Any slight mechanical change could have been the reason. Clemens is held as perfecting his motion, same as other long term successful pitchers. Marino Rivera, for instance. His control is usually imppecable. He's got a robotic motion which is usually the same. But, even he loses control from time to time. If his shoulder goes down slightly, and he gets under the ball...he can toss a riser that'll get away from him. Same with Clemens and countless other pitchers.
Fatigue. If he'd thrown a long amount of innings, or in extreme heat, or too many complete games, if he'd laid off the jogging for a few weeks...who knows? But he might have had to catch a second wind to regain his control.
Minor injuries. He could've had a minor nagging injury that hindered things to thow him off his motion.
Personal Problems. Could've had problems back home, arguments, whatever...that managed to boil up and get to him professionally. These dudes have lives. They're personal lives don't just freeze and stay still during the season, they have to deal with **** like life too.
Off-year...players have those too, don't they? Years where things just don't go well for them, and they fall off in one or more categories of stats.
I think I could name a few...but my point is control could be the cause of a minor issue or a bigger issue. You'd have to really crack the bank to see what was really going on there and take a look inside.
It depends on the frequency and amount you use them. One injection doesn't last a year but it lasts a long time.
But, regular uses do in time begin to deform and brittle whatever you're injecting. The effects probably last a long time, but in terms of a career or a season...it's probably not enough to take one shot a few or so times.
I mean, it is a quick fix...esepecially when you're talking about injury recovery HGH to try and coax over an injury.
I did hear an interesting comment on ESPN against the mindless moron Skip Bayless that cortisone shots should be seen in the exact same light because it is a performance enhancer and can brittle bones and muscle when using too many times.
I thought that was interesting.
Was he denying that Clemens used them when he was under federal investigation?
Supposedly, yeah. Far as I know, that's one of the points made in the suit against McNamee. That, suppodedly, McNamee denied and denied and denied until later. This was all while he was under the investigation and looking at serious jail time.
Anyone could take that anyway, too. You could look at it as him trying to protect his boy. Or him being spoon fed what they wanted.
This case is really incrediblly confusing. I mean, nothing really sides to either guy. Everything seems to be about POV or something...
Pettitte admitting it adds credibility to what McNamee has said that was in the Mitchell investigation. Just because one used steroids doesn't mean the other would. Clemens would get injections in his apartment.
Which is exactly the argument you could make to defend Clemens. Just because Pettitte used, doesn't mean that Clemens did either.
But, I find it strange that if Clemens was a regular user...as close as the media make them out to be in guilt-by-association...that Pettitte should have been as regular a user as Clemens was supposedly.
But, even then...if we believe Pettitte, which I think we can...he probably didn't see a thing. Unless he was there watching it all, and just decided to watch and not use.
Their testimony could be about Clemens specifically and the investigation may not have known about them. The Mitchell investigation wasn't going to track down every steroid supplier or everyone who knew what was going on.
I don't buy that, though. Because supposedly, the Mitchell investigation needed every shred of help it could find because they found so many obstacles and walls to block them from finding things out. I could buy them not knowing the sources, but you'd think if McNamee knew of them he'd had tossed them to Mitchell's people.
Yes. He gave them other names in addition to Clemens. Him getting out of jail wasn't dependent upon whether he could link Clemens to steroids.
That's the question though. I've heard reports saying that they wanted Clemens because of McNamee's connection to him. Let's say he gave up Petitte first and they simply assumed that Clemens had to be too, and that McNamee was protecting him. I mean, I could see it going down like that.
What we do need is to know exactly what happened between McNamee's and the fed and Mitchell's investigators...and just how everything went down, because there are too many questions about all of it that's been unanswered.
I'm hoping the Congressional hearing is where we'll hear details from McNamee himself.
I wasn't going for humor.
Well I often do. Keeps the edge off and takes the heat off of heated debates. Keeps me from getting banned, I must say.
And your research is what? Entering his name in Google?
