[LSC9901]

BOSTON - Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling called on Roger Clemens to give up the four Cy Young Awards he's won since 1997 if he can't clear his name from allegations that he used steroids to prolong and enhance his career.

"If he doesn't do that then there aren't many options as a fan for me other than to believe his career 192 wins and three Cy Youngs he won prior to 1997 were the end," Schilling wrote Wednesday in his blog, 38pitches.com. "From that point on the numbers were attained through using (performance-enhancing drugs). Just like I stated about Jose (Canseco), if that is the case with Roger, the four Cy Youngs should go to the rightful winners, and the numbers should go away if he cannot refute the accusations."
Schilling to Rocket: Give back Cy Youngs - Yahoo! News

[ThePundit]

For somebody who faked a bloody sock, he should pipe his butt down.

[ginahunt3]

Dude, are you sure you're a Boston fan? First of all, what reason would he have to fake a bloody sock. There was no guarantee we would win that game, & we knew he was going to have the surgery. He wanted to be a part of it all, win or lose so he had a patch job done until our season was over, win or lose. It's not like he received compensation for the loss of blood. Finally, even if it was faked, did it enhance his pitching? Not unless he threw with his feet. Which he probably could have done & still won the game. Clemens, IF guilty (I believe he is), did use steroids, repeatedly. So let me ask this, If Schilling did fake the blood & Clemens did use roids, which is the worst offense? Hypothetically speaking.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by ginahunt3

Dude, are you sure you're a Boston fan? First of all, what reason would he have to fake a bloody sock. There was no guarantee we would win that game, & we knew he was going to have the surgery. He wanted to be a part of it all, win or lose so he had a patch job done until our season was over, win or lose. It's not like he received compensation for the loss of blood. Finally, even if it was faked, did it enhance his pitching? Not unless he threw with his feet. Which he probably could have done & still won the game. Clemens, IF guilty (I believe he is), did use steroids, repeatedly. So let me ask this, If Schilling did fake the blood & Clemens did use roids, which is the worst offense? Hypothetically speaking.

You have mistaken Pundit for a Sox fan...

Still, the point probably is, if you are gonna be gunning for the rest of the league, you better come with a clean pair of socks...

[azrael492]

Before Clemens is strung up from the rafters, I think we need a little more than one guy saying he gave him shots. He may have used, and I have wondered why he was never involved until now, but you can not take away any of stats. That would open up an even bigger mess. If you take away his wins, you will be adjusting the stats of every other player involved. Will you take away the saves from the closers he had? I agree with Mitchell and we should just close this chapter and move on paying closer attention.

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by azrael492

Before Clemens is strung up from the rafters, I think we need a little more than one guy saying he gave him shots. He may have used, and I have wondered why he was never involved until now, but you can not take away any of stats. That would open up an even bigger mess. If you take away his wins, you will be adjusting the stats of every other player involved. Will you take away the saves from the closers he had? I agree with Mitchell and we should just close this chapter and move on paying closer attention.

At some point in time those that track stats are going to have to agree to adding asterisks to the record books. I don't have a big, big problem with the moving forward from this point .... but !!!!! What legal implications should all of these offenders face ? If it was illegal by law then that should be held separate from whatever the baseball commission wants to do.

[ginahunt3]

I know it would be impossible to take away the numbers away from Cleopatra Clemens King of Denial. There is no way of knowing which games if any were effected by steroid use. However, the Cy Young awards are forever tarnished. If it is proven that he used then they should be given to the person who deserved them. Schilling is entitled to his opinion regardless of what anyone else thinks but as far as the sock, I haven't seen one post as to what his reason would be to fake it. Even if he did, which I doubt, what purpose would that serve? It didn't change the outcome of the game.

[ThePundit]

Originally Posted by ginahunt3

Dude, are you sure you're a Boston fan? First of all, what reason would he have to fake a bloody sock. There was no guarantee we would win that game, & we knew he was going to have the surgery. He wanted to be a part of it all, win or lose so he had a patch job done until our season was over, win or lose. It's not like he received compensation for the loss of blood. Finally, even if it was faked, did it enhance his pitching? Not unless he threw with his feet. Which he probably could have done & still won the game. Clemens, IF guilty (I believe he is), did use steroids, repeatedly. So let me ask this, If Schilling did fake the blood & Clemens did use roids, which is the worst offense? Hypothetically speaking.

