Originally posted by no1marauderYou really think Clemens brought this trainer to The Yankees and EVERYONE ELSE was doing steroids but not Roger? You really think Roger is clean and this trainer lied about it?
Your retarded arguments have already been refuted; I gave several examples of Hall of Fame pitchers older than Clemens was in 1997 having much better years than their last few. And you don't have a shred of evidence that Clemens used steroids in 1997 and you know it. So why don't you stop embarassing yourself? By your "logic", Perry and Sutton must have used steroids, too.
That's retarded.
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitI rely on evidence, not "I don't like Clemens cuz he left my team". I had no idea that EVERYONE ELSE in baseball was doing steroids; is this something you learned on talk radio?
You really think Clemens brought this trainer to The Yankees and EVERYONE ELSE was doing steroids but not Roger? You really think Roger is clean and this trainer lied about it?
That's retarded.
P-
The evidence that Clemens did steroids is one man's word and his credibility is dubious. There's nothing in Clemen's record that is inconsistent with performances by prior Hall of Famers. Maybe you should actually get some of the facts; I've laid them out for the stupid like yourself in this thread.
It is funny that a guy has four bad seasons in a row, you acknoweldge that he has two. It is 100% unprecidented to come back from that. You compare Clemens to Gaylord Perry and Don Sutton (two of the biggest cheaters in their era) they chose to doctor a baseball instead of themselves. Sutton may be a borderly line Cy Young winner but nothing he did makes him comparable to Clemens (no first of second cy young finishes, 1 20 win season 1 other 19 win season). He never came back the way Clemens did because at no point in his career was he ever a dominant pitcher like Clemens. Gaylord Perry was a dominant pitcher in his career -- at no point has 4 bad seasons in a row until he got old and never got better.
For people who think there is no evidence against Clemens, I am wondering if you think any of these guys may have taken performance enhancers (1) Bonds (2) McGuire (3) Sosa (4) Tejada. Perhaps you also believe there is no evidence that Lincoln was shot, that OJ was guilty or that the sun revolves around the earth.
Originally posted by poundleeYou really need to finish your elementary school education: I don't acknowledge that ANY of Clemen's seasons between 1993-1996 were "bad". At his worst, he still had an ERA substantially below the league average and still had a strikeout rate of nearly one per inning - far above the league average. You saying over and over and over again the false claim that "Clemens had four bad seasons in a row" doesn't make it true - Hitler sucessfully used this type of Big Lie technique but only the extremely gullible would fall for it now.
It is funny that a guy has four bad seasons in a row, you acknoweldge that he has two. It is 100% unprecidented to come back from that. You compare Clemens to Gaylord Perry and Don Sutton (two of the biggest cheaters in their era) they chose to doctor a baseball instead of themselves. Sutton may be a borderly line Cy Young winner but nothing he did make ...[text shortened]... no evidence that Lincoln was shot, that OJ was guilty or that the sun revolves around the earth.
It hardly matters what Perry and Sutton did to the ball unless your claim is they suddenly started doing it late in their career and that caused them to have the resurgent seasons they did (this would be analogous to your claims regarding Clemens). And even if someone believes the untrue claim that Clemens had "four bad seasons in a row" the fact remains that he won the Cy Young in 1997 and there isn't a single shred of evidence - not even unsubstantiated claims by accused felons - that he used steroids in 1997. To repeat for your and Phlab's benefit. McNamee wasn't even Toronto's trainer in 1997. So you have to explain how Clemens won the Cy Young in 1997 NOT using steroids, but needed steroids to win the Cy Young in 1998. I await that "explanation".
Whether other players did or didn't use steroids is irrelevant to whether Clemens did; last I checked we didn't decide whether the Duke lacrosse players were guilty of rape because someone else was once convicted of rape. Such an "argument" as the one made in your last paragraph is beyond stupid; it is the childish bleating of a crank.
Today, espn is reporting that 4 years ago McNamee was worried that Clemens might test positive for steriods. There also are reports that Pettite and Clemens have a fall out. This is significant because Pettitte would not be bothered by Clemens denials if the denials were truthful; however, false denials put Pettitte in a tough position when he knows he could be asked to testify under the penalty of perjury.
Clemens last 4 year in Boston are absolutely 100% awful for the middle of a career for a guy who wins 350 games. To show me guys who were far worse than him who had two instead of four mediocire years is irrelevant.
Finally the Duke casde was based on the testimony of one prostutute. Clemens was inplicated in McNamee proceeding (already completed.. prosecutor and judge cound the testimony credible), Mitchell (an independent organization verified their results), teammates (pettitee) corroborate McNamee truthfulness, circumstantial evidence implicated Clemens, the New York Times has indpendent sources, Congress wants to investigate. How much more does anyone need?
