If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

[vernond]

I'm not arguing whether or not the man deserves to be in the hall of fame on his baseball merits obviously he does, but so does Pete Rose. If he gets convicted for lying to congress about using steroids are the baseball writers going to vote Clemens in the hall?

[dalnet22]

Re: If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

I have no problem with steroid users going into the hall of fame because there are already plenty of cheaters in the hall and plenty more who will go in for having surgery, taking pain relievers, and analyzing videotape under the guise of "just getting an edge." Steroids (unless they are banned) are no more cheating than having lasic eye surgery to see the ball better.

Should steroids be banned for their health effects? That's hard to say. However, the users should not be labeled criminals, cheaters, or "not HOF worthy." The only time someone should be labeled a cheater is if they break a rule to get an advantage. Unless I'm wrong, steroids were not illegal in the 90s.

If Clemens lied under oath, then he deserves to go to jail. It has nothing to do with his performance on the field, so let him into the HOF. Now, if he used steroids after they had been banned from the game, then he does not deserve to go in. Regardless, his lying in court does not in itself exempt him from eligibility.

[Steelersfan85]

Re: If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

I have no problem with steroid users going into the hall of fame because there are already plenty of cheaters in the hall and plenty more who will go in for having surgery, taking pain relievers, and analyzing videotape under the guise of "just getting an edge." Steroids (unless they are banned) are no more cheating than having lasic eye surgery to see the ball better.

Should steroids be banned for their health effects? That's hard to say. However, the users should not be labeled criminals, cheaters, or "not HOF worthy." The only time someone should be labeled a cheater is if they break a rule to get an advantage. Unless I'm wrong, steroids were not illegal in the 90s.

If Clemens lied under oath, then he deserves to go to jail. It has nothing to do with his performance on the field, so let him into the HOF. Now, if he used steroids after they had been banned from the game, then he does not deserve to go in. Regardless, his lying in court does not in itself exempt him from eligibility.

If Pete Rose ban isn't lifted then all PED users should receive a lifetime ban or they let them in and Pete in.

[dalnet22]

Re: If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

If Pete Rose ban isn't lifted then all PED users should receive a lifetime ban or they let them in and Pete in.

Yesterday, I learned that steroids were technically banned from baseball in 1988 and officially acknowledged in 1991. So, I suppose all steroid users post 1987 were cheaters and should not be allowed in.

[Steelersfan85]

Re: If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

Yesterday, I learned that steroids were technically banned from baseball in 1988 and officially acknowledged in 1991. So, I suppose all steroid users post 1987 were cheaters and should not be allowed in.

I am not completely against letting them in but if they are allowed you have to go back and let Rose in since he more then deserves it.

[SPTO]

Re: If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

I am not completely against letting them in but if they are allowed you have to go back and let Rose in since he more then deserves it.

I think this is a fair statement though Rose has done and said a lot of stupid things in his time after the banishment but still, from everything i've seen he gave every ounce of himself to the game of baseball. If you're going to let PED abusers in then you have to take a very strong look at letting Rose in the HOF.

[DrJones]

Re: If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

To answer the OP's question: no. Even if he isn't convicted, it's going to be a while before Clemens gets in.

[steelcurtain311]

Re: If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

All I want is for it to be an equal thing. I don't want some people going in despite roids, and some people being denied for roids. Like, if you're going to hold out Sosa for roids, it's pretty stupid to let Bonds in. Granted, Bonds was twice the player Sosa was, but still. I'm pretty sure 600 HR's is getting you into the Hall. Or even vice versa, if they let certain players in because they were "media friendly" about their steroid use, while they leave Bonds out because he made such a huge deal about it, then that is BS.

If it were me though, I wouldn't let any of them in. It sends such a terrible message and makes a mockery of the competition of your sport.

[ryan36]

Re: If convicted is Clemens in the HOF?

It may take him until he reaches the veteran's committee to get in