SportsCenter ‏@SportsCenter 22m22 minutes ago

 

MLB commissioner Rob Manfred denies request to reinstate Shoeless Joe Jackson. http://es.pn/1PJ1g2x

Honestly I find this stuff kind of tired.

Was hoping that he'd get a shot to get in.

Reading between the lines does not bode well for Pete Rose other then Rose didn't throw any games that we know of

What a joke. All evidence points towards his innocence. Manfred just doesn't have the balls to reinstate him.

I do believe he was innocent

Honestly I find this stuff kind of tired.

 

Me too. I find it funny when a fan today gets emotional about Joe Jackson or Buck Weaver.

 

Gambling was rampant before 1920. They finally did something about it after the 1919 World Series. That was the final straw, and the game has been better for it since.

Me too. I find it funny when a fan today gets emotional about Joe Jackson or Buck Weaver.

 

Gambling was rampant before 1920. They finally did something about it after the 1919 World Series. That was the final straw, and the game has been better for it since.

Most of the evidence points to Jackson being innocent. He was a victim of the other 7 idiots using his name with the gamblers since he was the leagues star player at the time. No one disputes the black sox took money and threw the series. Jackson however did not. The White Sox are pretty short on historically great players, so it'd be great to see one of the few actually honored.

I think it speaks volumes about his innocence that people always contend for him, but not for Cicotte who was another dominant player.

I do believe he was innocent

He was acquitted but banned for not narc-ing on the others.

He was acquitted but banned for not narc-ing on the others.

 

He attempted to inform Comiskey of the scandal but Comiskey refused to meet with him.

Most of the evidence points to Jackson being innocent. He was a victim of the other 7 idiots using his name with the gamblers since he was the leagues star player at the time. No one disputes the black sox took money and threw the series. Jackson however did not. The White Sox are pretty short on historically great players, so it'd be great to see one of the few actually honored.

 

6 idiots. Buck Weaver was only banned for not informing officials when he caught wind of the scandal but otherwise had zero involvement.

Edited September 1, 201510 yr by lasttriptotulsa

As he should have. We are talking about the validity of a sport being overturned, if this happened in modern day, I'd expect banning from the sport to be the least of the concern. If baseball didn't come down hard on this, who knows if it's popularity would have continued in the modern eras. Could have ended up like horseracing.

He was acquitted but banned for not narc-ing on the others.

 

No one likes a rat.Look how long steroids infected the game. How many players came forth to expose them over the years with most likely many knowing of it ?

As he should have. We are talking about the validity of a sport being overturned, if this happened in modern day, I'd expect banning from the sport to be the least of the concern. If baseball didn't come down hard on this, who knows if it's popularity would have continued in the modern eras. Could have ended up like horseracing.

The need to boot Thomas out of the hall next for not naming names.

Being 100% honest, I know next to nothing about the case outside of what I saw in 8 Men Out. What are you all using as source materials for what really happened?

Being 100% honest, I know next to nothing about the case outside of what I saw in 8 Men Out. What are you all using as source materials for what really happened?

 

There's a lot of information out there if you do some quick googling. People have done a lot of research on this using newspaper reports from the time, testimonies, etc...

Steroids were not even banned during Thomas's time. ANd frankly, even if they were, to pretty much everyone not making cheap points, purposely throwing a game is a completely different level than taking performance enhancers. There is a huge difference when you are changing the game so that the result is fixed.

Steroids were not even banned during Thomas's time. ANd frankly, even if they were, to pretty much everyone not making cheap points, purposely throwing a game is a completely different level than taking performance enhancers. There is a huge difference when you are changing the game so that the result is fixed.

They were banned for essentially the entirety of Thomas' career. They probably had a bigger impact on the game than throwing games ever did.

That is such bull. Would anyone watch baseball if there was serious doubt over whether the games were fixed? Would you watch baseball again if it turned out the White Sox lost in the world series because the umpires were paid off?

 

People certainly answered whether they would watch baseball if there were players on performance enhancers.

 

The difference on the real "integrity of the game" is so gigantic it's not even debatable.

Steroids were not even banned during Thomas's time. ANd frankly, even if they were, to pretty much everyone not making cheap points, purposely throwing a game is a completely different level than taking performance enhancers. There is a huge difference when you are changing the game so that the result is fixed.

 

Technically they were always banned, they just weren't tested for.

Technically they were always banned, they just weren't tested for.

 

Alright, sure, but stuff like this was going on that is banned now:

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/27/opinion/...-pep-pills.html

That is such bull. Would anyone watch baseball if there was serious doubt over whether the games were fixed? Would you watch baseball again if it turned out the White Sox lost in the world series because the umpires were paid off?

 

People certainly answered whether they would watch baseball if there were players on performance enhancers.

 

The difference on the real "integrity of the game" is so gigantic it's not even debatable.

 

There is a large difference in logic and motivation here. With steroids, it was all about guys trying to win. With gambling, the chances is there that someone is trying to lose. That makes a very big difference to me in terms of punishment. Someone who is purposefully trying to lose should never be allowed to play professional baseball again, period.

 

They were banned for essentially the entirety of Thomas' career. They probably had a bigger impact on the game than throwing games ever did.

 

It's arguable that steroids had a positive impact on the game.

There is a large difference in logic and motivation here. With steroids, it was all about guys trying to win. With gambling, the chances is there that someone is trying to lose. That makes a very big difference to me in terms of punishment. Someone who is purposefully trying to lose should never be allowed to play professional baseball again, period.

 

With steroids you have players honestly motivated and trying to compete, in the other, you have the absence of competition. Not unfairness within competition, but the absence of it. That's a huge deal.