The Black Sox Scandal

Discussion in 'History Forum' started by CoachC, Sep 30, 2004.

  1. CoachC

    CoachC
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    We have been discussing in an American History class I'm teaching several issues surrounding the "fix" of the 1919 World Series and the banishment from baseball of the eight Black Sox.
    I began the process with the idea that Judge Landis was unfair in his banishment of a few of the Black Sox. I think the Joe Jackson and Buck Weaver probably should have had their banishment removed. However, as I & my students continue to study the effect of the scandal on baseball and on the nation I am coming to the conclusion that Landis did the right thing banishing all eight of them.
    I would support Jackson's reinstatement just because "shoeless" Joe does belong in the Hall of fame but I think in the context of the damage the scandal did to baseball in 1919. Landis was right.
    I would be curious to know what other members think about this issue & even the Pete Rose scandal, its modern equivalent.
     
  2. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think Shoeless Joe was railroaded. He had too good of a series to be guilty of throwing it. However, there needed to be a strong stand taken with the others and they should have been banned for life. If you can't trust the integrity of the game, then the purpose of playing is over.

    Pete Rose is the modern equivalent and deserves the same punishment. He should be banned for life. He should not be eligible for the Hall of Fame because of his deeds. The Hall of Fame is a place of honor and Rose does not deserve that. He was a great hitter but he shamed the game and compromised its integrity. There is no place in the Hall for people who do that.

    On a similar issue, I feel the same way about Bonds. There is no way that he is not using drugs. If you look at the dramatic jump in his numbers and his body, there has to be drugs involved. Because of that, his homerun record is tainted. He did not do it under the same standard that Ruth and Aaron did it. And the case can be made that Ruth was still a better player anyway.

    People who compromise the integrity of the game should not be honored by baseball.
     
  3. dianetavegia

    dianetavegia
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Hubby is a baseball fanatic and the BlackSoX scandal has always been one of his interests. I'll point this out when he gets home. I'm sure he'd like to join in.

    I have a big framed print of Tinkers To Evers To Chance above my computer. [​IMG]
     
  4. CoachC

    CoachC
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2003
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Buck Weaver batted .324 in the eight games and committed no errors. He took no money from the gamblers, which Jackson did. Weaver sat in on the meetings which Jackson did not. Weavers numbers over a career project to a hall of fame career. I find his case almost as sad as "shoeless" Joe's.

    Would baseball have survived if Babe Ruth had not just been traded to the Yankees?

    I agree with you that Bonds is on drugs and that the HR record when he gets it should have an asterick by it. The one thing I think Bonds is though is the best athlete of the three. Babe Ruth was a great hitter but was to fat and slow to be called a great athlete. Aaron didn't have the explosive athleticism that Bonds has.

    I will also, respectfully disagree with you about Pete Rose. Rose should be in the hall of fame as a player. Rose compromised the integrity of the game as a manager, however, the pride, and effort and intensity he brought to the field as a player honors the game. As a player he was "charlie hustle". He didn't become "charlie the hustler" until he was a manager.
     
  5. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    9,649
    Likes Received:
    312
    The question of Mr. Jackson's banishment from baseball to me was made moot by death. The same should occur with Mr. Roses' death (which is not likely to happen any time soon).

    To me the question is should Mr. Jackson be allowed into the Hall of Fame? On that, I say yes. His exhibit would tell the story of the Scandal.
     
  6. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why are professional sportists held to a higher standard than the Prsident of the USofA? Why are politicians expected to lie and cheat?
     
  7. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    More integrity in a game than in politics!

    I will not second guess the judgment of the people who were right there, who talked to witnesses, who had all the info.

    Jackson and Rose were adjudged by the powers-that-be to be "bad" for baseball. They both still are. Neither deserves "armchair quarterbacking" by us today.
     
  8. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    As for Shoeless Joe,

    http://www.geocities.com/shoeless_60067/shoeless.html

    Here is a great page about it: http://www.baseballimmortals.net/Jackson_Joe/jackson--innocent.shtml

    Here is his line from that postseason: 1919 WS CHW CIN L 8 32 5 12 3 0 1 6 1 2 .375 .394 .562 0 1 0 0 0

    Those numbers are too high for someone throwing a series. I think the later evidence shows that he was innocent and was railroaded.

    I don't think a permanent ban is too much for someone who compromises the game. The HOF is place for baseball to honor its best players and Rose, IMO, cannot be considered in that group. I have to be a hard nose on that one. You gamble; you're gone ... for good.

    But I guess the debate will continue. I maintain that Rose's worst break of his life came when Giamatti died. Giamatti probably would have let him back in. Then Rose became too stubborn to admit what everyone else knew. It made him look bad. If he had admitted it 15 years ago, he would have been back in baseball long ago and it would be just a footnote of history, rather than the story of history.
     

Share This Page

Loading...