January 7, 2008
Clemens Strikes Back on 60 Minutes
Roger Clemens took to the airwaves last night defending himself on 60 Minutes. But the strongest action he took was off the air, filing a lawsuit against Brian McNamee for defamation and claiming that McNamee has “ruined Roger's reputation with a large percentage of the public."
On 60 Minutes Roger appeared angry and defiant in the face of Mike Wallace’s questions. Stating that he was “pissed off” Clemens launched into a angry denial of the accusations against him: “I'm angry that that what I've done for the game of baseball and the personal, in my private life, what I've done that I don't get the benefit of the doubt.”
Clemens also launched into the ridiculous with his claim that if he used steroids or HGH he “should have a third ear coming out of my forehead. I should be pulling tractors with my teeth.” He also refused to discuss Andy Pettitte’s case, saying only that he was shocked to learn about Pettitte and that “Andy’s case is totally separate.” Clemens also said that he's "probably" going to retire, something he's done several times before.
Interestingly, Clemens claimed he did not talk to Mitchell ahead of time because of the advice of counsel and if he had known what the report said he would have sat down with Mitchell in a second. To date, we have not learned what investigators told players when they asked for an interview.
But the bigger story is now Clemens’s lawsuit. After an "emotional" phone call with Brian McNamee, Clemens has decided to sue. The call led to one of McNamee's lawyers to wonder if Clemens was trying to influence his former trainer's testimony. Was the call a last-ditch effort by a guilty man, or the rightful actions of someone who has been wrongly accused? The suit states that “all of McNamee's accusations are false and defamatory per se,” so Roger is denying everything that McNamee said. Do you believe him?
|
In addition to Mitchell, his council should have advised him not to speak with 60 Minutes. That interview did not help his case with the public.
Of course I don't believe him. He lied to the public at least three times when he claimed to be retiring and then came back. How are we supposed to believe that this isn't a lie, too?
at the end of the day, is this a "he said-he said" situation? obviousely someone is lying, but how can they prove guilt or innocence without corroborating evidence? right now all they have is conflicting testimonies.
I support Clemens. The Mitchell report is slander.
I support Clemens. The Mitchell report is slander.
I just have a hard time believing Clemens at all. In the 60 minutes interview, he was basically like, "look, the people who know me know that I didn't do anything wrong," but when asked, "well what about all your fans?" he replied that it really didn't matter what anyone thinks. He also said he really doesn't care about the Hall of Fame stuff - that it's nice, but not a big deal to him. So, my question is, why the heck is he going on 60 minutes and suing his former trainer in that case? Also, if he has nothing to hide, why didn't he cooperate with Mitchell earlier? Just seems shady.
I hope he pitches for 1 more year, so he gets boo'd and harrassed like Bonds did. He won't though, unless the Skankees step in and give him 30 million to pitch 5 games.
Saying you're going to retire and then changing your mind isn't lying. It an example of a person changing his mind (in the face of significant salary offers). If your father decided to go back to a career he loved and sacrificed for would you call him a liar? To disbelieve Clemens on the basis of that is essentially admitting that your already biased against him for unfounded reasons.
I believe Clemens. At this point, there's no smoking gun evidence, there's only the uncorroborated testimony of one man. While I don't think he's done a great job defending himself in public, I'm not sure there is a good way for anyone to defend themselves against this kind of witch hunt.
The man won Cy Young awards and pitched 90+ MPH fastballs both before AND after the time McNamee claims to have injected him. As Clemens said last night, if the juice was so miraculous, why would he ever stop taking it?
I want to believe him. But he just looks like a 'roids case. He has that greasy, bloated, wide-faced and big-necked super-muscular look, just like McGwire, Bonds, Canseco, or Giambi. It seems to me that with most players, you can tell just by looking.
Just watching him all sweaty and shifty eyed during the interview convinced me he was lying. I have no respect for the guy anymore. The fundamental question remains: why would McNamee lie about Clemens and tell the truth about Pettite?
UP-INJECTION
Roger Clemens achieved greatness
By giving it all he's got,
So when he's down with a cough and sniffles,
He gets an aspirin shot.
I don't believe him. But, then again, what does it matter what any of us believe? We created this monster. By being fans, seeking higher and higher levels of performance, cheering aging athletes smacking 70+ home runs or winning a crucial game at the age of 45, we supported this industry. Owners, by paying immense salaries with performance incentives, encouraged it. It seems to me we all, fans and owners, knew our favorite players were juiced and just pretended that it wasn't the case.
In the end, it really doesn't matter one bit. Have these athletes committed a crime? I don't think so.
Have they behaved irresponsibly? Certainly, with regard to the effects these drugs have on their health, they have. Will athletes continue to use performance-enhancing drugs? Of course. Will they move on to drugs that cannot be detected? Of course. Does our government have any business spending money on hearings and more hearings? I think not. Did Roger look uncomfortable, shifty and guilty? I thought so. It's time for us all to move on. It's professional sports, like the entertainment industry, it going to be rife with irresponsible behavior. It's been going on for decades and will continue. Chuck Knoblauch? No comment.
And what about these clubhouse fitness instructors? How do these flunkies get access to professional athletes? To prescription drugs?
To veterinary products? B12? Lidocaine? hGH?
Would you let a guy like McNamee inject you with anything? If you decide to let some auto mechanic from Long Island put drugs in your butt, don't you deserve to have your judgment questioned?
Even if he didn't use steroids, he's still an asshole.
"The fundamental question remains: why would McNamee lie about Clemens and tell the truth about Pettite?"
That question only occurs if you treat McNamee as an all-or-nothing source. The events in question happened 7-10 years ago. IMO, it's not out of the question that McNamee would incorrectly recall who did and did not get injected.. nor is it implausible that McNamee named Clemens out of revenge for whatever reason. Of course, it's just as likely that Clemens is lying. In any case, I don't take the fact that Pettite owned up to mean that all of McNamee's information is 100% accurate.
The late Boston Globe writer Will McDonough used to call Roger Clemens The Texas Con Man.
Finally, there is something that Boston & New York sports fans can agree on.
rangers suck it!