PDA

View Full Version : Palmeiro is garbage


DumpJerry
08-06-2005, 03:43 PM
So, the Players' Assoc. is considering a grievance because the identity of the type of juice Palmeiro used was released to the public in violation of the agreement which states that only the player's name and punishment may be released. I agree with the agreement's policy, however, when the player mocks everyone by blatantly lying by stating that he does not know how it got in his system when it is a steroid that can only be taken by itself and not in cream, drink or protein shake (creating the possibility for plausible deniability), then all bets are off.

The reports are that the 'roid Palmeiro used can be taken only by pill or (I think) injection. Nonetheless, it is a 'roid that is entered into the body only with the person's explicit knowledge since it cannot be slipped into a different medium.
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/3867496

PaleHoseGeorge
08-06-2005, 05:29 PM
Not to hijack your thread, but in a separate thread there was much confusion by several posters about how "unfair" it was for Palmiero to get his appeal heard over several months while others (like the Twins' Rincon) were quickly suspended. Some of the crazier posters even saw a conspiracy behind MLB's actions.

Can we once and for all stop the nonsense? The MLBPA is looking out for the interests of ALL its members. If Rincon had any real beef with his treatment, the MLBPA lawyers would be squealing like stuck pigs on his behalf JUST LIKE THEY ALREADY ARE FOR PALMIERO.

SOXSINCE'70
08-06-2005, 05:51 PM
:bashbro

"I don't look like an idiot now,do I??"

DumpJerry
08-06-2005, 06:55 PM
Not to hijack your thread, but in a separate thread there was much confusion by several posters about how "unfair" it was for Palmiero to get his appeal heard over several months while others (like the Twins' Rincon) were quickly suspended. Some of the crazier posters even saw a conspiracy behind MLB's actions.

Can we once and for all stop the nonsense? The MLBPA is looking out for the interests of ALL its members. If Rincon had any real beef with his treatment, the MLBPA lawyers would be squealing like stuck pigs on his behalf JUST LIKE THEY ALREADY ARE FOR PALMIERO.
My post was not to complain that Palmeiro appealed the finding. As a lawyer, I would never fault someone for doing that (unless such an appeal harms my client). My gripe is that he made a statement once the test and punishment were made public that he did not know he had somehow ingested a banned substance and made it sound almost like the Jim Miller Defense of "I did not know where it came from, I would never do this on purpose" when that was a bald-faced lie. If the rules of confidentiality had been followed, then a significant portion of the public would have believed his crap. Since he lied to the public, he deserved to have the substance used released to the public so that the truth is out. He should have said "I messed up and I accept my punishment" and left it at that.

(BTW, this is my 1,500th post!!!:bandance: )

Trav
08-06-2005, 07:37 PM
Not to hijack your thread, but in a separate thread there was much confusion by several posters about how "unfair" it was for Palmiero to get his appeal heard over several months while others (like the Twins' Rincon) were quickly suspended. Some of the crazier posters even saw a conspiracy behind MLB's actions.

Can we once and for all stop the nonsense? The MLBPA is looking out for the interests of ALL its members. If Rincon had any real beef with his treatment, the MLBPA lawyers would be squealing like stuck pigs on his behalf JUST LIKE THEY ALREADY ARE FOR PALMIERO.

How can you fault anyone for thinking that the MLB and Selig could do something like the "crazies" suggested? I wouldn't put it past them.

PaleHoseGeorge
08-06-2005, 07:40 PM
How can you fault anyone for thinking that the MLB and Selig could do something like the "crazies" suggested? I wouldn't put it past them.

It's complicated. You wouldn't understand. Sorry.

Trav
08-06-2005, 07:47 PM
It's complicated. You wouldn't understand. Sorry.

What do you mean by that?

PaleHoseGeorge
08-06-2005, 09:16 PM
Read this thread (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=55331). Pay special attention to my posts regarding this subject.

Then read the article posted by DumpJerry at the top of this thread.

And finally, read my post answering the exact question you're asking. It's post #2 in this thread.

Told you it was complicated.
:cool:

SOXfnNlansing
08-06-2005, 11:03 PM
:bashbro "just because a ball bounced off my head for a HR doesn't mean I'm a complete moron."

Rooney4Prez56
08-06-2005, 11:46 PM
It scares me to think that Canseco was right.

Ol' No. 2
08-07-2005, 11:22 AM
My post was not to complain that Palmeiro appealed the finding. As a lawyer, I would never fault someone for doing that (unless such an appeal harms my client). My gripe is that he made a statement once the test and punishment were made public that he did not know he had somehow ingested a banned substance and made it sound almost like the Jim Miller Defense of "I did not know where it came from, I would never do this on purpose" when that was a bald-faced lie. If the rules of confidentiality had been followed, then a significant portion of the public would have believed his crap. Since he lied to the public, he deserved to have the substance used released to the public so that the truth is out. He should have said "I messed up and I accept my punishment" and left it at that.

(BTW, this is my 1,500th post!!!:bandance: )As a lawyer, you ought to know that confidentiality on the part of MLB is a contractual obligation. Or can I assume that no one here would mind if their employer released their confidential medical information?

