Mitchell Report Comes Out Today

[Michael Anthony Horrigan]

LOL! Right on...

 

[Jim Brennan]

The other issue is that the players were not the only ones who benefitted. I hope (but doubt) that since it is publicly announcing the players, that it does the same with the managers, trainers, owners and MLB officials who were complicit with these instances. This wasn't a bunch of athletes going down to Walgreens. People knew and looked the other way. In some cases, largely for increased ticket sales. There are plenty of crosses to nail them to as well.

 

[ugafan]

I still don't see how it was "cheating"?

you don't see how taking an illegal substance to give yourself an advantage over a law abiding player isn't cheating?

 

[Rick Meyer]

I just want to move on from this whole situation and focus on my Yankees winning next season

Here here. You and me both. If I found out Jeter is on this list but just didn't make the initial report...I'll shiv myself.

I still don't see how it was "cheating"?

Well, imagine you are one of two street fighters equally matched. You have taken the quarrel outside and its "on". Only, your opponent sneaked brass knuckles into the match. The playing field is not so even now....wheres the honor?

Umm, yeah. That pic rules.

 

[J.R. Hudson]

I still don't see how it was "cheating"? It wasn't against the rules. It's professionals getting paid to perform a service. Why wouldn't you use science available to keep you performing so you keep getting paid? Do we call all the guys using maple bats cheaters? Or the newest latest Air Nike cleats? What about all the players who got Tommy John surgeries that enabled them to extend their careers? What about all the atheletes that get "shot up" between innings/periods/quarters to numb that aching ankle/shoulder/back so that they can get their butts back out on the field? Are they cheaters to?

JohnG

These drugs are not approved by any organization as safe. On the contrary, they are unsafe. As previously mentioned, THEY WERE ILLEGAL DRUGS in the UNited States.

If Crystal Meth wasn't on the list, would that make it right ?

What about the thousands of players not taking these drugs and losing jobs to these jokers ?

 

[J.R. Hudson]

wheres the honor?

YES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[J.R. Hudson]

And Cinealma

If these clowns had nothing to hide; wouldn't they just come out and say it ?

 

[JConnors]

Yeah, the fact that they constantly deny they did just makes them look like bigger asses (ie Palmero).

 

[cinealma]

And Cinealma

If these clowns had nothing to hide; wouldn't they just come out and say it ?

Of course! But hey, without an endorsement deal... :evil:

No, I'm not advocating the use of illegal drugs, by any means. There are very dangerous side effects to these drugs. If we talk about the morals/ethics of taking illegal drugs, then, yes, these guys are bad guys. The rulebook for baseball at the time this was all happening was "no illegal drugs" ie. cocaine, etc., AND "no legal drugs without a perscription". So if a doctor prescribes a player, then what?

Cheating as far as the game goes is only cheating if you don't follow the rulebook. It's a game. Now, as far as public opinion, obviously people are going to put their own morality into the picture.

I'm going to think about this some more. I think I'm coming off as a jerkweed when really I'm just trying to understand all this stuff.

 

[Blaine]

I am disappointed in several of the names on the list in the context of the Mitchell report. I never thought about them juicing, but when I look back and see how much better they performed than would be expected, I have to wonder how I missed it.

The thing about the report that troubles me is someone like Brian Roberts.

Once again, quoting the Mitchell Report

Brian Roberts is an infielder who has played for the Baltimore Orioles since 2001.
He has been selected to two All-Star teams.

Roberts and Larry Bigbie were both rookies in 2001. According to Bigbie, both
he and Roberts lived in Segui’s house in the Baltimore area during the latter part of that season.

When Bigbie and Segui used steroids in the house, Roberts did not participate.

According to Bigbie, however, in 2004 Roberts admitted to him that he had
injected himself once or twice with steroids in 2003. Until this admission, Bigbie had never suspected Roberts of using steroids.

In order to provide Roberts with information about these allegations and to give
him an opportunity to respond, I asked him to meet with me; he declined.

To me this is an egregious case of hearsay. ::waiting for the other shoe to drop::

 

[Jeremy Ordan]

Clemens released a statement through his lawyer denying ever taking substances.

