Comments on: Another fastball from Clemens

By: Apologistfornoone

Apologistfornoone — Sun, 23 Dec 2007 00:14:33 +0000

“I took roids when I played ball for my highschool team – best move I ever made. It enabled me to recover from fatigue and I made it to college on a full scholarship. I never made it past college ball but did get a a great college degree and now own my own investing firm.”

“Phil: No side effects. You need to talk to your doctor if you want to do it the right way. I would take tamoxifen to couterbalance any potential side effects.”

“I do not condone steriod use without the approval of a physician”

———————

I hope you characters posting here have the sense to realize Adam Lazaria is either seriously pulling your leg, or he’s just a whacko.

Tamoxifen is a cancer treatment used for women who’ve suffered breast cancer. Its side effects are just as horrendous as the documented side effects of prolonged anabolic steroid use.

No reputable physician would “approve” anabolic steroids for the uses Adam Lazaria confessed to, or those MLB players who’ve used.

By: Raven

Raven — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:09:09 +0000

Alright.
Let’s throw the Rocket into GuantÃ¡namo Bay and soon he’ll talk.

By: whoa

whoa — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:04:53 +0000

You can sue anyone you want. The problem is that NYT v. Sullivan has made it virtually impossible for public figure to prevail in a defamation suit. Occasionally, a reporter’s source has bad info. That entitles a plaintiff to…wait for it….NOTHING!

By: jon

jon — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:20:18 +0000

Suing a newspaper is hardly impossible. It’s just that most of the times – especially the high-profile times – the newspaper is telling the truth.

By: vrsce

vrsce — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:05:49 +0000

Will anyone care to wager against Clemens clearing his name?

It may be that we will all be (pleasantly) surprised.

In any event he is not going down without a fight.

By: whoa

whoa — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:13:05 +0000

You are correct smoke. It doesn’t do Clemens any additional damage, but it doesn’t help him either.

By: smoke

smoke — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:47:53 +0000

“Canseco said that he didnâ€™t think Clemens did them, and figured he would have known. This same Canseco who had no compunction about naming other players wouldnâ€™t finger Clemens and add on a chapter in his book?”

Uh, Clemens was in Canseco’s book. Canseco claims he discussed steroids multiple times with Clemens, and that Clemens discussed stacking them and whatnot. He also mentions Clemens success starting in 1997 was extremely suspicious. He never SEEN clemens use roids, but he certainly hints at clemens cheating in his book.

By: smoke

smoke — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:43:22 +0000

I fail to see how this helps Clemens in anyway. So he wasn’t named By Grimsley, yet his trainer yet again was named as a guy who refers players to sources where they could obtain illegal drugs.

If Roger Clemens didn’t use steroids ( and that is VERY unlikely at this point ), he kept a criminal who was HEAVILY involved with steroids and HGH, and was referring players to roid sources, as his trainer for ten years, and as randy said, a man he let sleep in his home. It’s amazing how Clemens trainer, the man he took with him from Toronto, to newyork, to Houston, and apparently injected Clemens good buddy Pettitte with HGH, and was referring various players to roid sources, yet somehow Roger Clemens never dabbled with a ped himself. It’s truly amazing that Clemens can resist such tempation like that when MLB didn’t ban the substances, and they weren’t testing for them. Yeah right, and O.J was innocent too.

Clemens is a fraud, he’ll never sue.

By: whoa

whoa — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 07:03:29 +0000

Read New York Times v. Sullivan. Once you do you will understand that the chances that the LAT published that report knowing it was false or with reckless disregard for the report’s truth or falsity is about as likely as pigs flying.

Also, if Clemens were to bring a lawsuit, he would open himself to discovery on his possible PED usage.

It will not happen.

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 06:40:23 +0000

the bargained for standard of proof between MLB and the MLBPA is a positive test.

And Clemens is gonna own part of the LA Times and his lawyers should be able to find out during discovery where the LAT got the idea that Clemens name was in the affidavit. It could turn out that there was malicious intent from the party whose info they used.