Bonds at it again - Boycott HoF?

[JimH5]

A couple of points. . .

 

First off, I'm not absolutely sure that Ecko is donating the ball. He may be loaning the ball, while retaining ownership himself. I'll stand corrected if someone has evidence that it's an outright donation. The Hall does have artifacts that belong to other people. Besides that, it's safe to say that Ecko has gotten more than $500K worth of publicity on this stunt, so let's not make him out to be Melinda Gates.

 

Secondly on to Bonds himself. . .

 

If the HOF displays that ball with an asterisk, then it's a slap in Barry's face--whether you feel that slap is justified or not.

 

And how hypocritical would it be for him to stand at the podium of an organization that features an item made historic by him, specifically defaced with the intent of discrediting him?

 

It's certainly understandable if he chooses to sit that one out.

[Fatter than Joey]

It's certainly understandable if he chooses to sit that one out.

 

I agree with this -- I think Bonds can have an opinion in the matter, but the HOF should just take the ball for what it is.

[PKBadger]

Shoeless Joe, Pete Rose, and Barry Bonds should all be in the HOF.

 

As FTJ alluded to, my stance on this is that these players should have an exhibit devoted to them in Cooperstown, but they shouldn't get a bronze plaque. Don't like it, don't associate with gamblers or put a syringe in your butt.

 

Unless they can find a way to display that ball where the * cant be seen, every father walking through will have to explain to his kid why it was on there and vilify Barry without ever failing a test.

 

They SHOULD have to explain to their children why there's an asterisk on it. Also the "he never failed a test" argument is about as solid as a kid denying that he stole from the cookie jar when he's got crumbs on his face.

 

They have indicated that they would take the ball in any condition, and haven't ever once scolded Ecko for defacing the ball.

 

It's Ecko's ball, he can do what he wants with it. Unless MLB wants to change their policy about foul balls/HR being fan's property. The Hall of Fame didn't scold Todd McFarlane about keeping the McGwire ball in a trophy case in his house, either.

[RobertR]

I think accepting the donation is just asking for future attention seeking messages on historic baseballs. I don't want to see balls branded "AFraud" or "Bud Selig Stinks" or political messages make their way into the Hall. The Bonds ball is a calculated publicity seeking stunt, and that type of thing should be discouraged. The Hall won't be a lesser thing without the ball. Not every historic ball is in the Hall in the first place.

 

Robert

[pogokat]

it would be ridiculous for bonds to not be in the hof...

 

along the same lines, it would be ridiculous for the hall to display the mark ecko ball...that's not what the hof is about...put that sucker in the smithsonian

[TooLiveBrew]

The Hall of Fame is just a museum that archives the history of the game. In my opinion, all of these debates (did he use PEDs to help him break the record, is the record legitimate, what to do with the ball, how it should be displayed) are all a part of the story of Barry Bonds breaking the home run record, and should be archived in the Hall as such. Present all sides of the story and let the people who visit the Hall decide for themselves.

 

Very, very, very well-said, crewcrazy.

 

Pogo - NOT display the ball that was hit out to set the all-time HR record? That's absurd to me. As crewcrazy said, the HOF is a museum - why would it pass on displaying the ball that represents the biggest record in all of pro sports?

 

What are they gonna do - display another ball? If the other option here is to simply have a display with his uni, bat, cleats, hat, but no ball - no thanks. It's not their fault (nor is it Ecko's or the voting fans) that Bonds has openly admitted to using (more than one type of!) PEDs. Barry is bluffing so hard on this one, it's simply too easy to call him on it. That egomaniac cares about - apparently - three things:

 

1) Having the most all-time HR

2) Being in the HOF

3) Being treated as though he didn't cheat - when he admittedly did - on the way to the HR record & HOF

 

Barry wants everything catered to him, and since it's incredibly embarrasing & cheapening that the ball is branded with an asterisk, Barry no happy! It's entirely fitting that the action taken on the record-setting ball does exactly what Bonds did to the HR record. (though I'd like to say I'd have preferred the ball to not be branded or otherwise altered, since it clearly belongs in the HOF).

