2013 HOF ballot out, includes Sosa, Clemens, Bonds

[lasttriptotulsa]

Rose doesn't deserve to be in the HOF. The rules of baseball said that if you gamble on the game you are gone. It was proven he gambled on the game. There is no discussion.

There is discussion about the PED users. I believe it is ethically wrong (and more important medically wrong) to use them. However, there was no rule at the time against them. I wouldn't vote them in but that's more a personal view than rules of the game.

 

I hear people say all the time that steroids were not banned, but that's just not true. A quick google search gave me this nugget.

 

"On June 7, 1991, commissioner Fay Vincent sent a memo to each team and the players union that stated: "The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players or personnel is strictly prohibited ... This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs ... including steroids." The seven-page document didn't cover random testing -- that had to be bargained with the union -- but it did outline treatment and penalties."

 

Link http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/20...ids-in-bas.html

[Texsox]

It seems to me that if you disgrace an organization by cheating or attacking the credibility of the competition you probably are not someone who should be held in high esteem by that organization. To hold up Bonds or Rose and say "these are the greatest individuals in baseball history and MLB is proud of their accomplishments" would be a joke. Baseball was made worse by their accomplishments and actions, they should not be honored. Plus they lied and lied until finally the evidence was too much or they needed to make a deal. Not the kind of people baseball should be honoring.

 

If MLB started with Rose and Bonds, it never would have survived.

[ptatc]

I hear people say all the time that steroids were not banned, but that's just not true. A quick google search gave me this nugget.

 

"On June 7, 1991, commissioner Fay Vincent sent a memo to each team and the players union that stated: "The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players or personnel is strictly prohibited ... This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs ... including steroids." The seven-page document didn't cover random testing -- that had to be bargained with the union -- but it did outline treatment and penalties."

 

Link http://grg51.typepad.com/steroid_nation/20...ids-in-bas.html

I've seen that before and I agree. However, since it wasn't negotiated and no specifics were named the rule is very subjective. A memo does not constitute a rule. That is why I think some people could debate it. In my mind it is illegal and regardless of the rule in baseball, it's cheating and should be treated as such.

[southsider2k5]

I've seen that before and I agree. However, since it wasn't negotiated and no specifics were named the rule is very subjective. A memo does not constitute a rule. That is why I think some people could debate it. In my mind it is illegal and regardless of the rule in baseball, it's cheating and should be treated as such.

 

baseball has an anti-trust exemption, plus the "good of the game" powers for the commish.

[Texsox]

Could any of these be bought legally without a prescription? If the players thought it was ok, why didn't any player piublically say "I'm bigger because I'm taking X? They knew it was wrong.

[southsider2k5]

MLB ‏@MLB

 

Umpire Hank O'Day, @Yankees owner Jacob Ruppert & 19th Century C/3B Deacon White elected to @BaseballHall by Pre-Integration Era Committee.

[Texsox]

I was thinking, between Rose and Bonds, I believe Rose deserves it more. His hits were all legit, and he would be going in as a player. I still would rather see them both out, but if one was to get in, I prefer Rose. Who knows what Bonds would have done without PEDs?

[southsider2k5]

I was thinking, between Rose and Bonds, I believe Rose deserves it more. His hits were all legit, and he would be going in as a player. I still would rather see them both out, but if one was to get in, I prefer Rose. Who knows what Bonds would have done without PEDs?

 

Rose broke the cardinal rule of baseball, knowing what the consequences were. I have no pity for Pete Rose.

[LittleHurt05]

I was thinking, between Rose and Bonds, I believe Rose deserves it more. His hits were all legit, and he would be going in as a player. I still would rather see them both out, but if one was to get in, I prefer Rose. Who knows what Bonds would have done without PEDs?

 

He won 3 MVP awards without them. Or at least without the really good PEDs he got from Balco.

[Texsox]

Rose broke the cardinal rule of baseball, knowing what the consequences were. I have no pity for Pete Rose.

 

I have none either. On the slippery slope of letting in people who disgraced the sport, he's the first I would.

 

You do make an excellent point that he fully, without any equivocation, knew the consequences.

[Texsox]

He won 3 MVP awards without them. Or at least without the really good PEDs he got from Balco.

 

Which kind of makes it worse, doesn't it?

[lasttriptotulsa]

I have none either. On the slippery slope of letting in people who disgraced the sport, he's the first I would.

 

You do make an excellent point that he fully, without any equivocation, knew the consequences.

 

Personal bias aside, I would put in Shoeless Joe before either of them.

[Quin]

Personal bias aside, I would put in Shoeless Joe before either of them.

 

+1

[LittleHurt05]

Which kind of makes it worse, doesn't it?

 

Yeah, I could see how thats the case. It would have been interesting to see how his career finished if it stayed on the same trajectory. Jealousy is a b**** though, and Bonds couldn't handle all the attention the major PED users were getting.

[ptatc]

baseball has an anti-trust exemption, plus the "good of the game" powers for the commish.

Sure he could but it would lead to a major union problem if you suspend a player for something that is not explicitly against the rules.

[ptatc]

Could any of these be bought legally without a prescription? If the players thought it was ok, why didn't any player piublically say "I'm bigger because I'm taking X? They knew it was wrong.

You cannot legally get them without a prescription.

