CubsSuck1 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I am doing a project on the Black Sox for English, and I really didn't know much about the whole situation. Upon research, he knew about the fix, but didn't do much to stop it from happening. He played well during the series, and was the only one of the eight players to not admit to being in on the fix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSteve Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I go yes. I feel that Rose should never get back in baseball, so I have to be consistant. He knew about it. I would flip out if my teammates were taking a dive. I am sorry, but there is no excuses. He should get back into baseball before Rose does IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 There wasn't even reasoning that Shoeless Joe even knew about the scandel. He might had heard about it, or people might have said something about it, but I don't believe he cared. He didn't lose on purpose like the other eight. He still played his ass off in that World Series, and you got to respect that. He definitely shouldn't been banned. Rose went on and knew he was betting as a player and manager. That's what's different about those two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Hose Jon Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Shoeless has proved innocent by a court of law, let him back in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDsDirtySox Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 If you are doing a project that focuses on the 1919 Chicago White Sox, you should really focus on Buck Weaver. That is a man who deserves to have his name cleared. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I thought he actually agreed to it. Buck Weaver is the one that never agreed to anything. All Weaver did was know about it. That is bulls***. His name should definately be cleared of the Black Sox Scandal. He was totally against it from the start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 This has been bashed to death before, but he hit well in meaningless situations and hit s***ty when he had to. He also fielded poorly though sneakily error free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggio202 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I am doing a project on the Black Sox for English, and I really didn't know much about the whole situation. Upon research, he knew about the fix, but didn't do much to stop it from happening. He played well during the series, and was the only one of the eight players to not admit to being in on the fix. you are mixing up buck weaver and shoeless joe i believe... buck weaver was the one who happened to walk in on the players fixing the series with the gamblers...he refused to be a part of it..never took a dime and played his ass off in the series.. shoeless joe took 5k from gamblers , signed a confession admitting to throwing the series....the confession was lost during his criminal trial but somehow founds its way into a 1923 civil suit between jackson and sox owner charlie comiskey...also sometime around 1923 there was a story in one of the new york papers about shoeless joe throwing the series...he said that the guys didnt think they could make it look believable by trying to purposely makes outs at the plate and decided to throw the series in the field...joe talked about taking a bad angle on a catchable fly ball to make it look like he just missed it...making throws into the infield off line to let runners advance..stuff like that... there is no doubt in my mind that shoeless joe knew what he was doing and was a willing participant..at that point in his career he was a veteran ballplayer...he knew what was going on...and while he was ignorant as far as education he wasnt a stupid man...after his playing days in outlaw leagues he retired back in his hometown in SC and was a successful businessman... buck weaver's name should be cleared...while he was one fo the best of his era i could never get behind reinstating the guy...too much evidence says he was guilty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purdue129 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 It's always interesting to hear a Sox fan's point of view on the whole situation. I agree that he should be let in before Rose(if Rose ever is let back in). BTW... Shoeless Joe hit .375 that series, didn't he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Under no circumstances should Joe Jackson in the HOF. Unless baseball is going to totally ignore some of its most important rules, and set a scary precidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Lopez Ghost (old) Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Matthew and Baggio got it right about Jackson's performance in the Series. Weaver is sort of innocent, but he knew about the fix and didn't go public. To me, that's guilty enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmmmbeeer Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I haven't watched the movie since I was a kid, but was Eight Men Out a fairly accurate portrayal of the situation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoe22 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 You should also look into the 1929 Cubs. They threw that series as well. Lots of evidence to support that. Also, the phrase "Black Sox" originated not from the 1919 Series but because mizer Comiskey would not wash their unis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsoxs1 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 haven't watched the movie since I was a kid, but was Eight Men Out a fairly accurate portrayal of the situation? Your correct Eight Men out is good portrayal of the situation. Plus its a good movie to boot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Your correct Eight Men out is good portrayal of the situation. Plus its a good movie to boot. It's been over 80 years. Who knows what really happened? Whether Joe Jackson and/or Buck Weaver deserve to be reinstated is, at this point, unprovable one way or the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Gleason Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Joe took the money, but didn't throw the Series. He admitted to taking the money, but always insisted he didn't throw the Series. But he still took the money, and he still knew about the fix. Joe got what was coming to him. Buck Weaver needs to be reinstated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CubsSuck1 Posted February 7, 2004 Author Share Posted February 7, 2004 Joe took the money, but didn't throw the Series. He admitted to taking the money, but always insisted he didn't throw the Series. But he still took the money, and he still knew about the fix. Joe got what was coming to him. Buck Weaver needs to be reinstated. I think that he went to give the $5,000 to comiskey, but was ignored about the situation. That is according to speculation though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernuke Posted February 7, 2004 Share Posted February 7, 2004 This is some info based on the stuff i have read. Jackson was offered $10,000 to take part in the fix, he refused. Later he was offered $20,000 he again refused. this info is taken from his grand jury testimony. There is evidence to suggest that Jacksontold one or more club officials that a fix was in the making before the series began, and he also requested to be benched for the series to avoid suspicion that he was involved. As for the $5,000 that he "took", Lefty Williams went to Jacksons hotel room and offered him the money. Joe refused to accept it and an argument ensued, Jackson stormed out of his room, Williams through down the envelope and left and Jackson found it there upon his return. This was attested to under oath by both Jackson and Williams the only two people there. To me it looks like the money was dumped on him not taken by him. Sleepy Bill Burns one the guy who put the players and the gamblers testified under oath at Joe's 1924 cival trial that he never spoke to Jackson but instead took the word of Lefty Williams who claimed he could speak for Joe. In the same trial Williams testified that he did not have Jackson's pemission to speak for him or use his name. Also if you look at Joe's grand jury testimony you see jackson telling two very different stories, one confessing guilt and one claiming innocence. The players were all counseled by Comiskey's lawyer Alfred Austrian before giving their testimonies and since Austrians main concern would be protecting Comiskey not Jackson. Comiskey had to protect his reputation now and didn't want anyone knowing that Joe had tried to tell him about the fix. It is easy to infer here that Joe's confession was the story given to him by Austrian (who Joe mistakenly believed Austrian was his Lawyer) and the claim of innocence was his own feelings. Anyway enough from me, if you are interested in further reading try Say it ain't so Joe! by Donald Gropman the Revised second edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supernuke Posted February 7, 2004 Share Posted February 7, 2004 One other thing if he was able to hit .375 against the best team the NL had to offer when he was trying to do poorly part of the time he just may have been the greatest hitter of all time. 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.