|
Post by StreetDreamer83 on Dec 14, 2007 20:38:46 GMT -5
I don't feel sorry for any of the players who were named. If they were innocent, they should have had no problems stepping up to Mitchell and talking. And even if they didn't want to, I'd have my lawyers ready and willing to sue for defamation if I were in one of those guy's shoes and the information was truly false. Of course, those names were only the tip of the iceburg. I'm just surprised that Brady Anderson's name wasn't there because I'm pretty sure it should have been.
Matt
|
|
|
Post by Crowfan on Dec 15, 2007 19:26:52 GMT -5
Alex Rodriguez was not named by the Mitchell Report either. Apparently, he's going to be interviewed on "60 Minutes" tomorrow, Sunday, Dec 16.
|
|
|
Post by mistermister on Dec 15, 2007 19:49:12 GMT -5
I don't feel sorry for any of the players who were named. If they were innocent, they should have had no problems stepping up to Mitchell and talking. And even if they didn't want to, I'd have my lawyers ready and willing to sue for defamation if I were in one of those guy's shoes and the information was truly false. Of course, those names were only the tip of the iceburg. I'm just surprised that Brady Anderson's name wasn't there because I'm pretty sure it should have been. Matt While I'm certain not all (or even any) of the players named were innocent, that still doesn't change the fact that this was nothing more than a witch hunt. I want concrete proof, not this "he said-she said" garbage. Have you ever been the victim of someone else's false claims that you were responsible for something? It's not a very fun position to be in. Furthermore, they did not catch all the people who have been supplying steroids and HGH, so of course they don't have a complete list of players who are linked to steroids (even if it is as flimsy as someone merely saying that they "thought" they heard someone say they had used them). I'm of the belief that Alex Rodriguez has used steroids or HGH, based simply on an excerpt from an interview where, when asked about them, the muscles around his mouth twitched before he gave a response. Now, does that mean that he ACTUALLY took them? No.
|
|
|
Post by fireballil on Dec 16, 2007 0:31:50 GMT -5
I don't feel sorry for any of the players who were named. If they were innocent, they should have had no problems stepping up to Mitchell and talking. And even if they didn't want to, I'd have my lawyers ready and willing to sue for defamation if I were in one of those guy's shoes and the information was truly false. Of course, those names were only the tip of the iceburg. I'm just surprised that Brady Anderson's name wasn't there because I'm pretty sure it should have been. Matt While I'm certain not all (or even any) of the players named were innocent, that still doesn't change the fact that this was nothing more than a witch hunt. I want concrete proof, not this "he said-she said" garbage. Have you ever been the victim of someone else's false claims that you were responsible for something? It's not a very fun position to be in. Furthermore, they did not catch all the people who have been supplying steroids and HGH, so of course they don't have a complete list of players who are linked to steroids (even if it is as flimsy as someone merely saying that they "thought" they heard someone say they had used them). I'm of the belief that Alex Rodriguez has used steroids or HGH, based simply on an excerpt from an interview where, when asked about them, the muscles around his mouth twitched before he gave a response. Now, does that mean that he ACTUALLY took them? No. There is one good reason why you don't have the 'concrete proof' you seek: the players union didn't cooperate; Mitchell got most of his info from two or three people who were clubhouse personnel who sold them to the players. Don Fehr and the players were dragged kicking and screaming into this; those who were involved didn't want to lose their edge. Yes, the owners didn't want to lose their big money they were making, and Selig is basically an owner, but the union hid behind 'privacy' and didn't want to have any testing at all.
|
|
|
Post by Crowfan on Dec 16, 2007 10:41:12 GMT -5
I don't think the union wants testing now, either, even after the report.
|
|