Rob, you’re a smart guy so I’m disappointed that you would take such a simpleton’s view on this.

Just because a few cheats got in lets keep bringing them in in truckloads? Really?

Instead of saying hey a few got in, but lets install some better measures so it doesn’t happen again, you want to keep doing whats wrong?

Thank God you’re not in politics.

BTW, whatever happened to Bill James Classic Baseball?

We know Babe Ruth injected himself with ram testosterone. We know players took whatever pills or “medicine” a guy in a lab coat gave them to help them play better. We know steroids have been around since the 1930s. We know steroids were used in Olympic events during the 1960s (that is when it started going public anyway).

All of that is circumstantial and open ended, but so is a lot of the “evidence” we have now.

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2012/1/12/2700688/mickey-mantle-hall-of-fame-steroids

That’s how he ended up in the hospital right? You never, EVER hear about the use of drugs being a stain on Mantle.

What I am saying is… do we look at steroid users because they TOOK steroids or because of the RESULTS from taking steroids?

To me there is a HUGE difference between the two. Is Jeremy Giambi as big of an offender as Jason Giambi or Barry Bonds? If you’re being honest about the subject, the answer has to be yes. Yet their results varied.

Why is it a big deal? Because they took an illegal substance to help them do something their body naturally can not do. End of story,

So why is it that players who took amphetamines for example are not seen in the same light as people who took steroids? Why does it matter the result? Aren’t we supposed to be mad they cheated the game and not the box score?

If you’re only mad at the few players who exceled after taking steroids than you’re not really mad they took steroids, you’re just mad the drugs worked better for them than others. If Bonds didn’t break HR record would you be as mad about his steroid use? You should be…

Really Peter? Gammons loves his Boston Red Socks. And he’s giving his opinion on Clemens? Hell, Gammons ghost wrote “Rocket Man” for Clemens. He can’t very well say that Clemens belongs and Bonds doesn’t so instead he says they both belong in the Hall Of Fame. A bit of a conflict of interest, don’t ya think?

And, with Gammons thinking, how can the Hall be the Hall without Pete Rose?

Gammons is a mouthpiece for those in baseball who want to float a story line. He’s not much more.

As far as should steroids use prevent people from reaching the Hall? Well, we have cheating, particularly with Celmens and Bonds who simply didn’t want their age to stand in the way of their abilities. And you have massive lying that effects their family, their former teams and the fans.

Bonds and Clemens simply didn’t want to grwo old. They wanted to excell way past their use by date. So screw the Mickey Mantles who left baseball in their mid-30′s. These guys actually performed better on the roids at advanced ages.

The shame is that both would have been hall of famers if they didn’t take the roids.

They should both be in the new wing of the hall which puts stars known to have taken ped’s and leave it at that.

” The older guys witnessed the game before steroids were rampant and a 30 HR season was a nice accomplishment. ”

You mean before we knew about them. Anabolic steroids were first synthesized in the 1930s. We know players were ingesting and injecting all types of things, including animal testosterone since the 1860s. It is a pretty reasonable bet that there was a Victor Conte running around in “the Good Ole Days”.

And those older guys have no problems with players who used other substances (greenies and such).

A lot of thing that HoF members have done are illegal.

Also, can we take away the votes of writers who knew about the PED use while it was happening?