Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Banned Players

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Banned Players

    Do Pete Rose or Joe Jackson belong in the Hall of Fame? Or both? Or neither?
    68
    Rose
    8.82%
    6
    Jackson
    17.65%
    12
    Both
    33.82%
    23
    Neither
    39.71%
    27
    Originally posted by bhss89
    "Hi. My name is John. I'd like you to meet my fastball. Can you catch up to it?
    Didn't think so. I'll see you again tomorrow night around the top of the ninth."
    Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy
    Why can't they just air the doubleheaders? Those programs aimed at children are crap anyway.

  • #2
    Originally posted by blacksilverfan12 View Post
    Do Pete Rose or Joe Jackson belong in the Hall of Fame? Or both? Or neither?
    I don't understand your question. Are you asking if Rose and Jackson belong in the HoF based on their major league careers? Or you asking if they belong in the HOF despite being involved in gambling?
    Last edited by Honus Wagner Rules; 03-28-2008, 01:22 PM.
    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

    Comment


    • #3
      I'm just wondering whether or not Ron Santo belongs in the HOF.
      Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
      Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
      Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
      Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
      Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Captain Cold Nose View Post
        I'm just wondering whether or not Ron Santo belongs in the HOF.
        I didn't know Santo was ever banned. lol.
        Seriously, I have always felt that Jackson should be in. And my argument has been when people ask about Rose if he gets in after being banned, than so should Jackson.
        I voted both.

        Welcome back ARod. Hope you are a Yankee forever.
        Phil Rizzuto-a Yankee forever.

        Holy Cow

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by soberdennis View Post
          I didn't know Santo was ever banned. lol.
          Seriously, I have always felt that Jackson should be in. And my argument has been when people ask about Rose if he gets in after being banned, than so should Jackson.
          I voted both.
          If you're well aware it's a crime, don't do it. Simple as that.

          This subject comes up quite a bit here, but it's likely been quite a long time since we've done a poll on it. Whether or not it stays or gets merged is up to Jim.
          Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
          Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
          Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
          Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
          Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

          Comment


          • #6
            They were both banned for good reasons.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
              I don't understand your question. Are you aking if Rose and Jackson belong in the HoF based on their major league careers? Or you asking if they belong in the HOF despite noth being involved in gambling?
              Despite being involved in gambling
              Originally posted by bhss89
              "Hi. My name is John. I'd like you to meet my fastball. Can you catch up to it?
              Didn't think so. I'll see you again tomorrow night around the top of the ninth."
              Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy
              Why can't they just air the doubleheaders? Those programs aimed at children are crap anyway.

              Comment


              • #8
                Jackson should be in because I myself don't think he did anything wrong. I think he was used.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Iconic figure that Shoeless Joe Jackson is cannot erase the fact he took money to throw World Series games. Those of you who want to quibble that he may have actually played well simply miss the point.

                  And a Rose is Rose except when its name is Pete.
                  Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Funny thing is, Jackson might not have the HoF support that he does now if he hadn't taken the money.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The only thing I have to add is that the voters should be permitted to make their own judgments about the character, integrity and sportsmanship of banned players rather than having such players institutionally excluded from consideration.
                      "It is a simple matter to erect a Hall of Fame, but difficult to select the tenants." -- Ken Smith
                      "I am led to suspect that some of the electorate is very dumb." -- Henry P. Edwards
                      "You have a Hall of Fame to put people in, not keep people out." -- Brian Kenny
                      "There's no such thing as a perfect ballot." -- Jay Jaffe

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Erik Bedard View Post
                        Funny thing is, Jackson might not have the HoF support that he does now if he hadn't taken the money.
                        If he hadn't taken the money he wouldn't have been banished from the game. He almost certainly would have gone on to post the kind of numbers that would have made him a Top Tier HoFer.
                        Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by crazyhorsesghost View Post
                          I think he was used.
                          Yeah, he USED $5,000.

                          I wish someone would use me that way - and I won't even ask for the modern equivalent of the cash.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Classic View Post
                            The only thing I have to add is that the voters should be permitted to make their own judgments about the character, integrity and sportsmanship of banned players rather than having such players institutionally excluded from consideration.
                            Not sure I understand this.

                            Are you saying that an organization has no right to administer itself and set down rules and regulations? That a group - whatever its line of business - whatever its market is - can and should not set guidelines for itself?

                            Where's the backbone? Who is going to run this organization which apparently doesn't have a say about itself or any mechanism to define itself?
                            Last edited by Brian McKenna; 03-28-2008, 01:20 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Neither belong in. I think I may live to see the day that Rose is inducted, but I don't think Jackson will ever get in.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X