Boston Globe
December 14, 2007
It's never going to be tidy. There will be no closure. You won't be able to get your arms around it.
Baseball had its steroid era. Yesterday the much-anticipated Mitchell Report was released. The former senator spoke of "widespread illegal use" of anabolic steroids and human growth hormone to improve athletic performance.
There was much gum-flapping after the release of the report, and debate will rage forever. No one will be satisfied, but here in Boston and across Baseball America, we know the biggest loser of Dec. 13, 2007, was Roger Clemens.
The Rocket's résumé was flushed down the toilet yesterday when he was dimed out by a report that relies heavily on witnesses of questionable credibility. The report holds that Clemens was a steroid guy, starting in 1998 and continuing through two years with the Yankees (2000-01). The juicy disclosure might not hold up in court, but that doesn't matter to much of the viewing public or probably to the Hall of Fame electorate. Clemens has assembled a legion of haters through the decades (many of them Red Sox fans), and they now have a weapon any time his name is raised. The Mitchell Report says Clemens walks hand in hand with Barry Bonds. One of the greatest pitchers who ever lived is now tainted.
Clemens sounds like a man ready to fight. He didn't have an ounce of Mark McGwire in him when he issued his denial last night through his attorney.
Commissioner Bud Selig said he ordered the Mitchell investigation so nobody would ever be able to say, "What were they hiding?" He hired the dignified but compromised Mitchell (fifth on the depth chart of the Red Sox masthead) to dig into the recent dark past of illegal performance-enhancing users in baseball.
Today, a lot of fans and people in the game are asking not, "What were they hiding?" but, "Why, Bud?"
Why name names? Why sign on to such an obviously incomplete report (Mitchell did not have subpoena powers and almost 100 percent of the ballplayers told him to take a hike)? Why put so much weight on the testimony of a former bat boy and a onetime trainer who cooperated under the threat of prison time?
Oh, and while we're at it - why not read the whole report, Bud? Is that too much to ask when a man with seven Cy Young trophies is getting thrown under the bus to Cooperstown?
The report is guaranteed to infuriate the Players' Association, but union director Donald Fehr held his tongue when he spoke with the media during the dinner hour. Fehr even admitted that steps to prevent steroid use could have been taken sooner. Fehr and his minions were portrayed as enablers of the steroid scandal. Mitchell's decision to trash reputations by naming names will not go over well with the ever-militant and protective association. It certainly doesn't bode well for the next basic agreement negotiations.
We'd known for a couple of days that Mitchell's report was going to be released yesterday. Naturally, there was a rush to "be first" with the breaking news, and ESPN did a nice job reporting Clemens was going to be named in the report. However, in the early afternoon there were web reports listing names, many of which turned out not to be in the Mitchell Report. One can only wonder how much damage was done. How many bloggers and radio jockeys reacted to "reports" of players who were going to be named by Mitchell? Some of the names were pretty interesting. Where do those players go to reclaim their reputations?
Mitchell again arrogantly dismissed his obvious conflict of interest by citing his good works and his efforts brokering peace in Northern Ireland. It's astounding that a man as smart as Mitchell can so easily shrug off his compromised position. He either has a blind spot or he thinks his audience is stupid. The man is the official "director" of the Red Sox and he just issued a report that trashes some Yankee gods while leaving the championship Red Sox unscathed (Mo Vaughn played here in the pre-Mitchell era, Eric Gagné was dirty as a Dodger, and who cares about Mike Lansing?). Mitchell's reputation is impeccable, but he had no business holding his Red Sox title while conducting this investigation.
Speaking of the pre-Mitchell days, what about Dan Duquette? The former Sox general manager said Clemens was in the "twilight" of his career when he let the Rocket walk after 1996. The Duke was ridiculed when Clemens went on to win four more Cy Young trophies, but appeared vindicated by Mitchell's findings.
"I don't have any comment," Duquette said last night.
Selig had plenty of comments. He said the report was a "call to action." He said he will react. He defied Mitchell's recommendation and said there might be punishments.
Years from now, we might look back at Dec. 13, 2007, and say it was a good day for baseball. It just doesn't feel that way now. And it will always be the worst day in the career of Roger Clemens.
Dan Shaughnessy can be reached at dshaughnessy@globe.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment