Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:If his records are displayed in the HoF I don't really think it matters whether he is in or not.
This
Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf
Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:If his records are displayed in the HoF I don't really think it matters whether he is in or not.
joopen wrote:MWB wrote:joopen wrote:Well considering one of the qualifications for entry is and always has been "integrity", I could see how they would want to exclude those who are deemed ineligible to participate in the MLB.
Yet Ty Cobb is in.
Is Ty Cobb ineligible to participate in MLB?
joopen wrote:MWB wrote:joopen wrote:MWB wrote:joopen wrote:Where is the accountability on LGP? First we are stealing hot sauce from Chipolte and now we don't want rules to exist because we don't like them
What is the point of this rule? The betting on baseball rule for MLB makes sense. This rule for keeping people out of the HoF doesn't make sense and serves no purpose.
Well considering one of the qualifications for entry is and always has been "integrity", I could see how they would want to exclude those who are deemed ineligible to participate in the MLB.
Yet Ty Cobb is in.
Is Ty Cobb ineligible to participate in MLB?
MWB wrote:ExPatriatePen wrote:MWB wrote:joopen wrote:Where is the accountability on LGP? First we are stealing hot sauce from Chipolte and now we don't want rules to exist because we don't like them
What is the point of this rule? The betting on baseball rule for MLB makes sense. This rule for keeping people out of the HoF doesn't make sense and serves no purpose.
It's highly possible, probable even, that if Rose didn't purposely throw games when he was a manager, he at least shaved points.
I repect the way Rose played (Charlie Hustle), but IMHO he does not belong in the HoF.
The betting has nothing to do with his on field performance. That's what merits HoF consideration. Put the betting stuff on the plaque.
MWB wrote:joopen wrote:MWB wrote:joopen wrote:Well considering one of the qualifications for entry is and always has been "integrity", I could see how they would want to exclude those who are deemed ineligible to participate in the MLB.
Yet Ty Cobb is in.
Is Ty Cobb ineligible to participate in MLB?
One of the qualifications is "integrity," and Cobb failed that on many levels. Arbitrary application.
joopen wrote:MWB wrote:joopen wrote:MWB wrote:joopen wrote:Well considering one of the qualifications for entry is and always has been "integrity", I could see how they would want to exclude those who are deemed ineligible to participate in the MLB.
Yet Ty Cobb is in.
Is Ty Cobb ineligible to participate in MLB?
One of the qualifications is "integrity," and Cobb failed that on many levels. Arbitrary application.
It is their rules not yours. Cobb is not ineligible. Rose is. End of story.
Rylan wrote:Is Pete Rose one of the best ball players of all time? yes or no?
joopen wrote:You can disagree all you want. Pete Rose is the only one to blame for him not being in the Hall
MWB wrote:joopen wrote:You can disagree all you want. Pete Rose is the only one to blame for him not being in the Hall
Of course he is, but that doesn't make it any less foolish in my mind. It's a museum that theoretically celebrates the best players through the years. By keeping players out it does itself and the fans a disservice.
MWB wrote:joopen wrote:You can disagree all you want. Pete Rose is the only one to blame for him not being in the Hall
Of course he is, but that doesn't make it any less foolish in my mind. It's a museum that theoretically celebrates the best players through the years. By keeping players out it does itself and the fans a disservice.
MRandall25 wrote:One could argue they don't even let the "best" players in anymore. Hall of Fame has become "The Hall of Very Good". Once again, politics.
MWB wrote:Joopen, this seems to be all about the rule for you. So if they decided to change that rule 5 years from now, you wouldn't care if he was admitted, right? Or am I misunderstanding?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests