Comments on: Ain’t no way

By: pounder

pounder — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 02:22:15 +0000

George Mitchell went back on the Red Sox payroll at 08:00A.M. 17 Dec.2007.Let somebody explain that to me with a straight face.

By: AstoriaMetsFan

AstoriaMetsFan — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:21:55 +0000

“Mitchell seem to leave out as much sox related as possible.”

What? There is so much assumption in that statement.

Mitchell seems….this infers you know more and have more information than Mitchell. Is that the case? Did you do your own 20 month investigation? How do you know he had information and then made the decision to leave it out? How could you possibly know this?

“Dan,

The Paul Byrd leak during the ALCS when the sox are down just tells u which side Mitchell is on. IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m sure the leak has to do with him.”

What? What proof do you have Mitchell leaked the info? The idea is preposterous.

Do you honestly think a man who has spent his entire life building his reputation is going to destroy that reputation because he likes the Red Sox more than the Yanks.

Please, spare us. Mitchell is much more intelligent and far less petty than those questioning his intergrity and objectivity.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:42:09 +0000

If u take a look at the report, Clemens started doing roids right after he LEFT Boston when he signed with the Jays. So how does that effect the sox in anyway? Its not like he was using them with the sox too. Who knows that could be true. Mitchell seem to leave out as much sox related as possible.
And if u look at his numbers from his last year with the sox compare with his first year with the jays, it tells u something. Those numbers were off the charts…

Dan,

The Paul Byrd leak during the ALCS when the sox are down just tells u which side Mitchell is on. I’m sure the leak has to do with him. If the Yanks were to make it to the ALCS, Clemens and Pettite will probably get leaked earlier also.

By: pounder

pounder — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:19:45 +0000

Yesterday, George Mitchell was baseballs Judge Ito,today,he is back on the Red Sox payroll!Please don’t tell me about his squeaky clean reputation,like other respectable paragons of virtue he may prove to have feet of clay.He is a Red Sox pimp!

By: adl

adl — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:45:15 +0000

Of course Mitchell was biased—he was paid by the owners to fabricate a document that deflects blame away from those responsible for “the integrity of the game” and focus it on the players and other employees while throwing up a big enough cloud of controversy to get everyone overlooking the fact that steroids helped the owners line their pockets over the last 10 years. That Clemens was featured so prominently smears the Red Sox as much as it does the Yankees—or do Yankee fans fail to remember that Clemns pitched for Boston, too?

By: Annie Savoy

Annie Savoy — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:12:45 +0000

Again I agree with Sloppy.

Don’t any of you know George Mitchell’s background – in Maine a DA, a federal judge, then a Senator who risked his reputation to go to Nothern Ireland for world peace. When asked about bias, he replied ‘judge me by my work’.

He did all the work he could, stymied at every turn by a Players Association who strongarmed their members into not cooperating and by a weak commissioner.

There’s a lot of blame to go around here, but it’s not on George Mitchell.

By: sloppy

sloppy — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 12:56:54 +0000

The guy did more for world pece than any other modern poliitician other than Jimmy Carter. Anyone think a guy with that kind of reputation is going to risk it to get the “Yankees” is truly of a warped, pathetic mind.

The fact that he took the undertaking without a hammer tells me he must be a true baseball lover.

By: Dan Gurney

Dan Gurney — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:39:37 +0000

Does Mitchell have any record of challenging members of his own political party when they get with their fingers in the cookie jar? I don’t follow politics closely anymore (me, with the BA in Political Science, yet. Interests and hair length change in 30 years!). I don’t know if there is any real cover up, Mitchell had limited stool pigeons (Mets clubhouse attendant, Giambi, Clemens and Pettitte’s “trainer”) and admits there is more. But the “Paul Byrd is a user” leak in the ALCS stretches the limits of credibilty. But I can’t think of too many names I was really shocked at. Jim Bouton said 40 years about 80% of pitchers would take a pill that would take 5 years off their life if it guaranteed 20 wins. Back then that was a $10,000 raise.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 06:38:02 +0000

All I’m saying was Mitchell seem to be targeting a certain “group” of people. If this is not a complete list, he sure did leave out a handful of sox players. To be honest, it seems like hes targeting players from the yankees “dynasty” run and their not some no names either.

By: John Delcos

John Delcos — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 06:17:08 +0000

To metsfan (RE: Speculation): Sure, Manny is a natural hitter. So is A-Rod. So are a lot of guys. Nobody is a surprise. Mitchell said not to assume this is the complete list, that there are others. That’s a big part of this issue, that everybody is suspect.-JD

By: metsfan

metsfan — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:50:58 +0000

the fact is, obviously not everyone is mentioned, but I don’t see where naming Manny and Big Papi fit into this. If you name them, why not name any other player? Why not David Wright? Jose Reyes? Beltran? PIAZZA? C’mon now, we all know one thing folks, HRs are not all we should be looking at with the steroid issue, if you can’t see past that, then you’re totally lost. Just because Ortiz and Manny hit HRs means they may have taken steroids? it’s ludicrous. Now i’m not saying for sure they didn’t, but by accusing them, you should accuse every player. and either way, Manny is the most natural hitter you’ll find, and look at him, he’s not in shape, and the only thing thats gotten bigger on Ortiz is his gut.

By: dave

dave — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:47:35 +0000

You mean the former Met who was facing 25 years in jail? No of course that had nothing to do with his cooperation with Mitchel. It has nothing to do with his testimony being the heart of this report.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:24:11 +0000

The names that surface before the report came out has players like Damon, Garciaparra, and Troy Nixon. I wouldn’t have doubted that, also should include Veritek, Manny, Ortiz…. Didn’t surprise me that none of the Sox are named. And does it just so happens that his report were based on only TWO New York Trainers testimony.

By: John Delcos

John Delcos — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 04:07:35 +0000

To Steve (RE: Ortiz): Mitchell said his report was not totally conclusive, that there could be others.-JD

By: Steve Phillips

Steve Phillips — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 03:31:18 +0000

i dunno. I think it’s not unreasonable to wonder where is Big Pappi on the list?

By: ed

ed — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 03:10:01 +0000

No wonder Knoblauch was throwing the ball twenty feet over the first baseman’s head into the stands! They should have let him juice-up and play right field.