Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
There was nothing alleged about it. There was also nothing particularly unique about it either considered in light of the whole of MLB at the time.
|
How do you figure? By what yardstick are you measuring my use of the term "alleged?" In a court of law, all "conspirators" were found to be not guilty on all counts, including conspiracy to commit a confidence game. The presiding judge even complimented the jury for what he felt to be a "just verdict" after all evidence and testimony had been given. At that time, and to his death, Buck Weaver denied any knowledge of a fix, and certainly any involvement, and continued to petition MLB to reinstate him.
Though there are rumors of fixes throughout the history of baseball, none have been proved. I am sure that there were a lot of shady dealings in earlier 20th century baseball, though, considering the poor pay, the existence of the reserve clause, and the way many owners treated ballplayers in general.
However, one person presided over the fate of the Chicago 8, and that was Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, the newly appointed commissioner of MLB. Regardless of the finding of a court of law, Landis chose to ban the players for life.
Pretty much the same fate that Pete Rose faced, except that Rose chose to be put on the ineligible list if baseball ceased investigating the matter, and to prevent further legal investigation. (Sounds to me as though he had/has something to hide.) Of course, the caveat to that was that after one year he could begin to petition MLB for reinstatement, which he has done, and which has subsequently been denied.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakota
If Barry Bonds gets into the Hall, there is no reason other than pure stubbornness on the part of the pretend commissioner to keep Rose out.
|
I don't agree. MLB baseball, against the advice of many, did not choose to ban "performance enhancing" substances until after the 2002 season. Therefore, for the majority of their careers, Bonds, Palmiero, Sosa, McGwire, and anyone else engaged in these practices were not violating any code of baseball, unless they continued to do so in any season 2003-2006. So, why should their legal accomplishments lead to them being banned from the HOF?
Of course, I don't really believe that any of them will ever see the hall, because of the subsequent Balco scandal and the prevailing attitude of the nation regarding the taking anything of a performance enhancing nature.