Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa and Roger Clemens don’t have the integrity, sportsmanship or

[G1911]

I'm fairly agnostic on the steroid issue, but not voting for a player for cheating on the field is reasonable, even if I don't agree with it. Taking away voting rights for any voter that wants to punish cheating seems rather absurd to me. I suppose one's own point of view would be better carried out if all dissenting views were silenced and eliminated from voting, but this doesn't seem a rational basis for voting.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by G1911

I'm fairly agnostic on the steroid issue, but not voting for a player for cheating on the field is reasonable, even if I don't agree with it. Taking away voting rights for any voter that wants to punish cheating seems rather absurd to me. I suppose one's own point of view would be better carried out if all dissenting views were silenced and eliminated from voting, but this doesn't seem a rational basis for voting.

Ortiz never failed a test, other than "one anonymous test".


I'm all for dissenting views, but not when they are not rooted in science..I mean facts!

I have no skin in the game either way, but feel players accomplishments in the field should be the #1 factor.

Unless they spcifically bet on baseball, which i believe would disqualify someone based on the HOFs own rules. Aka mlbs "ineligible list". You want to add peds to this list, then go ahead it will have them ineligible for the hall.

[Frank A]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Ortiz never failed a test, other than "one anonymous test".


I'm all for dissenting views, but not when they are not rooted in science..I mean facts!

I have no skin in the game either way, but feel players accomplishments in the field should be the #1 factor.

Unless they spcifically bet on baseball, which i believe would disqualify someone based on the HOFs own rules. Aka mlbs "ineligible list". You want to add peds to this list, then go ahead it will have them ineligible for the hall.

I guess then , that is OK with you that they keep all the records they broke by cheating. These guys knew what they were doing. let them pay the price for it.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by Frank A

I guess then , that is OK with you that they keep all the records they broke by cheating. These guys knew what they were doing. let them pay the price for it.

But where do you draw the line? What about the players that are already in the Hall of Fame that used Amphetamines or other types of drug concoctions during their playing days?

Ruth experimented with Sheep Testicle Extract. Pud Galvin did something similar. Hank Aaron took Amphetamines once, is he disqualified? Mike Schmidt and Goose Gossage have admitted to amphetamines, and this is just the players we know. I don't treat Canseco's word as gospel, but he's been pretty reliable on the players that he's named, and according to him there's already players from the "Steroid Era" that have managed to make it into the Hall of Fame, that took drugs. Not to mention Bud Selig sure as hell didn't care about his players juicing when he was the owner of the Brewers.

Cap Anson was one of the major factors in keeping the game segregated, Kennesaw Mountain Landis, upheld segregation, Tris Speaker was in the KKK, all three of those things are sufficiently worse, in my opinion, then taking PED's yet we don't blink an eye, and there's no campaign to kick any of those three men out of the Hall.

You can't cite a "character clause" for one set of guys, but not the other. The Hall of Fame is rapidly turning into the "Hall of Hypocrisy."

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Frank A

I guess then , that is OK with you that they keep all the records they broke by cheating. These guys knew what they were doing. let them pay the price for it.

Not my rule, mlb should place them on the ineligible list if they are not HOF worthy. However, the list seems to be specific to gambling.

If in the 70s, players heard drinking whale sperm would help you got home runs, they'd be lined up at sea world.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Not my rule, mlb should place them on the ineligible list if they are not HOF worthy. However, the list seems to be specific to gambling.

If in the 70s, players heard drinking whale sperm would help you got home runs, they'd be lined up at sea world.

That is true today, yesterday, and every other day. That line would have included EVERY player and many would try to get in line multiple times.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by bnorth

That is true today, yesterday, and every other day. That line would have included EVERY player and many would try to get in line multiple times.

You could argue some were forced to get in line. either by management, or because everyone else was doing it

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

Ortiz never failed a test, other than "one anonymous test".


I'm all for dissenting views, but not when they are not rooted in science..I mean facts!

I have no skin in the game either way, but feel players accomplishments in the field should be the #1 factor.

Unless they spcifically bet on baseball, which i believe would disqualify someone based on the HOFs own rules. Aka mlbs "ineligible list". You want to add peds to this list, then go ahead it will have them ineligible for the hall.

Voters are allowed to have opinions as to who took steroids and vote accordingly. Nothing about the voting process is based on science, its all opinions.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Voters are allowed to have opinions as to who took steroids and vote accordingly. Nothing about the voting process is based on science, its all opinions.

