Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Sports Forum

Sports Forum

  1. 07 Jan '08 15:17
    http://assets.espn.go.com/media/pdf/080107/mlb_clemens.pdf

    Roger Clemens has filed a defamation suit against Brian McNamee.

    Whom do you believe is telling the truth or does it even matter? Last night on 60 Minutes with Mike Wallace (who looks like he is 120 years old), Roger stated that it may not even matter who is telling the truth anymore because his name has already been muddied and people will believe whatever they want to believe regardless of what proof exists.

    What is your opinion? Do you give Clemens the benefit of the doubt?
  2. 07 Jan '08 15:22
    PS - I love the quotes from the investigators who put the heat on McNamee. I swear all cops must be born with such lameness in their bones.
  3. 07 Jan '08 15:51
    It is really hard to see how Clemens could be telling the truth, but I think if Congress goes ahead and calls but him and McNamee they could come up with some sort of story that a lot of people would believe.
  4. 07 Jan '08 15:58 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by poundlee
    It is really hard to see how Clemens could be telling the truth, but I think if Congress goes ahead and calls but him and McNamee they could come up with some sort of story that a lot of people would believe.
    And you think that McNamee is? The guy seems pretty shady to me (Alleged Rapist, Drug Dealer, etc.) At least with Roger, we know that he trained rigorously and worked hard his whole career. What do you know about Brian McNamee?

    I found it interesting that McNamee called up Clemens and asked to borrow his good fishing equipment three days before the Mitchell report came out. Speaks to his character, if you ask me.

    I'm not passing judgment either way right now but I can't say that I find this McNamee character 100% believable anymore.
  5. 07 Jan '08 16:13
    McNamee is a drug dealer. He was convicted; you should not respect him any more than any other street peddler. But you get drugs from a dirty trainer so I sort of expect a guy like him to be involved.

    But, lets face it. Clemens certainly looks guilty doubt. His career completely revived (it just does not happen), it lasted longer than fireballers careers last, he threw a ball and hit Piazza in the head, he threw a broken bat in the general direction of Piazza (roid rage?), he had the opportunity to talk to Mitchell before the report came out knowing that he would be named (if I knew and I am truly a moron with zero inside information, he knew... would not talk because he had something to hide), his trainer gave people steriods (a link), he has legendary secret invite only workouts (really really looks bad). It ain't as convincing as the case against Bonds, but it is enough for me.
  6. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    07 Jan '08 16:14
    Originally posted by darvlay
    And you think that McNamee is? The guy seems pretty shady to me (Alleged Rapist, Drug Dealer, etc.) At least with Roger, we know that he trained rigorously and worked hard his whole career. What do you know about Brian McNamee?

    I found it interesting that McNamee called up Clemens and asked to borrow his good fishing equipment three days before the Mit ...[text shortened]... ther way right now but I can't say that I find this McNamee character 100% believable anymore.
    I just wonder why McNamee would purger himself to call out Clemens when everyone else he named has now admitted they DID do it.

    It's all fishy, and I'm leaning towards the word of the pool-drug induced woman rapist on this one.

    P-
  7. 07 Jan '08 16:25
    McNamee could simply say he gave Clemens steriods. The government had him dead asked for the list of people he gave steriods to and he gave it to Clemens but he could say that he never told Clemens that it was steriods or that he called it B-12 which was a code name for steriods and figured Clemens new that but Clemens says that he thought it was B-12 like the stuff he gets from Cheerios. That might be plausable to some people but Clemens has lawyers and then are trying to use known facts to exonerate him so I am sure there will be some story. McNamee just wants the benefit of his deal with the govenment but I am sure he'd rather not hurt Clemens.
  8. 07 Jan '08 16:26
    Originally posted by poundlee
    McNamee is a drug dealer. He was convicted; you should not respect him any more than any other street peddler. But you get drugs from a dirty trainer so I sort of expect a guy like him to be involved.

    But, lets face it. Clemens certainly looks guilty doubt. His career completely revived (it just does not happen), it lasted longer than fireballers car ...[text shortened]... really looks bad). It ain't as convincing as the case against Bonds, but it is enough for me.
    Clemens is most often compared to who? NOLAN RYAN. When did Nolan Ryan retire and how old was he when he stopped throwing at players? (Hint: He never stopped). It's flat out wrong to say that "it just does not happen" or to blame fiery competitiveness (which he's had his entire career) on roid rage.

    Granted, he made a mistake not talking to Mitchell when asked however, according to Clemens, he had no idea that he was going to be mentioned in the report or that someone was dropping dimes on him, plus his counsel advised him not to speak and who goes against their counsel? Look at how many players did speak. I bet you can count 'em on one hand.
  9. 07 Jan '08 16:27
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    I just wonder why McNamee would purger himself to call out Clemens when everyone else he named has now admitted they DID do it.

