YASNY Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Put me in the unpopular opinion of no hall for Pete Rose and (yes Sox fans) Joe Jackson. I've given my reason before and HSC and others countered albeit very well educatedly but it is more of a difference of philosopy in most cases I believe. I'm with you on this one. The integrity of the game should be the first consideration. Jackson flat out took money to throw a World Series. Unforgivable. Rose knew the consequences for gambling on baseball. To me it all boils down to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted January 9, 2003 Author Share Posted January 9, 2003 As far as Jackson goes, I ask one questions, does he really have the numbers that put him in the hall? I know the numbers are deflated because he didn't play his entire career, and the committee will make exceptions if the player had a career ending injury or something along those lines, but I just can't see them making exceptions for a guy who was kicked out because he took money (No one can deny this) and although he never through the game, it was still taking money and I would agree he would have to serve his suspension. As far as Rose goes, I'd be real happy if he never made it into the hall, especially in his lifetime, but I also think the hall is for the best in the history of the majors and I think once he dies, their would be no problem putting him in, because he was one of the greatest to ever live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cy Young Porzio Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 When Pete Rose is dead, then, and only then, will I agree that he has served his lifetime ban. He deserves to be banned from playing or working in the game. You cant take the hall of fame away. They are the elite. And there is nothing that he can do that can take his numbers away. If he should be out of the hall just becuase he's a stupid asshole , why wasnt OJ kicked out of the hall ? this is a damn good point and i think oj did a lot worse than rose did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleM23 Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Jackson flat out took money to throw a World Series. I don't think anyone's ever proved that. Hell, they weren't even convicted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleM23 Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 As far as Jackson goes, I ask one questions, does he really have the numbers that put him in the hall? This alone, IMO, is enough for him to get in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 How can I say this nicely. Billy Cannon, white, caucasian winner of the Heisman Trophy (1959) is also a convicted felon. No one has suggested his trophy be taken away nor that he lose his Heisman vote. I work in a law office and have for many years. I personally think OJ is guilty, guilty, guilty. However, he was acquited of all criminal charges. Now, on what grounds do you throw someout out of a Hall of Fame after they have been acquited? Because he's black? Pete Rose signed a consent agreement to keep all the evidence sealed. No way should he be allowed into the HOF - and we forget, he is a convicted felon who served time. Because he signed the consent agreement BEFORE he was admitted to the HOF, we can keep him out. HOWEVER had be been admitted to HOF BEFORE the gambling evidence was there and he signed the consent agreement, then how do you throw him out? Is there any procedure in place right now for expelling someone from a HOF? But with Rose and OJ, we are talking two different HOFs anyway so how some of you see these things is parallel confuses me. I don't give a damn how Charlie Hustle was such a great player. There is another meaning to the word "hustle" and that's what he did, he hustled everyone. A cardinal rule in baseball is you do not bet on baseball. And you sure as hell don't bet on your own team and others from the dugout. Am I making this up? Pete Rose signed the consent agreement, not me, and he continues his hustle and his con job (which is ok because he is an ex-con) by plying his trade as a victim. Victim my ass. As for as Jackson, anyone who believes that he did not take money is just ignoring the facts. He himself admitted it, he went to Comiskey and told Comiskey he took the money and knew of the fix. If nothing else, read Eight Men Out and get some facts to go along with the prejudices. Now should Jackson posthumously be admitted to the Hall is an entirely debatable question but at least do it honestly, in that, yes, he was a part, maybe not the lead part, but a knowing part who took the money, of the fix, and given that, should be still be allowed in? And my personal opinion on Jackson: no way should he be in the HOF. I despise him and his 7 friends. If they had not done what they had done, we would have won the World Series in 1919 and for many years after that, my White Sox would have been what the Yankees became, those 8 players cost us how many World Series and how much history. Without them, maybe we would be the ones with 27 world championships, because what they did threw the Sox for a long, long