Our Opinion: Hall voters will have tough decisions to make

Opinion

Discussion

COMMENTING ON STORIES:

Welcome to our story comments feature. We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including the unpopular ones. We only ask that you keep your conversations clean, civil and on the topic of the story you are commenting on.

Coinciding with our websites redesign, we launched our new story comments feature through Disqus.

Disqus gives users the ability to log into our story comments feature so that they may be able to track their conversations, receive emails when their comments get a reply or to even have your comments update onto your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

For the time being, our story comments feature will continue to have the ability to post comments anonymously. We reserve the right to require registration in the future using your name and verified email address.

Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified at the newspaper’s discretion for a number of different reasons. Please follow our Online Rules of Conduct at all times.

RULES OF CONDUCT:

We reserve the right to remove comments that are unacceptable, to wit:

1. False and inacurate statements.
2. Personal attacks. Explicit name-calling.
3. Harassing, harmful, vulgar, obscene and defamatory language.
4. Threatening statements or statements that suggest violence.
5. Hate speech of any kind.
6. Intolerant comments on religion, race, age, gender, sexual preference or disabilities.
7. Accusations of criminal activity.
8. Content that is harmful to children and minors in any way.
9. References to any type of sexual activity and other private matters.
10. Random and inflammatory statements that are off topic.
11. Advertising of any kind.
12. Typing in all caps.

WE ENCOURAGE REASONABLE AND COURTEOUS COMMENTS THAT:

1. Create conversation on issues of interest and concern to fellow readers and local community members.
2. Express opinions and contrarian views.
3. Stimulate debate with respectful language.
4. Stay within the boundaries of these rules.

WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO SUSPEND OR TERMINATE ACCESS FOR:

1. Violating any of these Online Rules of Conduct.
2. Deliberately disrupting discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or spam.
3. Misrepresentation of identity or impersonating another user.

WE WELCOME:

1. Flagging violations of these rules that you observe to our attention.

MONITORING:

We monitor comments regularly Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Approval of comments outside of this time will be sporadic.

comments powered by Disqus

July 24, 2012

Our Opinion: Hall voters will have tough decisions to make

The Cooperstown Crier Tue Jul 24, 2012, 07:00 PM EDT

The Baseball Hall of Fame’s annual Induction Weekend is by far the biggest event in Cooperstown each year. This weekend, Cincinnati shortstop Barry Larkin and Cubs third baseman, the late Ron Santo, will join the elite fraternity.

The ceremonies are generally grand occasions, a celebration of the sport, with the only real controversy surfacing when Pete Rose comes to town to sign autographs. Enjoy it, because that’s about to change.

This winter, the Hall’s selection committee, the Baseball Writers’ Association of America, will be faced with an enormous decision. What to do about baseball’s Steroids Era? Names such as Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa and Mike Piazza will be on the eligibility list for consideration.

The voters have spoken and they’ve shown us that they will not approve any player who has been found to have used performance-enhancing drugs. They also have issues with players who are suspected of using performanceenhancing drugs.

Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGwire, known performanceenhancers,

didn’t even get 20 percent of the writers' vote (75 percent is needed to be inducted). Jeff Bagwell only got 41.7 percent of the vote, with some of the “no’s” clearly attributed to suspicion of using PEDs, though no evidence has ever come forward.

Good for the voters. They should stick to their standards. Many editorial writers are saying the voters need to get a new attitude or suggest that the museum add a Steroid-Era wing because if these players are not inducted somehow it will be “bad for business.” CNBC writer Darren Rovell even goes as far as suggesting a more drastic measure taking away the vote from the writers. He calls the Baseball Hall of Fame a business and says it’s good business to induct performance- enhancers or suspected performance-enhancers.

It may be good business, if the Hall of Fame were collecting from each ticket holder. But the ceremony itself is free and it is supposed to be a great honor to be enshrined.

Character is part of the criteria for election, so unless that is taken out, it should not be taken lightly. Also, the Hall of Fame is a nonprofit. Is the main goal to make money or to honor the game?

People will always be tempted to cheat in pro sports by using performance enhancers. The money and fame are too tempting to ignore for many athletes. However, the Baseball Hall of Fame should not promote steroid use, gambling on the game or cheating. It has used others as examples Pete Rose is a prime example.

All baseball players who played in the Steroid Era should not be discounted from the Hall of Fame due to possibly being juiced. It is too hard to really know who for sure is cheating, but those who do test positive for sure should be left out

Those eligible next year include Bonds, Clemens, Craig Biggio, Curt Schilling, Sosa, Piazza, Kenny Lofton, David Wells, Julio Franco, Shawn Green, Steve Finley, Roberto Hernandez, Jeff Cirillo, Jose Valentin, Reggie Sanders, Jeff Conine, Jose Mesa, Royce Clayton, Bob Wickman, Ryan Klesko, Aaron Sele, Woody Williams, Rondell White, Mike Lieberthal, Tony Batista, Mike Stanton, Sandy Alomar Jr., Damian Miller and Todd Walker. There is plenty of time for steroid debate. For now, we want to honor the pair of players getting their due in Cooperstown.