Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Jackson among players reinstated by MLB

Donate To GopherHole
Ope3 said:
MLB could not stop it immediately. The MLB Players Union fought it for more than a decade before it was eventually collectively bargained.

Also the curators displaying the artifacts are not the ones Voting on enshrinement.



Yes, that is weird. I guess Bonds fell short on at least 3 of the criteria listed.

BBWAA ELECTION RULES | Baseball Hall of Fame

baseballhall.org baseballhall.org

5. Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

-----

I don't think Baines should have gotten in, but I guess if it helped Oliva obtain enshrinement, not all bad.
Click to expand...
I don't think they apply those criteria in a way that makes any sense. The fact that baseball writers hold the Hall of Fame over people's head is just bizarre to me. They've clung on this one thing as an act of power and not integrity (IMO).

Baseball banned steroids in 1991. They did not implement testing until 2003. MLBs disgust with steroids was ceremonial. This is the exact thing that Vince McMahon got lambasted for in the 90's, he said wrestlers weren't allowed to use steroids and then didn't test. The league got to pretend to care about people cheating while being propped up by the cheaters.

The MLB and MLBPA signed 3 CBAs between 1991 and 2003 and they did not add drug testing to any of them. They weren't worried about the integrity of the game, they were worried about viewership.
 

Slim Tubby said:
Yup. Nobody benefited more from the PED era more than MLB themselves. They made billions of dollars and rejuvenated the entire sport by promoting the exploits of Bonds, McGuire and Sosa. Some would argue it's by far the greatest marketing campaign MLB has ever produced.

The 2017 Houston Astros literally cheated all of baseball - other teams, other players and certainly fans across the globe. In the record books, they are still recognized as the World Champions that season.

You're spot on with your take, Bob...MLB and the owners chose huge financial gains over protecting the "integrity" of their league. Put the stat worthy guys in the HOF with an asterisk on their plaques and let baseball fans pass their own judgement.
Click to expand...
I would lunp the Astros with the PED guys. There atoricious to me.

Then there are the rule benders.

Whitey Ford, Perry, Nolan Ryan.

The Mets routinely busted Nolan Ryan with the astros for cutting balls with a bottle cap.

The difference in my head between what I don’t like is the liability. You can’t catch the PED guys without their permission. The astros used tech..

Baseball is a sport that tests the whole gamut of a human. One needs to be fast, powerful, strong, explosive, detailed. Then calm. Controlled emotion, then an explosion. You have to think, then turn it off and retreat to the zone.

You can’t play against the clock, you have to give the other guys their turn. You have to beat the human.

Sign stealing, and doctoring are part of the competitve fun. As long as it is done with the brain. Once you add outside science and tech, that cannot be seen right there, (or be pattern recognition from memory) it is where my personal line is drawn.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Baseball banned steroids in 1991. They did not implement testing until 2003. MLBs disgust with steroids was ceremonial. This is the exact thing that Vince McMahon got lambasted for in the 90's, he said wrestlers weren't allowed to use steroids and then didn't test. The league got to pretend to care about people cheating while being propped up by the cheaters.

The MLB and MLBPA signed 3 CBAs between 1991 and 2003 and they did not add drug testing to any of them. They weren't worried about the integrity of the game, they were worried about viewership.
Click to expand...

One of the 3 signed agreements was following the Lock Out of 1994. No chance the MLBPA was going to agree to it, and MLB was also mostly concerned about getting an agreement itself.

Indeed MLB Owners should have been more worried about it, but they were also more worried about the impacts from that Lock Out to push for full on testing. No doubt Owners were naive to the extent of the problem.

What has frustrated me more about MLB "banning" it, was that in pretty much all the egregious juicers, it was not just against Baseball Rules it was ILLEGAL.

To be clear, I do not absolve the Owners for their role in this, but I also think they and Selig pushed for reform well before it was enacted as they were rebuffed by the MLBPA.
 
Last edited:

Ope3 said:
One of the 3 signed agreements was following the Lock Out of 1994. No chance the MLBPA was going to agree to it, and MLB was also mostly concerned about getting an agreement itself.

Indeed MLB Owners should have been more worried about it, but they were also more worried about the impacts from that Lock Out to push for full on testing. No doubt Owners were naive to the extent of the problem.

