Read up on Babe Ruth's antics during his playing days. He was an alcoholic degenerate gambler and womanizer. He was also the greatest baseball player in history. Gambling wasn't Pete Rose's only fault. He admittedly had intimate relations with under age girls while playing in the majors. Basically, just your run of the mill degenerate gambler and womanizer. Also one of the greatest baseball players in history.
Wow. Its a hard balancing act isn't it? Separating out reality jn one area from reality jn another... there has to be some hard boundary lines that people either cross or don't cross to know how to deal with them.
I agree there has to be an explanation of why there weren't included while they were alive. AND consideration of whether we are normalizing/condoning their behavior even after the fact. Not sure on that last bit -- definitely risky...
Bill - I'm not sure I agree with your comments about "context" or past behaviors.
Imagine for a minute that at some stage in your professional career, you were nominated for the writers "Hall of Fame", but before you could be included, all your faults and prior failures at life would be laid out bare for the whole world to see - and then society got to vote on whether you were a fabulous writer, or just an awful human being.
Should the world judge your merits as a writer based upon the work you left behind and it's impact on the world, or should you be judged as to whether or not you lied to the priest at your last confession? What about the speeding ticket? Would it make a difference if they knew about (fill in the blank)?
Is it possible for a "bad" person to actually do great things? Or does the bad always outweigh the good? If social norms change should that disqualify past accomplishments of great leaders? If Samuel Clemens was a racist, does that mean all his literature should be burned and he should be cancelled? Since Martin Luther King Jr was a womanizer, does that mean his monuments should be torn down (or at least a giant asterisk on the base that spells out all of his shortcomings according to the social norms of our day)?
Many a great human, dare I say ANY, would "fail" to make ANY "Hall of Fame" if society got to vote on the person's character faults (or dare we say - their compliance with social norms of the time) before regarding their eligibility and impact on the world.
These are good points and you make me realize I should have added one point to make a key distinction — which is that MLB now views "the color line" as basically the Original Sin of baseball. So all of these other things that you mention might legitimately not be relevant to their context. But Cap Anson's total contribution to the game itself should probably include being one of the driving forces behind making the game only available to one race for 50 years.
If you gamble on the sport you play you’ve stepped over a line. Journalists have lost their jobs and been shunned from the industry over plagiarism and even false reporting. Pete broke the one cardinal rule and that alone is why he was given the boot. Anson caused years of direct harm to his sport.
Excellent article...as a Chicagoan, I appreciate the storied history of Chicago baseball. Pete Rose was definitely one of the greats in 20th century sport. Nobody is a born saint and their prodigious talents in their chosen career doesn't mean they should be punished for that fact.
Bill, seriously? Not sure I understand that because someone dies, their sins die with them. I am Christian and I get that with my faith in Jesus, but I don’t think the baseball commissioner can do that. Rise gambled. He knew it. He did it anyway. Now that he is dead, everything is OK? Nope.
Excellent article...as a Chicagoan, I appreciate the storied history of Chicago baseball. Pete Rose was definitely one of the greats in 20th century sport. Nobody is a born saint. Their prodigious talents in their chosen field needn't be thrown on the trash heap for that fact.
Let he who is perfect throw the first stone. I still listen to Michael Jackson music despite the allegations against him, still find some of Bill Cosby funny, still enjoy some of Harvey Weinstein’s movies and west Nygard clothes. Never cared for P. Diddy. I think that sometimes we need to separate the person from their achievements. Humans are frail and full of faults and none of us are perfect.
We cannot judge the past by present standards. But I do agree that context should be included.
I kind of like Keith Olbermann’s idea of including the black sheep but definitely either separate them from the more honorable honorees; like have a dingy space that maybe gets swept once a week or something to that effect, or definitely have something that tells of their transgressions. I got the impression he was ok with their installation but with conditions attached.
I am just catching up on all of this week's newsletters.
Bill, you are right, and it applies to more than just players banned from the Hall of Fame. The people who are hell bent on cancelling things like statues, building names, etc. are seeing things through the eye of today's standards. If we were able to cancel history according to our laws and social standards in the 21st century, we'd be able to fit all of the world's history in a book shorter than the bible. We would also be destined to repeat history because there are no lessons to learn from reading about the hard truths.
