h.s.sportsrbest

As someone mentioned, if they get penalties and go to court, now they are under oath on the stand. So, do they take that risk and stand up to any penalties?

Umm, someone was me.

There is a difference to standing up to a penalty by the Union filing a grievance and suing for slander / defamation. You won't need to testify under oath with a grievance filed.

DId you know that smoking weed can stunt your growth?

Bravo. :ylsuper:

0%

Funny shaped things bounce in funny ways.

IF THEY PENALIZE THE PLAYERS and the teams were turning a blind eye to it, why should they not share in the penalities?

A. Why are you yelling at me?

B. I'll be shocked if there is any penalties to the players. The evidence that Senator Mitchell has on most of them is so weak (hearsay in many cases) that it would never hold up once the Union filed their grievance.

Nothing will come of it, like I said earlier, besides the "court of public opinion." Colossal waste of time and money.

And the reason why I say, you penalize the players, penalize the teams and vacate any championships won during that period.

Respectfully, I think that would be over-kill. Let's not use a hammer to kill a fly.

Baseball had a steriod problem in the 90's.

Adam Dunn wasn't on the list.

Adam Dunn is a liability in the field.

Doesn't mean it couldn't be enforced, then or now.

 

Even with no "defined penalties," anybody who took part in the steroid trade from that point forward was "subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk(ed) permanent expulsion from the game." That could open a very large door, if the Budman chooses to do so.

Bud Selig and his band of merry men are the biggest hypocrites in this whole ordeal. If he goes after any of these players after-the-fact it will open a kettle of fish he'll immediately wish he hadn't.

Fortunately for him, the amount of defamation law-suits will be small because that would mean, in most cases, the players would have to take the stand UNDER OATH and answer questions. Umm, me thinks they wouldn't like that much.

Tom, be serious. They weren't testing and there was no defined penalties. They had no desire to enforce it because they needed Sammy and Mac to bring the fans back.

You are very intelligent -- you know that policy from '97 is nonsense.

Call me when you get a minute...

Give me 10 minutes -- I saw you called. :thumb:

Miami will remain...

Got ya. :thumb:

Didn't they just sign a contract to broadcast Miami(O) games? Long-term deal, in fact. Did I imagine that?

How about, misleading that 4th grader, sitting in the front row and wanting to be just like you,

Are you a "Norman Rockwell" artist? :bunny:

Again, WHY penalize the players? They didn't fail anything. MLB wasn't testing back then. The only penalty is in the court of public opinion.

Why would they not throw a 50-game suspension on the players?

Why would they? These guys never failed a drug test and used (allegedly) before the penalty structures were in place. If they haven't failed a drug test since the program's inception, what would the penalty be?

As I said in a Bonds thread months ago, the group most to blame for this is Bud Selig and his troops / owners for having their heads in the sand for years and then feigning surprise when the info started going public.

Hypocrisy at its finest. Who can blame the players when there were no penalties in place and no one gave any indication of caring what they did?

I'm with you Latch, I still think that is why the Wood deal fell apart so quickly and quietly.

So is Kerry Wood in the report or not? Does my theory hold water? Are those two questions mutually exclusvie of one another?

Kerry Wood

http://www.bluegrasspreps.com/showthread.php?t=138173

Post #15. Hmm?

49-44 OVERALL RECORD

I say this is a very average pitcher at best.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/harenda01.shtml

A. Wins and losses are as useless in establishing quality with a pitcher as me inside the 3-point arc.

B. He is MILES from average.

Again, pardon me for expressing an opinion ...

I wasn't being sarcastic. If he never pitches again I'll be shocked and you will have had a huge scoop in my eyes.

In this case I was being quite sincere. The written word is often tough to express emotion in. Sorry.

Sad day for baseball...

Agreed.

I wonder how much "proof" Sen. Mitchell insisted on before including a name and basically permanently smearing their name for the remainder of their career? I assume simple hearsay wasn't enough.

Was he doing an impersonation this morning?

Sticky = Rich Little :thumb:

I'm confused as to what point you're trying to make here.

Think Cal Berkley / foliage / YouTube. :sssh:

The Mitchell Report has to do with steroid use...

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Freaking laughing out loud (literally) at my desk.

Standing ovation...

If other teams aren't worried about his attitude and you can get Haren for 3 years or Bedard for 2 years you have to trade him if he's the piece they want.

Agreed.

I don't think the Reds would be crushed by losing any of the "formely known as Big 3 prospects": Votto, Hamilton, Bailey.

They won't trade Cueto or Bruce.

They need to do something with Freel.

I still think there is a chance Junior is going to Seattle for the Japanese Catcher whose name I never spell correctly. With, of course, the Reds footing most / all of the bill.

I'll be surprised if Prior ever throws another pitch in the major leagues ...

Really? That is big -- I hadn't heard that before now; is he THAT hurt? I didn't realize his career was in question.