It is funny that these allegations are made by people who are under federal investigation who only gave information as part of their attempt to negotiate a reduced sentence.

After reading the first 300 pages of the report, this is the problem I have... If someone makes an allegation they are saying that it happened. There are the checks but it's not conclusive... I am not doubting, but saying, this is not the irrefutable evidence we were looking for.

 

[Jeremy Ordan]

To me this is an egregious case of hearsay. ::waiting for the other shoe to drop::

Thats what I am saying... In a court of law none of this would hold up

 

[Blaine]

I am more impressed with the checks and FedEx receipts than I am of the actual allegations. However, there are a few that are just too credible for me do deny...Paul Lo Duca is one. He was dearly loved in L.A. and people cursed the name DePodesta when he was traded away. The general feeling now is that perhaps management knew more than the fans.

 

[Blaine]

Statement by Frank McCourt, owner of the Dodgers:

"As the steward of the Los Angeles Dodgers, I am steadfast in the belief that performance-enhancing drugs have no place in baseball. The Dodgers have supported and fully cooperated with this investigation, initiated by the Commissioner and conducted by Senator Mitchell. We wholeheartedly support Commissioner Selig's efforts to rid the game of these substances and we commend Senator Mitchell on a thorough investigation. Our commitment to our fans during our stewardship has been and always will be to do everything in our power to maintain the game's integrity.
"With that said, I have not had the chance to read the report in its entirety and once I am able to do so, I'll be willing to share any further thoughts."

 

[bosindy]

Thats what I am saying... In a court of law none of this would hold up

Well it depends on the burden of proof. I think the testimony would meet a more likely than not (preponderance of the evidence) burden in a civil case. Probably not a criminal burden but you never know.

The moment when the rubber will hit the road will be when they put Roger under oath during some investigation. It sunk Bonds (because he lied) and McGuire (because he refused to answer) and it will sink him.

 

[snowleopard]

The rulebook for baseball at the time this was all happening was "no illegal drugs" ie. cocaine, etc., AND "no legal drugs without a perscription". So if a doctor prescribes a player, then what?

Actually, Mitchell took strong issue with this oft-repeated claim, stating in reference to all illegal drugs, "They had been covered since the 1971 drug policy prohibited using any prescription medication without a valid prescription...And (steroids) were expressly included in the drug policy (signed by Vincent and the players union) in 1991."

Beyond that, no one in their right mind can say it wasn't cheating because it wasn't specific enough in the rule book. That's just an absolutely absurd claim. It's so absurd, that it's the reason why no players on this list are going to hide behind it.

I come from a background of being a huge fan and supporter of Pro Cycling. Take a look at that sport of baseball fans want to see the writing on the wall. Add to that, MLB players have it EASY compared to the strict anti-doping code cyclists adhere to.

 

[Jim Brennan]

I'm going to think about this some more. I think I'm coming off as a jerkweed when really I'm just trying to understand all this stuff.

I don't think you are coming off that way, at least to me.

There are two different issues here and I don't think the commission is being effective differentiating them. If you used a banned substance, while it was banned, then you cheated. But if you you used a questionable, but not banned substance then you did not cheat.

That is the letter of the law, so to speak. The court of public opinion is another matter. Personally I think it is irresponsible to put these two categories together. As individuals we may judge these actions to be "wrong" or "Unethical" That is our opinion. But that is a very different thing than someone who knowingly broke a rule.

 

[Blaine]

Yes, but isn't an ILLEGAL substance still ILLEGAL, therefore WRONG, CHEATING, whatever? I mean, are coca leaves explicitly banned? Just because they're illegal...

 

[Jim Brennan]

I'm pretty sure that the MLB policy on illegal substances covers anything that is illegal. But (correct me if I'm wrong) some of these guys are being implicated for taking substances that were neither banned nor illegal at the time they took them.

 

[snowleopard]

I'm pretty sure that the MLB policy on illegal substances covers anything that is illegal. But (correct me if I'm wrong) some of these guys are being implicated for taking substances that were neither banned nor illegal at the time they took them.

Well, according to Mitchell (quoted in my post above) the rules placed forth in MLB did apply to this.