Jan
12

A day in court

By

While I wouldn’t normally think much of the leak that a federal grand jury has been convened as the government decides whether or not to indict Roger Clemens for perjury, this case may have some ramifications for the 2009 Yankees. As ESPN’s investigative reporter Mike Fish explains, Andy Pettitte could very well see himself dragged back into court to testify in front of the grand jury. While the Yanks and Pettitte are at a contractual impasse right now, this news will not be good for the Pettitte camp.

Categories : Asides, STEROIDS!

31 Comments»

  1. Manimal says:

    Indicted? INDICTED!!?!?!??!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2PLXFe93yc

    LOL whenever I think of the word Indicted I think of Jim Carrey.

  2. You would have thought they’d have bigger fish to fry. Like, I don’t know, Bernie Madoff for one?

  3. Mike says:

    There are a lot more important things to deal with, but he’s pretty much a fool if he lied about anything that they can prove.

  4. Nigel Bangs says:

    i bet 10 mill is going to look like a pretty sweet deal soon. what a boner.

  5. Manimal says:

    You guys hear about that guy that tried to fake his death because he is a executive for some big time company and he is charged with fraud. He crashed a plane and ejected himself from it and then swam to like Alabama from Florida.

  6. huuz says:

    what is the timeframe for another hearing/testimony…

    i don’t know how fast these things move, but it seems that they go quite slowly. maybe it wouldn’t happen until 2010?

    at any rate, this is an excellent point…i hope the FO is taking this into account.

  7. Greg P says:

    Speaking of mindless legal news, looks like Eddie Curry is upholding the fine Knicks tradition.

    http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/s.....t?MSNHPHMA

  8. Greg P says:

    In fairness, the guy has a rap sheet. Could be making the whole thing up.

  9. JeffG says:

    For the past couple of years I have tried to ignore the steroid conversation as it has distracted too many from the simple game of baseball. Sad as it was, half of baseball’s coverage in 2007 was dedicated to the subject of steroids rather than the actual game. But now that it is subsiding, perhaps it is something that we should look on openly and truthfully – without the knee-jerk, bad-guy mentality – and hopefully with some common sense.

    From the late 80′s until 2000-whatever players where doing nothing different as they tried to give themselves and their team the win (no matter what the cost). That is really the history of baseball – is it not? That is competition. There was a long day ago when the curveball was ungentleman. A stolen base is stolen. To a degree cheating has always been a part of the game. Getting away with something – the outside pitch – to a much lesser degree.
    So when do we condemn? My belief is that it happened when the commissioner’s office and the union said enough is enough.
    Before that, players were doing all they could for their teams and surely for themselves. However, it was not an anomaly, and it was a large part of the game. To the rule – players have always been given leeway. Understanding that, do you not convict the culture and what was allowed?
    There is where I have a problem. There is where I find fault in stripping individuals who still rose above their era. How do you deny them for what they accomplished?
    No one knows the percent of players that used drugs to enhance their ability. But everyone knows that there was a good many that did. Perhaps a majority, and undoubtedly, at the time, nobody did anything about it.
    However, once the cleanup began it was easy to find examples and ultimately scapegoats – the best players of that era. Mark McGwire – who probably would not have passed 61; Barry Bonds – who would have never passed Hank; Roger Clemens – who would not have passed 300 wins with ease.
    Do we really strip them? We’ve already taken the game away from the last two. But are we so blind, not to see that it was allowed? Are we not to blame baseball? I personally will never doubt the talent of all three mentioned. But I will doubt the logic that picks and chooses history when it never had a set date.
    - I’m smashed now – this may be mushy – but I think the argument against players that took part in the blind eye era should not be reduced to nothing.
    A Day In Court – With a Decent Jury.

    • JeffG says:

      Baseball didn’t stop it, there was no penalty, most players were getting away with it – playing to a potential, right or wrong, – that was their best. A team with the best players wins – and who doesn’t make that decision?

  10. AARON says:

    Just go sign Randy Wolf please

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.