Apr
30

DN: Roberts’ book ‘strongly suggests’ A-Rod used on Yanks

By

So The Daily News got its hands on a copy of Selena Roberts’ tell-all book about A-Rod, and as you can imagine, the book is as bad as we feared. That’s right folks — A-Rod tipped only 15 percent at Hooters. Tsk. Tsk.

We’ll delve into the more serious content after the “read more” tag, but for all of you who either don’t care or don’t want to know, just head on over to Joe’s game recap. Why let this piece of expected but still dismaying news ruin a start in which Joba utterly dominated the Tigers for seven innings.

Okay. Now that the dirty part is out of the way, let’s get down to the nitty-gritty. Tracy Connor breaks it down:

Although the slugger insists he dabbled in steroids only while with the Texas Rangers, the book “A-Rod” strongly suggests he didn’t give up performance enhancers when he came to New York.

Sports Illustrated writer Selena Roberts, who broke the story that A-Rod flunked a steroid screening in 2003, reveals fellow Bombers nicknamed the third baseman “B—h T–s” in 2005. That was after he put on 15pounds in the off-season and seemed to develop round pectorals, a condition called gynecomastia that can be caused by anabolic steroids, she writes.

In addition, an unnamed major-leaguer is quoted as saying Rodriguez and steroid-tainted pitcher Kevin Brown were seen together with human growth hormone – HGH – in 2004. Brown, who was named in the Mitchell Report on steroids, denied through a lawyer that he ever shared the hormone with the highest-paid player in baseball.

Two other anonymous Yankees said they believed A-Rod was using based on side effects they saw – and a clubhouse staffer said management wondered if he was using banned substances. “No one ever asked Alex directly that I know of, but there was a lot of suspicion in house,” the employee is quoted as saying.

Welcome to Legally Covering Your Ass 101 by Selena Roberts. It seems that Roberts’ book is going to tread very little new ground. A bunch of anonymous sources are going to allege that they thought A-Rod maybe took steroids, and it sounds as though the book is missing the smoking gun of the same ilk as the supposedly anonymous test results.

The worst part, as Connor puts, is hardly shocking. “Roberts dishes up a highly unflattering portrait of A-Rod as a needy me-firster who had to have his ego constantly stroked,” The Daily News scribe writes. You don’t say.

He may have tipped opponents off to pitches. He definitely cheated on his wife and played a lot of poker. And yes, as Connor reports, he tips just 15 percent at Hooters.

All in all, I’m fairly unsurprised by any of this. I didn’t expect anything less, and it frankly sounds pretty tame compared to the revelations Roberts unleashed upon the baseball world in February. I believe she used her most concrete materials in the Sports Illustrated story.

A-Rod plans to play in a rehab game today, and according to his doctor, the slugger could be back with the Yanks within ten days. Roberts’ book hits right after that, and while we’re expecting a hurricane, based on Connor’s advanced word, we’re going to get just a scattered shower.

Categories : STEROIDS!

138 Comments»

  1. John says:

    Selena=Bitch/Dumb trick

  2. Brooklyn Ed says:

    I don’t believe it at all. I think the reason why this “bogus” report is out because ARod is nearing his return. Why she didn’t come out with it and made a huge fuss about it? Insane? sure.

    • Zack says:

      The same reason she moved her book date up, then moved it back.
      It’s al about selling books

    • Chris C. says:

      Oh, right. AROD was clean as a whistle after 2003.
      She’s full of crap, even though she was the reason he originally had to admit to steroid use in the first place.

      Say what you want about her or Canseco or whomever, but whenever their original assertion about somthing is proven to be correct, it’s hard to doubt their credibility thereafter.
      I mean, you CAN doubt it if you want to be naive, but after years of steroid use in this sport, these guys HAD TO KNOW that someone would eventually get the goods on them.

      Sure, I’ll root for AROD, and all that stuff. But I won’t defend or feel sorry for anyone who tested positive for steroid use, then has more accusations tossed their way. That’s the bed they made.

      There are way too many guys in this game who actually did things the right way, knowing full well what the consequences would eventually be. So it’s a slap in their face to give steroid users the “benefit of the doubt”.

  3. leokitty says:

    More breaking news: A-Rod maybe doesn’t like puppies!!

  4. Yawn. If this article paints an accurate picture of the book, I’m a little surprised Roberts even bothered publishing this book. The whole thing sounds/feels like inconsequential, unsupported and boring fluff. I guess we’ll see when the book comes out. I can’t wait.

    • Brooklyn Ed says:

      It sounds like many of the claims she makes, can’t even be backed up.

