100th anniversary of Black Sox Scandal next year.... time to let them into the Hall?

[conor912]

Would love to see it, but they'll never consider putting Joe in until Rose is dead. If they put him in while Rose is still alive, he'd be up the HOF's ass mercilessly and they don't want to give him the satisfaction.

[clydepepper]

I can't say I'd be in favor of any of them ever being in...even if the Black Sox have some sympathetic figures (i.e.Jackson;Weaver)...it would be an insult to all those who didn't cheat or throw games.

IMO

Being a HOFer isn't a birthright and it isn't something you can attain just through numbers...rose, bonds, and Clemens all believe they were better than the game itself...and they were not!

[Rascal1010]

With legalized sports gambling on the legislative agenda's in a lot of states right now, and more than likely will be legal nationwide within the next 5 years, I don't ever see the Baseball Hall of Fame ever saying it's OK for any player to fix a game or games, much less a World Series. I wouldn't be surprised within the next 20 years we don't actually see more players receive "lifetime" bans for fixing games if we do in fact see legalized sports gambling. The "lifetime" ban has to remain in effect and in full force as a deterrent, or they are just saying fixing games isn't that big of a deal.

Personally, I think Joe Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame, but the fact still remains that he did conspire to throw a World Series. It doesn't matter if he actually took money or not, what his batting average in the Series was, the bottom line is he was a member of a "conspiracy" to fix games for gamblers, and for that he was banned from the game for life.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by Rascal1010

With legalized sports gambling on the legislative agenda's in a lot of states right now, and more than likely will be legal nationwide within the next 5 years, I don't ever see the Baseball Hall of Fame ever saying it's OK for any player to fix a game or games, much less a World Series. I wouldn't be surprised within the next 20 years we don't actually see more players receive "lifetime" bans for fixing games if we do in fact see legalized sports gambling. The "lifetime" ban has to remain in effect and in full force as a deterrent, or they are just saying fixing games isn't that big of a deal.

Personally, I think Joe Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame, but the fact still remains that he did conspire to throw a World Series. It doesn't matter if he actually took money or not, what his batting average in the Series was, the bottom line is he was a member of a "conspiracy" to fix games for gamblers, and for that he was banned from the game for life.

Steve- I don't think you're directing your comments correctly. The reason for Rose's ban is not because he bet on Baseball games, but that he bet on Baseball games on which he had inside information (injuries) or could take action (lineup changes) which could determine the outcome of those games.


I can see, regretfully, a time in the future when Baseball players are allowed to bet on games, but only with absolutely strict limitations on which games would be involved.

[Rascal1010]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Steve- I don't think you're directing your comments correctly. The reason for Rose's ban is not because he bet on Baseball games, but that he bet on Baseball games on which he had inside information (injuries) or could take action (lineup changes) which could determine the outcome of those games.


I can see, regretfully, a time in the future when Baseball players are allowed to bet on games, but only with absolutely strict limitations on which games would be involved.

I was not addressing Pete Rose and why he was banned for life, I was only addressing the "Black Sox" and Joe Jackson in particular. The "Black Sox" did conspire with gamblers, some or part of the group did accept payment from the gamblers, and all that were "linked" to the conspiracy were given lifetime bans from the game of baseball.

What Pete Rose did was an entirely different situation, some would say not nearly as bad as throwing games, but at the end of the day MLB doesn't draw a clear set of distinctions between the two crimes against the game, but they are both lumped together punishable with a lifetime ban. At some point in time what Pete Rose did may be addressed differently in the rules, thus ending his ban.

Unfortunately, someday players may be allowed to bet on games, but I just don't see a day when the game of baseball makes it allowable for them to "conspire" to throw games, much less a World Series. I also do not foresee the Hall of Fame enshrining any of the involved Black Sox including Joe Jackson as not to remove any doubt that MLB and the Hall of Fame view what they did as one of the absolute worst crimes that was committed against the game of baseball. If throwing games is tolerable in any way shape or form in the game of baseball, then really what's the point of the game?

[shagrotn77]

I know he performed at an elite level in the 1919 WS, so if there truly is no evidence to suggest that Shoeless Joe threw games, and his only possible crime is not reporting the fix while it was going on, then I think it's time he gets the nod. Problem is, there probably is no way to know with certainty one way or the other at this point.

[sphere and ash]

Originally Posted by shagrotn77

I know he performed at an elite level in the 1919 WS, so if there truly is no evidence to suggest that Shoeless Joe threw games, and his only possible crime is not reporting the fix while it was going on, then I think it's time he gets the nod. Problem is, there probably is no way to know with certainty one way or the other at this point.

Jackson took a pillow case filled with $5,000. If he "performed at an elite level," it is because he left the dirty work to his co-conspirators, demonstrating that there is no honor among thieves. And the contention that he performed at an elite level is suspect. Christy Mathewson, watching from the stands, thought Jackson was throwing the World Series.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Rascal1010

The "lifetime" ban has to remain in effect and in full force as a deterrent, or they are just saying fixing games isn't that big of a deal.

Sure, a "lifetime" ban. His lifetime is over. Let him in, IMO.

