OT: Shoeless Joe HOF decision?

edjs · #1 09-01-2015, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mybuddyinc

You can do a lot of things and not get banned from Baseball. But gambling or taking money has always been THE BIG NO-NO.

Jim Devlin, George Hall, Al Nichols and Bill Craver of the Louisville Grays were banned in 1877. They were, late in the season, 27-13, but went 8-12 in the last games. All but Craver admitted throwing games.

I've always felt these guys set the "unbreakable" rule in Baseball that has held up for all these years.

Rose, Jackson, Weaver, NO.

I have always understood that Weaver did not take money, nor threw any game, that his only part was not telling the league about the fix. Am I mistaken in this? I am definitely not a big time baseball historian, just a card collector and fan. I have always thought, though, that his wrong doing was much more minor than the others.

mattsey9 · #2 09-01-2015, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edjs

I have always understood that Weaver did not take money, nor threw any game, that his only part was not telling the league about the fix. Am I mistaken in this? I am definitely not a big time baseball historian, just a card collector and fan. I have always thought, though, that his wrong doing was much more minor than the others.

Some historians state that Weaver was present at three separate meetings when the fix was being planned. He was more than just some naive innocent.

Remember, Asinof's Eight Men Out took a lot of artistic license with the story and should be read with caution when seeking out historical fact.

packs · #3 09-01-2015, 04:50 PM

When MLB looked at Weaver's case again they found that he definitively participated in at least two meetings, one in New York City and one in Cincinnati. He discussed throwing the series with his teammates. He told no one and did nothing when they did throw the series.

mybuddyinc · #4 09-02-2015, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by edjs

I have always understood that Weaver did not take money, nor threw any game, that his only part was not telling the league about the fix. Am I mistaken in this? I am definitely not a big time baseball historian, just a card collector and fan. I have always thought, though, that his wrong doing was much more minor than the others.

Same with Louisville Craver. He never admitted to taking money. Later in life, trying to be reinstated, he adamantly denied it. He was included, in association, like Weaver, for not coming forward.

Arguably more minor, but others would argue the opposite.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Another great decision	T2069bk	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	9	10-04-2009 03:21 PM
I applaud your decision Leon take a bow (-:	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	1	08-11-2008 11:28 PM
Need to make a decision about T206's	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	14	03-10-2008 08:27 PM
B/S/T Decision	Archive	Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used	7	01-29-2008 03:51 PM
Huggins and Scott Auction Decision	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	28	03-12-2007 03:27 PM