Mitchell Report Thread

[Steve9347]

Since it's at the bottom of the previous page, and it's pretty important.

A previous report by WNBC naming many prominent MLB players, including Albert Pujols and Roger Clemens, has been disputed by an MLB official who has seen the Mitchell Report.

Rumors have been flying all morning about the potential names that will be released, though nothing has been verified. While WNBC's reported list seems plausible, it is likely we won't know the true identities until the report is officially released

[Steve9347]

I'm sure that there was some legal action threatened if that statement wasn't put out.

Yeah, you are probably right. I think the list is legit.

[GoSox05]

The Sox new slogan should be. "We may suck, but at least we don't cheat".

[nitetrain8601]

I hope more big names are added. Nothing besides Pujols makes me go awe. I mean, Pettite kind of surprises me, but the rest is a list that a casual fan wouldn't care about.

Edited December 13, 2007 by nitetrain8601

[HuskyCaucasian]

The Sox new slogan should be. "We may suck, but at least we don't cheat".

[Rowand44]

I hope more big names are added. Nothing besides Pujols makes me go awe. I mean, Pettite kind of surprises me, but the rest is a list that a casual fan would care about.

Agree but Pujols alone is big time.

Edited December 13, 2007 by Rowand44

[jackie hayes]

I'm sure that there was some legal action threatened if that statement wasn't put out.

Eh... What kind of damages could someone claim would result from releasing names a mere two hours before they're set to be released, anyway? This sounds like legitimate confusion.

[Balta1701]

I hope more big names are added. Nothing besides Pujols makes me go awe. I mean, Pettite kind of surprises me, but the rest is a list that a casual fan wouldn't care about.

Just because you may not be surprised by guys like Tejada or Vaughn or Clemens or Damon or Gagne showing up doesn't mean that they're not important. There are some major MVP's and record holders in that list, and other key guys for big time teams like Captain Varitek.

[Steve9347]

I hope more big names are added. Nothing besides Pujols makes me go awe. I mean, Pettite kind of surprises me, but the rest is a list that a casual fan wouldn't care about.

I dunno. Johnny Damon and Jason Varitek are pretty popular names that make me laugh.

[Balta1701]

Eh... What kind of damages could someone claim would result from releasing names a mere two hours before they're set to be released, anyway? This sounds like legitimate confusion.

It's the MLB Commish's office. It doesn't have to be legal action as much as the commish being able to come down hard on a leaker.

 

I think the list is probably legit. The Commish's office had the report yesterday, which means all the teams probably had copies yesterday, which means we went from a group of probably 20 people to a group of hundreds to maybe thousands of people who had the list overnight. It's not surprising at all that one of them leaked it.

[103 mph screwball]

This is good for the game in the long run. Get this info out. Allow the players to choose to make their drug test results known to prove their innocence and remove doubt. Out everybody. Give them hell. Forgive them because many of us would have done the same to make 10 million a year or play in the major leagues at all for that matter. Move on with a clean game.

[G&T]

This is good for the game in the long run. Get this info out. Allow the players to choose to make their drug test results known to prove their innocence and remove doubt. Out everybody. Give them hell. Forgive them because many of us would have done the same to make 10 million a year or play in the major leagues at all for that matter. Move on with a clean game.

 

Most people have to do this to make minimum wage.

 

BTW, the Score had on a law professor from Northwestern who was already questioning the sources and "evidence." I don't know if he was being totally serious, but it made me think about what these players are going to say when questioned.

[jackie hayes]

It's the MLB Commish's office. It doesn't have to be legal action as much as the commish being able to come down hard on a leaker.

 

I think the list is probably legit. The Commish's office had the report yesterday, which means all the teams probably had copies yesterday, which means we went from a group of probably 20 people to a group of hundreds to maybe thousands of people who had the list overnight. It's not surprising at all that one of them leaked it.

That may be -- it's plausible MLB asked someone to run interference. I just think a legal threat would be pretty weak.

