Ryan Braun issues his statements (split from previous thread)

[danzig6767]

I'm glad he admitted to using, that's about all I have to say about it.

 

I believe him wholeheartedly that he only used once and was doing so to get back on the field to help his team win.

 

He better be telling the truth about that because if there is evidence still out there about Braun also using PED's prior to 2011 and that evidence comes out, he'll get absolutely crushed by other players and the media for lying yet again.

[MNBrew]

Some insist that Tom Haudricourt is a Braun apologist and generally isn't good at asking the tough questions. I think his Sunday column would suggest otherwise:

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/braun-still-has-plenty-to-explain-b9982152z1-220965651.html

 

Much of it is a reasonably well-articulated and justified request for more or better answers, but thankfully it's not couched in the angry "I'm entitled to know because I want to know" mentality we're hearing some of in all the commentary that's going on out there. A couple points strike me as digging at unnecessary details because they seem aimed at getting Braun to answer to every accusation & inuendo that's out there, which may be more than is necessary or appropriate.

 

But TH's bottom line is that anything short of transparency is going to seriously hinder any chance Braun has of fully making amends and healing the wounds he unfortunately but now clearly has caused.

[BruisedCrew]

I was listening to ESPN radio today and the hosts were railing on him for this.

 

ESPN was railing on Ryan Braun? /insert shocked face.

 

And they would have been railing on him if he had faced the cameras too. No matter what he would have done, the media sharks (Tom Haudricourt included) would not have been satisfied and would have been demanding more. And the public that is bent on skewering him wouldn't have hated him any less. So, why feed them more material?

[BruisedCrew]

Some insist that Tom Haudricourt is a Braun apologist and generally isn't good at asking the tough questions. I think his Sunday column would suggest otherwise:

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/braun-still-has-plenty-to-explain-b9982152z1-220965651.html

 

Much of it is a reasonably well-articulated and justified request for more or better answers, but thankfully it's not couched in the angry "I'm entitled to know because I want to know" mentality we're hearing some of in all the commentary that's going on out there. A couple points strike me as digging at unnecessary details because they seem aimed at getting Braun to answer to every accusation & inuendo that's out there, which may be more than is necessary or appropriate.

 

But TH's bottom line is that anything short of transparency is going to seriously hinder any chance Braun has of fully making amends and healing the wounds he unfortunately but now clearly has caused.

 

Nothing that Braun says or does right now is going to make amends or heal the wounds that are already there. All that the complete transparency that he wants would do is keep the story in the headlines. Those wounds are never going to completely heal, but the scars will become less visible with the passage of time if Braun conducts himself well on and off the field going forward. Continuing to pick at the open scabs right now is not going to speed up the healing process.

 

Haudricourt shows how out of touch he is when he says that Braun should specifically answer the question of whether he used PEDs at any other time. Doesn't he realize that Braun can only answer that question in the negative without subjecting himself to more suspensions and other legal problems, including possible criminal charges and voiding of his contract. You might as well ask a convicted murderer if he has killed anyone else.

 

And "What about the lawsuit by former friend Ralph Sasson who claims you used PEDs all the way back to your college days". Hello, Tom!! Sasson DOES NOT MAKE THOSE CLAIMS. He simply included them in a request for admission because he knew that media hacks would report them, but many of those requests are irrelevant to his case. Why should Braun be obligated to address every unsubstantiated claim made against him, including the claims made by unnamed sources?

 

The question that I would like to ask Haudricourt is exactly how he thinks Braun answering all of these questions right now would help the healing process. Even something like Braun vacating his MVP award would be blasted by the haters as an empty gesture. Providing the details of exactly what substances he took, and when, and why may help to feed voracious appetites, but it wouldn't help Braun improve his status in the public eye.

[BarneyStinston]

The problem with most media people are that they don't seem to understand the important reasons for people not to take interviews or answer pointed questions. They feed on "popular" opinion to make their stories grow. They automatically assume that any person, who is honest and truthful, should be inclined to answer any question. In reality, for most people, there are generally more good reasons not to engage the media than to do so even if you have nothing to hide. It looks to me that most of us are in agreement that Braun shouldn't be doing anything outside of getting ready for next season.

[JohnBriggs12]

"It's not a lie, if you believe it." George Costanza telling Jerry how to beat a lie detector test.

 

Criminals often unable to face the horror of their own acts, convince themselves that either they didn't do it or that they were justified and therefore innocent. OJ Simpson, Jerry Sandusky are likely two prime examples.

