by Brian Pears

Created on: September 27, 2009

One can easily understand the argument against allowing steroid users into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Though the use of steriods was not officially banned by Major League Baseball when most of those caught were using them, use of steroids that was not prescribed by a doctor was certainly illegal at the time. Also, their use clearly runs afoul of American norms regarding fair play. Yes, as a country, we glorify achivement. We will often wink when people bend the rules on the way to success. But we do not celebrate those who blatantly cheat to get there. As a people, we forgive, but we do not forget.

So the argument towards banning those players that cheated, if only in spirit, is a strong one. What's more, baseball has set a precedent towards banning those who have cheated egregiously from holding a position within the sport. Such bans including Shoeless Joe Jackson and the other Black Sox from 1919, and more recently, the all-time hits leader Pete Rose. Those bans do not make those players ineligible for election to the Hall of Fame, but as the Hall's voters have shunned those men, the bans have served as de facto disqualification. Those players have achieved infamy rather than immortality.

The counter argument is strong. But banning the "Steroid Era" players, whether formally or tacitly, is the wrong thing to do.

We need to make anyone and everyone from that era eligible for the Hall of Fame. That includes those who have, and will, be identified as included on the notorious list of 104 players who tested positive in 2004. I have a bit more sympathy for shunning players like Manny Ramirez, who have tested positive for banned substances since baseball began formal testing policies. But clearly, we ought to allow anyone caught or suspected before testing began, no matter how distastefully some of those suspected have handled accusations against them.

I see two reasons for inclusion that outweigh any of the arguments against allowing those players to remain eligible. Neither get into the legality of steroids, nor into baseball's policies at the time. I'll also avoid looking at some sort of tacit collusion between players, managers, and owners, in which all involved knew something was going on but said nothing because the players' performance was good for the game. Those are worthy topics to explore, but my reasons instead tend towards common sense.

The first? Everyone was doing it.

Yes, the excuse that never worked with your parents when you got caught drinking

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next Page >>