Originally posted by poundleeYour reliance on unsubstantiated rumors is pathetic. Your gross exagerrations are sad ("100% awful" LMAO at your idiocy). Your idea of proof is retarded.
Today, espn is reporting that 4 years ago McNamee was worried that Clemens might test positive for steriods. There also are reports that Pettite and Clemens have a fall out. This is significant because Pettitte would not be bothered by Clemens denials if the denials were truthful; however, false denials put Pettitte in a tough position when he knows he co ...[text shortened]... rk Times has indpendent sources, Congress wants to investigate. How much more does anyone need?
When you have some actual evidence, let me know.
Originally posted by no1marauderWhen I said Everyone Else I was talking about all the players in the Mitch Report that used the SAME TRAINER and fessed up.
I rely on evidence, not "I don't like Clemens cuz he left my team". I had no idea that EVERYONE ELSE in baseball was doing steroids; is this something you learned on talk radio?
The evidence that Clemens did steroids is one man's word and his credibility is dubious. There's nothing in Clemen's record that is inconsistent with performances by ...[text shortened]... ly get some of the facts; I've laid them out for the stupid like yourself in this thread.
I never hated Roger, he was great when he was here and I respected him as a Yankee. No grudge. I'm actually hurt to find out he did ROID UP.
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitPlease actually read the report; no players linked to McNamee except Clemens were accused of using steroids. Andy Petitte and Chuck Knoblauch were named as receiving human growth hormone in 2002 and 2001, respectively. Petitte admitted doing so TWICE; Knoblauch hasn't made a definitive statement either way (If he used HGH, it didn't help Chuck much; he had a lousy 2001 and 2002 and retired after the latter season).
When I said Everyone Else I was talking about all the players in the Mitch Report that used the SAME TRAINER and fessed up.
I never hated Roger, he was great when he was here and I respected him as a Yankee. No grudge. I'm actually hurt to find out he did ROID UP.
P-
All you "found out" is that a guy accused Clemens in return for not being prosecuted for dealing steroids. The same guy was believed by police to have lied regarding the details of a date rape (his statements contradict the statements of several other witnesses). Why people find him credible NOW is beyond me; the idea that no one would lie to avoid prosecution is laughable (as is the idea that Mitchell and his investigators would have believed McNamee if he said that Clemens never used steroids). Of course, McNamee on several prior occasions had denied that major leaguers were using steroids at all; the guy seems to have a serious problem with keeping his story straight.
Hey, Clemens picked McNamee probably understanding that druggies (like himself) get their substances from a drug dealer. He had free trainers and free doctors. Why did he need a drug dealer? Only a moron would he have a trainer inject him with medicine UNLESS the medicine was something you could not get from a doctor.
McNamee did not just make everything up. Pettitte said the stuff about him is true. Leads me to belive that the stuff about Clemens is true. Mitchell did not print every rumor he heard. Apprently he too thought what he heard about Clemens is true. The New York Times does not print every thing that everyone tells them. Apparently they though their source saying Clemens talked about performance enhancers a lot was credible. Congress does not gather evidence on everything that is rumored. Apparently they feel there is ample evidence too. Judges and prosecutors are not satisfied with the turthfullness of every story a defendant tells them. They too were satisfied with Clemens story. Now there are rumors that Clemens and Pettitte are having a falling out (probably becuase Clemens' lies put Pettitte in a bad situation. There is also a story that Mcnamee's people told Clemens 4 years ago that they were worried that Clemens would testify positive for steriods.
Originally posted by poundleeLike I said, when you have some evidence, get back to me. This is the second straight post where all you did is repeat rumors and unsubstantiated statements. That is obviously all that you have. The papers reported a year ago that Clemens was named in the Grimsley affidavit and idiots like you believed that was "proof" too. Turns out the papers were wrong, which may be a shock to the extremely gullible like yourself but really doesn't surprise anyone who follows the media - which is always willing to rush out sensational rumors and gossip regardless of their truth.
Hey, Clemens picked McNamee probably understanding that druggies (like himself) get their substances from a drug dealer. He had free trainers and free doctors. Why did he need a drug dealer? Only a moron would he have a trainer inject him with medicine UNLESS the medicine was something you could not get from a doctor.
McNamee did not just make everything ...[text shortened]... d Clemens 4 years ago that they were worried that Clemens would testify positive for steriods.
There are also statements that you keep making that have been shown to be utterly false. You are truly a pathetic dishonest clown; you and McNamee seem to have a lot in common.
