Monday, July 31, 2006

Is this an ethical response from an ethical voter?

From, Rick Swanson, August 15, 2005

"The question is why should these privileged BBWAA members have exclusive HOF membership rights anyway? Since there are 825 members of this exclusive club today, why did only 516 cast ballots in the last election? Should those 309 BBWAA forfeit their voting privilege, because they never even voted? Maybe the Hall needs to open up the election process to those that really care about the game.

Back in the dark ages when baseball was only written about by those members of the press that were present at the games it made sense.

Some of those people with voting privileges now really don’t deserve to have them. Look at what Rick Reilly wrote in last week’s Sports Illustrated about BBWAA member Jayson Stark. According to Reilly, Stark said “I am not a cop, and it isn’t my job to police the sport.” Well Jayson maybe you need to turn over your voting privilege to someone that really cares about the game. I’m sure if Stark was a card carrying member in 1953 he would have been one of the 56% of the voters that left Joe DiMaggio off the ballot. Those members saw to it that Jolten Joe had to wait 3 years before getting in. He wasn’t much of a role model, or even a ballplayer back then anyway.

  • For starters there are 309 openings where members didn’t vote.
. The number one requirement as far as I am concerned is rule 5, and I am going to keep writing this rule until somebody finally hears me. Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character. Maybe you don’t have to be a cop to vote but you do have to look at this eligibility rule.


Post a Comment

<< Home