time because of all the after effects of losing 8 players, most of them among the best that ever were. How anyone feels affection for people who cost us our World Series and our history is beyond me. Just my opinion. I expect to get flamed a bit for it. I get tired of people taking macho poses that are so separate from facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernuke Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 How can I say this nicely. Billy Cannon, white, caucasian winner of the Heisman Trophy (1959) is also a convicted felon. No one has suggested his trophy be taken away nor that he lose his Heisman vote. I work in a law office and have for many years. I personally think OJ is guilty, guilty, guilty. However, he was acquited of all criminal charges. Now, on what grounds do you throw someout out of a Hall of Fame after they have been acquited? Because he's black? Pete Rose signed a consent agreement to keep all the evidence sealed. No way should he be allowed into the HOF - and we forget, he is a convicted felon who served time. Because he signed the consent agreement BEFORE he was admitted to the HOF, we can keep him out. HOWEVER had be been admitted to HOF BEFORE the gambling evidence was there and he signed the consent agreement, then how do you throw him out? Is there any procedure in place right now for expelling someone from a HOF? But with Rose and OJ, we are talking two different HOFs anyway so how some of you see these things is parallel confuses me. I don't give a damn how Charlie Hustle was such a great player. There is another meaning to the word "hustle" and that's what he did, he hustled everyone. A cardinal rule in baseball is you do not bet on baseball. And you sure as hell don't bet on your own team and others from the dugout. Am I making this up? Pete Rose signed the consent agreement, not me, and he continues his hustle and his con job (which is ok because he is an ex-con) by plying his trade as a victim. Victim my ass. As for as Jackson, anyone who believes that he did not take money is just ignoring the facts. He himself admitted it, he went to Comiskey and told Comiskey he took the money and knew of the fix. If nothing else, read Eight Men Out and get some facts to go along with the prejudices. Now should Jackson posthumously be admitted to the Hall is an entirely debatable question but at least do it honestly, in that, yes, he was a part, maybe not the lead part, but a knowing part who took the money, of the fix, and given that, should be still be allowed in? And my personal opinion on Jackson: no way should he be in the HOF. I despise him and his 7 friends. If they had not done what they had done, we would have won the World Series in 1919 and for many years after that, my White Sox would have been what the Yankees became, those 8 players cost us how many World Series and how much history. Without them, maybe we would be the ones with 27 world championships, because what they did threw the Sox for a long, long time because of all the after effects of losing 8 players, most of them among the best that ever were. How anyone feels affection for people who cost us our World Series and our history is beyond me. Just my opinion. I expect to get flamed a bit for it. I get tired of people taking macho poses that are so separate from facts. Eight men out is a bad book on the subject. Read say it ain't so, joe if you want a more acurate version of Joe's part in the scandel. It is more acurate to say the money was forced upon Joe not taken by him and that his inability to read was taken advantage of when getting him to sign his confession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 I wish I could remember more about this, but Jerome Holtzman recently investigated the Black Sox scandal for MLB. He pretty well concluded the Jackson did, in fact, throw games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted January 10, 2003 Share Posted January 10, 2003 Eight men out is a bad book on the subject. Read say it ain't so, joe if you want a more acurate version of Joe's part in the scandel. Thanks for the book tip, I will check it out! YASNY - I would love to read what Holtzman wrote, thanks for posting about, any idea where to find it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernuke Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 Eight men out is a bad book on the subject. Read say it ain't so, joe if you want a more acurate version of Joe's part in the scandel. Thanks for the book tip, I will check it out! YASNY - I would love to read what Holtzman wrote, thanks for posting about, any idea where to find it? No problem. I was against Joe going to the hall of fame myself until I read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 Eight men out is a bad book on the subject. Read say it ain't so, joe if you want a more acurate version of Joe's part in the scandel. Thanks for the book tip, I will check it out! YASNY - I would love to read what Holtzman wrote, thanks for posting about, any idea where to find it? Not sure where I saw it, but I'd guess the MLB website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.