 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
04-11-2013, 12:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Barnes did play only nine seasons between 1871-1881, but he also played many years with the Forest Citys of Rockford. Seems like if they wanted to include him they coud give him some credit for 1866-1870.
But I didn't realize he only played nine pro seasons. Edited to add you said pretty much the same thing. Last edited by barrysloate; 04-11-2013 at 12:41 PM. 
|
|
#3
04-12-2013, 04:07 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The fair-foul argument is not valid. Every player at the time had the opportunity to use the fair-foul hit to their advantage. The fact that Barnes was the best at it should not be a criticism of his ability, but an acknowledgment of his talent. We can only measure a player's accomplishments by comparing them to the others players of the day using the rules of the day. We don't diminish the abilities of 300 game winners of the 19th century for their wins from a 45 or 50 foot pitching distance, or Babe Ruth's HRs to a 298 ft right field line. In fact, we celebrate them. Also, Barnes led the league in doubles and triples multiple times. I don't believe those hits were all the result of fair-foul hits.
Last edited by GaryPassamonte; 04-12-2013 at 06:16 AM.
|
|
#5
04-12-2013, 08:35 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Maybe the Ruth example wasn't a good one, but you understand my point. The arbitrary 10 year rule excluding pre-1871 players from HOF consideration is really the crux of my argument in this thread. Negro League players with little or no Major League experience have been allowed entrance to the HOF because they were not allowed to play in the Major Leagues at the time. I fully agree with this consideration. Pre-1871 players did not play in the Major Leagues because there were none. These players should be given consideration similar to that given Negro League players. I am a Barnes supporter, but there are others excluded because of the same circumstances. I believe the pre-1871 players are the only group currently excluded from HOF consideration by a rule that shouldn't pertain to them.
|
|
#7
04-12-2013, 09:44 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
My thoughts have always been that if a rule can be excepted once (Joss), it can be excepted again.
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 1922 Tobacco Card: Ross Young, Jesse Barnes | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 11-23-2023 04:04 PM |
| Who needs the Hall of Fame anyway?! | 53Browns | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 52 | 06-13-2011 10:41 PM |
| You'd think the Hall of Fame would get it right | Rob D. | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 14 | 03-01-2010 11:12 AM |
| Ross Barnes wanted | Archive | 19th Century Cards & ALL Baseball Postcards- B/S/T | 7 | 12-22-2007 02:06 AM |
| Hall of Fame | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 03-07-2007 04:02 PM |
Hybrid Mode
