Canseco, please go away.

by 10 14 23 26 on Dec 14, 2007 11:36 AM CST

It's hard to believe at one point in my life, I admired Jose Canseco. Now, I cringe when I see him or his suddenly annoying name. He will take any chance he can get to be noticed, including being a part of mind-numbing reality TV shows of washed up "stars".

While it may be unfair for some players to be named in the Mitchell Report and not every player who ever took steroids, I don't think it is fair for former players to start telling the press names of players that should be in the report.

Jose is now saying "All I can say is the Mitchell Report is incomplete...I could not believe that (Rodriguez's) name was not in the report." What a shock; he picked the most popular player in MLB to accuse. Maybe A-Rod should b listed, maybe not. The point is nobody can/should make that accusation without evidence. I'd prefer any further reports of players linked to this to be official, not from this meat-head doing anything he can to stay in the spotlight for another day.

My guess is he's bitter that Flava Flave got his own show after Surreal Life.

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/mlb

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 29 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Now that my friends...

is slander. We go back and forth about this but I do believe he can wind up in court should ARod truly be innocent and choose to pursue this.

MMMMM...Golden shrimp and chicken combo from Ron of Japan!

by Kinky Reggae on Dec 14, 2007 11:33 AM CST reply actions

There's no back and forth on this

There are people without knowledge of the law claiming something is slander and, periodically, someone explaining why it is not slander.

In order for A-Rod to successfully sue Canseco, he would have to show that Canseco either knew or should have known what he was saying was untrue and he would also have to show that Canseco intended to harm A-Rod with the statement.

There is no need to even get to the second part because it would be next impossible to prove that Canseco knows or should know that A-Rod did not take steroids. Indeed, given how widespread steroids are in baseball , Canseco, you, me and anyone else can freely say they think any MLB player is using or has used steroids.

Fukudome is my homie

by Porfi on Dec 14, 2007 3:07 PM CST up reply actions

I suppose you are the "periodically"?

So there is no way that he can be charged with something like defamation (?) of character?

MMMMM...Golden shrimp and chicken combo from Ron of Japan!

by Kinky Reggae on Dec 14, 2007 3:54 PM CST up reply actions

You can sue anyone for anything

but litigation is expensive and suing doesn't mean you win.

Basically, if you are a public figure, you are screwed. There are, of course, exceptions. For a a recent local example, Illinois Supreme Court justice (and former Chicago Bears kicker) Bob Thomas won a $7 million dollar judgment against a newspaper columnist (and the paper itself) for a column that claimed Thomas traded a more lenient punishment for someone in exchange for political support.

In order for a baseball player to win a libel suit, the accusation would have to, at a minimum, be much more specific and direct than someone saying Player X is on the juice.

Keep in mind that even after Thomas won his verdict, the court reduced the award to $4 million. Additionally, the case was tried in Illinois state court, and in addition to the appearance of potential conflict of interest, there were some decisions favoring Thomas made in course of the trial that many observers (myself included) find questionable (that's being generous). In fact, the newspaper filed its own suit in Federal Court this summer. Eventually, the parties settled, reportedly for $3 million.

Fukudome is my homie

by Porfi on Dec 14, 2007 5:58 PM CST up reply actions

Canseco blew the lid off all of this

If it wasn't for him, there would be no Mitchell investigation and it would've been business as usual. Think what you will about him (I make no comments on his character), but he did put his thoughts in print in book format. While many have complained, no one has brought him into a coutroom to challenge it.

My take is that there is a ton of truth, if not tangible facts, that support his claims. In the end, truth wins out and I'm afraid that Canseco probably has truth on his side.

by NO100 on Dec 14, 2007 11:44 AM CST reply actions

Yeah, but

He may have started the investigation, which I don't have a problem with, however, he's now just throwing names out without proof. At least the MLB conducted an investigation. He should not be able to just throw out names and be trusted by the general public because it's assumed he knows who did roids. Again, he got the ball rolling on this and now he can go away.

by 10 14 23 26 on Dec 14, 2007 11:50 AM CST up reply actions

Sad as it may seem

I now trust Canseco more than Selig and this stupid report.

by rlpete on Dec 14, 2007 12:59 PM CST up reply actions

Fair enough

He does deserve some credit for what he's done so far, but, yes, I wouldn't mind seeing him walk off into the sunset myself either.

by NO100 on Dec 14, 2007 1:51 PM CST up reply actions

You are correct

there is no doubt in my mind this whole issue would still be under the rug if Canseco had not gone public.