[southsider2k5]

Personal bias aside, I would put in Shoeless Joe before either of them.

 

No way. Jackson bet against his own team. Everything I have read about Rose indicates he at least bet with his own team.

[Quin]

No way. Jackson bet against his own team. Everything I have read about Rose indicates he at least bet with his own team.

 

Allegedly.

[YASNY]

Allegedly.

 

He admitted it.

[ChiSox_Sonix]

No way. Jackson bet against his own team. Everything I have read about Rose indicates he at least bet with his own team.

 

But probably not really.

 

He admitted it.

 

He signed a paper he was advised to without fully knowing what he was signing (illiterate) and was given bad counsel by the Comiskey's attorney (who wanted to distance himself from the players.)

 

The main players in the plot all would later confirm that he was never present at the meetings and they only used his name to give more credibility to the plot

[Texsox]

As anti as I am about them getting in, I would like to see a display of the steroid era or even expanded to notorious players. Don't ignore it, acknowledge it. Mention the players and their accomplishments. It would be an exhibit, but the players would not be HoF members.

 

Would the pro Rose and Bond find that acceptable?

[Swingandalongonetoleft]

As anti as I am about them getting in, I would like to see a display of the steroid era or even expanded to notorious players. Don't ignore it, acknowledge it. Mention the players and their accomplishments. It would be an exhibit, but the players would not be HoF members.

 

Would the pro Rose and Bond find that acceptable?

 

I think Rose gets in posthumously.

 

I'm not a gambler, but I don't think it's serious enough to warrant the kinds of consequences it does. I wouldn't be surprised if there are dozens of other things being done to hurt the integrity of the game that aren't talked about, and therefore not penalized.

[witesoxfan]

As anti as I am about them getting in, I would like to see a display of the steroid era or even expanded to notorious players. Don't ignore it, acknowledge it. Mention the players and their accomplishments. It would be an exhibit, but the players would not be HoF members.

 

Would the pro Rose and Bond find that acceptable?

 

I bet the pro-Bonds and Clemens would find this acceptable, but the pro-Rose would ask why the hell it would matter.

[YASNY]

As long as there is this hard line stance against Joe Jackson they should all be kept out. Rose, Bonds, Clemens and Jackson could all have cases made for them based on their careers prior to their transgressions. But, if you open the door for them then you potentially open the door for Sosa, Palmeiro, MacGuire, etc.

[southsider2k5]

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/heatindex/...-vote-year.html

 

By Mark Faller azcentral sports Sun Dec 23, 2012 7:20 PM

 

My ballot for the National Baseball Hall of Fame 2013 election is in the mail.

 

It’s dutifully signed, has my Baseball Writers’ Association of America badge number recorded, all official.

 

What it does not have is a vote for a single player.

 

The day of reckoning I’ve been dreading for five years — ever since Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens finally left the playing field and started the countdown to Hall of Fame eligibility — has arrived.

 

With no guidance from either the Hall of Fame or Major League Baseball, no clarity from the courts or Congress, and no soul-baring from the players themselves, it’s up to the 600 or so Hall of Fame voters to be judge and jury for these symbols of baseball’s steroids era.

 

The questions are unprecedented. Who was dirty? Who was clean? Who got an advantage from using performance-enhancing drugs and who didn’t?

 

In the end, all we have is a ton of circumstancial evidence, a general acknowledgment that it was a dirty time in baseball for a lot of players, but no checklist telling us who juiced and who was clean.

 

Hall voters are left with three options:

 

Vote based on players’ career records and shelve the PED debate.

 

Selectively vote based on whatever suspicions one might have.

 

Vote for no one.

 

I am choosing to speak loudly by using silence.

 

This is my way of expressing my anger to baseball. Angry that the powers-that-be turned their backs while this was going on. Angry that it took us so long to shine light on it.

 

If you think I’m being stubborn, illogical or naive, or you think I’m ducking the issue, you are welcome to those opinions. And here’s something else that might push you off the deep end: I probably won’t do the same thing next year.

 

Over time, the debate has gone from outrage to disinterest. The prevailing winds now blow toward a reconciliation of sorts: Baseball’s issues from the past haven’t impacted the Hall of Fame, so why is this stain different? I’m not sure I buy that, but I acknowledge that lots of people are sick of talking about this.

 

Straw polls have made it pretty clear that Bonds, Clemens and Sammy Sosa won’t get enough support for election when the voting results are announced on Jan. 9. But Hall of Fame voters have a history of changing their minds, and I can see some of these players getting voted in some day, maybe even next year. That drives players nuts; they argue that the statistics haven’t changed, so their chances shouldn’t either. But a Hall of Fame is more than a set of impressive numbers. It’s a reflection of the times in a given sport, an assessment of who rose above their peers. The passage of time can impact one’s evaluation.

 

I don’t know what I’ll do next year, but I’m fairly sure I won’t send in a blank ballot. This one-year protest should make my point.

 

I admit to a tiny bit of guilt over possibly keeping out an innocent player by not voting, but I can live with it since there is no one I’d vote for who is in his 15th and final year of eligilibity. I’m not jeopardizing anyone’s legacy.

 

Frankly, I’d feel a whole lot guiltier checking the box next to the names of Bonds and Clemens and a few other guys. That can wait for another day — or never. Remains to be seen.