Skip to main content

In the Black Sox scandal and this is a scandal they sent a clear message that gambling and the knowledge of a player gambling would result in those players being banned for life from ever playing the game again. It was done in the best interest of baseball and was a clear message to all remaining and future players what would happen if they crossed the line. Now fast forward to this drug scandal when Mitchell said that he recommended that no punishment be handed out I almost through a glass through my TV. You see the amount of players that are implicated was far greater than anyone imagined and the financial implication is enormous. But isn't that the biggest reason these athletes chose to use and will continue to use these illegal drugs. How does everyone else feel when the message being sent to the young players coming up that you have to be bigger to even have a chance to compete at the next level, they call that potential. Well the players in the Black Sox scandel were acquitted of criminal charges in a court of law yet The commissioner Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis suspended each player and banned them for life in spite of the fact that all were cleared of criminal charges. Quote "Regardless of the verdict of the juries," he said, "no player that throws a ball game . . . will ever again play professional baseball." What followed was controversy.

While seven of the eight "Black Sox" went so far as confessing, one player seemed to be relatively innocent -- "Shoeless" Joe Jackson. Joseph Jefferson Jackson was one of the best hitters to play the game, finishing with a .356 career average (third all time), and, in the last years before Babe Ruth took over the sport, was arguably the most popular. A sure-fire Hall-of-Famer.

In the Series he hit a robust .375 while setting a major league World Series record with 12 hits, one of which was the only home run hit during the entire Series. Does that sound like the type of performance one trying to lose would have?

While reportedly "Acknowledging that he had let up in key situations," Joe Jackson has received tremendous support over the years for his ban to be lifted and for his induction into the Hall of Fame. Posthumously, unfortunately. The evidence? Apparently not only had he told Comiskey of the fix, but asked to be benched during the series so there was no way anyone could say he had a part in it. Comiskey refused, and actually tried to cover up the fix afterwards to save face.

Both Scandals are driven by money and for this I believe if Selig really wants to act on this scandal he needs to re-write history and bann all players named on the list for life... period no exception. Move swiftly and allow history to tell the story of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and the rest of the players who put their personal gains before the purity of the game. Let the message be sent and lets get our game back.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Considering how widespread steroid use has been, and how there is a large lack of evidence other than hear-say, a lifetime ban for steroid users does not seem like a good idea to me.

Many of the sources in the Mitchell report were forced to speak against the players to stay out of prison themselves. I wouldn't find it surprising if those sources lied about some players, mainly big-name players, because that's what the authorities wanted to hear.

Now if you wanted to do that on a positive drug test from hear on out...that would be more reasonable, however, it does seem way too harsh in my opinion, especially when you've heard of some NFL guys getting a positive, and then passing lie detector tests saying they have not used performance enhancing drugs.

I myself have failed a drug test for a job when I have never used a drug in my life. The test came back positive for cocaine, a drug I have never even seen with my own eyes. False positives do happen....
Yes, false positives do happen. So...nothing's to be done, then? Didn't get the job, though, did you?

Me, I don't care about the NFL. Or the NBA, or the WBA, or the PGA, or international football. I care about baseball.

Anybody who wants to find an excuse (heresay, circumstantial evidence, lies) for the players' behavior is welcome to do so. It won't change the fact that PEDs were taken by professional ballplayers.

The guys who testified, IIRC, are open to perjury, slander, and/or libel charges if they lied. What would be their motivation for lying?
My guess is that most if not all of the people named in the report did at least what was reported. Having said that, I'm not for any punishment based on the report. I can understand why some of the players did what they did. That's one reason they won't be prosecuted by law enforcement for the PED use although there may be some prosecutions based on money laundering or something of that ilk.

I do believe they need to implement the recommendations of the report and I do believe enforcement has to be as strict as it can possibly be in the future. I also believe as I've stated elsewhere that anyone who doesn't come clean should be punished under today's rules if new evidence comes up that they used PEDs in the past.

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×