Roberts Comes Clean

[Sapper]

Brian Roberts has admitted to one time steroid use. He says he tried it once in 2003. This acording to the Baltimore Sun.

But he didn't inhale.

[LAOSfan]

The same people that believe Roberts do not believe Pettite. I don't believe any of them. They lied in the past about it. What makes us think they are now telling us the truth?

[ledzepp8]

Give Brian a break.

He didn't have to come out and say this. It just confirms my opinion that he is a good man.

If you say otherwise, we can take it outside.

I agree. With the lack of real evidence of his use in the report, he could have just kept his mouth shut.

[Dipper9]

And got himself suspended, more than likely.

Give me a break. You people act like you're saints. You would do the same thing in his situation. So would everyone else. There's a reason not a single person has came out - before the truth was discovered - and admitted they tried roids once. It's not because pro atheletes are scum, it's because they're human and in the interest of self preservation, NOBODY wants to admit they did something, when doing so could have negative repercussions.

If you're insinuating I would use steroids to help me perform in sports, than you are highly mistaken, and I take offense at the suggestion!

If you are insinuating that I would hide the truth about something I did wrong, then you are right. Again, I find no FAULT with what Roberts did. My point is he should not be praised as some saint just because he admits something AFTER he was outted.

[ledzepp8]

Steroids...HGH, PED's, PES'.....

:SuN045:

Yeah I take steroids. I eat that **** for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

****ing protein, ****ing protein...where's the goddamn protein...MA?!! I told ya to get me some protein...ugh!!

[El Gordo]

Anyone think anyone listed in the Mitchell report is innocent now? People misunderstand the innocent until proven guilty thing. That is just for a court of law. In real life we can judge the evidence and think and say what we want.

GUILTY!

By the way cant we use confessions as proof of guilt?

Right that's why we have lynch mobs. "We don't need no stinkin' courts"!:002_sbiggrin:

[El Gordo]

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a saint. I have great respect for those who have erred and have found a better way to live.

If I recall my Catechism classes, saints were frequently people who saw the errors of their ways and found the light, rather than those who saw the light from the beginning. But it's been a long time since those classes.:002_sbiggrin:

[JohnD]

Yeah I take steroids. I eat that **** for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

****ing protein, ****ing protein...where's the goddamn protein...MA?!! I told ya to get me some protein...ugh!!

I immediately got that one. And I chuckled over here. Time for me to get my new haircut, haha.

[Gurgi]

Right that's why we have lynch mobs. "We don't need no stinkin' courts"!:002_sbiggrin:

The point I am making is this. In the Blacksox scandel in 1920 they had a trial. They found the players innocent. Did that stop the comish? Hell no! He used his brain! Found the logical way to reply. He banned the whole rotten crew for life.

We can boo them or bannish them. With only the standard of what is most likely the truth. Baseball is a private club. There is no RIGHT to play.

[The Wedge]

I'm not sure the treatment of the Black Sox is the best example to make. Many of the players could make very good cases for innocence, yet still remained banned. Though it's hard for them to argue their cases now, in death, but you get what I mean.

[mdguy2415]

It's interesting to the varying responses on this thread about Brian Roberts. Seeing him with my own eyes with his community service and love for what he does, I hoped that his inclusion in the Mitchell was nothing more than a mistake; however, internally I knew a lot better.

The sad thing is that some people really look up to Roberts as a hero and a certified role model, although very few of us here know what he's like away from the public eye.

Well, I am not saying he's evil, I'm just saying we don't know him off the field; however, we admire him because he wears the hometown uniform, is a heck of a ball player and seems like a great person.

I’m to the point where I have come to an acceptance that everyone in sports may or may not be clean, and I will accept it as is. Baseball is simply a form of entertainment for me at this point, not some extension of our supposed morality or anything like that.

Yes, athletes do hold an esteemed place in society (above teachers, firemen, soldiers, saw enforcement, doctors, sadly...)

I don’t care if professional athletes or multimillionaires pump themselves up with unknown substances, but it shows you have to cheat to win. We tell kids from infancy to near adulthood not to cheat, but with everything going on in sports in general (especially baseball), I'd venture to say a lot of people think that the risk is worth the reward.

Now, do I believe Brian Roberts? I’d like to say yes, but history has proven to us that there may be more to the story.

[RShack]

And you know what? The whole point of the Mitchell Report wasn't to out players specifically, but to get an idea of the scope of the problem.

That's the party line, but I don't believe that for one second. If what they really wanted was to get to the bottom of things, then they would've done something *way* different than what they did. There are many better possibilities. Among them are:

• Listing people without their names. Just refer to players as #A21 or #D37 (or #B12 ;-)
• Work with the union, give everybody immunity (like they gave to Giambi), have a month-long amnesty period for guys who fess-up, and this create a situation where everybody just tells the friggin' truth.

There was no good reason for smearing some guys and not others. If they wanted the truth, they were lots of better things to do instead of what they did. Problem is, getting to the truth would've meant grilling the owners too, and they wouldn't stand for that.

[Bond007]

Kudos to Roberts for coming forth and clearing his conscious even though there wasn't much evidence out there to support that he'd done any roids.

All speculation from here on down:

As far as his reason why, wasn't he battling with Hairston in 03 for the 2nd base job? If he knew Hairston was using that's probably what led him to try it. He knew Hairston had that advantage over him.

[Cokeman]

That's the party line, but I don't believe that for one second. If what they really wanted was to get to the bottom of things, then they would've done something *way* different than what they did. There are many better possibilities. Among them are:

[*]Listing people without their names. Just refer to players as #A21 or #D37 (or #B12 ;-)
• Work with the union, give everybody immunity (like they gave to Giambi), have a month-long amnesty period for guys who fess-up, and this create a situation where everybody just tells the friggin' truth.

There was no good reason for smearing some guys and not others. If they wanted the truth, they were lots of better things to do instead of what they did. Problem is, getting to the truth would've meant grilling the owners too, and they wouldn't stand for that.

How long do you think it would be before some names leaked out?

[The Wedge]

That's the party line, but I don't believe that for one second. If what they really wanted was to get to the bottom of things, then they would've done something *way* different than what they did. There are many better possibilities. Among them are:

• Listing people without their names. Just refer to players as #A21 or #D37 (or #B12 ;-)
• Work with the union, give everybody immunity (like they gave to Giambi), have a month-long amnesty period for guys who fess-up, and this create a situation where everybody just tells the friggin' truth.

There was no good reason for smearing some guys and not others. If they wanted the truth, they were lots of better things to do instead of what they did. Problem is, getting to the truth would've meant grilling the owners too, and they wouldn't stand for that.

Your first suggestion? People are complaining that THIS report is all smoke and mirrors, sound and fury signifying nothing. What would they say about a report like that without any teeth at all?

Your second suggestion implies that the union would actually work with them to do any of that, which if history is any support they'd definitely not.