Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Let me give you an example of why I have a problem with this report. David Justice was accused of using steroids because he had a conversation with someone associated with a club he was on. No paper trail, no eyewitness reports, just a conversation that he had years ago about the drug which even did not suggest that Justice claimed he was using or used the drugs previously.
I keep bring it back to officiating. Would it be fair if you worked a conferences and someone took a conversation you had years ago and assumed that you helped throw a game all based on a conversation? Then as a result you are known as a cheater by everyone because your name was put in a report with people they actually proved or admitted to throwing games? I put this on the same plane as NBA Officials being mentioned in a report about throwing games with Tim Donaghy based only on information that they had a conversation with Donaghy or were accused by Donaghy without any cooperation and then the accused official also loses their job or their reputation.
Would that be fair?
Peace
|
Are you trying to say the Mitchell report has accused Justice of being a steroid user on the "evidence" of only having a conversation with someone that did not involve the use of steroids? Really!