“Today’s news that those members of the BBWAA afforded the privilege of casting ballots failed to elect even a single player to the Hall of Fame is unfortunate, if not sad….To ignore the historic accomplishments of Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, for example, is hard to justify. Moreover, to penalize players exonerated in legal proceedings — and others never even implicated — is simply unfair.”
—-Major League Baseball players union executive Michael Weiner, in a formal statement released after the news that the Baseball Writers Association of American had denied Hall of Fame admission this year to all-time home run leader Barry Bonds, pitching ace Roger Clemens, and several other players who have either admitted to steroid use or are strongly suspected of being users. No player was on the requisite number of ballots this year.
It takes a Harvard lawyer to be that unethical in so few words.
It’s not easy to pack so much bad ethics into one statement, but we should not be surprised that the baseball players’ union chief was up to the task. The union shares responsibility with baseball’s “see-n0-evil” management during the steroid era and the willful blindness of the sportswriting community for allowing steroids and other performance enhancing drugs to permanently scar the game’s integrity and distort its records beyond repair. Small wonder Weiner is eager to rationalize his organization’s complicity with an absurd, deceptive and corrupting assertion that none of it should make any difference:
- The writers did not “ignore” Bonds’ accomplishments. To the contrary, his “accomplishment” of blatantly abusing steroids, launching a late career surge of power and prowess that was alien to the career arc of every other player who ever set foot on a field as he morphed into baseball’s version of the Hulk, all while lying his head off and convincing other players that drug-assisted cheating was the accepted way to achieve fame and fortune, was exactly why he was on less than 40% of the ballots ( 75% is required for enshrinement.)
- None of the players rejected by the writers have been “exonerated” in legal proceedings. A jury’s (admittedly self-contradictory) verdict was consistent with the allegation that Barry Bonds lied about using steroids. A botched and unwise perjury prosecution against Clemens failed because the evidence presented didn’t prove Clemens guilty of lying to Congress beyond a reasonable doubt. Not being convicted “beyond a reasonable doubt” is not and has never been, legally or logically, the same as exoneration, unless you consider O.J. Simpson, Robert Blake and Casey Anthony, not to mention “Shoeless Joe” Jackson, to have been exonerated. Since Weiner is a lawyer (Harvard law, multiple judicial clerkships) and knows how untrue this is, his statement goes beyond client advocacy to intentional misrepresentation, and constitutes professional misconduct.
- It isn’t “hard to justify” rejecting players who obviously and clearly flunk the Hall of Fame’s character requirements, such as Bonds, Mark McGwire, and Rafael Palmeiro. It is easy, as indicated by the fact that most of the writers were able to do it, and the fact that the justifications are powerful, many and well-publicized.
- What would be unfair would be to not only reward cheaters, but to knowingly and intentionally force former baseball greats who played the game with integrity and respect for its place in American culture to share a devalued honor with the likes of Barry Bonds.
______________________________________
Graphic and Facts: Yahoo! Sports
Ethics Alarms 
Look at that guy! You CAN judge a book by its cover.
Ethics tend to become very “flexible” these days with professional advocates in these unions. Additionally; did this guy- who claims to be representing the best interests of his “comrades”- ever consider fully what steroid abuse can and has done to athletes? Did he ever contemplate (or care) what this profession is all about in the first place? It’s more than entertainment. It’s to inspire people with dedication, teamwork, community pride and sportsmanship.
How can that be done with “teams” that degenerate into packs of pampered, drug crazed hoods-on-the-take? How do you celebrate that in good conscience and peddle it off to kids as a goal in their own lives? You sacrifice conscience. Weiner’s not only done that, he throws it in our face and demands we accept it.
It’s unfair, but I have to admit, I thought the same thing. Weiner looks like he’s auditioning to be Pacino’s understudy in “The Devil’s Advocate.”
Maybe if he goes on TV and starts screeching “Attica… Attica” to the cameras, they’ll lead him off to some quiet padded cell. In any case, it might be best for all concerned!
MLB writers are morons for ignoring clemens bonds? Players like Ty Cobb should not be in the hall of fame. He would not get elected today. He would be felon and racist. Keeping bonds and clemens out is a joke.