I don't like Conseco either, just like I didn't like Sammy (the bull) Gravano, but sometimes it takes something like this to blow the lid off a problem most want to ignore.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Dec 14, 2007 12:34 PM CST up reply actions

Canseco

should get more respect for telling the truth, and not hiding like most other players.

by tizzle on Dec 14, 2007 12:17 PM CST reply actions

Absolutely...

To blast Canseco now, is because you just don't like him. With that, you have every right to.
(Kinda like me and The Former Employee. I just don't like him, so -- see ya!)

However, he's been proven right, for the most part -- and, other names will surface. (I'm still waiting for Brett Boone.) Without getting another legal discourse underway, if an individual has grounds to sue for slander, they will do so. I don't think we'll see many of the names in the Mitchell Report take legal action. Some will (I think one individual will do anything to clear his name. (Right, Roger??)

To echo an earlier poster, only Jose Canseco was able to look sincere in that Senate hearing. The others were all an embarrassment. That, in many ways was worse than the Mitchell Report -- all involved, except Canseco lied, and lied, and evaded, and 'forgot how to speak english.'

Canseco's no hero, and he made cash off of this -- but he, for the most part -- opened the door for the truth (or shadings of the truth) to come out.

by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Dec 14, 2007 5:56 PM CST up reply actions

Remember the hearings?

McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, Selig, etc. Canseco came off as the most honest on this subject.

Besides the obvious - Go Irish.

Z. He doesn't need an exclamtion point. He is one.

by PopeFlick on Dec 14, 2007 12:50 PM CST reply actions

Again...

I don't fault him for making the steroids issue public knowledge. I agree with you that Sosa/McGuire looked worse by lying at the hearings and Canseco at least owned up to it.

I do, however, think it was wrong for him to go to the media and just start throwing out names. He only chose to mention a-rod. That doesn't seem odd? Could it be he is looking to increase his book sales?

by 10 14 23 26 on Dec 14, 2007 1:42 PM CST up reply actions

Jose Canseco is an attention whore.

I guess you can go ahead and credit Juiced for bringing attention to the issue. I don't know if I'd say the contents are at all credible. I do know that the attention they brought to the issue hasn't precipitated any positive change.

And I don't think that Juiced was a necessity at all; the investigation that spawned "Game of Shadows" -- a much more reliable and thoughtful book -- started in 2004, before Canseco's book was published. The dirty laundry would have been aired with or without Canseco.

I would suggest you learn to truly interrupt all stats before using any selective stats. -- cubswin

by cwyers on Dec 14, 2007 1:53 PM CST up reply actions

"Canseco is an attention whore"

I think that says it best. Not to mention he's broke.

by 10 14 23 26 on Dec 14, 2007 2:00 PM CST up reply actions

Remember when ...

A ball bounced off his head and was ruled a home run?

Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs will make three errors today.

by northsidenonsense on Dec 14, 2007 1:21 PM CST reply actions

Jeez

that was sooooooo funny.

by NO100 on Dec 14, 2007 1:52 PM CST up reply actions

How off the wall have Canseco's claims been?

Seems to me he's been proven right. Has anyone sued him for slander? No. It isn't like the guys he named didn't have access to a lawyer. It is just that they couldn't have taken a stand under oath. I say name everyone you want, Jose. Get all the dirty laundry out there, only then can we move on.

by Nibbles on Dec 14, 2007 2:04 PM CST reply actions

It's not a matter...

Are we ever really going to know every person took roids? Do you really believe Jose Canseco is going to help solve this problem or help get us past it? My guess is no.

As of now, Jose Caseco has already sold his World Series ring due to financial issues. It makes me wonder what his motives are for naming A-Rod as a former user of roids. At this point, I believe JC will say whatever he can to sell another freakin book.

I think everyone here can agree that players need to be accountable for their past and future actions as they relate to steroids. My point is we just don't need Jose leading that charge.

by 10 14 23 26 on Dec 14, 2007 2:14 PM CST up reply actions

I don't agree at all.

I think what baseball needs is "Truth and Reconciliation." Have an amnesty for anyone who will come forward and confess in a certain period of time. Get everyone to come forward and kumbaya on a better testing regimine. And then move on.

It's far less important to hold people accountable than it is to just clear the air and focus on ensuring that baseball has a bright future.

I would suggest you learn to truly interrupt all stats before using any selective stats. -- cubswin

by cwyers on Dec 14, 2007 2:21 PM CST up reply actions

I agree......

100%! Give the players until the start of the season. If they confess their "sins" they are given amnesty.

If they refuse to cooperate, MLB can suspend them per the collective bargaining agreement or the "best intrests of baseball" clause.

