HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Baseball (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=167)
-   -   How long is too long? (Shoeless Joe Jackson) (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1342899)

thestonedkoala 02-06-2013 01:12 AM

How long is too long? (Shoeless Joe Jackson)
 
It'll be 94 years this year since Shoeless Joe Jackson was banned from baseball, though more and more evidence is coming out that he never took part in the Black Sox scandal. Selig said a few years ago the case was under review but hasn't touched it since then. Most people side with Jackson and most of the evidence points of his innocence. Why is it taking them so long to get Jackson back into the MLB? He's one of the most popular and one of the best players to have played the game.

robert terwilliger 02-06-2013 01:20 AM

they're too busy crucifying anyone who has ever taken a drug in their life to decide whether or not a player threw games 94 years ago.

thestonedkoala 02-06-2013 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robert terwilliger (Post 59150123)
they're too busy crucifying anyone who has ever taken a drug in their life to decide whether or not a player threw games 94 years ago.

Jackson is a huge part of MLB history. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if they did something in 6 years.

Modo 02-06-2013 06:08 AM

Same reason Pete Rose has been unfairly shunned.

Both his play and the play of Jackson, without a doubt, merit HOF entry, but MLB's supposed "moral code" keeps them out?

Hogwash, says I.

Big Poppa Puck 02-06-2013 08:16 AM

Him and Rose should both be in. Jackson's dead, but in Rose's case why can't you put him in yet still "ban" him from everything else? He bet as a manager not a player.

These greats need to be acknowledge and so do the greats of the "Steroid-era" but everyone's on their high horse and want to be the moral police. I think they wanna keep Bonds and co. out more because "they cheated the game" than whether or not their stats were inflated.

Players have been looking for a competitive edge for ever. Greats still stood out and scrubs were still scrubs.




Back on the topic of Shoeless Joe:

I've never done much research on the Black Sox other than watching Eight Men Out, but if you're to believe that, Jackson was involved, but at the same time he really wasn't. Either way he hit .375 in that series, those aren't the numbers of a guy who was throwing it.

He should be in for sure.

Everyone wants to call the HoF "Baseball Heaven." No it's not baseball heaven, it's a history museum to honor, acknowledge and showcase the greats of the game. Not everyone in their is a ****in saint, like some would have you believe. Ty Cobb, for example, was of the biggest dbags around. And a lot of other players elected took greenies, amphetamines, etc.

UL Washington 02-06-2013 09:47 AM

I think Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame. But I also believe he took the money from the gamblers and knew about the fix.

My rationale for putting him in the Hall is that Jackson wasn't the only star player involved in throwing games for money. He just got caught up in the most famous case.

Landis swept similar charges (for less important games, mind you) regarding Cobb, Speaker, Wood, etc under the rug.

Furthermore, with the way Comiskey treated his players, you can't judge these guys the same way you would today's players. Back then , there was no recourse if your owner was screwing you. Owners had been slashing salaries across the board even though just a few years prior that had promised to increase them (because of the threat of the Federal League, which was short-lived).

Not saying what these guys did was right, but with how things were back then, it was only a matter of time before a World Series was going to get thrown.

I beleive Landis was also right for throwing them out of baseball for life (he had to make an example out of them so it wouldn't happen again). The punishment had to be over the top or it would have happened again. Look at today, and the 50 game suspensions don't prevent anything.

That being said, Jackson is dead, so his life sentence should be over. Bring him into the Hall of Fame where he belongs.

Rose, on the other hand, wasn't facing the same issues. He was just an egotistical degenerate that wasn't facing any of the same issues as the players were back in 1919. Plus his new reality show sucks.

No Fun Shogun 02-06-2013 11:40 AM

Yes, Jackson was a phenomenal player, but he was also part of a plan to screw his teammates out of a World Series. So what if he played well, he still did nothing to prevent it. Plus, I'd still like to know when he was good in the series. Was he just getting garbage hits when the team was already out of it in games or was he consistent throughout?

He shouldn't be in because of that. And neither should Rose. Not betting on baseball has been an established rule since essentially the formation of the professional game, a sign warning people not to do it is in every MLB clubhouse, the consequences for getting caught were well-known, he still did it anyway, and then he lied for a couple decades about it, too. Sorry, but if you intentionally light yourself on fire, I'm not going to be moved to tears when you suffer a few burns. Plus, for the folks that mention that he always bet on his own team, can you say with 100% certainty that he didn't change his managerial style, in any way, shape, or form, to either keep people in during games he bet on that he otherwise would've taken out, negatively affecting later games that he didn't bet on, or rested players in other games to make sure they were ready for games he was betting on?

Jackson and Rose might very well go down in history as two of the best players ever not to get in, probably only behind Bonds who I honestly don't think will be let in because he's burned too many bridges and the HoF is very vindictive with that sort of thing, but big whoop. The Hall of Fame, despite as messed up as its become, isn't a birthright.

Epictetus 02-06-2013 11:50 AM

I've learned a new baseball term today.

"Garbage hits".