Why? Because as good a pitcher as he is, he's even a bigger idiot:

Gary Thorne said on the air, while the Orioles were batting in the fifth, that he'd been told by Sox catcher Doug Mirabelli that was not blood, but paint, on the sock Schilling wore during Game 6 of the 2004 American League Championship Series against the Yankees. It was done for the public relations effect, Thorne said.

"The great story we were talking about the other night was that famous red stocking that he wore when they finally won, the blood on his stocking," Thorne said to broadcast partner Jim Palmer, the Hall of Fame pitcher, in a conversation that had begun with a discussion of Schilling's blog.

"Nah," Thorne said. "It was painted. Doug Mirabelli confessed up to it after. It was all for PR. "

Boston Red Sox - Schilling's sock called into question - The Boston Globe

[azrael492]

Originally Posted by ginahunt3

I know it would be impossible to take away the numbers away from Cleopatra Clemens King of Denial. There is no way of knowing which games if any were effected by steroid use. However, the Cy Young awards are forever tarnished. If it is proven that he used then they should be given to the person who deserved them. Schilling is entitled to his opinion regardless of what anyone else thinks but as far as the sock, I haven't seen one post as to what his reason would be to fake it. Even if he did, which I doubt, what purpose would that serve? It didn't change the outcome of the game.

That is the big problem they are facing...who is deserving. How do they know the person behind him in the voting wasn't using if he was.

I also agree that the bloody sock was not a big scam. He just had surgery on it. Of course it would bleed if he put that much pressure on it. Mirabelli could have just said that because he was throwing the competition off. If I were facing a pitcher with a bum leg, I would bunt to see if he could move. Maybe he new Schilling couldn't handle that. This is just as plausible as "fake blood"

[ginahunt3]

Hasn't anybody heard that Mirabelli retracted that statement? I believe it was earlier this year when there was all the talk about the sock. He stated that he was joking around & it was real blood. I want to know, who needed more theatrics in the 2004 post season? Any true Sox fan was ready to chew their toenails because they didn't have any fingernails left.
I saw on ESPN this morning that Goose Gossage has alot to say about Clemens. He posed a good question though, why did the Red Sox get rid of him in '96 if he could still pitch the way he did in '97?

[EmpireWF]

This is why I dislike Schilling. He opens his mouth/keyboard when it doesn't concern him.

I would be curious, if the shoe was on the other foot would Schilling voluntarily give up any awards? Or if a teammate was accused (again, not proven) to use steroids or HGH, would Schilling go off on them?

He's so two-faced...

[ginahunt3]

Wait a minute. Schilling is a citizen just like the rest of us. He has a right to voice his opinion. Why is he expected to stay quiet? We are all 'shooting our mouth off' about the same subject. Baseball is his job so why shouldn't he express his feelings on the subject? Every person involved in MLB from the bat boys to the owners is under a magnifying glass & as long as that is the case, he has more of a right to speak on the subject than we do.

[EmpireWF]

Schilling has a big mouth. He made a fool of himself in front of Congress two years ago and continues to jab jab jab about the topic of the day. Schilling should have his own radio show before & after games...if he doesn't already.

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by ginahunt3

Hasn't anybody heard that Mirabelli retracted that statement? I believe it was earlier this year when there was all the talk about the sock. He stated that he was joking around & it was real blood. I want to know, who needed more theatrics in the 2004 post season? Any true Sox fan was ready to chew their toenails because they didn't have any fingernails left.
I saw on ESPN this morning that Goose Gossage has alot to say about Clemens. He posed a good question though, why did the Red Sox get rid of him in '96 if he could still pitch the way he did in '97?

I'm not so sure the Sox "got rid of him" in '96. Rogo's statement back then as he was leaving Boston because the GM "never really wanted me back." He signed a 3 year deal with the J's for $24.75 Million. His previous 4 seasons left him with a 40-39 record. Why would Boston want to pay that much for a 50/50 record ??? What would Rogo do to become a better pitcher .... who knows ???

[ginahunt3]

$24.75 million for 3 yrs. that was 11 years ago. He got $28 million for 4 months this year. Kind of makes you wonder if his parents were wine makers, he's getting better with age. I think not.