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.

 

I would say the NBA has survived their referee scandal pretty well.

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.

I love almost everything you have said on this thread.

 

People don't understand this. Legal or not, to eliminate the competitive spirit is to tear the fabric of the game. The only thing baseball truly has is the game. The game is the keystone that holds the MLB together.

Edited September 1, 201510 yr by AustinIllini

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

Eddie was dirty. Bad.

 

I feel bad for Buck, as i do for those of you who have no sense of tradition.

 

Buck knew about the fix so that's why he's banned. Curious...did anyone on the Reds know Pete was gambling on games? Why hasn't that question ever been raised?

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?

I got way into it a few years ago and read several books on the subject. "Say It Ain't So" is a good read and a good place to start. "Burying the Black Sox" is another.

Edited September 2, 201510 yr by The Ginger Kid

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

Despite reports to the fact that he did throw games.

I mean. Ok, this might sound callous, but:

 

Who cares? The guy was born 126 years ago, before cars were invented. He retired before electricity was common in homes. He died before polio was cured. Does the sixth generation of his family really need this? How can we possibly have evidence to overturn anything from that long ago? Is anyone not over this?

I mean. Ok, this might sound callous, but:

 

Who cares? The guy was born 126 years ago, before cars were invented. He retired before electricity was common in homes. He died before polio was cured. Does the sixth generation of his family really need this? How can we possibly have evidence to overturn anything from that long ago? Is anyone not over this?

 

The bid was instituted by his namesake museum IIRC.

http://www.chicagonow.com/soxnet/2015/09/s...atement-denied/

http://www.chicagonow.com/soxnet/2015/09/s...atement-denied/

 

The question in my mind would be IF Jackson ever was cleared by MLB, would the veterans committee members hold the past against Jackson's resume, much like HOf voters have done to Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire.

The bid was instituted by his namesake museum IIRC.

 

Ahh, ok.

Shoeless Joe Jackson is a baseball legend in lore and real life. The evidence is there to prove his innocence.

 

What does MLB gain by having him banned?

Buck knew about the fix so that's why he's banned. Curious...did anyone on the Reds know Pete was gambling on games? Why hasn't that question ever been raised?

I'd never thought of that about Pete's teammates, but as I said in the past about steroids, they knew. I'm certain of it just based on my experience in the workplace. There are always people who have info, and they're usually pretty ready to gossip. I doubt an MLB clubhouse is any different than most of our workplaces.

Shoeless Joe Jackson is a baseball legend in lore and real life. The evidence is there to prove his innocence.

 

What does MLB gain by having him banned?

 

I personally think it's one of those things where MLB doesn't ever want to admit they were wrong about a ruling.

I'd never thought of that about Pete's teammates, but as I said in the past about steroids, they knew. I'm certain of it just based on my experience in the workplace. There are always people who have info, and they're usually pretty ready to gossip. I doubt an MLB clubhouse is any different than most of our workplaces.

Exactly. Yet the rules instituted by Landis state that anyone with knowledge of gambling who doesn't speak up is also banned. That's how he banned Buck, aka The Ginger Kid, btw.

I think Jackson was guilty. But i also think a lifetime ban is just that. Jackson has been gone over 60 years. Let the hall decide his fate.

 

Same as rose. He should not be alive to enter the hall.

I think Jackson was guilty. But i also think a lifetime ban is just that. Jackson has been gone over 60 years. Let the hall decide his fate.

 

Same as rose. He should not be alive to enter the hall.

 

That's fine, but almost all the evidence points to him most likely not being in on it.

That's fine, but almost all the evidence points to him most likely not being in on it.

His stats in Sox losses vs Sox wins screams "the fix is in".

His stats in Sox losses vs Sox wins screams "the fix is in".

 

I mean if that's all you're using, he hit .286 (6-21) with 3 2B, 1 HR, 3 RBI, 3 R, 2K in the losses. Not exactly terrible.

 

I did a lot of research on this time period for my senior research paper for my history degree in college and gained access to the Hall archives, old newspapers, etc and there's really hardly any evidence suggesting he was in on anything. The same can not be said for the 6 others.

Edited September 3, 201510 yr by ChiSox_Sonix

That's fine, but almost all the evidence points to him most likely not being in on it.

He took money.

I'd never thought of that about Pete's teammates, but as I said in the past about steroids, they knew. I'm certain of it just based on my experience in the workplace. There are always people who have info, and they're usually pretty ready to gossip. I doubt an MLB clubhouse is any different than most of our workplaces.

 

I think most of our workplaces have women in them. Can't say that about an MLB clubhouse.

His stats in Sox losses vs Sox wins screams "the fix is in".

 

Can't that be said in general about any team losing ? Individual performances are down in losses and up in wins. And we have said nothing about sample sign. There's nothing anyone can glean about a "fix being in" based on stats in a a short playoff . It certainly falls way short as proof. It screams nothing except whoever thinks that is ignorant and grasping at straws.

Can't that be said in general about any team losing ? Individual performances are down in losses and up in wins. And we have said nothing about sample sign. There's nothing anyone can glean about a "fix being in" based on stats in a a short playoff . It certainly falls way short as proof. It screams nothing except whoever thinks that is ignorant and grasping at straws.

Good point, especially when said player carries the offense. We're far more likely to lose if Abreu goes 0-4 rather than 2-4. But those 0-4 games happen.