Does Pete Rose go to the HOF now?!?

[dolfan]

After the George Mitchell experimental exercise in innuendo and destruction of reputations, does anybody now still seriously think that Pete Rose should be kept out of Cooperstown?????

[CantBCoy]

I would love to see him go to the hall. It's a shame they can't strike stats from the record books. I'd like to see baseball use the asterisk, only not for bonds. Give it back to Maris and one to Aaron and let it stand for the true kings of the long ball in a season/career. Bring attention to the true accomplishments.

[Rob]

I'm probably going to be in the minority here, but my vote is no hall for Rose. He committed the cardinal sin of baseball by betting on it. Having seen the Mitchell report, I don't think any of those guys deserve to be in the hall. However, at the time most of them used HGH/steroids it was not against the rules of baseball.

However, it is another reason why I have decided to not be a fan of the game any longer either.

That's my $.02

[Paully_44]

I have always thought he should most definately be in the Hall.


As for the Mitchell Report? $20 million of 1 sided "allegations"

[Rob]

I have always thought he should most definately be in the Hall.


As for the Mitchell Report? $20 million of 1 sided "allegations"

Some of those who did are coming out and confessing too.

[Paully_44]

I have always thought he should most definately be in the Hall.

As for the Mitchell Report? $20 million of 1 sided "allegations"

Some of those who did are coming out and confessing too.

I think that is great, if somebody used then they should admit it.

But for those who didn't use and were named in the report, it doesn't appear that there are drug tests or even cross-examinations of those who provided the information in the report. That is what I have an issue with.

[dolfan]

Personally, in my little brain, I don't see why the steroid/HGH issue is an issue in terms of players' legacies and HOF. Aside from the legality of the substances, there's no difference in using them to modify one's body and its capabilities than using technology and material to modify equipment to enhance performance. Now, maybe people read a moral shadow into it, that it is just plain wrong to take drugs and enhance performance. I disagree -- and I know I'm in the minority. As I personally see it, there's not a dime's worth of difference in taking vitamins and taking steroids to make the player's body a better baseball machine that earns more money and plays longer.

Let's take it outside of baseball. What if Bjorn Borg had played his Wimbledon tournaments with today's tennis rackets? Would we asterisk his titles because of them? No, of course not. But, if Andy Roddick were discovered to be a steroid or HGH user, look out --- even if he used a wooden racket. I simply do not see any meaningful distinction between enhancing equipment to enhance performance and enhancing the body to enhance performance. And, as far as the means to do that, until someone can illustrate the utter moral bankruptcy of steroids or hormones as an enhancing agent, I simply don't care if everybody in all sports takes them.

Obviously, steroids are dangerous. The "message" sent by pro athletes using them is not what you want your kid athletes to understand as the way to success. But, without that danger, no one has suggested that these using athletes are taking shortcuts or working less or training with less vigor or dedication to achieve those ends. The "cheat", as it is, is simply that there's a violation of a rule, and the rule is there because there's a stigma on steroids being introduced into the body because of its harmfulness. It is the beyond-the-game implications and impact of steroid use that causes the anti-doping rules to exist, not the competitive advantages that come from using them.

But, that should NOT, IMO, mar the records or legacies of steroid-using players and it shouldn't be so much as a hiccup on their way to Cooperstown.

[Paully_44]

What if Bjorn Borg had played his Wimbledon tournaments with today's tennis rackets?

Could you imagine the numbers that Babe Ruth would have put up in today's smaller parks, lighter bats and video technology to analyze his swing and the opposing pitchers?

[Full Quiver]

Could you imagine the numbers that Babe Ruth would have put up in today's smaller parks, lighter bats and video technology to analyze his swing and the opposing pitchers?

Well you'd also have to factor in today's pitching but what if the BABE had not been a drunk?