He is either like Floyd Landis and wanting to deny, deny, deny - or, he is actually innocent. I am going to believe him for now, but I hope he is doing the right thing (hate to see the best hitter AND pitcher of all time in prison for purgery).

He is either like Floyd Landis and wanting to deny, deny, deny - or, he is actually innocent. I am going to believe him for now, but I hope he is doing the right thing (hate to see the best hitter AND pitcher of all time in prison for purgery).

 

Is there a third option?

Is there a third option?

 

His trainer injected him and he didn't know it.

His trainer injected him and he didn't know it.

 

So he's innocent...

If he is not telling the truth he is making a huge mistake going so public in saying he did'nt use, seems like to smart of a man to put himself out there knowing the truth will come out. I believe him, hope I'm right.

I dunno what to believe. I mean a person can lie, lie, and lie some more and it doesn't matter whether they are under oath or not. If they don't want to tell the truth they're not going too. We may never know what was really injected or not injected. I just wish this was over and done with.

At this point, I believe that he did knowingly use, but am trying to keep an "semi-open" mind because I've always liked him so much. But if he shows up in Congress and declines to testify because of "ongoing litigation" after having promised repeatedly to talk, then that will make up my mind.

So he's innocent...

 

Ok, obviously I'm not an idiot and I realize that the only options are guilty vs. innocent. Thanks for pointing that out, though.:mad:

Ok, obviously I'm not an idiot and I realize that the only options are guilty vs. innocent. Thanks for pointing that out, though.:mad:

 

:lol::lol:

 

Just wondering what guilty but innocent scenario you had...

:lol::lol:

 

Just wondering what guilty but innocent scenario you had...

 

:fire:

I believe him until there is actual evidence to prove he did it.

 

You could ask yourself why McNamme would lie about Clemens and not the others. But at the same time who knows what Mitchell told McNamme. Maybe he was looking at jail time if he didn't come up with a big name.

 

I would also like to add that if Congress can't find anything better to do with our tax dollars then this, we need some new bodies in there. People took the drugs, everyone knows people took the drugs, so why the heck are we still going through all of this.

I believe him until there is actual evidence to prove he did it.

 

You could ask yourself why McNamme would lie about Clemens and not the others. But at the same time who knows what Mitchell told McNamme. Maybe he was looking at jail time if he didn't come up with a big name.

 

I would also like to add that if Congress can't find anything better to do with our tax dollars then this, we need some new bodies in there. People took the drugs, everyone knows people took the drugs, so why the heck are we still going through all of this.

 

Totally agree. When asked who cheated, the answer is "yes".

I believe him until there is actual evidence to prove he did it.

 

You could ask yourself why McNamme would lie about Clemens and not the others. But at the same time who knows what Mitchell told McNamme. Maybe he was looking at jail time if he didn't come up with a big name.

 

I would also like to add that if Congress can't find anything better to do with our tax dollars then this, we need some new bodies in there. People took the drugs, everyone knows people took the drugs, so why the heck are we still going through all of this.

 

I don't think Mitchell could have threatened McNamee with jail time. He doesn't wield that type of power.

O yeah. I do believe Roger. The reasons I have behind that are 1-I don't see the change in his body from his rookie year in '84 til now, 2- The way he performs on the field hasn't changed much either he has always been pretty dominate, and 3- I like Roger and I want to believe him, I don't want him to be a liar and a cheater.

 

THAT is the point. He's well into his 40's and he is still dominate--the exact argument used against Barry Bonds.

I have to say no. Playing everything out in your head and presuming he's innocent and then doing the same thing while assuming he's guilty...it seems much more likely that he's guilty.