[Ferd]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

(I don't think you even understand the point I was making)
Just because you don't agree with my point doesn't mean I don't have a point. My point is that at this point in time after the initial allegations went public in those other cases (i.e. a few short weeks after the initial allegations and/or evidence) the general mood, as far as public sentiment, was one of disbelief and skepticism toward Bonds, Vick, Jones...and Pete Rose, for good measure. I'm a sports fan and remember these episodes very well. There was no groundswell of "I believe 'em. They might actually be innocent.", like we see for Clemens now.

Second, no one is asking at what point YOU believed Marion Jones, etc. You keep referring to when YOU believed Vic, Jones, Bonds were guilty. This post is not about what Ferd believes in particular. I'm referring to what seems to be public sentiment in general. So its silly to say I don't have a point just because YOU believed Marion Jones when she pleaded guilty. The fact is, the sportswriter community and the fan base were very skeptical of her from the very beginning, as they were with Vick long before he pleaded to anything, and of Rose once the initial allegations surfaced, even when the evidence was still just circumstantial at first.

Nobody's asking you to hang him. If you choose to believe Roger, that's fine. This is a he said/he said case, so in the end, it will probably end up being a stalemate. People will come to their conclusions based on whatever testimony and evidence is out there. But your assertion that I don't have a point just because of of your personal perspective on these incidents is not valid at all.

have a good day, Mr Ferd

you got me. peace.

(im not ready to believe Roger btw. I hate the guy. he never would come to the Rangers.)