apologies abound

Greg Couch of the Chicago Sun-Times wonders about all the PR moves apologies coming from caught-using-steroids baseball players these days. What's that saying? Cheaters never win, unless they don't get caught? Yeah. That's it.

more clemens

As expected, many sports columnists around the country have weighed in on the Clemens hearings, and their perspective is enlightening. Here's a roundup of a few more that caught my attention. No need to thank me.

* Rick Telander of the Chicago Sun-Times couldn't help but notice that Jeff Novitsky, the IRS special agent responsible for investigating BALCO and bringing down Barry Bonds and Marion Jones, was in the house. Telander concludes Clemens had better watch out.

* Rich Hofmann of the Philadelphia Daily News wonders what was gained by the whole thing.

* Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News sounds confident that Clemens exposed himself as a perjurer.

* Gary Shelton of the St. Petersburg (Fla.) Times seems convinced the hearings won't amount to much, though he did reach this insightful conclusion: "[a]fter looking at Congress in action, yes, it is a miracle that this country isn't in worse shape than it is. ... What I believe is that this was the brainless accusing the shameless in front of the clueless." Zing!

clemens, the day after

Sielski, after having fun with the A Few Good Men column, really gets to the heart of the matter with his piece in the Bucks County Courier Times today. A great read, and spot-on in terms of placing the blame ... on us. All of us. Because the bottom line is, what now? Pitchers and catchers report today, and if you're a baseball fan, you're excited. Nothing's really going to change, is it?

the clemens saga

So here we are, on the day before pitchers and catchers report for spring training, and Roger Clemens is testifying before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which ESPN is carrying live. The spectacle is at once sad and unbelievable, just as Wallace Matthews said it would be in yesterday's Newsday. Clemens seems almost Clintonian in his denials, as though he actually believes his own lies. I can't help but be reminded of Mike Sielski's Jan. 15 column in the Bucks County Courier Times, which hilariously compares Clemens' pending testimony to Col. Nathan Jessep's in the film A Few Good Men. The great irony here, as a lawyer friend of mine just pointed out, is that absent a criminal conviction, there will always be some doubt (at least according to the reasonable standards of a court of law) about which side is really telling the truth. Astoundingly, McNamee appeared to be truthful with what he said about Clemens, given that his testimony was corraborated by Andy Pettitte, Chuck Knoblauch, and, apparently, Clemens' own wife. But somehow McNamee also seemed to be lying about himself. Very strange. Whether it's enough for the Department of Justice to seek a perjury conviction is now the open question, but without any hard evidence, it's tough to tell. In the meantime, Clemens seems likely to end up like Mark McGwire, whose evasions before Congress two years ago forever tainted his legacy despite no hard evidence to actually prove he was on the juice. Bud Selig must be proud.