      For example:

      Another student said the son of coach Rich Hofman admitted he saw Rodriguez use steroids.

      Hofman said it was news to him. “Whatever he was doing, he was doing it somewhere else,” he said.

    • JoT says:

      I love how folks just rationalize everything away. I have no doubt that if A-Rod had ended up with Boston, everyone on this site would be talking about what a genius Roberts is. Face it, the guy juiced. He lied about it until he was caught, and then only fessed up to what there was iron-clad prove of. I have no doubt he’s continued to lied. Why should I believe him now? Selena Roberts is a damn good reporter. She had the goods on the positive test and I have a feeling she’s got A-Rod nailed on a lot of this stuff, too. The guy is a cancer, and the only reason why folks on this site are so quick to defend him is because he’s got great stats. If only Hank S hadn’t stepped in and forced Cashman to re-sign him.

      • “the only reason why folks on this site are so quick to defend him is because he’s got great stats.”

        That, and that he’s on the team for the next 9 years no matter what we say or do. Why waste the energy getting worked up?

  5. Rich says:

    “[S]trongly suggests” is an insufficient standard for a “journalist” to use when a another person’s reputation is at issue.

    I wonder what the former Duke lacrosse players that she smeared will think about this book. Any serious journalist should have a quote from each of them in every article that is devoted to this trashy vendetta book.

  6. Kevin Greene says:

    It just pisses me off, the personal attacks, if it is about roids and baseball, thats all fair game, but leave the gambling, the strippers, and all of the family shit out of it…..i am just done with roberts… she officially turned into nothing more than a greedy journalist who wants nothing more that to profit off of someone else’s pain…. thats awful karma. Is arod a good guy? prolly not, but should be be personally attacked, of course not…
    this just sucks to take the steam off of a great start by Joba

  7. Joey says:

    She just comes off as trying to ruin his life like he slept with her mother and ran over her dog. I don’t know what to believe or what not to, her credibility is non-existent and A-Rod isn’t exactly as trustworthy as my parents are to me. As long as he is clean now and hits the damn ball like he’s paid to do, I won’t waste a penny on the book or a moment of time (besides what I’m writing now) thinking about it. The media storm will come and go, just like everything else in life.

  8. Arod, all the time says:

    I hope she wins a Pulitzer. Well deserved.

  9. Honestly, now I’m more surprised by players who don’t use roids than those that do.

    I can’t wait for the ritalin/adderrall issue to blow up next…

    • Don’t hold your breath. I think people will have a little more trouble getting worked up about drugs their 10-year old sons and daughters are on than they have getting worked up about PEDs.

      • Tom Zig says:

        Well some parents don’t seem to care. I’ve read somewhere that parents ask doctors to give their kids Tommy John surgery because of the alleged increase in velocity that could result.

        • Kevin G. says:

          Mr. and Mrs. Pavano?

        • Zack says:

          The alleged increase in velocity is probably because the player has been pitching with a damaged ligament. So it’s not, have this surgery and it automatically adds 5+mph.

          But I hear what you’re saying, just turn the news on and see reports of parents fighting with coaches or umps or whatever, it’s ridiculous

      • A.D. says:

        Its not kids on adderral is the numerous high school & college students that use it to study, essentially an academic PED.

  10. Drew says:

    The great thing about now, as opposed to when stories broke in the winter months, is we have baseball to watch. To be honest, my daily drama with Alex will not be how much he tips, who and what he does off the field, but I’ll be worried about what he gets done on the field. The tough part about the winter was that there was nothing to divert us from this sensationalized journalism so it was essentially “baseball related.” Now, it’s just some ass trying to smear Al and make some money. Will we really give a damn about this book in two weeks when it comes out? I know I won’t I got some baseball to watch.

  11. Spaceman.Spiff says:

    LOL, I can’t wait until the Boston Red Sox fans chant Bitch Tits to A-Rod instead of A-Roid or A-Fraud.

  12. Two time world champ CLAY BELLINGER says:

    The Daily News and Selena Roberts just gain more and more credibility with every new story they come out with….

    • radnom says:

      No offense, but Roberts has plenty of credibility regarding Arod before this book came out.

      Is it really hard to believe that Arod was still doing HGH with the Yankees? I would hardly call this proof…but I would almost be inclined to believe it. I mean, he stopped using steroids when testing became mandatory, but why would he stop using something which is undetectable? We will never know if he did or not.

      • No offense, but Roberts has plenty of credibility regarding Arod before this book came out.

        The Duke Men’s Lacrosse team would beg to differ. She burned a lot of her credibility on that issue.