PaulDrake
08-07-2005, 11:26 AM
It's complicated. You wouldn't understand. Sorry. It is complicated, and all the facts and individual timelines for each offending player are not clear to me. When I examined what was available to me and put this into my brain such as it is, I remained unconvinced that Palmeiro did not receive if not favorable treatment, at least a little more time. I am not by nature someone who falls for each and every conspiracy theory out there. As a matter of fact I dismiss most of them. I don't think anyone was on the grassy knoll shooting, and I don't believe that the Illuminati rule the world.

DumpJerry
08-07-2005, 11:46 AM
As a lawyer, you ought to know that confidentiality on the part of MLB is a contractual obligation. Or can I assume that no one here would mind if their employer released their confidential medical information?
I am fully aware that the contract calls for confidentiality. However, when someone bends reality, the phrase "what comes around, goes around" comes into full force. That is why the information was leaked out by someone with knowledge. Of course, the reporters could have develope backbones and asked Palmeiro what it was he teste for, I'm sure the confidentiality rules do not apply to the player just as HIPAA (the federal law which estabilishes medical confidentiality) allows for the patient to make knowing consent to relase information.

Ol' No. 2
08-07-2005, 11:57 AM
I am fully aware that the contract calls for confidentiality. However, when someone bends reality, the phrase "what comes around, goes around" comes into full force. That is why the information was leaked out by someone with knowledge. Of course, the reporters could have develope backbones and asked Palmeiro what it was he teste for, I'm sure the confidentiality rules do not apply to the player just as HIPAA (the federal law which estabilishes medical confidentiality) allows for the patient to make knowing consent to relase information.I was as glad to see Palmeiro get his comeuppance as anyone. But if MLB was complicit in releasing this information, the MLBPA has a LEGALLY valid basis to file and win a grievance, and they would be woefully failing in their duty to the player NOT to file a grievance.

Trav
08-07-2005, 12:13 PM
Read this thread (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=55331). Pay special attention to my posts regarding this subject.

Then read the article posted by DumpJerry at the top of this thread.

And finally, read my post answering the exact question you're asking. It's post #2 in this thread.

Told you it was complicated.
:cool:

I guess I should take Writing Clearly 101. While I don't think that something underhanded happened in this case, I wouldn't put it past them in the future. As a matter of fact, I didn't think that anyone high profile would come out this year. I reckon I was wrong.

PaleHoseGeorge
08-07-2005, 12:41 PM
So, are we reaching consensus yet? *If* there was a conspiracy by MLB to make individual ballplayers look bad (whether it be Palmiero, Rincon, or any of the eight others), we would be hearing RIGHT NOW public demands by the MLBPA on behalf of those players like we already are hearing from MLBPA on behalf of Palmiero. (See UncleJerry's link in the first post of this thread.)

Rincon and the Twins already had a "hearing" about his fine and suspension -- but it came AFTER he had served his suspension, thus showing the motives were mostly to save face, not challenge the finding of steroid use.

Some of us need to be a little less naive about the role public relations plays in how the commissioner's office, MLB clubs, and individual players approach this problem. If you're looking for a "conspiracy", that's the one.

TornLabrum
08-07-2005, 01:32 PM
It is complicated, and all the facts and individual timelines for each offending player are not clear to me. When I examined what was available to me and put this into my brain such as it is, I remained unconvinced that Palmeiro did not receive if not favorable treatment, at least a little more time. I am not by nature someone who falls for each and every conspiracy theory out there. As a matter of fact I dismiss most of them. I don't think anyone was on the grassy knoll shooting, and I don't believe that the Illuminati rule the world.

You're right. It's the Trilateral Commission.

ma-gaga
08-08-2005, 12:07 AM
Good question. Here's another one, this time for you and the official Twins mouthpiece to answer. Why would Rincon even bother with an appeal if he already agreed to serve a suspension first -- other than for the obvious P.R. and face-saving aspect to it?
...
Rincon and the Twins already had a "hearing" about his fine and suspension -- but it came AFTER he had served his suspension, thus showing the motives were mostly to save face, not challenge the finding of steroid use.

Some of us need to be a little less naive about the role public relations plays in how the commissioner's office, MLB clubs, and individual players approach this problem. If you're looking for a "conspiracy", that's the one.

uh... I missed the first question in the long thread, so I'll attempt to answer it here.

From what little I know, it seemed like they "railroaded" Rincon thru, where-as Palmiero got a little more time. Frankly I don't care. They both got busted and said pretty much the standard MLBPA line, "I never intentionally blah blah blah..."

But it did seem a little funny that Palmiero got 2-3 months before his suspension occurred. It could be because his hearing was a little 'more compelling', or because he was 25 hits away from 3000.

Something smells a little rotten, but it doesn't matter. MLB didn't put the steroids into Rafael Palmiero, or the other 8 players...

Jose Canseco did!

:gulp:

wassagstdu
08-12-2005, 01:03 PM
What a mistake these guys make when they listen to their attorneys and clam up. Of course their attorneys are trying to keep them out of jail, but at the cost of their reputation and public esteem. McGwire destroyed himself with "I am not here to talk about the past," and Palmeiro is destroying himself with "I can't say a word because the House Committee is looking into it." I for one interpret that as a full admission of guilt -- but without any remorse or apology. I say Go Away!