But the stats dont lie, and that is the first base for any and all HOF election per their own description. Anything else is more of a popularity contest

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Republicaninmass

But the stats dont lie, and that is the first base for any and all HOF election per their own description. Anything else is more of a popularity contest

Stats are facts but whether those stats overcome a players bad character is still the voters opinion.

Albert Belle should be in the HOF, if character didn't matter.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Stats are facts but whether those stats overcome a players bad character is still the voters opinion.

Albert Belle should be in the HOF, if character didn't matter.

It should be the last consideration. based on their own description. Maybe for a Slider candidate, it might sway an opinion. Any writer who could leave out Ortiz based on character , never watched him play.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Stats are facts but whether those stats overcome a players bad character is still the voters opinion.

Albert Belle should be in the HOF, if character didn't matter.

Character aside, Belle was also a known cheat, remember his infamous corked bat incident? And what about someone like Gaylord Perry throwing spitballs during his career, and he's in the HOF? Those are both instances of cheating, but you never hear much about it in those forms, but the PEDs yes. Why is one form of cheating so much worse than the other? Cheating is cheating, right?

And speaking of cheats, what about what the Astros did a few years ago? I felt what they did was way more reprehensible than any PED user. Yet they did virtually nothing to the players involved. If I had a say, I'd tell each one of them that was in on it that they are now and forever banned from ever getting into the HOF. And I probably would have banned them all for at least a year. Problem is it is all about the money, as usual, and they couldn't afford to alienate an entire city and team. Had it only been a player or two involved, I bet there was would have been some significant punishment after all. But when it turned it to be to so many players, they couldn't punish them all without alienating the entire city and region.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by BobC

Character aside, Belle was also a known cheat, remember his infamous corked bat incident? And what about someone like Gaylord Perry throwing spitballs during his career, and he's in the HOF? Those are both instances of cheating, but you never hear much about it in those forms, but the PEDs yes. Why is one form of cheating so much worse than the other? Cheating is cheating, right?

And speaking of cheats, what about what the Astros did a few years ago? I felt what they did was way more reprehensible than any PED user. Yet they did virtually nothing to the players involved. If I had a say, I'd tell each one of them that was in on it that they are now and forever banned from ever getting into the HOF. And I probably would have banned them all for at least a year. Problem is it is all about the money, as usual, and they couldn't afford to alienate an entire city and team. Had it only been a player or two involved, I bet there was would have been some significant punishment after all. But when it turned it to be to so many players, they couldn't punish them all without alienating the entire city and region.

They didn't punish Astros players because they gave them immunity in return for their testimony. And I'm sure Manfred didn't want to have to deal with the players union, it would have dragged out forever, JMO.

Sammy Sosa was suspended for using a corked bat also.

I can't answer about Gaylord but I don't think the solution is putting more cheaters in the HOF.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by BobC

Character aside, Belle was also a known cheat, remember his infamous corked bat incident? And what about someone like Gaylord Perry throwing spitballs during his career, and he's in the HOF? Those are both instances of cheating, but you never hear much about it in those forms, but the PEDs yes. Why is one form of cheating so much worse than the other? Cheating is cheating, right?

This (while hilarious) sums up how steroids conjure up a whole different sinister image than anything but the Black Sox. Sadly perception is what mostly matters

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_pHrZuGyS4

[Frank A]

Bullshit that only stats should apply. This is not only about stats, it's also about the records that were broken because of CHEATING. What is it that you guys don't understand? It's all fake production and they should not ever be allowed in the hall. Frank

[Seven]

Originally Posted by BobC

Character aside, Belle was also a known cheat, remember his infamous corked bat incident? And what about someone like Gaylord Perry throwing spitballs during his career, and he's in the HOF? Those are both instances of cheating, but you never hear much about it in those forms, but the PEDs yes. Why is one form of cheating so much worse than the other? Cheating is cheating, right?

And speaking of cheats, what about what the Astros did a few years ago? I felt what they did was way more reprehensible than any PED user. Yet they did virtually nothing to the players involved. If I had a say, I'd tell each one of them that was in on it that they are now and forever banned from ever getting into the HOF. And I probably would have banned them all for at least a year. Problem is it is all about the money, as usual, and they couldn't afford to alienate an entire city and team. Had it only been a player or two involved, I bet there was would have been some significant punishment after all. But when it turned it to be to so many players, they couldn't punish them all without alienating the entire city and region.

The latter is entirely on Rob "It's just a piece of metal" Manfred. Never thought we'd get a worse commissioner than Selig, boy was I wrong. He makes Gary Bettman look competent