But, that's my point. I know nothing about the guy. The first REAL look I've had him and his life was in the phone conversation with Clemens.
It just feels like he's a nameless, faceless thing against a guy who's been infront of the spotlight with his life examined, his career picked apart, and his image always in the forefront.
It's just...I dunno...hard for me to take McNamee serious on everything he says without knowing more about him. I'd really like to see him do an interview and see the same exact decipering of body movements, nerves, and his vocal tones that we all did on Clemens. Just seems more fair to me, to see McNamee more public now.
So do you believe Isiah Thomas that he didn't sexually harass Anuca Brown-Sanders because you can see him? Honestly, that's some of the dumbest reasoning I've heard. Personally, I'll believe the guy who was facing federal prosecution if he lied.
Well, to me the dumbest reasoning is to plow on a guy who had his name picked out by a guy who NEEDED to cut a deal.
Taking the word of a desprate, patethic, cornered man...is dumb.
And isn't Clemens putting himself under the gun, legally, now? If you can't believe either one is capable of lying...then you're being entire too gullible.
The case is that McNamee's testimony was false and made with malice which has damaged Clemens' reputation and made him susceptible to financial injury. It only implies that McNamee was forced by the investigators to link Clemens to steroids.
Which is why the suit is against McNamee and not the Federal Government.
I think the Feds and Mitchell's people were pressuring him because they thought he needed it, and if you believe McNamee then they were right in pressuring him the way they did, I suppose.
It is because it is bias.
No it's not. I could be a fan, and still recognize faults and flaws and guilt. I just think there needs to be more on Clemens before we talk about taking away his HOF licensce and hang him.
I just need more on him. I think that's fair, since they're trying to prove his guilt.
He's angry to the point where he can't even produce one coherent thought. It hurts his case when he starts cursing and saying things like he's angry just looking at the people at the press conference. He's completely irrational and nothing justifies that.
I don't know what the hell you were looking at...but he produced coherent thoughts. You're making it sound like he threw a chair and was about to tear one of the reporters head's off.
I think the Andy Pettitte question, and the way that vicious reporter TRIED hard to have Clemens condem and spit on Pettitte was probably what started the anger the most.
People wanted to see him angry. They wanted to see him sue. They wanted him to do Press Conference.
He did all those things, and people are still managing to create new reasons. For example, ESPN was crying...crying...and crying...about how the suit (which everyone on the network was demanding, if Clemens was truly innocent) that he'd done so now to plead the fifth infront of congress. They were crucifying Clemens on an assumption they made.
Until Clemens made clear that he would infact talk and speak freely, did it stop.
I think that type of stuff is part of the reason for his anger.
Again, if he's innocent...it seems like the natural reaction.
Can you blame people for making a decision on him? It took him a week to respond. He should have made a statement Dec. 14.
Do you buy what his lawyer said? About the legal advice thing? I mean...I do, but...Lawyers...lol...
Barry Bonds is never calm and under control. He's been an angry, arrogant prick his entire career.
At points, after being asked 10000 times the same question, he seemed to get pissed off out of annoyance.
But, remember...for a long time, he would answer those question coldy, as if it were any other question. I think it was that approach, which had alot of people judging him guilty so quickly.
I think Clemens did do something in his own favor that no other athlete has ever done.
He sued. That's helped him considerbly, I think.
Yeah, you really deserve the benefit of the doubt when you're a notorious headhunter and throw broken bats at other players. He deserves nothing from the public.
The headhunter thing is something that was built out of fear of the guy. Nobody can say he purposely tried to murder Mike Piazza with a fastball and the bat thing seemed reactionary to me.
I think he does deserve the beniefit of the doubt since he's really been good for the game. From what you've said...he probably doesn't deserve anything from other BASEBALL PLAYERS.
I hate anyone who cheats.
Do you think Andy Pettitte cheated? I mean, would you clasify that as cheating?
And what should happen to guys like Gagne, Lo Duca, or Tejada now...?
And how much proof do you need to KNOW someone cheated?