[pogokat]

it's not baseball history---the bat, the uniform, the plate...etc...are all just as historic..

 

the ball is pop culture, and as such makes more sense to me at the museum of american history in dc

[danzig6767]

I'm with Barry on this one.

 

The only reason that ball has (or will have) an asterisk is because some D-level fashion designer decided to insert himself into the story. Barry didn't put the asterisk there. Nor did the pitcher, or the umpire, or even the fan who caught the ball. Instead, it's a guy who bought the ball from the fan who caught the ball from Bonds, who hit the ball.

 

Marc Ecko used this historical artifact to draw attention to himself, using that ball as a perpetual billboard for himself.

 

Ecko decided to be the judge, jury and executioner himself, permanently besmirching Bonds, his career, and this historic achievement.

 

 

I'm not a fan of what Ecko did, but do you really think some marking on a baseball is what is besmirching Bonds, his career, and his home run record? The ones who will be the judge and jury on whether Bonds record is besmirched at all is the fans themselves, their opinions won't be formed either way based on something done to a baseball.

[JimH5]

. . .do you really think some marking on a baseball is what is besmirching Bonds, his career, and his home run record?

 

I think it would be silly for the Hall of Fame, MLB and the village of Cooperstown to think that Bonds would accept induction into a place where there was an outward sign of disrespect toward his accomplishments.

 

Who among us wouldn't balk at such a backhanded compliment?

 

Of course he's a jerk, and of course he used steroids. But that doesn't make him wrong with every single opinion he offers.

[Fatter than Joey]

The Bonds ball is a calculated publicity seeking stunt, and that type of thing should be discouraged.

 

I agree -- although I think that once balls start getting auctioned off that is where the problem starts.

 

It makes you appreciate that kid that just gave McGwire his big HR ball

[Thurston Fluff]

I think it would be silly for the Hall of Fame, MLB and the village of Cooperstown to think that Bonds would accept induction into a place where there was an outward sign of disrespect toward his accomplishments.

 

How much respect has Bonds given to Aaron by breaking the most hallowed record in baseball via the pharmacey instead of pure talent?

How much respect has Bonds shown baseball as a whole by reducing the significance of two of the most hallowed record in baseball to a level far beneath what they used to be?

 

Perhaps Bonds should have treated the game and those who came before him with the respect they deserve. Then none of this would be happening now. He could have retired with less homeruns and fewer records but there would have been no question of him being a first ballot HOFer. He would have went down in history as one of the greatest of all time with no asterisk or debate about it. His reputation as a beligerant jerk would have faded and his prowess as a player would have glowed ever brighter with the passage of time. Just like that of Ty Cobb or any of the other butthead personalities who happened to play the game at a level so few could play it at. The reason Barry is were he is in this situation is due entirely to his weakness as a person.

[TooLiveBrew]

it's not baseball history---the bat, the uniform, the plate...etc...are all just as historic..

the ball is pop culture...

 

Says who? And who said the other stuff isn't "as historic"? This is the part I that bugs me. That ball is baseball history. The 'pop culture' part is merely a smaller part of the larger composite. It indicates the swirl of attention and drama that surrounded the historic countdown & realization. To say that this ball is "not baseball history" pretty much pushes me over the edge, so I'm just gonna stop here.

[pogokat]

the event is history...the ball is no more important than any other item involved...

 

if it was just the ball, i would say it should be in the hof...

 

but its the ball and the baggage...the asterisk...the controversy...bonds boycott...etc...none of which the mlb should want to showcase

[TooLiveBrew]

the ball is no more important than any other item involved...

agreed.

none of which the mlb should want to showcase.

True, but it's not MLB's decision. It's the National Baseball HoF's.

[jlau20]

I'm still torn on the issue, but I am somewhat disappointed that the vote went in favor of branding the ball with an asterisk. I voted to leave it be and donate it to the Hall as is. If they choose not to put it on display after certain things come out, etc., so be it, but I think it's really unfortunate that the Hall would even consider accepting the ball and putting it on display with an asterisk branded on it. Come on.

[Baldkin]

Bonds deserves to be in the HoF, as does McGwire, in my opinion. They broke no MLB rules. None.

