In the journalistic equivalent of a big baby crying on the floor with a poop-filled diaper, baseball writers today elected no players to the hall of fame.
It's only the eighth time this has ever happened, and the first since 1996.
Everyone knew this was going to be a thing as it's the first time a crop of players from the "steroid" era of baseball were up for the vote.
The fact that Bonds didn't even get in is a real shame as he was a sure hall of fame candidate even before there were allegations of steroids. I personally thing it's really stupid to eliminate these players and a whole era of baseball because of this.
Did they make mistakes and break the rules? Yes. But at that time, everyone was doing it. I'm not necessarily arguing they should be rewarded for doing that but you can't argue that players like Bonds were the best at what they did. I think you have to take into strong consideration what the culture was at any given time in a sport before you pass judgement.
So in a time when errone was using these players were the best at it. Or something.
Cheater's a cheater, regardless if everyone else was doing it.
ReplyDeleteGood morals isn't a credential to get in and like I said Bonds was already a Hall of Famer before all that. It's based solely on production. If you're not going to put some of the greatest players in the HoF what's the point in having it?
Delete