[darwinbulldog]

MLB should get to decide who gets banned from MLB but not who gets banned from the Hall of Fame.

I'd put Joe in.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

MLB should get to decide who gets banned from MLB but not who gets banned from the Hall of Fame.

I'd put Joe in.

MLB doesn't get to decide. The Hall for years had an informal policy barring banned players from being elected. They put the rule in writing to address the Pete Rose issue.

But, if they changed their minds tomorrow, the Hall could admit Joe Jackson and MLB couldn't do anything to stop it.

[orly57]

Cobb participated in a Detroit-Cleveland fix during the last week of the 1919 season, on Sept. 25, immediately before the Black Sox scandal. Cobb later conceded he was among the four players in on the fix, but refused to ackowledge the accusation he had agreed to bet $2,000 on the game. The evidence indicated otherwise, that Cobb was fudging.

The other players involved in the conspiracy were pitcher Dutch Leonard, Cobb`s Detroit teammate, and playing manager Tris Speaker and pitcher Smoky Joe Wood of Cleveland. There was no public knowledge of the fix until 1926, when letters written by Cobb and Wood were sold by Leonard to American League President Ban Johnson.

As fixes go (there were more than a dozen similar connivances in the early 1900s), it wasn`t much. At stake was third place. The White Sox had already won the pennant, and Cleveland had clinched second, with the Tigers and the Yankees battling for third. Although figures are not available, a third-place share was probably worth about $500 per player.

The Cleveland players, for whatever reasons, wanted Detroit, not New York, to finish third. And so the plot was hatched: The Indians would lose to the Tigers. Detroit won 9-5, but justice prevailed. The Yankees finished third, a half-game ahead of the Tigers.

Charles Alexander, in his exhaustive biography of Cobb, writes:

``Then, said Leonard, the four agreed that they might as well bet some money on the game. Cobb was to put up $2,000, Leonard $1,500 and Speaker and Wood $1,000 each. Cobb suggested a park attendant named Fred West would be a good man to place the bets. But because Detroit was a 10-7 favorite and because the local bookmakers were unwilling to handle so much money, West only managed to get down $600 against the bookmakers` $420 for three betting partners.``

So, like the steroid guys, it appears that we only take umbrage with those WHO GOT CAUGHT.

[timn1]

Is it weird that some of the community who want to let Shoeless Joe in are the same ones who want to keep marginal (but entirely honest as far as we know) players like Alan Trammell out?

Letting any of the dishonest Black Sox in would be a travesty to the HOF. However, Rose is a different kettle of fish, IMO.

Originally Posted by clydepepper

I can't say I'd be in favor of any of them ever being in...even if the Black Sox have some sympathetic figures (i.e.Jackson;Weaver)...it would be an insult to all those who didn't cheat or throw games.

IMO

Being a HOFer isn't a birthright and it isn't something you can attain just through numbers...rose, bonds, and Clemens all believe they were better than the game itself...and they were not!

[jerrys]

All major league baseball club houses have a sign posted stating the rules of conduct.

Rule 21(d):

BETTING ON BALL GAMES. Any player, umpire, or club official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has no duty to perform shall be declared ineligible for one year.

Any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible.

It says permanently.

If Pete Rose was given a pass - added to his stats on his HOF plaque would be: As manager, guilty of betting on baseball games from the dugout during ball games.

On Jackson's plaque: Joe Jackson: Guilty of being a willing member of a conspiracy to fix World Series baseball games.

Honor with dishonor - contradictory - incompatible.

[Bigdaddy]

I agree completely. And I am a lifelong Cincinnati Reds fan. Pete even had a (slight) chance for redemption and he blew it. He continued to lie - to his biographer, to the commissioner, to the public - about the depths of his involvement with organized gambling.

Both are tragic figures and I even feel a bit of empathy for Joe. Pete, however, was the architect of his own undoing.

Originally Posted by jerrys

All major league baseball club houses have a sign posted stating the rules of conduct.

Rule 21(d):

BETTING ON BALL GAMES. Any player, umpire, or club official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has no duty to perform shall be declared ineligible for one year.

Any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible.

It says permanently.

If Pete Rose was given a pass - added to his stats on his HOF plaque would be: As manager, guilty of betting on baseball games from the dugout during ball games.

On Jackson's plaque: Joe Jackson: Guilty of being a willing member of a conspiracy to fix World Series baseball games.

Honor with dishonor - contradictory - incompatible.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by jerrys

All major league baseball club houses have a sign posted stating the rules of conduct.

Rule 21(d):

BETTING ON BALL GAMES. Any player, umpire, or club official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has no duty to perform shall be declared ineligible for one year.

Any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible.

It says permanently.

If Pete Rose was given a pass - added to his stats on his HOF plaque would be: As manager, guilty of betting on baseball games from the dugout during ball games.

On Jackson's plaque: Joe Jackson: Guilty of being a willing member of a conspiracy to fix World Series baseball games.

Honor with dishonor - contradictory - incompatible.

Obviously it was a known no-no, but were these signs and concrete rules/consequences in place in 1919, or did they come as a result of it? I honestly have no idea.