calling Hooton to assure him all this stuff they’re saying he did ain’t so?
Repoz
Posted: February 05, 2013 at 10:21 AM |
66 comment(s)
Login to Bookmark
Tags:
yankees
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. SG Posted: February 05, 2013 at 10:45 AM (#4362970)Right. Those that are innocent shout it out to the world, just like Roger Clemens and Rafael Palmeiro did.
There has been absolutely no reward from the BBWAA for being honest about the use of steroids. This, to my historian's mind, has been the biggest disaster of the whole Steroid Era.
PICARD: That is not a crime, Worf. Nor can we infer his guilt because he didn't respond.
WORF: Sir, if a man were not afraid of the truth, he would answer.
PICARD: Oh, no. We cannot allow ourselves think that. The Seventh Guarantee is one of the most important rights granted by the Federation. We cannot take a fundamental principle of the Constitution and turn it against a citizen.
He's probably still humiliated from that incident at the Kansas City restaurant.
But ARod did deny it, in a statement. Of course, that wasn't good enough, because nothing is. One would think that after Clemens climbed to the highest rooftop shouting that he was innocent only to have that seen as further evidence of his alleged guilt sportswriters would stop with this BS that that might make a difference, but clearly not.
The best response to this stuff, at this point, is probably a silent 'eff you.'
I love this from Madden, though:
And why is that? Could it be that nobody really cares about football players doing this stuff?
But so we're clear: according to Madden and the lesson learned from Ray Lewis, all ARod has to do is tell reporters he is innocent like Lewis did, and ARod will be believed and all of this will fade away!
Not even Madden believes that. Which means that the faux Hall of Fame writer is being dishonest.
WTF are you talking about, SugarBear? Clemens never got a chance to prove that.
He could also produce his own blackmail as he must know some names that aren't out in public.
Or he could just move to some island somewhere with his piles of cash.
WWF style?
Sure he did. He sued and bailed.
The status regarding the legal system is as I wrote: The government couldn't prove perjury beyond a reasonable doubt; Clemens has tried and been (as yet) unable to prove by a preponderance that he was defamed. If Clemens proves defamation, this will change -- naturally.
Clemens didn't get "a chance to prove" defamation because he went for the home-court advantage in picking his venue.
It doesn't?
"Routine pop up to third, Evan Longoria under it--OH MAH GAWD KING! IT'S A-ROD! HE'S GOT A GATORADE BUCKET!"
MLB tests for amps. If MLB is still providing amps to its players, that is news to me.
It is no such thing. Clemens has claimed in court that he was defamed, but has been unable to prove it. That statement is entirely true in all particulars.
It is also likely true that he has stopped trying to prove it once his effort to obtain a home-court advantage in a clearly wrong forum failed. So the best conclusion on the current record is that Clemens is unwilling to submit his claim of defamation to a neutral forum in a proper venue.
MLB has allowed "therapeutic use" exemptions to its anti-amp rules since the anti-amp rules were put in place. Something on the order of 8% of players have been granted such exemptions. A hundred or so players have played amped up, with the knowledge of MLB, since 2007.
This is knowledge fundamental to understanding the issue. Amps are "banned" in MLB in name only.
It is entirely false. He was not "unable" to prove it. He was "unable" to get the chance to prove it.
Forum shopping is what all plaintiffs do; a plaintiff's lawyer would be a fool not to do so.
The NY forum would not be neutral. But even this does not support the notion that Clemens "wasn't able" to prove defamation.
This was already suggested here all the way back in 2006, in this (abridged) Primey-winning post:
I would totally buy a package of Alex Rodriguez Heroin Nougat.
Someone forgot to tell Chooch.
John Rocker
AJ Pierzinskwhatever
You're kidding, right?
Tyrus Cobb?
You know, this nation needs nothing more than it needs a movement to protect the rich and privileged from newspapers and reporters. Thank God(s) we have Calcaterra there to lead this essential and indispensible charge.
Kids, I personally assure you that I am everything I portrayed myself as.
signed,
A-Rod.
Also I am still a mythical horse/man creature.
As Max Bialystock's jury might have said, Madden is incredibly guilty in conspiracy of speaking.
It's a dumb column in a bitter newspaper from a writer who is Exhibit A in the ongoing comedy that elected no players this year but wouldn't dream of skipping a Spink Award induction if the apocalypse arrived.
Cmon, you deserve no protection from besmirchment if you are rich and privileged, or wealthy and affluent, or even loaded and prosperous.
It's still fantastic.
Well, hero or villain is often dependent on which side of the fence you are on. Reggie Jackson was a hero to NY fans after his WS exploits with the Yankees; I'm certain many LA fans saw him as a villain.
Although a fairly popular player overall, Pete Rose was despised in LA, especially during the '70s when the Dodgers and Reds had a heated rivalry for a while in the NL "West" Division. To that end, Rose really clearly enjoyed getting jeers from the Dodger crowd, and it seemed the louder they booed, the better he hit.
And the more he would bet on the game.
Yeah, 'cause A-Rod doesn't have anybody telling postive mistruths about him and never has.
Eddie Stanky comes fairy close, although he was more The Brat (his nickname) than the villain.
Bart: Well, you're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't.
Nice sense of morality you seem to be espousing.
"P.S. Please join my campaign for higher-capacity toilets in the Yankees' locker room."
No, but on the list of problems in the world, it probably doesn't rank in the top million.
Not to mention that the positive lies that have been told about MLBers vastly outnumber the number of negative things said.
I for one would enjoy watching A-Rod hit Madden with a steel chair.
Who cares? We're not deciding whether to put someone to death. We're deciding that Bill Madden is a jackass.
Reggie was my thought, though, obviously, New York and some other fans loved him. He definitely embraced the boos when on the road though.
it used to be that the gossip writers had to say "a little bird" told me that someone (who they then describe so that everyone knows who they are talking about) did Something Bad
now - why bother
a public person can't deny anything and be believed because if a media person accuses them, they are automatically guilty. there is actually no way to PROVE innocence.
actually, same thing with a non-public person. suppose i went to clinic X when i was sick and got medicine. if the doctor who ran the clinic was accused of pushing testosterone, and my name was on a list of clinic patients, does this mean i scored some illegal testosterone? according to the media, it sure does. and according to too many people in this world, it sure does. even if there is like zero proof that i ever got it let alone used it.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main