 

But apparently the leaker isn't cowed, since WNBC (?) is sticking to its story.

[Balta1701]

Most people have to do this to make minimum wage.

 

BTW, the Score had on a law professor from Northwestern who was already questioning the sources and "evidence." I don't know if he was being totally serious, but it made me think about what these players are going to say when questioned.

That's what they'll say, but it doesn't matter. The Commish has, if he's desperate, his "best interests of baseball" dictatorial power. He can suspend these guys all he wants and even an arbitrator will have to rule in favor of that. And just putting their names out there as a McCarthy-like list will do more to fix the future than anything. These guys suddenly will have their values go through the floor and have their HOF candidacies ruined. Would you pay Clemens $1 million a start if his name is on that list?

[knightni]

Sports Illustrated has some apologizing to do to Soxtalk.

[RockRaines]

I dunno. Johnny Damon and Jason Varitek are pretty popular names that make me laugh.

Those and Wood and Prior make my day.

 

 

[jackie hayes]

Mitchell Report released early!!!

 

http://kissmesuzy.blogspot.com/2007/12/ksk...port-early.html

 

[RockRaines]

Sports Illustrated has some apologizing to do to Soxtalk.

Yes they do. And I would like to see an article written by Jas as the final word on the last page.

[SpringfieldFan]

You know, as I think about the potential fallout from all this, I wonder if the owners could legally revoke the contracts of some of their players on the grounds the players misreprented themselves and their value, especially given how it will drop in the wake of these events. Also, can we fans sue for ticket reimbursement because we were never getting the product we thought we were getting. Thoughts?

 

SFF

[Balta1701]

You know, as I think about the potential fallout from all this, I wonder if the owners could legally revoke the contracts of some of their players on the grounds the players misreprented themselves and their value, especially given how it will drop in the wake of these events. Also, can we fans sue for ticket reimbursement because we were never getting the product we thought we were getting. Thoughts?

 

SFF

If any owner was smart enough after 2002-2003 to start writing a clause into a contract that would allow termination for steroid use, perhaps. But think about Giambi...the Yankees had him with his body falling apart and they still never made a move to get out of that contract. If the Yankees didn't move on that, then I'm pretty sure there's a legal reason why they didn't.

[RockRaines]

You know, as I think about the potential fallout from all this, I wonder if the owners could legally revoke the contracts of some of their players on the grounds the players misreprented themselves and their value, especially given how it will drop in the wake of these events. Also, can we fans sue for ticket reimbursement because we were never getting the product we thought we were getting. Thoughts?

 

SFF

No, because there is no empirical evidence that any of these guys did roids. They have no tested positive, and some of them were only named because the Mitchell investigators asked interviewees who they "thought" was on steroids.

[G&T]

You know, as I think about the potential fallout from all this, I wonder if the owners could legally revoke the contracts of some of their players on the grounds the players misreprented themselves and their value, especially given how it will drop in the wake of these events. Also, can we fans sue for ticket reimbursement because we were never getting the product we thought we were getting. Thoughts?

 

SFF

 

You aren't getting anything simply because there won't be enough evidence to show that the owners knew enough to defraud the public. Furthermore, this is entertainment, and going to the park itself is entertainment whether the team is a bunch of cheaters or not.

 

I doubt there is any language in the contracts because I can't imagine the player's union would allow it.

[SpringfieldFan]

No, because there is no empirical evidence that any of these guys did roids. They have no tested positive, and some of them were only named because the Mitchell investigators asked interviewees who they "thought" was on steroids.

 

Thats a very good point.

 

SFF

[ptatc]

No, because there is no empirical evidence that any of these guys did roids. They have no tested positive, and some of them were only named because the Mitchell investigators asked interviewees who they "thought" was on steroids.

 

There never will be empirical evidence. Most of them will be linked to HGH. HGH can only be detected through blood tests, currently. No union allows blood tests, including the NFL. This is why it can all be refuted and there will never be proof.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Carl Everett is innocent. There are no steroids in the Bible.