In recent years since steroids have become such a hot topic in sports and especially in baseball I’ve heard many sports writers say or write that they wouldn’t vote for the accused users on the first ballot for the Hall of Fame (HOF) but would vote for them thereafter. Or, some people have predicted that Mark McGuire, who was snubbed in his first year of eligibility in the summer of 2007, will make it.

If you’ve read my blog in the past you may already know that I am firm in my stance that no steroid user should ever make the HOF. I’m going to challenge the seemingly popular public opinion that getting into the HOF after waiting umpteen years is somehow less satisfying than getting in on the first ballot.

Sure, it might be somewhat anguishing waiting all that time, but if you won the lottery at age 45 does it mean any less than if you had won it with the very first ticket you purchased on your 18th birthday? Who cares? You’re still a millionaire.

Using steroids is not on the same moral plane as murder, but what if it was? What if a judge reduced a life sentence down to 5 years because he thought the guy really learned his lesson? That prisoner is saying “hey, that wasn’t so bad, my crimes were well worth it.”

We live in a society that does not reward the bad guys. Baseball should be no exception.


Cheaters don't win, in any sport, or in life.

Using steroids is cheating, and cheaters aren’t supposed to win. Major League Baseball should, by any means necessary, see to it that anybody ever suspected—that’s right, I said suspected, not proven—of using performance enhancing drugs never even sees his name on the ballot.

There is too much left open to subjectivity in this debate, and this is the only way I see that works. You were indicted by a grand jury on charges of perjury, Mr. Bonds? Bye bye Cooperstown. You failed a steroid test, Mr. Palmeiro? No HOF for you. Your name appeared on the now notorious Mitchell Report, Mr. Clemens and Mr. Pettitte? Sorry, no can do.

While in previous posts I have argued that baseball should retroactively pull post-season awards (MVPs, Cy Youngs, etc) from users and erase their stats from the record books, I have now come to the conclusion that even if it did so—a nearly impossible slippery slope to maneuver around in and of itself—not every sports publication would acknowledge such a move. Would ESPN.com actually remove all references to Barry Bonds from its website? No, but the one thing that is constant is that name on a plaque in the halls of baseball glory in Cooperstown, New York.

There are several reasons why I believe that proof of steroid usage is not necessary in enacting this baseball law. The first, and the most obvious, is that baseball law is not synonymous with and is not governed by the court of law. In this regard, users are not “innocent until proven guilty” because they are not being sent to prison. Rare it is that a player actually fails a Major League steroid test for several reasons. First, the Player’s Association has not approved a test involving blood, which would be necessary to detect certain drugs, including Human Growth Hormone (HGH). Other drugs, like erythropoietin (EPO) and insulin, are difficult to detect using any means. Also, many cheaters were able to successfully cover up their usage with other drugs. Norbolethone (aka “The Clear”) is a drug that balances the levels of natural testosterone and epitestosterone, which means, according to Bonds’ currently imprisoned former trainer Greg Anderson in the book Game of Shadows “You can take [the steroids] the day of [a drug test], pee, and it comes up clear.”


Anderson explained how easy it was to beat
the steroid tests.

This is all very important because, for most of the past decade, there has either been no steroid testing in baseball, not a strict enough test, or too many subsidiary drugs to conceal drugs that were being tested for.

There is also precedence for banning cheaters in spite of there being no criminal evidence or intent. The first commissioner of baseball, Kennesaw Mountain Landis, banned all 8 members of the Chicago “Black Sox” even after they were all acquitted of charges by the judicial system. Landis was a real commissioner who ruled baseball with tough love. The current commissioner, Bud Selig, is a cowardly pud who apparently feels no action is obligatory to restore the sanctity of the game.

Many have stated that it is hypocritical for voters to keep Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa out of the HOF when they are same people who voted for these guys to win the Cy Young and MVP. This logic is not valid. Just because they were wrong then doesn’t mean they have to be wrong for the rest of their lives. In the same way, it is asinine to make any argument that says “Player X (Ty Cobb, ####lord Perry) is in the HOF, so Player Y (Bonds, Clemens) should also be.” In hindsight, it was probably a mistake to put Perry, an admitted ball doctor, into the HOF, but that doesn’t mean we have to make the same mistake over and over and over again forever. Times have changed. It’s time to raise the bar. This is the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Pretty Darned Good or the Hall of Spectacular, but I Cheated.

In 2005, two Chicago based radio personalities read an all-inclusive list of baseball HOFers. They then spent approximately 45 minutes “kicking guys out” who didn’t deserve to be there, thus reducing the list by at least 40%. Though this was done just for fun, it is something I keep in mind when deciding who should go and who should not. The HOF is too watered down anyway. Phil Rizutto? Bill Mazerowski? Puh-leeze.

(Oh yes, and before you spout off the “Rizutto was a key member of a Yankees dynasty winning many World Series’” argument, you may want to read this July 2006 post stating that Individuals Don't Win Championships, Teams Do).

If baseball has stood firm this long with the decision to ban Pete Rose, there isn’t much in the way of taking it one step further with steroid cheats. What these guys have done; bulking up and hitting jaw-dropping, tale-of-the-tape home runs in awe inspiring quantity, is far worse than gambling. Betting on a game doesn’t affect the outcome.

Just because everyone else was cheating doesn’t mean it was ok for Player X to cheat too. To quote myself when I wrote in August of 2007 in The Difference Between Ruth, Aaron, Maris and Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, “So if 20 guys all get busted robbing a bank does the police let them go because they had strength in numbers? More importantly, and more realistically, if the CEO of a tax firm turns a blind eye to his accountants fudging numbers on purpose would the public brush the incident off its collective shoulders and chock it up to an oversight? Hell no! They’d all be punished, all arrested, all fired. Selig is just as much to blame as the McGuires and Sosas of the world.”

Putting cheats in the HOF is a slap in the face to people who actually deserve to be there. This feeling is equivalent to an injured U.S. soldier going down to the corner Wal-Mart and seeing Purple Hearts on sale for $19.99 plus tax. That act of heroism during battle doesn’t seem all that heroic now that everybody has the medal.

And making a guy wait X number of years before finally letting him in is not punishment enough, either. I wouldn’t let a murderer out of prison early, just as I wouldn’t allow my toddler to have the cookie 10 minutes after saying “no” the first time. Not only should steroid cheats never be voted into the HOF, but their names should never even appear on a ballot.