Read up on Babe Ruth's antics during his playing days. He was an alcoholic degenerate gambler and womanizer. He was also the greatest baseball player in history. Gambling wasn't Pete Rose's only fault. He admittedly had intimate relations with under age girls while playing in the majors. Basically, just your run of the mill degenerate gambler and womanizer. Also one of the greatest baseball players in history.
Wow. Its a hard balancing act isn't it? Separating out reality jn one area from reality jn another... there has to be some hard boundary lines that people either cross or don't cross to know how to deal with them.
I agree there has to be an explanation of why there weren't included while they were alive. AND consideration of whether we are normalizing/condoning their behavior even after the fact. Not sure on that last bit -- definitely risky...
Uber didn't invent kissing, but their commuter shuttles sound like a good idea for rush hour...
Ha I wondered if I had a typo in that item (kissing v busses!)
Bill - I'm not sure I agree with your comments about "context" or past behaviors.
Imagine for a minute that at some stage in your professional career, you were nominated for the writers "Hall of Fame", but before you could be included, all your faults and prior failures at life would be laid out bare for the whole world to see - and then society got to vote on whether you were a fabulous writer, or just an awful human being.
Should the world judge your merits as a writer based upon the work you left behind and it's impact on the world, or should you be judged as to whether or not you lied to the priest at your last confession? What about the speeding ticket? Would it make a difference if they knew about (fill in the blank)?
Is it possible for a "bad" person to actually do great things? Or does the bad always outweigh the good? If social norms change should that disqualify past accomplishments of great leaders? If Samuel Clemens was a racist, does that mean all his literature should be burned and he should be cancelled? Since Martin Luther King Jr was a womanizer, does that mean his monuments should be torn down (or at least a giant asterisk on the base that spells out all of his shortcomings according to the social norms of our day)?
Many a great human, dare I say ANY, would "fail" to make ANY "Hall of Fame" if society got to vote on the person's character faults (or dare we say - their compliance with social norms of the time) before regarding their eligibility and impact on the world.
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
These are good points and you make me realize I should have added one point to make a key distinction — which is that MLB now views "the color line" as basically the Original Sin of baseball. So all of these other things that you mention might legitimately not be relevant to their context. But Cap Anson's total contribution to the game itself should probably include being one of the driving forces behind making the game only available to one race for 50 years.
If you gamble on the sport you play you’ve stepped over a line. Journalists have lost their jobs and been shunned from the industry over plagiarism and even false reporting. Pete broke the one cardinal rule and that alone is why he was given the boot. Anson caused years of direct harm to his sport.
Excellent article...as a Chicagoan, I appreciate the storied history of Chicago baseball. Pete Rose was definitely one of the greats in 20th century sport. Nobody is a born saint and their prodigious talents in their chosen career doesn't mean they should be punished for that fact.
Bill, seriously? Not sure I understand that because someone dies, their sins die with them. I am Christian and I get that with my faith in Jesus, but I don’t think the baseball commissioner can do that. Rise gambled. He knew it. He did it anyway. Now that he is dead, everything is OK? Nope.
Excellent article...as a Chicagoan, I appreciate the storied history of Chicago baseball. Pete Rose was definitely one of the greats in 20th century sport. Nobody is a born saint. Their prodigious talents in their chosen field needn't be thrown on the trash heap for that fact.
Let he who is perfect throw the first stone. I still listen to Michael Jackson music despite the allegations against him, still find some of Bill Cosby funny, still enjoy some of Harvey Weinstein’s movies and west Nygard clothes. Never cared for P. Diddy. I think that sometimes we need to separate the person from their achievements. Humans are frail and full of faults and none of us are perfect.
We cannot judge the past by present standards. But I do agree that context should be included.
I kind of like Keith Olbermann’s idea of including the black sheep but definitely either separate them from the more honorable honorees; like have a dingy space that maybe gets swept once a week or something to that effect, or definitely have something that tells of their transgressions. I got the impression he was ok with their installation but with conditions attached.
I am just catching up on all of this week's newsletters.
Bill, you are right, and it applies to more than just players banned from the Hall of Fame. The people who are hell bent on cancelling things like statues, building names, etc. are seeing things through the eye of today's standards. If we were able to cancel history according to our laws and social standards in the 21st century, we'd be able to fit all of the world's history in a book shorter than the bible. We would also be destined to repeat history because there are no lessons to learn from reading about the hard truths.