Page 1 of 1

Roger Clemens on 60 Minutes

Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:32 pm
by TheConfessor
Anyone else watch this? Did you think he was very convincing? I don't think he changed many minds. If you thought he was clean, you probably still do. If you thought he was dirty, you probably still do. His basic argument was that he should be treated with more respect after all he has done for the game of baseball.

Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:04 pm
by Snaxx
I missed the beginning; in the part I heard it was the same story that I read in the NY area papers. Especially about the B12... yeah.



___________________________

ImageImageImageImageImageImage ImageImageImageImageImage Image

Post error. Otto sez signature too long.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:25 am
by peacock2121
I just kept saying "Look at the size of his head."

I loved the part where he said if he supplied the needles and the steroids, he had to get it from somewhere - and he asked the someone who supplied him with the stuff to come forward. Like that's gonna happen.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:21 am
by minimetoo26
Alas.

I wanted to believe him.

I did not.

Alas.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:27 am
by Craig Paquette
I never used steroids!

Nobody would let me. I always had to be the shooter...

CP21

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:31 am
by Bixby17
peacock2121 wrote:I just kept saying "Look at the size of his head."

I loved the part where he said if he supplied the needles and the steroids, he had to get it from somewhere - and he asked the someone who supplied him with the stuff to come forward. Like that's gonna happen.
He has always been a really big guy.

I saw him up close when he was first starting out in the bigs. My husband used to be a prosecutor, and called me because Clemens was supposed to be in court that day because he had got into a minor altercation.

So I go to court and see him. All I could think was: 1. wow, that suit has a lot of material in it; 2. white guys shouldn't wear dark mustard colored suits.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:24 am
by wbtravis007
Bixby17 wrote:
peacock2121 wrote:I just kept saying "Look at the size of his head."

I loved the part where he said if he supplied the needles and the steroids, he had to get it from somewhere - and he asked the someone who supplied him with the stuff to come forward. Like that's gonna happen.
He has always been a really big guy.

I saw him up close when he was first starting out in the bigs. My husband used to be a prosecutor, and called me because Clemens was supposed to be in court that day because he had got into a minor altercation.

So I go to court and see him. All I could think was: 1. wow, that suit has a lot of material in it; 2. white guys shouldn't wear dark mustard colored suits.
He's a wuss.

He should stand up like a man. He's coming across like a little kid would -- like he's so indignant that he's about to cry.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:34 am
by peacock2121
The drinking water and the sweaty upper lip did not help.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:58 am
by Appa23
Roger's mama didn't raise a fool.

According to ESPN, he has filed a defamation suit against the trainer.


Now, he has an excuse why he can not testify before Congress (pending litigation).

Re: Roger Clemens on 60 Minutes

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:42 pm
by kusch
TheConfessor wrote:Anyone else watch this? Did you think he was very convincing? I don't think he changed many minds. If you thought he was clean, you probably still do. If you thought he was dirty, you probably still do. His basic argument was that he should be treated with more respect after all he has done for the game of baseball.
I did not see the entire interview, just the last couple of minutes and then again the clips this morning.

Gotta tell you, I am in shock of where I am and what I saw.

Not sure if I changed my mind but am leaning to change it. I thought before that he was dirty and the way I saw him, I am not so sure anymore. I did not see the classic "blinking" of the eyes or the "look away" when answering. Like I said, I am in shock over my thinking that I might change my mind.

I do not believe he will testify before congress---ever.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 2:33 pm
by Bixby17
Appa23 wrote:Roger's mama didn't raise a fool.

According to ESPN, he has filed a defamation suit against the trainer.


Now, he has an excuse why he can not testify before Congress (pending litigation).
IIRC, the Chronicle article says he is planning to testify and that the pending lawsuit won't stop him.

I think he was racing to the courthourse to try to get venue in Houston where he and his lawyer live.

Interestingly, the lawyer for McNamee claims he was in the room when the feds talked to his client and that there wasn't any pressure on McNamee at all. I would think that this would make McNamee's lawyer a witness in the case, disqualifying him from representing him in the litigation.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 3:09 pm
by lilyvonschtupp26
I want to know how shooting lidocaine in your butt, helps your joints. I read about lidocaine online and it seems to only be a local anesthetic or patch.

somehow the song doesn't go "the gluteus is connected to the elbow . . ."

I REALLY wanted to believe him, but I didn't. Wouldn't the trainer keep a log to keep track of who he injected what with and when so he wouldn't get confused? Shouldn't there be a hard copy even if it was coded?

all of this makes me a sad baseball fan.

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 3:11 pm
by ne1410s
all of this makes me a sad baseball fan.

Me, too, lily...

So when do pitchers and catchers report?? :?

Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:14 pm
by etaoin22
B-12 is the excuse of all who have in fact used an injectable anabolic steroid, from Ben Johnson onwards.

The lidocaine is in fact a bit more credible, even though it sounds a bit odd. It is used for injection into tight sore locations in muscle (trigger points), and I think that is what he is talking about.

However:

Until one of the ageless wonders provides detailed evidence explaining how their (legal) training methods have differed from those of other fit players who do not push back the age frontier of performance by 5 years or more, I assume all are guilty of use of anabolic steroids, plus or minus HGH.

With the small proviso that the use of HGH exclusively for injury repair may have to be considered differently, since that probably could be defined as appropriate medical care. (I mean, if cortisone, why not HGH?)