        • radnom says:


          regarding Arod

          Duke lacrosse was why I used those two words.

          If I only was reading these comments I would think all she ever did was pull a total hitjob on Arod, but she did actually break a significant and accurate report on his steroid usage, motives aside.

          • Yeah, but a journalist’s credibility is not judged on a case by case basis. It’s about the journalist’s credibility as a journalist, not his/her credibility on a particular story.

            The Duke vs. A-Rod distinction is meaningless.

            • radnom says:

              Oh, I agree.

              On one hand, she has proven that she will report information that she has not 100% confirmed. Based on the brief description of the book in this post, a lot of it appears to be speculation of this nature.

              On the other hand, she has also, in the past, had inside information on Arod which no one else had, and broke it after thoroughly making sure it was accurate. This does give her some credibility.

              Of course both things must be taken into account. I was merely noting that most people here seemed to be focusing on the first hand whilst completely ignoring the later part.

              • JT says:

                I agree that the Duke scandal was a massive fuck up as far as journalistic credibility goes but she seemed to be right so far on Arod. He even tried to smear her and apologized, he was clearly scared that she had substantial stuff.
                Honestly, the guy is a massive prick, we all knew that, I don’t think it is that unreasonable to assume that someone like him did all this stuff, he doesn’t exactly have lofty morals (see: cheating on wife with a kid at home and not even trying to hide it, using high-priced call girls, etc..)

        • Chris C. says:

          She was wrong about the Duke Lacrosse team, and she backed off when she realized it.
          With AROD, she caused the guy to admit to steroid use……so she was obviously not wrong about that.

          In the Duke case, her crime was jumping to conclusions. In the AROD case, she acted on facts.

  13. k42 says:

    As implied above, Robers needed to hit a home run after the Duke lax case, and if this is the worst of it, she didn’t get it out of the infield.

    She chose the most polarizing figure in sports and wrote a “tell-all” book that 1) is only being talked about right now because of March’s nice publicity boost, and 2) piles on everything the eight billion NY papers had already figured out up to this point. If twice-removed, anonymous sources is all she has, it’s tough to think of this book as anything more than a play for $ through easy muckraking.

    I won’t need to pay $25 to find that out that the highest-salaried professional athlete isn’t a saint.

    • Zack says:

      Give me a month and I could write a tell-all about ARod just from newspaper headings.

      Like you said, these guys arent saints:

      Jason Varitek cheated on his wife after being together since high school, where’s the book on that?

      • ClayBuchholzLovesLaptops says:

        But he tips 25 percent at Hooters, so he is one of the good guys. Plus, he is the SUPERCAPTAIN!!!

      • JT says:

        That one’s real fucked up. I live down the street from Varitek and though I despise him, he has always seemed like a great guy (sits outside and signs autographs in his driveway, always in town taking his kids out for ice cream) Really shows how some people gain put on a show when they’re not banging the hot blonde from NESN.

      • Chris C. says:

        Jason Varitek cheated on his wife after being together since high school, where’s the book on that?

        It was already written…….it’s called, “The Biography of Just About Every Professional Athelete”

      • DRG says:

        Dude, internet rumors posted by anonymous bloggers and commenters hiding behind “fun” screen names don’t make it the truth!

        Oh, and he met his wife in college, so you already got that part wrong. He filed for divorce from her – no the other way around!

        • Zack says:

          Whether he met her in high school or college, does it really matter?

          “anonymous bloggers and commenters” very similar to “unnamed sources” when we hear about Arod

  14. LiveFromNewYork says:

    The swine flu pandemic started while Arod was out “rehabbing.”

    Oil prices remain high though there is a big surplus while Arod was out “rehabbing.”

    Citibank wants to give its employees bonuses while Arod was out “rehabbing.”

    Arlen Specter switched sides while Arod was “rehabbing.”

    Phil Specter was convicted of murder while Arod was “rehabbing.”

    I am pretty sure that “rehabbing” is code for all the above shit is all his fault.

  15. Frank Sobotka says:

    “Tipped opponents off to pitches”? What the hell does that even mean?

    • Drew says:

      Well the SS position gives him a view of his catcher’s sign. He can suggest what pitch is coming or where it might be located. I call bullshit though, he did not do that.

    • radnom says:

      Told them what was coming. In exchange for the same information.

      Lets say its a 10-1 game, either side. Arod would signal his buddy on the other team what the pitch would be, so that guy could pad his stats. In return, Arod would get the other teams pitches tipped to him for the same reason.

      Not saying I think this happened, but I believe this is what the allegation is implying.