 

Steroids are illegal. Yes. I know this. So was cocaine, amphetamines, and alcohol during prohibition (1920 to 1933 - you can't tell me the Babe wasn't a drinker during that time)

 

Does that mean anyone who did those shouldn't be in the hall as well?

It gave them a competitive advantage, maybe so. So did taking greenies in the 70's and 80's.

 

The case for Rose and Shoeless Joe are totally different. They broke rules that were in place in baseball at the time. They tarnished the game itself.

 

Anyway. Don't mean to turn this into a HOF argument.

 

I can't imagine the HOF displaying the ball with an asterisk on it, just seems like the institution is classier than that. Especially considering what they just did for the late Buck O'Neil.

[TooLiveBrew]

Thanks for that update on the Hall's plans re. O'Neil, baldkin.

 

To anyone: if you don't like Buck O'Neil, I don't like you. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Baldkin]

My pleasure, TLB.

 

If you haven't read it, I highly recommend The Soul of Baseball by Joe Posnanski

 

[Thurston Fluff]

The case for Rose and Shoeless Joe are totally different. They broke rules that were in place in baseball at the time. They tarnished the game itself.

 

I could be wrong but I think it was the same type of illegal to throw a baseball game in the B;acksox scandal as it was in the 90's to be taking performance enhancers. I know the ban for gambling as it is today is based off that particualar scandal but I don't believe it was laid out in black and white prior to that.

 

Bonds deserves to be in the HoF, as does McGwire, in my opinion. They broke no MLB rules. None.

 

In both instances it was obviously wrong and shouldn't have needed rules. In baseball, like everywhere else, steroids was not legal ever. The only thing that wasn't spelled out was testing and punishment proceedures.

 

Steroids are illegal. Yes. I know this. So was cocaine, amphetamines, and alcohol during prohibition (1920 to 1933 - you can't tell me the Babe wasn't a drinker during that time)

By this reasoning both murder and speeding should have the same punishment. They are both illegal and if one person gets a life sentence so should the other. I wouldn't have a problem with amphetamines being treated more harshly but I don't believe a player being more awake is the equivlenat of being faster and stronger.

 

I can't imagine the HOF displaying the ball with an asterisk on it, just seems like the institution is classier than that.

 

Class has nothing to do with it. They are there to tell the history of baseball and it's greatest players. I fail to see how they could tell the true story of Bonds without telling something of the one of the defining characteristics of the era and his involvment in it. If it is about class how classy would it be to those who didn't use PED's if they failed to mention he admitted he did "unintentionally" use illegal PED's. Since he won't the ball will tell he story of how the public viewed his accomplishments at the time.

[RobertR]

The case for Rose and Shoeless Joe are totally different. They broke rules that were in place in baseball at the time. They tarnished the game itself.

 

I could be wrong but I think it was the same type of illegal to throw a baseball game in the B;acksox scandal as it was in the 90's to be taking performance enhancers. I know the ban for gambling as it is today is based off that particualar scandal but I don't believe it was laid out in black and white prior to that.

Yeah it was laid out that black and white in the MLB Constitution back then. It just wasn't investigated or enforced until the Black Sox scandal.

 

see http://www.roadsidephotos.com/baseball/1903NatAgree.htm

 

There really wasn't a punishment spelled out for steroid use until the latest CBA. It was illegal, but there was not a structured mechanism for investigation and punishment. And the latest CBA only gave a mechanism for going forward.

 

Robert

[Thurston Fluff]

Thanks for the link RobertR. I knew fixing games was illegal but I didn't know if it was implicit or was actually spelled out. I knew the BlackSox scandal was a catalyst to stronger oversight but didn't know if it was explicitly addressed prior to that. What I didn't see was the penalty for such actions. Did I missed it there or was it covered elsewhere? Not that it makes a lot of differance. Everyone knew it was wrong as did everyone with regard to steroids. That's why I don't buy the it wasn't illegal in baseball arguement. They knew full well it was wrong. The simple fact that they deny doing it proves they knew? Mark McGuire didn't deny he used andro because it wasn't illegal. He did deny using steroids. It doesn't take a genious to figure out why.