Another classic dumb argument that people repeat without thinking, or because they can’t think. Ty Cobb was no more of a racist that the rest of America for the entire period he was playing. That’s retroactive ethical hindsight, and is itself unethical (if it’s not just a terrible rationalization concocted to mitigate Bonds.) Racism is a belief, and had nothing to do with baseball—there weren’t any blacks in baseball to discriminate against, and Cobb wasn’t the one keeping them out. How was Cobb a “felon”? A felon then, as now, is someone who breaks a law. What law did Cobb break? Finally, the fact that TY Cobb was a creep is completely irrelevant to whether the Hall should validate cheaters. Ty Cobb, more than most, earned every hit, run and stolen base he ever got.
Saying something is “a joke” on this blog will always be interpreted as, “I believe something but am completely incapable of justifying it with a valid argument.”
Ty Cobb wasn’t a racist . He spoke out for the integration of Baseball in the early 1950’s , built and finaced housing for African Americans in the early 20th century, founded and financed a hospital for African Americans that still serves that community today and set up a scholarship fund that did not discriminate. He had life time friends and employees who were african american. And quoting the books by Alexander and Stump to show he is a racist doesnt hold water as when the incidents they report as happening are examined and compared to statements and reports made at the time of the incidents it shows that what they reported as fact actually didnt happen.
Thanks, Bill. Alexander and Stump, it is now being discovered, just made things up. Cobb certainly started out as a racist, as did Abe Lincoln, but he was a very smart man, and capable of growth. Cobb helped build baseball and deserved to be honored by it. Using him to justify Bonds is both misleading and unfair.
I don’t even think he started out as a racist. Its reported that his father voted against legislation that discriminated against African Americans . And Cobb developed the housing project when he was 19, that’s not the act of a bigot in my opinion.
I did not have a problem with baseball not nominating anyone, but if they made the decision to send the players a message. I think that is what the courts are for.
Barry Bonds and Roger Clemons are two of the greatest players and I am sure someone who cheated has gotten through. What about all the years before so much attention was paid to steroids.
As to your second point, so what? Do we not punish students who cheat because we know others have gotten away with it? Scientists have been denied prestigious awards because of falsifying data. Is there any doubt that others have won those awards whose deceptions weren’t discovered? False witnesses may be prosecuted for perjury. Is the fact that thousands of witnesses get away with perjury an argument for never prosecuting perjurers? CEOs, firm lawyers and professors who got their jobs with fake credentials get fired. What about all the fakes who get hired and who are never caught?
Did you just repeat this horrible, absurd, unethical and illogical argument because you happened to read a lot of badly-reasoned rationalizing sports writers who repeated it and just assumed it was valid, or did you actually think it makes sense? I hope not the latter, because it doesn’t, and I’m really tired of reading it.
As to the first, you have it exactly backwards. Courts enforce the law. Their job isn’t to send messages. What message did the OJ verdict send? And the writers weren’t sending a message, other than inherent and obvious ones, albeit one almost half need to be sent themselves: You don’t honor cheaters. Cheaters aren’t great; cheaters break the rules to appear great. Cheating makes you not great even if you would have been great without cheating. Putting cheaters in the same competition, class, category, Hall of Fame or sentence with non-cheaters is an insult to the non-cheaters.
Jack I am not saying reward cheaters but unfortunately their decision to be tough on a few of players hurts non-cheating players as well.
I am not advocating cheating however I find it hard to believe there are no players in the Hall of Fame who did not cheat. The problem for these players are that we live in a different time.
I appreciate the BBWA doing all it can to maintain its integrity. I must admit I am not a big follower of baseball, but I will yield do your opinions instead of trying to argue facts with you.
“Jack I am not saying reward cheaters but unfortunately their decision to be tough on a few of players hurts non-cheating players as well.”
That’s just it, unless the voters collude together and coordinate their votes, then there isn’t a *decision* to be tough on the *entire* body of players.
Correct me if I’m wrong, the voting writers submit their ballots in relative secrecy before the start of the post-season. If it is like most other votes, there is relatively little coordination before hand (I may be in error on this).
But that’s the beauty of a secret ballot….there isn’t any pre-planned vengeance, there isn’t any coordinated unfairness…no “decision to be tough” was made. The body of voters, composed of apparently individual convictions, did not see fit to elevate anyone to the hall of fame. There is no injustice if you cannot prove conspiracy.