    • Chris C. says:

      “Tipped opponents off to pitches”? What the hell does that even mean?

      You don’t know what that means, and you’re on a baseball website?

  16. Mike HC says:

    I believe all of it, I think A-Rod (and many other major leaguers still juice) and I really just dont care.

    • Drew says:

      “juicing” is such a general term, just like performance enhancers.

    • Chris C. says:

      That’s pretty much my opinion at this point too. I used to care, but now realize it’s pointless.

      The saddest part to all of this is that the guys who played the game clean are grouped in with the cheats. But that’s their problem, not mine. But it’s still unfortunate.

  17. Johnny says:

    My take is that if there were anything concrete at all about juicing with the yanks it would have come out already. that story is the holy grail for sports writers, if it’s out to be found nobody just sits on it, much less delay the release of it.

    in regards to what this book is likely to reveal about a-rod as a person, I really don’t care what he does in his personal life. sometimes I think we all forget that historically baseball players are womanizing booze hounds and generally not the most family friendly personalities away from the field. and thats fine. I love that. It may be the single biggest reason that at age 25 I have the same dream I’ve been having all my life of playing for the yankees and getting a big hit.

    Also, while david ortiz is living it up, eating live human babies for feul, and red sox fans almost universally hate puppies and jesus, support terror, beat their wives, and do unspeakable things with livestock, I find it a bit off the mark to criticize A-rod for enjoying busty blond escorts and playing cards.
    there, I said it.

    • “Also, while david ortiz is living it up, eating live human babies for feul, and red sox fans almost universally hate puppies and jesus, support terror, beat their wives, and do unspeakable things with livestock, I find it a bit off the mark to criticize A-rod for enjoying busty blond escorts and playing cards.
      there, I said it.”

      Your ideas intrigue me, and I’d like to subscribe to your newsletter.

  18. Thomas A. Anderson says:

    Professionally speaking, I’m disappointed that A-Rod went down this road, because he was a singular talent in the history of the game and didn’t need to take anything else to be a great player.

    That said, the reality of the situation is this:

    When money and fame are on the line, there are some people who are willing to go to whatever lengths necessary to either get it or keep it. He’s one of them.

    Disappointing, but I’m not outraged by any means.

    Second, whatever he was taking seemed to wear off in October. (sorry, had to do it.)

    Third, the ONLY thing I would be concerned about in his personal life, for his sake, is what he is going to do about explaining all of this to his daughters when they get older. And when I say older, I mean in like 2-3 years. They are the innocent ones in this whole mess.

    Fourth, I could not care any less than I do now about PED’s in sports. As I mentioned before, people are out there that are willing to take the risk to gain an edge. I wish that weren’t the case, but to wish for that is to not recognize that athletes are human just like we are, susceptible to the same flaws, vices, and life choices that we are subject to. Only they have their mistakes played out on a far larger scale.

    People are gonna cheat. When they do, they will suffer the consequences. I am not going to worry about PED use in sports from here on out. It’s just not worth the time and energy. I love sports too much to be bogged down by it. Even with all of this nonsense attached to it, sports is the best thing goin.

  19. YFan says:

    Blonds, cards, and hooters the more I hear the more I like the guy. I think ARod paid her off and we’re getting a publicity book.
    Gimme the real stuff!!!

  20. Tony says:

    Why do people keep talking about Roberts and the Duke issue? She didn’t report that story—she wrote columns based on police reports, other reporting, etc. It doesn’t have a damn thing to do with this book or her ARod SI story. She was fully within her rights and duties to write OPINION PIECES based on the facts as she knew them.

    I have never understood the continued misunderstanding and misleading about the events of that case and her “involvement” and it is completely irresponsible to continue to perpetuate the false idea that she is somehow responsible for what happened to those players. She isn’t Mike Nyfong, she was an EDITORIALIST presenting a completely valid position about an event she didn’t report or prosecute.

    • Tony says:

      “Something happened March 13, when a woman, hired to dance at a private party, alleged that three lacrosse players sexually assaulted her in a bathroom for 30 minutes. According to reported court documents, she was raped, robbed, strangled and was the victim of a hate crime. She was also reportedly treated at a hospital for vaginal and anal injuries consistent with sexual assault and rape.

      Players have been forced to give up their DNA, but to the dismay of investigators, none have come forward to reveal an eyewitness account.

      Maybe the team captains are right. Maybe the allegations are baseless.

      But why is it so hard to gather the facts? Why is any whisper of a detail akin to snitching?”