What has frustrated me more about MLB "banning" it, was that in pretty much all the egregious juicers, it was not just against Baseball Rules it was ILLEGAL.

To be clear, I do not absolve the Owners for their role in this, but I also think they and Selig pushed for reform well before it was enacted as they were rebuffed by the MLBPA.
Click to expand...
And its the MLB and plauera were stuck on far more issues. Seems niave to add another bargaining criteria when they where having difficulty - that is still going, We are stuck with Rob Manfred because he was suppossed to finally settle issues lingering from that era.
 

Slim Tubby said:
The 2017 Houston Astros literally cheated all of baseball - other teams, other players and certainly fans across the globe. In the record books, they are still recognized as the World Champions that season.
Click to expand...
I consider the Dodgers the Champs for 2017.
 



Ope3 said:
In watching ESPN last night, the BBWAA will have no role at all on passing judgment on Rose. It will be a Veteran's Committee meeting in December 2027.

16 Members. He will need at least 12 Votes.
Click to expand...
The committee is usually made up of a good amount of Hall of Fame players and executives. I'm going to guess a lot of former players dislike Rose so it might be tough.
 

Ope3 said:
It's pretty much accepted Joe took the dough.

Maybe he was too ignorant to know the ramifications or tried anyway, but I just don't see how that goes unpunished.

Having said that, under the presumption it was a "Lifetime Ban" and his life ended decades ago, I would vote Jackson into Cooperstown.

I"ve thought that ever since I heard Ted Williams discuss it with Bob Costas on his radio show.
Click to expand...
While we can't say with 100% certainty that he is completely innocent, it's likely a ban was too much of a penalty for him.

Some good info here: https://sabr.org/journal/article/an...s-public-statements-on-the-black-sox-scandal/
 




Ope3 said:
I see it more as Time Served as opposed to being "absolved".

It doesn't guarantee squat either, depending on if he ever gets on the BBWAA Ballot or by a Veterans Committee, either body would have to vote him in.
Click to expand...
The problem with those bodies is that they a tiny fraction of a fraction of people. There should be a third option, call it the final All-Star Ballot. A team's nominee can be added to the current year's all-star ballot. If the player gets more votes by position than the current players, they enter the HOF. Call it a back door from the incessant lobbying that goes on within the BBWAA, who can only be rightfully viewed as a group-think cabal of self-righteous Jackels. You know the type if you are a reader. A local writer recently got in trouble with the public by looking down his nose at us mere mortals. Jack Cass's like that guy shouldn't have special powers to control who enters the Hall. The fans should. I think Pete Rose could have entered the HOF year over year if the public was in charge, not that it should take more than one ballot.
 

ShushPush said:
The problem with those bodies is that they a tiny fraction of a fraction of people. There should be a third option, call it the final All-Star Ballot. A team's nominee can be added to the current year's all-star ballot. If the player gets more votes by position than the current players, they enter the HOF. Call it a back door from the incessant lobbying that goes on within the BBWAA, who can only be rightfully viewed as a group-think cabal of self-righteous Jackels. You know the type if you are a reader. A local writer recently got in trouble with the public by looking down his nose at us mere mortals. Jack Cass's like that guy shouldn't have special powers to control who enters the Hall. The fans should. I think Pete Rose could have entered the HOF year over year if the public was in charge, not that it should take more than one ballot.
Click to expand...

I disagree with fans having any power at all for Hall of Fame votes. Poor track record on voting for All Star Games and un-equal fans numbers in fan bases are just 2 of the reasons.
 

Ope3 said:
I disagree with fans having any power at all for Hall of Fame votes. Poor track record on voting for All Star Games and un-equal fans numbers in fan bases are just 2 of the reasons.
Click to expand...
Poor track record on voting? Well, ladies and gentlemen, I have witnessed another citizen who claims fans have no judgement. This is high treason. The game only exists at the MLB level for the fans.
 




Ope3 said:
Indeed. I voted to put Ron Jackson in the 1979 All Star Game for the Twins. As often as I could.
Click to expand...
Yet, you want the baseball writers to be the exclusive club for the HOF. You are the biggest bundle of contradiction.
 






You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom