tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8650264859764006366.post6080908312705276993..comments2023-10-29T08:25:54.951-05:00Comments on The Daily Something: Rose and the Hall (Sigh.)Billhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07840958382433052735noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8650264859764006366.post-43036740691770940002009-07-28T22:56:18.520-05:002009-07-28T22:56:18.520-05:00Kind of a minor point, since we're both talkin...Kind of a minor point, since we're both talking about kind of grudgingly putting him in, but I can't fully get behind the argument that the Hall is there to chronicle baseball history. The museum is there for that purpose, and that's why there is (or has been) Rose memorabilia over there, but that gallery with all the plaques is there not merely to chronicle, but to celebrate the greats who have earned places there, and I think Rose has absolutely forfeited that.<br /><br />And as I said, if the PED guys had violated the same kind of clear rule with the same clear punishment, I'd be against including them either. But they didn't (and they're not even the ones that threatened the integrity of the game, IMO, it was Selig, Fehr and the others who let it happen on a macro level). So I don't think it's really the same thing at all; Pete out, Barry in, unless you want to let Pete in just to shut him up. :)Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07840958382433052735noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8650264859764006366.post-61894774945452090042009-07-28T13:50:18.618-05:002009-07-28T13:50:18.618-05:00I agree, Bill, with both of yourselves. Pete did t...I agree, Bill, with both of yourselves. Pete did the worst thing a professional athlete can do, and he did it knowing full-well the punishment. And, as much as zero-tolerance policies can cause conflict from my much-too-willing-to-see-both-sides-of-the-issue soul, this seems like one I can fully get behind.<br /><br />But then I think about the Hall as a museum of baseball history. And, while you're right that the Hall is also intended to honor and celebrate the sport, I still think a museum as the responsibility to show all sides of its subject. "Whitewashing history" sounds a little harsh in this instance, but, minus the strong connotations of the phrase, I don't think there's a better term for it.<br /><br />So there's that. But then I think again about how well the punishment serves to discourage gambling, and I think it's a great thing. After all, there's really only been the one gambling problem since the Black Sox Scandal. If players were this afraid of using PEDs, then the issue would've disappeared years ago.<br /><br />And so on...<br /><br />I don't think this issue will ever go away as long as Pete is still alive and still banished. He's such a pompous, aggrandizing fool that he'll never let the discussion die, and he has too much of a case - career-wise - for it to be ignored. That's not to say that it's enough reason to put him in, but it's enough to make me waffle back and forth every time I consider his place in history.<br /><br />I think I'm leaning towards the "Hall as a chronicler of all history, no matter how nefarious" side of things right now...<br /><br />(Maybe they should go with a permanent exhibit about gambling in the sport - and maybe, in a couple of decades, they could expand it to include PEDs in the sport, if it seems necessary - and focus on the "disgraced hit-king" or the "disgraced heroes". Talk about their accomplishments as well as their downfall. That way, they're in the Hall without being properly "honored". They can call it "Say It Ain't So".)larhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17314820003835656973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8650264859764006366.post-20126151808114400962009-07-28T10:44:33.336-05:002009-07-28T10:44:33.336-05:00There's nothing wrong with arguing with yourse...There's nothing wrong with arguing with yourself. But when you start losing the argument, you have some issues.<br /><br />I agree, Rose doesn't belong. He broke the cardinal rule of baseball, and one that almost destroyed it several times. <br /><br />I'm not against a post-humous induction, but only if Shoeless Joe goes in first.Ron Rollinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16852012772573977515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8650264859764006366.post-17401444164255321862009-07-28T09:55:33.854-05:002009-07-28T09:55:33.854-05:00It actually almost made me sick to see that pic of...It actually almost made me sick to see that pic of Rose in his skivvies...urp...seriously, you should have put a warning at the top of this or something. On the plus side, it seems that Rose is one of the few poetically-just cases of being just as ugly on the outside as he is on the inside...<br />BTW, I really enjoyed this one...you rarely argue with yourself. :)Minervahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17803450940250232122noreply@blogger.com