Hall Pass

Author's note: I amended this post to correct my own sloppiness, the sentence that baseball writers had never voted in a player unanimously. If you know me or know journalists, you understand how cheesed off I am for this mistake. Please forgive.

Baseball’s annual Hall of Fame reveal is a nice little slice of Americana, which is to say it includes tradition, achievement, bias, selective memory and full-on bitching. People do or do not get voted into Cooperstown, and then everyone retreats to their respective barstools to gasbag the wisdom or ignorance of the decisions.

It’s a welcome dose of baseball in January, even if a bit self-reverential. No American major league sport takes itself more seriously than baseball, owing mostly to history, nostalgia and several generations of self-appointed guardians of the game. Baseball tacitly approves of its characterization by some as national religion, with Cooperstown as its Vatican City.

I can offer little on the merits of the HoF Class of 2021, but I believe it increasingly puerile to continue to reject Barry Flaxseed and Roger Syringe. They weren’t one-offs, but the product of an entire era with which baseball is still coming to terms. Curt Schilling’s odious personal and societal positions, post-career, present a different argument, but one that’s even less germane to his resume.

According to the Baseball Writers Association of America’s rules for election: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played. The so-called “character clause.” Points 1, 2 and 6 are reasonable; 3, 4 and 5 are where it gets tricky.

A gent named Robert W. Cohen authored the book “Baseball Hall of Fame – or Hall of Shame?” in which he detailed many of the reprehensible doings of those enshrined in Cooperstown. He wrote, “Baseball has always had some form of hypocrisy when it comes to its exalted heroes. In theory, when it comes to these kinds of votes, it’s true that character should matter, but once you’ve already let in Ty Cobb, how can you exclude anyone else?” (EDITOR'S NOTE: Ty Cobb, who hails from noteworthy and noble American stock, is much-erroneously-maligned. As it turns out, the rumors of his misanthropy and misdeeds were greatly exaggerated. Dammit.)

Cap Anson, now there's a racist

Indeed, the Hall is full of racists, abusers, cheats, womanizers, drunks and miscreants. Younger me was a little more strident about inductees exhibiting some ill-defined standard of conduct and integrity. Older me now views Halls of Fame as historical markers, and criteria should mostly be: could a guy ball in relation to his peers and to history? If so, he gets in. Does the history and progression of the game require that someone’s story be included? If so, they get in. Mention whatever transgressions and context necessary, but they get in. To deny someone whose accomplishments clearly merit induction becomes logically indefensible.

A common argument for rejecting Bonds, Clemens and the PED stat stuffers is that they cheated the game and cheated their clean peers, while the behavior of racists and abusers, though contemptible, did not affect the game. That’s some Coco Chanel-level needle threading, given points 3 and 5 above, and the fact that it’s called a Hall of “Fame.”

Remember, too, that though steroids were banned from baseball in 1991, MLB didn’t begin testing for them until 2003. Baseball was only too happy to count the money generated by home run binges and power surges. Players essentially got a wink-and-nod pass for a couple decades.

Some folks draw the line at positive drug tests for HoF consideration. In that way, one can rationalize Bonds and Clemens getting in, but Alex Rodriguez and Manny Ramirez disqualifying themselves. That’s an even thinner limb to crawl out upon. It’s worth noting, as well, that when it comes to doping and PEDs, the cheats are often one step ahead of the cops. Rather than risk honoring players who simply had access to cleaner jet fuel and better masking agents while tarring those who got pinched, include everyone whose numbers pass muster. Tailor and adjust the narrative accordingly. The Republic will survive.

It should be obvious that Cooperstown is less hallowed ground and more an exclusive What A Bunch of People Think. Otherwise, there’s no justification for embracing noted racist and color line enforcer Kennesaw Mountain Landis immediately, yet waiting 40 years to grudgingly induct labor pioneer Marvin Miller, who only changed the sport forever. Another tell on Hall voting and membership is the fact that the only player ever to be elected unanimously was a relief pitcher. Granted, Mariano Rivera was an exemplary relief pitcher, but still. Look at the history. Not Ruth, not Ted Williams, not Koufax, not Willie Mays, not Aaron, not Seaver, not Ken Griffey Jr. None of them unanimously. To a person, Hall voters will tell you that each of them, and a score of others, all deserve to be in the Hall. But each time around, at least a handful of voters chose not to vote for obvious candidates because, well, that’s just the way it’s done. Doesn’t exactly inspire confidence for objective standards.

It would be healthier if the Baseball Hall of Fame were viewed as the Smithsonian, rather than the Sistine Chapel. But where’s the fun in that? It’s not coincidence that there’s only a few letters’ difference between myth-making and marketing. Besides, debate on whether Michelangelo was a first-ballot guy is pretty much played out.