This whole time I was thinking that any hit off a professional pitcher was an accomplishment. Particularly in Jackson's case, as he did it many times.

Nevertheless, if you are betting against your team, you must be a special breed of stupid to throw out the opposing player at the plate and hit .375 in a World Series.

Must also be weird for the courts to find you 'not guilty'.

No Fun Shogun 02-06-2013 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epictetus (Post 59162809)
I've learned a new baseball term today.

"Garbage hits".

This whole time I was thinking that any hit off a professional pitcher was an accomplishment. Particularly in Jackson's case, as he did it many times.

Nevertheless, if you are betting against your team, you must be a special breed of stupid to throw out the opposing player at the plate and hit .375 in a World Series.

Must also be weird for the courts to find you 'not guilty'.

uh.... what are you talking about?

I'm asking if he was mostly hitting when the team was out if it and if he suddenly disappeared when the team was still in it.

And even if that wasn't the case, he still was party to a plan to throw the World Series. Him playing well doesn't negate that.

Also..... what betting against your own team? Jackson wasn't betting and Rose didn't bet against his team.

Blackhawkswincup 02-06-2013 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Modo (Post 59152499)
Same reason Pete Rose has been unfairly shunned.

Both his play and the play of Jackson, without a doubt, merit HOF entry, but MLB's supposed "moral code" keeps them out?

Hogwash, says I.

Agreed the moral code BS to keep out Jackson/Rose is laughable

- Ty Cobb was a violent racist
- Charles Comiskey was racist who prevented the color barrier from being broken by Charles Grant (Grant pretended to be white/cherokee but eventually his black ethnic roots were put out in publice by Comiskey and thus he was barred from playing in MLB)
- Tris Speaker and Cap Anson were members of Ku Klux Klan

No Fun Shogun 02-06-2013 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup (Post 59163477)
Agreed the moral code BS to keep out Jackson/Rose is laughable

- Ty Cobb was a violent racist
- Charles Comiskey was racist who prevented the color barrier from being broken by Charles Grant (Grant pretended to be white/cherokee but eventually his black ethnic roots were put out in publice by Comiskey and thus he was barred from playing in MLB)
- Tris Speaker and Cap Anson were members of Ku Klux Klan

All awful human beings, but not against the rules of the game. Throwing games and betting on games are against the rules of the game, though, which is why Rose and Jackson aren't in and Cobb is in.

That's the difference.

.... not to mention that it certainly didn't hurt that those guys all played in a fairly damn racist era. Should players be as good at the game as them and as racist as them now, then I'd be willing to bet that an active Klansman wouldn't be voted into the Hall of Fame, even if he was a career .400 hitter.

Pwnasaurus 02-06-2013 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun (Post 59164463)
All awful human beings, but not against the rules of the game. Throwing games and betting on games are against the rules of the game, though, which is why Rose and Jackson aren't in and Cobb is in.

That's the difference.

.... not to mention that it certainly didn't hurt that those guys all played in a fairly damn racist era. Should players be as good at the game as them and as racist as them now, then I'd be willing to bet that an active Klansman wouldn't be voted into the Hall of Fame, even if he was a career .400 hitter.

The problem I have is still today the veterans committee is electing "builders" that were proponents of segregation. The fact that some folks still think the steroid era is the biggest cloud in baseball history is distressing.

I've always been on the side of the numbers being the sole determination of election. Whether you saved 20 people from a burning building or even if you enjoy Robin Williams comedy, it should have no bearing on HOF election IMO.

BigFatCat999 02-06-2013 01:21 PM

If Ty Cobb is in the HOF Rose and Jackson should be. it's embarrassing. When I was doing an interview there you can see it's an embarrassment to the staffers there.

Epictetus 02-06-2013 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun (Post 59163029)
I'm asking if he was mostly hitting when the team was out if it and if he suddenly disappeared when the team was still in it.

Quote:

He had a Series-leading .375 batting average – including the Series' only home run – threw out five baserunners, and handled 30 chances in the outfield with no errors. However, he batted far worse in the five games that the White Sox lost, with a batting average of .286 in those games (although this was still an above-average batting average; the National and American Leagues hit a combined .263 in the 1919 season[8]). Three of his six RBIs came in the losses, including the aforementioned home run, and a double in Game 8 when the Reds had a large lead and the series was all but over.

Still, in that game a long foul ball was caught at the fence with runners on second and third, depriving Jackson of a chance to drive in the runners. Statistics also show that in the other games that the White Sox lost, only five of Jackson's at-bats came with a man in scoring position, and he advanced the runners twice.

One play in particular has been subjected to much scrutiny. In the fifth inning of Game 4, with a Cincinnati player on second, Jackson fielded a single hit to left field and threw home. Chick Gandil, another leader of the fix, later admitted to yelling at Cicotte to intercept the throw. The run scored and the White Sox lost the game 2–0.[9] Cicotte, whose guilt is undisputed, made two errors in that fifth inning alone.
I recognize the bias that appears in this, but the numbers are correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sox_Scandal

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun (Post 59163029)
And even if that wasn't the case, he still was party to a plan to throw the World Series. Him playing well doesn't negate that.