      What part of that calls her credibility into question? I would suggest people actually read the column rather than continue with this elaborate game of tlephone that has created a false reality around her work.

      http://select.nytimes.com/2006......html?_r=1

      • Bob Stone says:

        Thanks for the comment and link. It is enlightening to read her actual words instead of distorted, hostile, mysogynistic recounts of her role in the Duke case. While she can be accused of fanning the flames in an unjust attack against the accused but innocent Duke Lacrosse players, her article in the NY Times, in and of itself, should not be a valid reason to question her journlaistic integrity.

        Until I just read that article, I thought she had a more central role in railroading the Duke players and believed that her credibility was very poor. While I am not a fan of Roberts or her style at all, I would like to see more details on why her credibility is so tainted.

        • William says:

          Give me a break…if you want to know about Selena Robert’s hatchet job do a Google Search and set aside a few hours. Briefly quoting one article without context is a silly way to come to a judgment.

          The bottom line is Selena Roberts is a hack journalist who is a few levels below the paparazzi. And, even though her sex should be irrelevant, the bottom line is women face an uphill battle when it comes to credibility in sports. Sadly for the many professional women sports reporters, Roberts really sets then back.

          By the way, here is what Times, sports editor Tom Jolly said of how his paper covered the story:

          I very much regret my failure to recognize that we were dealing with a rogue prosecutor and that the university had compounded his bravado by overreacting to the initial reports about the case . . . The bottom line is that I’d do some things differently, and that knowledge gained by hindsight has informed our approach to other stories since then.”

          I wonder if one of things he’d do differently is employ Roberts.

          • Tony says:

            Briefly quoting one article? This is THE article.

            • William says:

              Right, and you briefly quoted it in your post. Of course, Roberts’ work on the Duke lacrosse case extends well beyond one article (which, contrary to your opinion, is rife with slanderous commentary). The internet is full of articles exposing Robert’s lack of credibility. Anyone who wants to read them can do so easily.

              • Tony says:

                Her work on the Duke case “extends” to another OPINION PIECE she wrote a week after the one I linked, and then a followup a year later talking about reader reactions.

                The internet if full of right-wingers knocking “liberal hysteria” that ruined the lives of these upstanding young men and their sex parties.

          • “And, even though her sex should be irrelevant, the bottom line is women face an uphill battle when it comes to credibility in sports. Sadly for the many professional women sports reporters, Roberts really sets then back.” (emphasis mine)

            I’m not sure how to respond to this statement, it’s just very wrong. Why would a woman be any less credible than a man? If anything, that statement illustrates your prejudice.

            • Moshe Mandel says:

              No one says this is how it should be, but that is the way it is. Anytime an Erin Andrews or Hannah Storm comes along, there are those who question them as reporters and feel that their looks got them where they re. Not fair, but a very real perception. Andrews has spoken on this at length.

        • Look, you guys certainly have a point. Much of the reaction to Roberts is heavily tainted with misogyny. She didn’t “report” the story, she “opined” on it. I understand why you think that’s such a meaningful distinction. But I disagree with that distinction and I disagree that her credibility isn’t tainted at all by her work on that story, and I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss criticism of her work on grounds of misogyny.

          “This thing is absolutely about her gender and writing for the Times. How many scolding columns do you think were written at the time?”

          You know what, this sucks for her, and it’s unfortunate for her that she got ripped harder than other columnists who may have written columns about that story that they later regretted, but, you know, that kind of comes with the territory when you write for one of the most widely read newspapers in the country. And yeah, I’m sure she does get hit a bit harder because she’s a woman and a lot of people are mouth-breathing misogynists (whether they realize it or not). But these issues have nothing to do with the question of her credibility.

          “The fact is, her credibility isn’t tainted by it at all because she didn’t break or report the story. She opined on from 1000 miles away, just like thousands of other columnists and *gasp* bloggers do every day.”

          You’re using a very narrow definition of “credibility.” Was her ability to form a balanced opinion on a matter after examination of all available evidence not impugned by her work on the Duke story? You would argue it wasn’t, I would argue it was (and I’ll discuss this below). She wrote a damning, accusatory, and sensational piece about the story, and in many ways her treatment of the story and her writing style and choice of words can absolutely be questioned. And I’m not sure why you include the reference to “other columnists and *gasp* bloggers.” Those people can have credibility issues, nobody is claiming they can’t.

          Her column drew a clear line between the reader and the, per her description, privileged, secretive and exclusive world of Duke and the Duke lacrosse team. She called them “a group of privileged players of fine pedigree” and she has defended her work by deflecting criticism by claiming that criticism is the result of people being threatened by attempts to shed a light on white privilege.

