The Boston Red Sox are back, Jack, and that’s all that counts right now.
That said, there isn’t (nor has there been) very much to say until someone gets out onto the field and starts to play, for as we all know, there have been Very few changes in the Sox lineup and they will take to the 2008 fields of play with virtually the same weapons, albeit a year older, than the ones they wielded when they whooped for joy last October in Colorado.
We’ve already talked about Sean Casey at some length; the only real newcomer on the squad. We’ve been through the Schilling drama, so we can tuck that away until the All-Star break at least. With him out, there’s a little controversy (if you can even call it that) over that fifth starting role, where Julian Tavares enters into the picture a little more prominently than he might have otherwise.
How about Roger and that trainer of his, appearing before a House of Representatives oversight committee yesterday? Have you ever seen two prominent people square off that way in a situation which, by definition, indicated that one of them was a flat-out liar. Remembering Roger from his days with the Boston Red Sox, I never got the impression that he was somebody I’d ever have been (or be) chummy with. I seem to recall a few personal incidents that reflected poorly on his judgement and in some way left me with the impression that he was no one’s idea of Mr. Nice Guy.
On the other hand, my gut tells me that he’s not the liar.
I think he’s making another error in judgement by pummeling any and everybody in earshot with his stubborn, pugnacious insistence that he’s innocent; in other words, not the liar.
Dare I sally forth into a relevant moment from Shakespeare?
Hamlet’s a little ticked off that so soon after the death of his father, his mother, Gertrude, has re-married. He thinks, perhaps, that Mom might have had something to do with the death of dear old Dad. But he doesn’t barge into his mother’s room and accuse her of this directly. Instead, he writes a play, with a Queen character, who bears a striking resemblance to his mother. The King in the play, like his own father, is murdered.
As this interior play unfolds, with his Mom in the audience, the Queen character in the play at one point starts going on and on and on about how loyal and devoted a wife she is and how, were her husband to die, she would not even consider re-marriage. Hamlet’s using the play to take some ‘digs’ at his own mother.
So during the performance of this interior play, Hamlet slips up close to his mother and asks, “Madam, how like you this play?”
To which, no fool she, she says, quite dryly, “The lady (referring to the Queen character) doth protest too much, methinks.”
What Hamlet’s mother was getting at was that the Queen character in the play had gone just a little bit ‘over the top’ with all of her fancy words about devotion and loyalty and as far as Gertrude was concerned, she’d overplayed that hand.
The man (in this case, Roger Clemens) doth protest too much, methinks.
Roger is out there protesting way too loudly that Brian McNamee is the liar.
Particularly if he’s innocent, Clemens should just shut up and let events unfold at whatever pace they do so. Ranting and raving about his innocence makes him appear like that character in Hamlet’s interior play – too strident and ‘over the top’ to be believed.
If he’s the liar, all that ranting and raving makes a little bit of sense. It’s like when you catch someone doing something inappropriate, and they respond by ratcheting up their volume and attacking you; an all too familiar scenario in all sorts of interpersonal situations.
That’s why I think Clemens is making a mistake. My gut tells me he isn’t lying, but his behavior is more of an indicator that he is.
Keywords: Boston Red Sox, Curt Schilling, Julian Tavares, Roger Clemens, Sean Casey, William Shakespeare
