Roger Clemens....was justice served?

Yesterday Roger Clemens was found not guilty on all charges after being accused of lying to Congress about his not use performance-enhancing drugs. This news to me was surprising. There was a ton of evidence and all seemed to be leading towards a guilty verdict. 

I want to think this guy is innocent. But deep down...something tells me he is not. But that's not for me to judge. The ruling was the ruling. I just had much respect and loved watching him pitch until this happened. This was the way I felt with all of the players involved in the steroid era.

All in all, this has hurt him in the hobby respect of things as well. Cards that I have, their values have dipped below more than half of what they used to be. Will a not guilty change this..probably not. In the end, this has hurt his reputation, his chances to make the Hall and his cardboard.

So was this 5 year and millions of dollars trial worth it all for a not guilty? Was justice served? Did he lie to Congress? I don't have an answer for this.

Do any of you feel the same way I do about Roger? Do you find think he is guilty but still wonder in the back of your mind that he is innocent? And should he make the Hall of Fame?

Upper Deck Redemption Lawsuit

The other day I was on www.beckett.com and came across this article:

http://www.beckett.com/news/2012/04/upper-deck-loses-court-case-over-redemption-cards/

Then now I have to rant. First off, Upper Deck, why didn't you check the rules before you sent a non full time employee to the case???!! You lost what should have been a winnable case because of that move. But that isn't my main rant. My main rant involves the plaintiff in this case. Any card collector, especially us seasoned vets, knows, first off, Upper Deck doesn't have an MLB license. Secondly, we know that every product for any company is bound to have redemptions that are "time sensitive" not to mention those words are put right on the outside of every card box. And thirdly, we all know that buying older product is a risk especially when it comes to the chance of finding a redemption or 2.

To me, I avoid buying anything a 1 year old. Its just what I stick by and what I recommend other collectors stick by. I would not want to buy lets say a 2007 MLB product because its cheaper and a product I love then pull a Nolan Ryan autographed redemption card that is worthless. Something that had a date that was dated for 2010 that can no longer be used. Something you can give to your dog for a toy. I avoid all of their older product due to that. These are things every true card collector knows. And especially when it comes to Upper Deck who could no longer legally make those cards anyways because of lack of licenses. The cards were never made because the athlete hadn't gotten the cards back to Upper Deck. Which opens a whole new debate over redemptions. Should companies skip out on Star players just to make sure all autos are in the product?? I can go both ways on that topic. But we will save that for another day.

In closing, it just infuriates me that a guy who claims to be a collector knew none of this. Then wins the battle because Upper Deck made a mistake. I know as you will see when you click on the link that Upper Deck has a lot of lawsuits coming down on them, but this one should have been an easy victory. However, by the plaintiff winning this case this could have opened a whole new can of worms in a negative way. And not just for Upper Deck, but for the overall hobby we love.

Any of you agree or disagree with me or with the case? Any thoughts?