          Her column also attacked the players’ integrity. She said they had “a desire… to exploit the vulnerable without heeding a conscience,” and she harped on the team’s “code of silence.” This, as it turned out, wasn’t so much silence caused by a code but silence caused by an absence of anything to say because the players didn’t do anything that they were accused of. Not to mention the fact that she was wrong about how “silent” the players actually were, they had cooperated (prior to the publishing of her piece) much more with the authorities than she allowed for.

          And her column also drew conclusions (unfairly) about what happened that night. She insinuated that some sort of assault or rape occurred by stating that “something happened” that night. You can’t, in good faith, argue that she didn’t mean that an assault/rape occurred. She said that “according to reported court documents, she was raped, robbed, strangled and was the victim of a hate crime,” and that she was “reportedly treated… for vaginal and anal injuries consistent with sexual assault and rape.” Her choice of words here is misleading, no “court documents” stated any of the above other than police documents describing the alleged victim’s (made-up) story.

          We should also take note of the fact that Times editors themselves have come out and stated regret over the paper’s handling of the story. It’s not too much of a stretch to read their comments as being connected to Roberts’ work.

          The reaction to Roberts is often tainted with misogyny and prejudice, and none of that is useful nor pretty. But I think you’d be wrong to dismiss off-hand the argument that Roberts lost some credibility due to her work on that story. I think there’s, at the very least, an argument to be made there.

          (PS: In an earlier comment I complained about people turning this into a left vs. right issue. Let me clarify – The criticism that is clearly stoked by an agenda against the Times and against what some critics perceive as the left in this issue is frustrating to me, too. I just think the question of her credibility can be discussed without getting into any of that stuff, all that stuff is tangential.)

          (PPS: Full disclosure, clearly I leaned on this analysis in writing this comment.

          • RustyJohn says:

            Wow, that’s probably the stupidest comment I ever read in my life-

            The only “court documents” available were police reports? What the hell do you think is in a court’s file in a criminal case? Ben Matlock’s diary? Maybe if you had some idea of what goes into a probable cause affidavit and information you’d know what’s in a court file.

            Second, your taking of select two word quotes out of the context of the article distorts the meaning of the article-which focused on “the wall of silence” in professional sports and athlete’s fear of being labeled a “rat”. This is hardly new news- seems we probably could have used a few rats about 20 years ago when all the steroid stuff started. Jim Bouton was labeled a rat. You can’t talk about what goes on in the clubhouse or else you are a rat- see one J. Torre.

            Your quote about players exploiting the vulnerable was not directed at the DUke players-that quote came after several paragraphs about the Minnesota Vikings, high school football players sodomizing jv players in hazing rituals, etc.

            Yes, someone who goes to Duke is privileged- they either are privileged to have money to pay for tuition or exceedingly smart to get scholarships.

            What is misleading about the word “reportedly”? She reported a crime, an officer took a report, a prosecutor filed charges. An article was written about general locker room codes of silence. This wasn’t written after it was discovered the accused had submitted evidence to the prosecutor that he refused to review-it wasn’t written after the details of a suggestive photo line-up were released, after it was discovered some of those implicated weren’t there.

            Maybe we should teach Honorable Congressman Mondesi rules in journalism school that declare no journalist shall ever write an article about a pending criminal charge until after trial- if OJ, Charles Manson, or Paris Hilton are ever charged with anything, nothing can be reported because the only information to report would be those statements in charging documents- I’m pretty sure while OJ was waiting trial there were comments that said he “reportedly” killed his wife.

            While we’re at it, let’s have the Mondesi rules of criminal procedures- before any crime is charged we have to have a trial- that way, there won’t be any false statements in charging documents…wait, how can you have a trial without charging someone…hmmmm…

  21. [...] also blasted Roberts for being completely WRONG in her reporting on the Duke lacrosse case. Other critics also point out the Roberts book is filled with anonymous [...]

    • Tony says:

      This thing is absolutely about her gender and writing for the Times. How many scolding columns do you think were written at the time? How many people get blamed for an event they played no substantive part in 3 years after the fact and to the point where it interferes with their livelihoods? I actually think this topic might warrant its own post, especially since Ben is in this comment section pushing it.

      The fact is, her credibility isn’t tainted by it at all because she didn’t break or report the story. She opined on from 1000 miles away, just like thousands of other columnists and *gasp* bloggers do every day.

  22. Greg G says:

    Uh, gyno is not “round pectorals.” As far as I know, pectoral shape is genetic. B.ts are called that because its like breasts on a male, not muscular development. Often it is just a little fat area around the nipple.

