Friday, December 14, 2007
Quick take on Mitchell report
That Roger Clemens' name appears in the Mitchell report is significant, yet not a shock. Steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs were not taken seriously for so long that some of the game's elder statesmen were bound to use them so they could keep playing at a high level. This may ruin Clemens' reputation, but it really shouldn't. One of the most ridiculous statements being thrown around is the idea of putting asterisks by the offending players' records. If anyone believes all the records in baseball history were achieved cleanly, their denial is worse than MLB's on the steroid issue. And baseball has handled the steroid issue atrociously.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I don't agree with your assessment of Roger Clemens. Clemens is in the same boat as Barry Bonds now. I don't think either deserve to make the Hall of Fame until Pete Rose is allowed in. Rose didn't cheat as a player and his gambling on baseball never showed he bet against the team he was managing. Clemens and Bonds elevated their performance and stats as players through illegal activities.
Post a Comment