1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Time to Come Clean Luppy

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Boom_70, Jan 12, 2010.

  1. We humans are complicated beings, aren't we? Bundles of contradictions.
     
  2. zagoshe

    zagoshe Well-Known Member

    That is my point -- all of these guys knew, nobody wanted to ask the questions and get involved and that includes the commissioner, who should have been run out of town for nothing else than letting this happen on his watch. Then, once public opinion swayed (i.e. the evil Barry Bonds started breaking records) all of the sudden all of these hypocrites wanted to get on their soap box.

    There has never been more disingenious and dishonest story telling than this "Steroids in Baseball" story.
     
  3. It was after Verducci wrote about it in SI and Canseco wrote a book about it. I think that the public is ignorant about steroids, and baseball writers are part of the public. I don't think it was an orchestrated attempt to provide cover for the players. I think most of them believed it was genuine.

    Isn't there a column that's linked here from time to time from 1998 in which a columnist expresses extreme skepticism?

    My favorite all-time oblivious '90s moment was the Sports Illustrated that had a steroids story as the cover, side by side inside with a Brady Anderson "How is he so good???!!! He's AWESOME!!!" story.
     
  4. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Turns out it was selective.
     
  5. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    Didn't follow up hard, didn't do what we devoutly wished he'd do.

    St. Louis approach.

    Too bad.
     
  6. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    This was 1998, not 1968. And, sorry, two things you don't get to carry in your laptop bag when you are a big-time sports writer are naivete and ignorance.
     
  7. I'm not defending them for being ignorant. I'm saying that's the reason they didn't report it. I honestly think that the majority of those guys truly believed that Big Mac and Slammin' Sammy weren't juicing. That's a different kind of bad than knowing and not pursuing the story, maybe a worse kind of bad, but different.
     
  8. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    Verducci wrote the Steroids cover story 6/3/02

    Here is just a sample of his work on Clemens a year later:
    The twilight zone
    Clemens' feats in late stage of his career are remarkable
    Posted: Tuesday May 27, 2003 1:18 PM


    Tom Verducci - Inside Baseball

    When Roger Clemens took the ball Monday afternoon against Boston in search of career victory No. 300, what may have been as impressive as his prolificacy is this truism: two months shy of his 41st birthday and after 584 career games, Clemens is still an ace. If the playoffs had started May 26 -- and goodness knows the Yankees have looked nothing like a playoff team for the past three weeks -- Clemens would have been New York's Game 1 starter. With the Yanks in a 3-11 slide, they had the ball in the hands of the very pitcher they would have chosen for such a spot.

    Clemens is getting to 300 with the stuff and mound presence of a young stud. He has placed himself in the argument for greatest pitcher of all time -- and no judicious editing, folks; the argument is not for one game, not for "prime stretch," not for just the postseason, but for the entire body of work -- because he is suffering very little diminution of ability at the last stage of his career.


    Given that Verducci was so in tune with steroids it's hard to fathom that a light did not go on when doing Clemens stories.
     
  9. He did fine. He had to keep the guy on for an hour of air time and keep him talking, a guy who isn't exactly an introspective talker to begin with. It wasn't Costas's job to argue with McGwire. He was taking a deposition for the public record on live TV.
     
  10. Boom, I definitely don't disagree with you. I guess the argument would be that there's no proof, so how do you write it, but SI certainly brought it up in its Randy Johnson takeout last year. And if you have suspicions, you are more than at liberty to tone down the ageless wonder rhetoric.
     
  11. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    Like wading through glue.
     
  12. BYH

    BYH Active Member

    Fixed. (Though I have little doubt you are right as well)
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page