    It's all fishy, and I'm leaning towards the word of the pool-drug induced woman rapist on this one.

    P-
    Who knows? Coercion. Vendetta. You just don't know.

    FISHY.
  10. 07 Jan '08 16:38
    Well, Clemens is dumb if he did not know he would be named and the players "code of silence" may or may not of helped them. No one knows what might have come out if they talked. But if I was 100% innocent, I would not need counsel to tell me not to tell the truth and I would talk to Mitchell and make sure some cheater ain't getting an edge and taking my job, fame or money.
    Michael Vick got hammered for financing a dog operation even though it is clear that many of the people involved had all the dog fighting connections and did most of the dirty deeds. Guys like Clemens financed McNamee even if McNamee is the convict and had the dirty connections. If there are public out cries for Vick to get punished more than anyone else in his operation (and then he did), I'd like the same outcry regarding Clemens (the financeer). Plus, Clemens is a few steps worse he got his buddies involved (actually it makes him a drug dealer via conspiracy.)
  11. 07 Jan '08 16:52
    Originally posted by poundlee
    Well, Clemens is dumb if he did not know he would be named and the players "code of silence" may or may not of helped them. No one knows what might have come out if they talked. But if I was 100% innocent, I would not need counsel to tell me not to tell the truth and I would talk to Mitchell and make sure some cheater ain't getting an edge and taking my j ...[text shortened]... teps worse he got his buddies involved (actually it makes him a drug dealer via conspiracy.)
    Hindsight is 20/20. Anyway, it will be interesting to see how this pans out. Poor Roger will likely be left pissing in the wind in five years when the hall voting comes up in five years. The court of public opinion has already passed judgment.
  12. 07 Jan '08 17:12
    Originally posted by darvlay
    Clemens is most often compared to who? NOLAN RYAN. When did Nolan Ryan retire and how old was he when he stopped throwing at players? (Hint: He never stopped). It's flat out wrong to say that "it just does not happen" or to blame fiery competitiveness (which he's had his entire career) on roid rage.
    Your post just brought back the memory of Nolan Ryan playing a diddy on Robin Ventura's head after he charged the mound. LOL!

    Clemens has always been an intense, hard throwing pitcher as well. Did he take steroids? I don't know. Not sure if the truth will ever come out.
  13. Standard member uzless
    The So Fist
    07 Jan '08 17:48 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by darvlay
    Hindsight is 20/20. Anyway, it will be interesting to see how this pans out. Poor Roger will likely be left pissing in the wind in five years when the hall voting comes up in five years. The court of public opinion has already passed judgment.
    No one knows for sure...but in cases like this look at history and usually history tells the story.

    Look at athletes in the past who've been accused of cheating. Most of them, in the end, are proven to have cheated.

    Is Clemens one of those few who didn't really take it (silken laumen eg.) or is he in the majority?

    If i were a betting man, i'd look at his age and stats during his alleged usage, compare those stats to when he supposedly stopped taking them, and then state that he likely took them.
  14. 07 Jan '08 17:54 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by uzless
    No one knows for sure...but in cases like this look at history and usually history tells the story.

    Look at athletes in the past who've been accused of cheating. Most of them, in the end, are proven to have cheated.

    Is Clemens one of those few who didn't really take it (silken laumen eg.) or is he in the majority?

    If i were a betting man, i'd look a ...[text shortened]... ose stats to when he supposedly stopped taking them, and then state that he likely took them.
    "...but in cases like this look at history and usually history tells the story. Look at athletes in the past who've been accused of cheating. Most of them, in the end, are proven to have cheated."

    Who are you talking about specifically and where is the proof?

    If I were a betting man (and I am), I would say that there is a third side to this story - the truth.
  15. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    07 Jan '08 19:26
    Originally posted by Phlabibit
    I just wonder why McNamee would purger himself to call out Clemens when everyone else he named has now admitted they DID do it.

    It's all fishy, and I'm leaning towards the word of the pool-drug induced woman rapist on this one.

    P-
    Phlab, your mind has been made up since day one. All of you beaners get your panties in a wad when one of your beloved leaves you and excels against your beaners. You have never met Clemens nor do you know McNamee. I will tell you this, in the entire time I player with Roger, he worked his ASS off in the training room and on the field. If he had been doing steroids as long as McNamee says he did, he would be facing health issues now (which he is not) if you believe what the AMA says about steroid use. Roger makes several very valid points regarding whether it was even possible to clear his name and to prove his innocence. The fact that he is proceeding with a lawsuit against McNamee for defamation is interesting because if Clemens wasn't telling the truth AND if McNamee has proof, Clemens would be subject to a countersuit. Another point to consider is that when McNamee's back was up against the wall and he was faced with extended amounts of prison time, you would think he would do whatever he had to do to avoid it in cutting his deal, regardless of whether it was true or not, because he had nothing to lose. That should answer your question as to why McNamee would purger his own testimony.