Well apparently there were some things wrong with the Mitchell Report. Now i know that it was Brian McNamee that stated Clemens name in the report, but Kirk Radomski also had something to do with it (or so it was said) but yet in Radomski's testimony Clemens name was never mentioned. So now its a "he said she said" game. Why would Radomski not mention Clemens if he also knew McNamee was shooting up Clemens? (the two trainers worked together) Seems odd. Another thing is this, in Radomski's testimony he apparently admits to other ballplayers who have used steroids but the "lesser" names arent in the report? How come? What was Mitchell's intentions? B/c now it seems like he had some....what the hell to make of all this.
I dont think the report will have any affect on baseball, but now its just twisting my brain on all of these things. Who the hell knows......
2007-12-20
19:33:02
·
5 answers
·
asked by
wcbaseball4
4
in
Baseball