[BruisedCrew]

What if the total transparency Haudricourt wants would involve implicating other people? Like maybe there are a lot of other players taking PEDs from other suppliers, and they talk and joke about how the drug testing is a joke because it can't detect anything unless the test is administered within hours after the player takes something? I can see why a reporter might love it if a player squealed like this, but that sure wouldn't help Braun's reputation any.

 

There are all kinds of reasons why telling the whole truth to reporters may not be a good idea, and they don't all involve the selfish interests of the person being interrogated. Sure, there are unanswered questions, but that doesn't mean Braun is obligated to answer them.

[JimH5]

In the end, he's going to get his money, so the only thing that is at stake is his reputation, and whether or not fans cheer for him. Whether that has any value to him is questionable. He lost some endorsements, but how much is that really worth? He possibly cost himself a chance at the Hall of Fame--but maybe not, if future voters decide it's not that big of a deal.

 

To me, I thought it was the best Haudricourt column I'd read in a long time. I wouldn't expect Braun to answer all of the issues raised, but I would like answers to some.

 

He's never going to confess to PED use beyond what he's been suspended for, but it's certainly reasonable to ask about what he is going to do going forward. From the column:

 

You say you want to "share the lessons" you learned and be "part of the solution and no longer part of the problem." What exactly does that mean? Are you going to be an avid spokesman against the use of PEDs? Are you going to use your free time to encourage young people not to make the same mistake?

 

That is an awesome question, and one that gets to the integrity that Braun proclaimed he has. What does being "part of the solution" mean to Braun? How does he see himself contributing to the solution--or was that just a nice-sounding throwaway line, with no follow-up action required?

 

 

It looks to me that most of us are in agreement that Braun shouldn't be doing anything outside of getting ready for next season.

 

Exclude me from that group.

[BruisedCrew]

 

He's never going to confess to PED use beyond what he's been suspended for, but it's certainly reasonable to ask about what he is going to do going forward. From the column:

 

You say you want to "share the lessons" you learned and be "part of the solution and no longer part of the problem." What exactly does that mean? Are you going to be an avid spokesman against the use of PEDs? Are you going to use your free time to encourage young people not to make the same mistake?

 

That is an awesome question, and one that gets to the integrity that Braun proclaimed he has. What does being "part of the solution" mean to Braun? How does he see himself contributing to the solution--or was that just a nice-sounding throwaway line, with no follow-up action required?

 

 

It's a fair question, but do you think Braun would really have specifics about that right now? That seems like the kind of question that definitely can wait for an answer. It's also unrealistic to think that Braun is going to start on that kind of public effort immediately. Do you think a school would be dying to have Ryan Braun come to talk to their kids at a time when he has been painted as liar and Public Enemy Number One by the media? He has to let some time pass, and probably reestablish himself on the field, before he can be an adequate spokesperson for anything. Or, maybe he can team up with Lindsay Lohan so they can also cover the perils of alcohol.

[JimH5]

 

It's a fair question, but do you think Braun would really have specifics about that right now? That seems like the kind of question that definitely can wait for an answer. It's also unrealistic to think that Braun is going to start on that kind of public effort immediately. Do you think a school would be dying to have Ryan Braun come to talk to their kids at a time when he has been painted as liar and Public Enemy Number One by the media? He has to let some time pass, and probably reestablish himself on the field, before he can be an adequate spokesperson for anything. Or, maybe he can team up with Lindsay Lohan so they can also cover the perils of alcohol.

 

Colleges bring in controversial figures all the time, so I could see there being no shortage of speaking engagements for him if he chose to pursue them.

 

And that really is what I'm getting at--what do words mean to Ryan Braun? Did he say "I want to be part of the solution. . ." and expect that to be enough? Or does he really want to be part of a solution?

 

Even if he doesn't start making public appearances or whatever right now, what is he planning to do, and when?

 

It speaks of his character. Is he going to back up his words with actions?

[BruisedCrew]

 

It's a fair question, but do you think Braun would really have specifics about that right now? That seems like the kind of question that definitely can wait for an answer. It's also unrealistic to think that Braun is going to start on that kind of public effort immediately. Do you think a school would be dying to have Ryan Braun come to talk to their kids at a time when he has been painted as liar and Public Enemy Number One by the media? He has to let some time pass, and probably reestablish himself on the field, before he can be an adequate spokesperson for anything. Or, maybe he can team up with Lindsay Lohan so they can also cover the perils of alcohol.