Sort of funny that you would accuse me of being a pathetic clown because you are defending seem to have a lot in common with your lying cheating friend Clemens who financially supported a drug dealer (even he does not deny that) introduced his friends to it who were encouraged to use drugs (he and Pettitte don't deny that) and then comes up with the most idiotic story I have heard in sports legal cases since OJ. I hope Congress calls the person who spoke to Clemens of McNamee's behalf 4 years ago. Are you going to say this person lies, just like the Mitchell report and the New York Times and the prosecutor and the judge who accepted McNamee's plea? According to you the only one in the who case who tells the truth is Clemens? You are beyond a gullable fool
Originally posted by poundleeFor one, idiot, no judge "accepted McNamee's plea": he was never charged even though there was proof he dealt steroids. For some reason, the prosecutors were more interested in going after supposed users than the dealers. Try to get at least SOME of your facts straight.
Sort of funny that you would accuse me of being a pathetic clown because you are defending seem to have a lot in common with your lying cheating friend Clemens who financially supported a drug dealer (even he does not deny that) introduced his friends to it who were encouraged to use drugs (he and Pettitte don't deny that) and then comes up with the most id the only one in the who case who tells the truth is Clemens? You are beyond a gullable fool
Clemens paid a trainer, nothing more. Where's the cancelled checks for the purchase of steroids like other players used? There are none.
"I didn't do it" is only an idiotic story to a sub-moron like yourself who has made up his mind even though you are woefully ignorant of the actual facts.
I have no idea who these mystery people that your rumors come up with are; so far as I know not a single person has verified McNamee's claims that Clemens used steroids in any way, shape or manner. Again, try to learn some of the facts; you're making a complete fool out of yourself with the retarded "arguments" you are making which seem to be all based on an incorrect understanding of the actual facts.
Originally posted by no1marauderSooooooooo Clemens is clean and McNamee lied to keep from getting put in jail? He told the truth to keep from getting in jail.
Please actually read the report; no players linked to McNamee except Clemens were accused of using steroids. Andy Petitte and Chuck Knoblauch were named as receiving human growth hormone in 2002 and 2001, respectively. Petitte admitted doing so TWICE; Knoblauch hasn't made a definitive statement either way (If he used HGH, it didn't help Chuck much; he h ...[text shortened]... ng steroids at all; the guy seems to have a serious problem with keeping his story straight.
Go ahead and believe Andy did it twice, not like he's saying something we want to hear to cover his bottom.
You know, you always want to use evidence when it backs you up, and common sense when it fits your beliefs.
Roger was shot in the ass, and it wasn't B-12 alone. It's a no-brainer and in this instance you want hard evidence. When it comes to cheating at RHP you have a totally different view, and believe what fits your opinions.
Whatever, live in your little world of fantasy.
P-
The prosecutors in McNamee understand that it is the athlete that finance the operation. It is same reasoning that gave Michael Vick the most time of anyone in his incident, but of course if you are the no1moron you would not undertand that.
There are a whole bunch of neutral people who look at McNamee's statements and Clemens statements and feel that Clemens is in trouble. The prosecutor and the judge both accepted that McNamee's testimony has truthful. The Mitchell investigation found it credible. Clemens refused to speak to Mitchell-- knowing he was at risk for incriminating himself. If he did not nothing he certainly would have nothing to fear. Pettitte admitted the Mitchell report and the McNamee's statements were truthful about him. Brian Roberts admitted that the Mitchell report was accurate about him. If players continually admit that these sources of performance enhancers are truthful, one should feel it is more likely to be accurate about Clemens. Clemens' release of a taped conversation with McNamee did nothing to clear his name... it merely showed he is a fool.
Just like it is inconceivable that without BALCO Bonds could suddenly double his homerun output, it was always suspect that Clemens could recover from a 4 year span being just one game over .500. His connection with McNamee simple explains it. Hopefully, his testimony before Congress will point out even more inconsistencies.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 595572
Originally posted by PhlabibitJust another in a line of Yankees shooting juice. Clemens, Pettite, did I spell that right? Sheffield, Knoblach, the great Giambi.....I think you have to go all the way back to Mo Vaughn to find one on Gods team though. Yup, Yankee Pride. Belly on up to the juice bar boys!
Sooooooooo Clemens is clean and McNamee lied to keep from getting put in jail? He told the truth to keep from getting in jail.
Go ahead and believe Andy did it twice, not like he's saying something we want to hear to cover his bottom.
You know, you always want to use evidence when it backs you up, and common sense when it fits your beliefs.
Roge ...[text shortened]... and believe what fits your opinions.
Whatever, live in your little world of fantasy.
P-