    Also this is something that people who don’t use steroids can also develop, and I know from personal experience that almost all the supposed side effects of steroids are sometimes seen in non-steroid users.

    I’m not saying A-Rod didn’t use steroids. It’s obvious a lot of players have. But a lot of the “evidence” ( weight gain in adulthood, head size, bacne,gyno) is not evidence at all. Suspicious as symptoms within context? sure. But not evidence of steroid use.

    • Zack says:

      Yeah he gained weight between the ages of 18-25, show me one person who wasnt gained weight as they age from a teenager to an adult. Take any players rookie league picture and compare it to them now.

  23. Zack says:

    Sounds like a book written by TMZ

    Arod doesnt tip!
    Arod cheats with blonde!
    Arod teammates dont like him!
    Arod used steroids!

    Unnamed high school teammate? Let me guess the back-up SS at the time?
    This book is going to flop, all it is, is a review of things that have happen, accusations with zero proof, and just personal attacks (seriously who tips more then 15% at hooters?)

    • Klemy says:

      Unless they do more then advertised, why should we tip more? ;) Just because they are wearing a revealing pushup doesn’t mean their food delivery deserves more tip then the girl in a sweater.

  24. William says:

    Roberts is a shock journalist, and a hack at that. By employing her, SI has descended into the cesspool of yellow journalism. The sources behind these claims are so outlandish, it’s comical. I mean, come on, do we really think a clubbie really knows what Yankee management was thinking? People like Selena Roberts are scum.

    • Chris C. says:

      “Roberts is a shock journalist, and a hack at that. By employing her, SI has descended into the cesspool of yellow journalism.”

      SI broke the story that AROD used steroids. That is NOT yellow journalism. That is BIG NEWS!
      You’re throwing terms around and you have no idea what they mean.

  25. Joey H says:

    Lets look at it this way. The paper is trying to sell the book. I’ll believe it all when I actually hear it from other sources. When do the papers tell the truth? We all know how much they love Rodriguez anyway.

    • Chris C. says:

      Okay……..so if it’s all BS, then AROD should file and win an easy lawsuit for slander. Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

      We’re still waiting for David Justice to sue for slander, like he said he would.

      These guys are all full of shit.

      Clemens is the only one who sued for defamation of character, and look how well that turned out. The trainer then said, “okay tough guy, for dragging me back to court, here’s the proof, along with some more shit you did!”

      • leokitty says:

        Okay……..so if it’s all BS, then AROD should file and win an easy lawsuit for slander. Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

        We’re still waiting for David Justice to sue for slander, like he said he would.

        While it’s all hot air, you should know that it’s not easy to win a slander case. There are circumstances that have to be fulfilled that most likely aren’t here.

        And anyway this would be libel. ;)

      • Joey H says:

        SUE FOR WHAT?! STOP Being an idiot! He has it all. The Money, the fame, you name it. What does he get for suing except negative press and facing being under oath. There is nothing he gets out of this that is of any positive sense.

  26. William says:

    Also, let’s not forget the Arod/slumlord stories. Throughout her career, Roberts has latched unto controversy as means to make money. Even in the recent Arod steroid story she had to use illegal grand jury leaks (which is basically a form of journalistic cheating…kind of like a baseball player taking PEDs). Roberts, like her book, is pure trash.

  27. A book based on anonymous sources and “could haves”. Great journalism on Roberts part. I guess she spent too much time with Lupica on the Sports Reporters.

  28. mko says:

    Wow, a book about what someone MIGHT HAVE done…how interesting. No evidence, no nothing. Well, that’s the best we could have hoped for.

    • jsbrendog says:

      oj simpson, how i might HAVE TOTALLY KILLED MY WIFE AND HER BASTARD BOYFRIEND.

      in stores now

      i love how on the cover of thebook the phrase, whatever ti is, is so small (i might have, how i would have, whatever) and then HUGE is something to the effect of KILLED MY WIFE. haha

      i saw the book and was like…wow! then its like seeing the fine print on a warranty..ohhhh..it doesnt cover dropping or water damage….no thanks

  29. Good ol peter abe:

    Roberts has never once written or said anything about A-Rod that didn’t prove to be 100-percent true. Never once. There is no reason whatsoever to doubt what she is writing now.

  30. Rich says:

    Roberts v. Roberts

    SI.com:

    Roberts: We have no hard evidence about any year other than 2003. Certainly, you wonder why Orza would tip a clean player about an upcoming test in 2004, but whether this was a one-time thing is probably best for Alex to answer if he chooses to clear the air.

