Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive
Good question. But isn't selection to the Hall of Fame based on your accomplishments on the field? Despite what they did off the field, the on-field accomplishments of Shoeless Joe and Charlie Hustle were monumental. Pete's gambling included betting on his OWN team and Shoeless Joe Jackson not only hit .375 (not bad for a guy trying to lose) in the 1919 World Series but was later found innocent of any complicity in throwing the series.
Clemens and Bonds? Again, monumental achievements on the field. They took drugs to enhance their performance--but how is that different from the rigorous training, diet and other practices that world-class athletes go through today? THOSE practices were unknown in days past and even when more advanced and modern training techniques became available many did not use them. It is said that Babe Ruth trained on beer and hot dogs. Should the accomplishments of today's baseball stars be denigrated because their predecessors did not have the advantage of such advanced training and medical knowledge? Sort of disingenuous, if you ask me.
Put all four into the Hall. With explanations of their (real and alleged) misdeeds as part of their record.
|
Bonds already had a hall of fame career before the use of enhancing drugs began, which should be a mitigating factor to get him in. Vet committee will right the BIG wrong!!