 

Colleges bring in controversial figures all the time, so I could see there being no shortage of speaking engagements for him if he chose to pursue them.

 

And that really is what I'm getting at--what do words mean to Ryan Braun? Did he say "I want to be part of the solution. . ." and expect that to be enough? Or does he really want to be part of a solution?

 

Even if he doesn't start making public appearances or whatever right now, what is he planning to do, and when?

 

It speaks of his character. Is he going to back up his words with actions?

 

Exactly! Actions speak louder than words, so what's the point in demanding more words right now. Bring it up after he and the Brewers have time to sort through things a little bit.

[H4P]

The American Way:

1. Somebody in the public eye screws up

2. They lie about it (this step is sometimes skipped. A DUI for example)

3. The truth comes out

4. The media and large portion of general public go crazy

5. They apologize

6. Somebody else in the public eye screws up (see 1-6)

 

Where am I going with this? I think it's in his best interest to stay out of the light until somebody else screws up. If he talks publicly now, his haters (of which there are many) will only draw negatives from it and point to that one moment where he didn't look contrite enough or stuttered or brushed away a bug or whatever.

 

I work in a residential treatment program primarily treating drug and alcohol abuse. Urine surveilance is part of it. Every week, people come back with dirty urine and I can't tell you the number of stories I've heard as to how that got in there. I used to think that people were just blatantly lying. Now, I think that people honestly believe their own stories.

 

At the same time, I've seen people who have fought positive tests in the past come forward when they had a negative test and admit guilt. I don't know if Braun was going through the same thing. But I have seen numerous cases of people who spent long periods of time invested in lies and deception change that seemingly overnight. And these people, by and large, had nothing fiscally at stake.

 

I feel like I'm rambling a bit. I'm not even sure what my point is. I guess I just think that since accepting the suspension, he's handled this about as well as he can. And I think it's very well possible that he may have had a "moment" and realized he needed to stop behaving the way he was behaving. It's also possible he hasn't.

 

Time will tell. I think it would be a paramount blunder to go public right now. Let the sharks go to whatever the new blood in the water will be before you do anything public.

[MNBrew]

There are all kinds of reasons why telling the whole truth to reporters may not be a good idea, and they don't all involve the selfish interests of the person being interrogated. Sure, there are unanswered questions, but that doesn't mean Braun is obligated to answer them.

This is exactly why I said that some of TH's questions seemed to be digging at unnecessary details. Many didn't, but at least a few did.

 

It's quite evident that the media's version of total transparency certainly is not necessarily aligned with whatever the ultimate integrity of the situation is -- steps/actions aligned toward both honesty and constructive progress in the direction of "moving forward" -- which I think is what BruisedCrew was getting at. The "picking at scabs" analogy is most apropos.

 

I'm not suggesting avoiding all the tough questions is necessarily right or excusable. Rather, more what BruisedCrew said (I added the boldface) above. At least a few of TH's questions, Ryan Braun has absolutely no need or business answering.

[LouisEly]

My $0.02:

 

1) Should every pitcher who ever threw spitballs or hid an emery board or sharp object in their glove to doctor the baseball be forced to give back every award they ever won, forfeit every playoff series their teams ever won, and renounce their enshrinement in the baseball Hall of Fame? Should every hitter who ever corked a bat or took "greenies" to get up for a game do the same? Isn't doing those things essentially the same thing as what Braun did - "cheating" or using drugs to enhance performance/be able to play better? If the answers to those questions are "yes", then a lot of rewriting of baseball history needs to happen. Cheating in one form or another has been a part of baseball since the inception of the sport. He cheated, he admitted to it, we move on.

 

B) Braun should be forced to hold a live, unrehearsed press conference the same day that Garciaparra is forced to hold a live, unrehearsed press conference with a blown-up photo of that SI cover next to him. For those who think Braun has been juicing since high school, how come Garciaparra looks more ripped on that cover than Braun ever has? Braun was tested more than any other player in 2012 and despite that had one of his best years; I doubt testing standards regressed from 2011 to 2012 so that fewer substances were detectable.

 

3) BruisedCrew is quickly becoming one of my favorite posters.

[MNBrew]

Thanks, LouisEly! I've been saying for years that the outrage generated mostly by the media re: steroids in general, HOF & award eligibility, etc., is sanctimonious, short-sighted, & foolish. To those who've said it's a different era, different society, etc., so different standards are in play, that's certainly convenient logic but ultimately nonsense. Cheating is cheating. The HOF is full of guys who did it. Many HOFers won't stand on the dais behind McGwire/et al. if the were to be voted in, but they sure had no problem standing behind Gaylord Perry, for example, whose career-long spitballing (greaseballing, etc.) was not only stuff of lore but also constant jesting!

 

The players' numbers are what they are. There doubtlessly are plenty of cheaters, druggies, drunks, criminals, definitely quite dirty players (Ty Cobb jumps to mind), possibly even some wife-beaters, etc. If the "character clause" cannot be applied consistently over time, it doesn't belong. I don't believe the HOF is rescinding any players' inductions/memberships, nor is the HOF mandating a public confessional and apology for anyone in question to maintain their current status.

 

I wonder just how ridiculous this era & some individuals' sagas will look 50 or 100 years from now. Certainly attitude & antics of a contentious & dirty player like Ty Cobb never could've withstood the media scrutiny of today -- lucky for him or he'd be on the "out" list, too!

 

Consider this scenario, too: Tony LaRussa well may be inducted someday. Last winter, only months after his retirement, he admitted outright that he ordered his pitcher to bean Braun after Pujols was inadvertently hit just before that in a late-season series. Yet in the couple days following the actual incident, LaRussa LIED THROUGH HIS TEETH about it, not only denying he did it when it seemed obvious to everyone watching, but also went on and on defending himself and being quite angry and self-righteous about it. . . . . In a very basic & similar way, LaRussa broke the rules of the game, making willful choices that blatantly could've injured a player (and a star player, at that!) AND compromised the outcome of the game, and went out of his way to mislead the media & the public by LYING about it. [sarcasm]Worse yet, LaRussa made those choices WITHOUT the influence of chemicals/drugs/PEDs!!! The guy was just breathing pure air! Talk about soiled character![/sarcasm]. . . . . But will there ever be even a peep in the press about LaRussa confessing his wrong and publicly apologizing to Braun, the Brewers, the Milwaukee & national media, and the fans? Will LaRussa ever be expected to conduct clinics for major-league, minor-league, and recently drafted players about the potential harms (physical to the player, as well as to the game's integrity) and the moral wrong of beaning an opposing hitter? The double-standards at play re: steroids & PEDs vs. everything else are for the birds!

[jerichoholicninja]

Where am I going with this? I think it's in his best interest to stay out of the light until somebody else screws up. If he talks publicly now, his haters (of which there are many) will only draw negatives from it and point to that one moment where he didn't look contrite enough or stuttered or brushed away a bug or whatever.

 

Exactly. Braun just needs to keep his mouth shut and stay out of the public eye until the next "scandal" happens and he'll be fine.

 

1) Should every pitcher who ever threw spitballs or hid an emery board or sharp object in their glove to doctor the baseball be forced to give back every award they ever won, forfeit every playoff series their teams ever won, and renounce their enshrinement in the baseball Hall of Fame? Should every hitter who ever corked a bat or took "greenies" to get up for a game do the same? Isn't doing those things essentially the same thing as what Braun did - "cheating" or using drugs to enhance performance/be able to play better? If the answers to those questions are "yes", then a lot of rewriting of baseball history needs to happen. Cheating in one form or another has been a part of baseball since the inception of the sport. He cheated, he admitted to it, we move on.

 

I don't understand why this is so hard to get. It seems people think that the first cheater in baseball was the first guy to take steroids.

 

Consider this scenario, too: Tony LaRussa well may be inducted someday. Last winter, only months after his retirement, he admitted outright that he ordered his pitcher to bean Braun after Pujols was inadvertently hit just before that in a late-season series. Yet in the couple days following the actual incident, LaRussa LIED THROUGH HIS TEETH about it, not only denying he did it when it seemed obvious to everyone watching, but also went on and on defending himself and being quite angry and self-righteous about it. . . . . In a very basic & similar way, LaRussa broke the rules of the game, making willful choices that blatantly could've injured a player (and a star player, at that!) AND compromised the outcome of the game, and went out of his way to mislead the media & the public by LYING about it.

 

St. Louis Cardinal = different standards (i.e. Cardinal way)

[xisxisxis]

Cardinals + cheaters = one of the best franchises in baseball.

 

Brewers + cheaters = still a crappy organization....

[1992casey]

Locked and superseded by this topic:

 

Ryan Braun calling season ticket holders; Graffito to close