Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911
Exactly, he ended up with meaningless statements about how he was 50/50 on if he'd heard a conversation right and blew the case against Clemens by leaving only an accusation from a convicted perjurer and no evidence. Speculation about which of his stories (even though Pettitte is so honest!) is true and which is false is just speculation and people's beliefs. By the standard applied to Clemens here, I'd have to believe most anyone accused of anything was guilty of that thing. Compare Clemens' situation to how this board will exonerate Ortiz, for whom the evidence is greater than it is for Clemens but people like him so he gets a pass. Evidence is a good standard to use, because among many reasons it helps to steer towards the center and around people's narratives of good guys and bad guys.
The best thing against Clemens is that his career trajectory tracks with McNamee's charges and is highly abnormal. But that ain't much evidence either.
|
HOF voting is about opinion though. Opinion is influenced by facts but not limited to them.