If the players want to clean the sport up, this is how to do it.....

"You are an asshole": NDcubsfan

by timeforachange on Dec 14, 2007 2:26 PM CST up reply actions

Ok...

Maybe I should not have used the word accountable, because possibly half the league would have suspensions. I agree, it just needs to be brought out into the open in order to move past this.

Again, my entire point is that Canseco just needs to shut his mouth on naming people directly to the media.

by 10 14 23 26 on Dec 14, 2007 2:29 PM CST up reply actions

Absolutely!

Which is why Selig screwed up yesterday by saying he will take each case on a case by case basis instead of saying they need to move on.

Now, if the player's assoc continues to drag their feet, then you lay the hammer down. At some point, you have to make it painful for the players to continue using. If they won't agree to a stricter policy, you invoke the "best interests of the game" clause.

Selig is a complete goof ball and I believe any credibility he may have had, is out the window. I would guess they are going to tear both he and Fehr a new one in the hearing next week, and it will be fun to watch.

It won't happen, but MLB needs to replace Selig with a person of much higher integrity, but I am sure the owners will dig in their heels.

"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel

by MPH73 on Dec 14, 2007 2:45 PM CST up reply actions

Canseco...

... is not a likeable guy. In fact, in many ways he's thoroughly detestable. He needs to keep his mouth shut now, because in fact, as a lot of the posters above have said, many of his accusations have turned out to be true.

He's playing the "I told you so" game, which is really stupid. If he'd just let this whole thing play out, he might even be able to rehabilitate his reputation. As it is now, he's looking like a loudmouth jerk.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Dec 14, 2007 2:18 PM CST reply actions

Although Al,

I have to say I understand why he is playing this game. He was criticized again and again for telling his story and called a liar and a cheat.

it has got to feel somewhat nice to see the public eat their words. I am only saying I understand his desire to say "I told you so".

He is and always has been a dumbass.

MMMMM...Golden shrimp and chicken combo from Ron of Japan!

by Kinky Reggae on Dec 14, 2007 3:53 PM CST up reply actions

A-Rod.....

Is it fair to say that if A-Rod does not challenge these claims that he is guilty too?

I think so.....if someone says something that damaging about me and I can prove that I am innocent, then I am fighting it to the extent of the law.

If i think there is something, even minimal, that I could get in trouble for, then I quietly deny his rumors.

It should be interesting to see where that goes....

"Take a journey with Ernie"

by Dcubbienole on Dec 14, 2007 2:50 PM CST reply actions

No

You don't understand how the law works. In addition to proving the comments are false, A-Rod would have to prove that he has suffered financailly from Canseco's comments. So not only would he have to somehow prove that he never once took steroids (got any ideas as to how he would do that?), but he would then have to prove that he has lost endorsement deals, could have got $300M instead of $275M, etc. because Canseco got people to believe he took steroids.

In the end the amount of legal fees doesn't make it worth it especially because so many people doubt Canseco to begin with. Finally, how widespread do you think Canseco's comments have become about A-Rod? This is the first I'm hearing of them.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 14, 2007 4:32 PM CST up reply actions

Has anyone seen the interview in question?

He didn't say what that fannation 'quote' claims he said. At least it didn't come across that way at all.

It was on the FOX business channel, and I found a link to his interview somewhere this morning.

He never himself mentioned Alex Rodriguez. The interviewer was putting words in his mouth "So you say your surprised that Alex Rodriguez is not in the report?" "I'm not going to comment on specifics right now". That was pretty much how that portion of the interview went.

The blurb on fannation.com seems to play up Conseco as a finger pointer in this interviewer, he really wasn't. Now, he is generally a finger pointer, and he sure didn't deny that he was surprised that A-Rod wasn't on the report, but he didn't use his air time to say that he was.

The most interesting part of the interview (and the only interesting part really) was how he claimed to have approached Mitchell in order to help with information, but was turned away. If Brian Roberts can get his name on the report because a teammate recalled a conversation, why can't Conseco offer equally valid insight to a steroid investigation.

This was really interesting. And frustrating really, as it seems the Mitchell report was more about exhausting the leads that they already had under their thumb, as opposed to turning over new stones.

by WittyUserName on Dec 14, 2007 3:19 PM CST reply actions

MLB wasn't going to dig deep

You think they want the media to spend a lot of time on this? Do you really want the media to spend a lot of time on this? I don't really care myself. I want them to put strict testing in place, but how does anyone benefit from knowing Matt Karchner did steroids? I could care less.

by IllinoisCubs on Dec 14, 2007 4:34 PM CST up reply actions