How? His involvement in the scandal is controversial, meaning this is not absolute. Players and the like all have differing stories. Just because he is banned, does not mean that it was the correct decision, immune to change.

I am not arguing against the fact that 'Player x' breaking said rule should be banned. I am saying there is lots of controversy over his guilt. It's possible he is innocent.

I'm not sure if you are arguing that if he did know about it, and refused to inform anyone, that he still deserves to be punished.

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun (Post 59163029)
Also..... what betting against your own team? Jackson wasn't betting and Rose didn't bet against his team.

Intentionally throwing the game, my apologies.

thestonedkoala 02-06-2013 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun (Post 59162341)
Yes, Jackson was a phenomenal player, but he was also part of a plan to screw his teammates out of a World Series.

There is a lot of evidence to prove he didn't take any money nor was involved in the scandal.

Quote:

So what if he played well, he still did nothing to prevent it.
That's false. There is evidence that he tried to talk to Comiskey about the throwing of the game but Comiskey didn't want to talk to him. Furthermore, do you know who represented Jackson at his trial?

No Fun Shogun 02-06-2013 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epictetus (Post 59168113)
How? His involvement in the scandal is controversial, meaning this is not absolute. Players and the like all have differing stories. Just because he is banned, does not mean that it was the correct decision, immune to change.

I am not arguing against the fact that 'Player x' breaking said rule should be banned. I am saying there is lots of controversy over his guilt. It's possible he is innocent.

I'm not sure if you are arguing that if he did know about it, and refused to inform anyone, that he still deserves to be punished.

I recognize that there are doubts and inconsistencies with everything that surrounded his involvement, but I'm not believing the slack-jawed yokel response that he just took cash for throwing the games without realizing the implications of it. Even if the reports that he tried to give it back on a later date were true, he was still complicit in it by either not more strenuously reporting it or talking other other teammates or his coach on the matter.

Comiskey certainly deserves a lot more of the blame on the matter than he gets, as it almost seems like he was aware of the fix and try to ignore it away, and I agree with the other poster that the inclusion of a few builders that certainly don't belong, particularly those that extended the segregation of the game, but the fact that other people were more heinous or more guilty than him doesn't excuse the severity the allegations, not to mention the necessity of the punishment.

If Jackson ends up getting in sometime, eh.... I won't really care. It'll be a century either way, and aside from making a few posts online arguing against him being included, it's not the type of thing that I'd put more energy than that minimal amount into. Nor would I do the same to try to support him, though.

Rose, on the other hand, I'd be more than happy to energetically fight against.

No Fun Shogun 02-06-2013 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the8bandarmadillo (Post 59168899)
There is a lot of evidence to prove he didn't take any money nor was involved in the scandal.



That's false. There is evidence that he tried to talk to Comiskey about the throwing of the game but Comiskey didn't want to talk to him. Furthermore, do you know who represented Jackson at his trial?

And yet he didn't talk to the other players getting screwed by the fix or his coach? Yeah, I'm not buying that.

And he was represented by Comiskey's attorney, if memory serves. And he was still found not guilty there, so that didn't seem to hurt him much there.

thestonedkoala 02-06-2013 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun (Post 59169291)
And yet he didn't talk to the other players getting screwed by the fix or his coach? Yeah, I'm not buying that.

He did talk to other players.

Jackson got railroaded.

Quote:

And he was represented by Comiskey's attorney, if memory serves. And he was still found not guilty there, so that didn't seem to hurt him much there.
Still a conflict of interest.

TheBeastCoast 02-06-2013 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun (Post 59163029)
uh.... what are you talking about?

I'm asking if he was mostly hitting when the team was out if it and if he suddenly disappeared when the team was still in it.

And even if that wasn't the case, he still was party to a plan to throw the World Series. Him playing well doesn't negate that.

Also..... what betting against your own team? Jackson wasn't betting and Rose didn't bet against his team.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/box-...d=191910080CIN
Out of the 8 games he had 5 multi hit games and 2 no hit games.......You don't ******** your way to numbers like that over 8 games.

Shoeless Joe 02-06-2013 04:28 PM

**** selig.

JaysCyYoung 02-07-2013 11:31 PM


LeBlondeDemon10 02-07-2013 11:50 PM

Does Jackson have any family around?

JaysCyYoung 02-07-2013 11:54 PM

The irony of this is that it was only supposed to be a lifetime ban. The man is dead and a tremendous majority of fans support his reinstatement. Redress a past wrong and put one of the most talented hitters in the game's history into the Hall.

thestonedkoala 02-08-2013 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeBlondeDemon10 (Post 59287039)
Does Jackson have any family around?

I actually believe he does

Pwnasaurus 02-08-2013 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeBlondeDemon10 (Post 59287039)
Does Jackson have any family around?

I think a relative maybe a decade or so ago auctioned off one of his Black Betsy bats...


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:25 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.