To the surprise of no one, the recent Barry Bonds perjury trial ended with a result that satisfied neither party and only really succeeded in stirring up another round of PED-related articles.
One of the most common type article to enter the fray is how the Hall of Fame will view such candidates; after all, Bonds (and others guilty/suspected of usage) put up some impressive numbers during his career.
Some writers are calling for the Hall of Fame to establish new guidelines on voting procedures for the next election; others are calling for an outright ban of all PED users.
Both of these ideas strike me as rather unnecessary. I mean, isn’t it the job of the HOF voters to decide who is worthy of induction? Besides, a lot of the arguments that are being used against PED users don’t really hold water—and could set a serious double-standard when it comes to past inductees.
PEDs vs. Gambling
One of the most popular arguments used against PED users is that they should be banned from the Hall because Pete Rose—another great player who suffered a major scandal within the game—is banned from the Hall.
People who make this argument do not seem to understand why exactly Rose (and fellow gambler Shoeless Joe Jackson) are ineligible for the Hall of Fame in the first place.
In truth, the Hall of Fame has no actual policy on gambling itself—both Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker are both enshrined despite their involvement in a famous gambling scandal, and chances are they are not the only HOFers who gambled on baseball in the early part of the 20th century.
The reason Rose (and Jackson) are not in the Hall of Fame, however, is because their gambling resulted in lifetime bans by MLB, and it is the policy of the Hall of Fame to prohibit such players from the ballot.
(Whether or not this should be the case is another argument for another day. But for the record, I believe Rose should be in the Hall of Fame but never allowed to work in MLB in any capacity above youth camp coordinator. And Jackson’s ban really should be up by now, considering he has been dead for nearly 60 years)
Believe it or not, PED users also fall under this provision. According to MLB’s steroid policy, any player who fails a steroid test on three separate occasions is given a lifetime ban from the game. Such players will also be ineligible for the Hall as a result.
Other Forms of Cheating
Another important thing to remember about the Hall of Fame is that it has never had a policy against forbidding cheaters of any type. Numerous players now in the Hall are guilty of illegal bats, illegal pitches, illegal modifications of equipment, stealing signs and numerous other illegal activities within the game.
Names like Cobb, Ford, Drysdale and Perry are among the HOFers who engaged in these activities during their careers.
Now to be fair, PEDs are a different form of cheating altogether (though not necessarily better or worse). However, the Hall has also never had a policy against drugs of any type.
I’ve pointed out before that the PED issue in baseball dates back as far as Pud Galvin in 1889, and the list of HOFers who have partaken in PED usage is extensive. Mantle, Aaron, Mays, Gibson, Perry, McCovey and Ford are but a few of the current HOFers who have admitted to engaging in PEDs during their careers (and so has Rose, by the way).
I know what you are thinking: “Yeah, but these players didn’t use steroids.” Maybe… or maybe not. After all, the Mitchell Report itself states explicitly that the Federal Government first determined that steroid usage was widespread in MLB clubhouses in 1973.
This corresponds quite well with statements by former MLB pitcher (and MLB pitching coach) Tom House, who is most famous for catching Hank Aaron’s 715th home run but has also admitted to steroid usage throughout the 1970s, claiming that every team he played for had at least six or seven pitchers experimenting with the drug.
In other words, it’s extremely naïve to think that there are not already steroid users in the MLB Hall of Fame.
(House, incidentally, believes that steroid usage has gone down since the 1970s as more people have become aware of—and made to fear—the potential side effects of usage).
Legality
The final argument often used (by all sides) to justify past PED usage is that the PEDs were not illegal or as potent at the time (Amphetamines were made illegal in 1970; steroids in 1989).
Well, so what? From a baseball prospective, there is no fundamental difference between using PEDs when they were legal and using them when they were not legal. Motivations for their usage remain identical: become a better player; play longer; improve chances of succeeding; and make more money.
If there’s one difference between the users of today and the users of yesterday, it’s that today’s athletes have a better understanding of how the PEDs work. Specifically, improved conditioning and weight training—a practice that was actually discouraged in MLB circles until the late-1980s—not only makes somebody a better athlete, but also makes the PEDs work more effectively.
In essence, people want to ban today’s PED users because they work harder in the offseason than ever before.
Conclusion
If the MLB Hall of Fame chooses to ban PED users, they will run counter to every established induction procedure/guideline they have ever had. They will also create a huge double standard between generations by allowing PED users from one generation in the Hall while banning those from another.
Worse, it could open up a Pandora’s Box when the drug use of older players is given greater scrutiny, resulting in past greats getting booted.
So the Hall should continue to keep the same criteria they have had for the past half-decade and let the voters decide on the issue for themselves. If they want to consider PED usage, fine; if not, simply continue voting in the best players on the ballot.
Just like they have always done.
Read more MLB news on BleacherReport.com