11 Jan 2010
Was there anyone left who thought that Mark McGwire was clean? I really don’t have much to say about his "admission" today, but I did find this quote from baseball’s commissioner to be interesting:
"I am pleased that Mark McGwire has confronted his use of performance-enhancing substances as a player. Being truthful is always the correct course of action, which is why I had commissioned Senator George Mitchell to conduct his investigation. This statement of contrition, I believe, will make Mark’s re-entry into the game much smoother and easier."
So let’s get this straight. McGwire cheated the game for years. He avoided telling the truth for years. He wouldn’t even admit to using steroids when asked by Congress and Selig feels fit to be "pleased" by him? Now, let’s look at a statement Selig issued 11 months ago when A-Rod admitted he used steroids:
"What Alex did was wrong and he will have to live with the damage he has done to his name and reputation. While Alex deserves credit for publicly confronting the issue, there is no valid excuse for using such substances, and those who use them have shamed the game."
There seem to be some inconsistencies in these two approaches and I would LOVE to hear the commissioner explain why the two different statements. A-Rod "shamed the game", but McGwire will have a "smoother and easier" re-entry into baseball because he told the truth.
From my view in the cheap seats we have two athletes who committed the same crime. Neither one of them would have ever admitted it unless they had to. I give A-Rod a little more credit for not dragging things out for years over this, but if one of them shamed the game, the other one certainly did as well. So, why the two completely different statements? Anyone have any ideas?