  31. Frank says:

    Bitch with an agenda!

  32. 306Taint says:

    Edited by RAB. Yeah, slanderous material will not be tolerated.

  33. Mister Delaware says:

    I feel like 90% of the sports world is turning into my wife. This celebrity did what non-important act??? OMFG!!!!!!!

  34. RobC says:

    After watching the movie “Bigger Stronger, Faster” I can fully understand A-Rod or anyone else using steriods.

    I think more fault is with those players who did not use ans did not push for testing.

  35. Chris C. says:

    “After watching the movie “Bigger Stronger, Faster” I can fully understand A-Rod or anyone else using steriods.”

    And after watching the movie “The WALL”, I can understand why people tuned in to LSD.

    So we can both understand why people do stupid things……………congratulations.

    • RobC says:

      you’re comparing LSD to steriods?????
      seriuosly???

      Why is doing steriods stupid? Especailly if it got him a job paying $30 million a year?

      I can say using steriods is wrong but only from a Justice Steward perspective of “I can’t define it but I know it when I see it”
      I cannot say it is stupid

  36. RustyJohn says:

    How is it that Selena Roberts is a “hack” for using anonymous sources and spreading what amounts to gossip, but any other sports writer-Tom Verducci comes to mind- is not a “hack”?

    An anonymous source isn’t someone the reporter doesn’t know- the reporter doesn’t disclose the name at the source’s request and journalists typically are required to have at least two sources on information.

    What if one of the anonymous source is Derek Jeter? How about Paul O’Neil or Scott Brosius? Or David Cone? What would happen if it was discovered that the anonymous sources were “true” Yankees? Would that make everyone here happy?

    No, the player identified would be accused of being a rat and breaking the unwritten rules of what happens in the clubhouse stays in the clubhouse.

    Wait! I think that’s what Selena Roberts’ Duke article was all about…the clubhouse code of silence…funny how these things come full circle- what irony.

    Something tells me that if Ms. Roberts wrote a book about Dustin Pedroia and his chomo brother you’d be eating it up.

    By the way- when ever anyone posts on here and denegrates someone’s profession and integrity it would be helpful if you could include your age, level of education, profession and resume so we can have an idea of what stellar background people have to make judgments about a profession they likely have never practiced.

    I await the “I’m 21 and in my job at Quizno’s I’m in charge of making sure the water where they heat the meat up is changed every four hours” replies…

    • Dave says:

      It’s not that she is a hack for using ‘anonymous sources,’ the problem is that, at least from what I’ve gathered in the Daily News’ is that her intention is to prove that AROD is a terrible human being in every facet of his life to the extent that he tips poorly at Hooters! Is this really good sports journalism? Would Pat Jordan write something like this?

      • RustyJohn says:

        Yes, Pat Jordan did write something like that- have you ever read his story on Jose Canseco? He talks about Canseco’s impotence among a host of other “personal” issues.

    • “By the way- when ever anyone posts on here and denegrates someone’s profession and integrity it would be helpful if you could include your age, level of education, profession and resume so we can have an idea of what stellar background people have to make judgments about a profession they likely have never practiced.”

      I’ll speak up here since I think you’re referring to our conversation above.

      You really need to relax a bit. I didn’t “denigrate someone’s profession and integrity,” I took a look at her performance on a specific story, and offered some opinions on that performance. I don’t think I unfairly went after anyone, nor did I draw any conclusions like you accused me of drawing. (You accused me of accusing Roberts “of not having any credibility” when I did no such thing. I said: “I think you’d be wrong to dismiss off-hand the argument that Roberts lost some credibility due to her work on that story.” That hardly rises to the level of accusing someone of having “no credibility.”) You’re the one who used insulting language/tone and said that you could teach me classes in journalism and law. You’re the only one freaking out and assuming they’re better educated and more qualified to comment on these matters than anyone else is (and assuming other commenters are not qualified, whatever their education-level or experience may be).

      Just relax and have a conversation or an argument with someone by addressing the words on the page and not your assumptions about that person’s age, career, education or intelligence.

  37. Dan says:

    Oy. This along with a playoff miss by the yankees could mean Cashman’s head. Yankees could look stupid on this one. A-Rod might be the new Roger Clemens.

  38. [...] Roberts’ book ’strongly suggests’ A-Rod used on Yanks / Gardner’s rough April  / Joel Zumaya: ‘I can’t stand the Yankees’ [...]

  39. [...] the fallout from yesterday’s less-than-shocking A-Rod revelations continues to die before the end of the 24-hour cycle, Selena Roberts and her publishers are quickly [...]

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.