clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Selig On the Mitchell Report

Earlier this afternoon, Bud Selig held a brief question-and-answer session with the press in regards to the Mitchell Report.  Here is the transcript.

Moderator:  Thank you to the press for attending this question and answer session with Major League Baseball commissioner Bud Selig.  Mr. Selig, thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to answer questions about the Mitchell Report.

Selig:  My pleasure.

Moderator:  With that we'll forge ahead.  Please be patient, there will be many questions asked by many different people.  Take your time and wait for your cue.  First question, please.

Press:  Mr. Selig, how would you describe your reaction to the Mitchell Report?

Selig:  Well, I haven't had the opportunity to fully examine the four-hundred-plus page document, but from what I've seen so far I would describe my reaction as satisfied.

Press:  So you're satisfied even though you haven't read the entire document?

Selig:  Of course.  We all knew this was happening and we all knew what this report was going to say.

Press:  So why exactly did you commission the report?

Selig:  A number of reasons.  First, it's important that the fans of the great game of baseball understand that Major League Baseball is committed to full disclosure of this dark era of the game.

Press:  Uh huh.  And how is "full disclosure" helping the issue of illegal substances in baseball?

Selig:  It isn't.

Press:  So why do it?

Selig:  Well, we wasted ten to twenty years of the game turning a blind eye to what was happening anyway, so we figured why not waste $20 million dollars and a few more months in order to point fingers at those who were guilty in the past.  You see, just because you know something is wrong, that doesn't mean you can just go forward and fix the problem.  You need to have a committee to investigate whether something is actually wrong.

Press:  You mentioned a "number of reasons" for commissioning the Mitchell Report.  Could you elaborate on any of the other reasons?

Selig:  No.

Press:  Please?

Selig:  Okay.  Another reason I commissioned the Mitchell Report was to create a flurry for the press.  You see, much like the Starr Report, the only real point of releasing this sort of thing to the public is for all the rubes to go "OOOHHHHHHHHHHHHH" and then mention a name or two and shake their head in what they feel at that moment is incredible shock and dismay.  It also gives me and the baseball fans a united front against cheaters.  Then I'm not the bad guy.

Press:  Is it true that the Mitchell Report is not a comprehensive list of all players who have tested positive for baseball's banned substances?

Selig: Yes, that's true.

Press:  So then why did you release the report as it is?  If this was supposed to be the be-all, end-all, "full-disclosure" document it was said to be, why wouldn't you include the name of every player who has tested positive?  Otherwise, what's the point of listing any players at all?

Selig:  What, don't you like hearing that Roger Clemens used illegal substances?  Don't you like hearing about how your heroes make bad decisions?  Don't you like knowing that a multiple Cy Young Award winner was a cheater??  Doesn't it validate your existence?!?

Press:  Don't care, don't care, don't care and no.  In that order.

Selig:  You don't care that Roger Clemens cheated?

Press:  I do care, but you didn't.  That's why he was able to cheat in the first place.  Right now all I'm concerned about is how baseball plans to move forward with it's testing, policy and disciplinary actions in regards to steroid and illegal substance use.

Selig:  As the report suggested, Major League Baseball will look into what options are available to tighten our guidelines.  We'll also adopt new testing policies.

Press:  Did you really need to read the report to know this?

Selig:  Not really, but like I said earlier, we already knew what this report was about.  Reading it doesn't teach you much that actually matters.

Press:  So I wasted my time reading it?

Selig:  Maybe.  I mean, we wasted our time commissioning and writing it.

Press:  Actually sir, Mitchell does propose a few interesting ideas...

Selig:  Yes I'm sure he does.  And now that someone else has told me it's okay to fix the problem, I can go ahead and fix it.  Actually, I don't want to brag...but a lot of his ideas I totally already had.

Press:  Except you didn't implement all of those ideas.

Selig:  Of course not, why are we going around in circles?  I needed to hire a committee to validate my ideas after they confirmed what was wrong in baseball.  Haha, oh man, I just KNEW there were steroids being used!

Press:  Sir, Barry Bonds was only mentioned 103 times in this report.  Do you feel that's a little excessive?

Selig:  Your mom's excessive.

Press:  Excuse me?

Selig:  No I don't feel that Barry's name was mentioned excessively.  I mean, hell, we've been pointing fingers at him for years.  And now all that finger pointing is totally going to pay off.  Even though a very vast majority of the players named in this report have never actually tested positive for use of illegal substances.

Press:  So you're saying a lot of the evidence in the Mitchell Report is circumstantial?  Because while that may be true, there is some damning evidence of use by some of these players.

Selig:  Eh.

Press:  One final question, sir.  If you could sum up your evaluation of the findings in the Mitchell Report in one word, what would it be?

Selig:  Duh.