Check Mate??????

LOL.

Curse of the Bambino still lives on.

Boston played dirty to break teh curse.


THE CURSE LIVES ON!!

Good lod ok every solid player that is top 100 in 2003 was on steroids, ok more liek 70 percent. I bet your favorite player was on one too. Sad that all the latinos, and blacks get away with a slap on the wrist, yet pete rose, mcguire, canseco, to name a few get crucified! oh well baseball is bs to me.

Am I the only one who noticed that the New York Times article only mentioned players from Boston on that list? What about the other 98?

I admit, I posted myself earlier this thread that Ortiz didn't seem like a roid-type (with that beer belly and jolly temperament of his).

Here's an overlooked quote from that same NYT article:

"There were no penalties for a positive test in 2003"

Translation: MLB tacitly endorsed steroid use back then. That doesn't make it right on moral grounds, of course. But MLB did foster an environment that looked the other way. That effectively encouraged juice-use. They hadn't learned any lessons from the late 90s when McGwire/Sosa et al were all juiced up. Why? Because fans liked seeing all those homers being hit, and kept showing up to he ballpark.

George Mitchell (who is a minority owner of the Boston Red Sox) when he did MLB's investigation a couple years back, mentioned NO RED SOX on his list. And he had unlimited resources and access to all records.

Now, this comes out. To say there was a BOSTON COVER-UP is not a wild notion anymore. It was clear there was

Every team had at least one guy in the "Mitchell Report" EXCEPT the Red Sox. Now this comes out today. Mitchell tarnished his legacy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2009 11:58AM by MikeO.

Oh well i hope they all get the book, or reinstate rose, i bet the next name to come out will be hmmmmm. I dont know?

MiamiThunder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good lod ok every solid player that is top 100 in
> 2003 was on steroids, ok more liek 70 percent. I
> bet your favorite player was on one too. Sad that
> all the latinos, and blacks get away with a slap
> on the wrist, yet pete rose, mcguire, canseco, to
> name a few get crucified! oh well baseball is bs
> to me.


Isn't Canseco a latino?

Jonathan Twilley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MiamiThunder Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Good lod ok every solid player that is top 100
> in
> > 2003 was on steroids, ok more liek 70 percent.
> I
> > bet your favorite player was on one too. Sad
> that
> > all the latinos, and blacks get away with a
> slap
> > on the wrist, yet pete rose, mcguire, canseco,
> to
> > name a few get crucified! oh well baseball is
> bs
> > to me.
>
>
> Isn't Canseco a latino?

Yep. Cuban-American. He graduated from my highschool (Coral Park)!

MikeO Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> George Mitchell (who is a minority owner of the
> Boston Red Sox) when he did MLB's investigation a
> couple years back, mentioned NO RED SOX on his
> list. And he had unlimited resources and access to
> all records.
>
> Now, this comes out. To say there was a BOSTON
> COVER-UP is not a wild notion anymore. It was
> clear there was
>
> Every team had at least one guy in the "Mitchell
> Report" EXCEPT the Red Sox. Now this comes out
> today. Mitchell tarnished his legacy.


I for one wish they'd expose every single person's name on the list, no matter which team they played for.

I dont' think anybody in their right mind thought the Sox were completely clean from steroid users, especially in those days. Clemens and Canseco are both former Red Sox.

montequi Wrote:
> >
> > Isn't Canseco a latino?
>
> Yep. Cuban-American. He graduated from my
> highschool (Coral Park)!

Howcome he has a street named after him right next to SouthWest high? I could never figure that out.