John Fay Abstains from HOF Voting to Avoid Casting Votes for Bonds and Clemens

[George Anderson]

There is a good chance Bonds and Clemens are going to be on the ballot again next year so does he do the same thing next year? Is Fay going to abstain as long as any rumored user is on the ballot?

If that is the case he needs to be removed from voting.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by George Anderson

There is a good chance Bonds and Clemens are going to be on the ballot again next year so does he do the same thing next year? Is Fay going to abstain as long as any rumored user is on the ballot?

If that is the case he needs to be removed from voting.

Well, Fay said this at the end of the article.

My gut feeling is that I’m done as a voter. Maybe time will give me clarity on the issue, but, right now, I’d rather not vote than send in a ballot I don’t fully believe in.

And removing him as a voter doesn't mean he's replaced by someone else. The writers still have to meet their own criteria. 10 years and maybe some more qualifications.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

Well, Fay said this at the end of the article.



And removing him as a voter doesn't mean he's replaced by someone else. The writers still have to meet their own criteria. 10 years and maybe some more qualifications.

The BBWAA's criteria is outdated so you're right in that until they change their criteria, it's unlikely he'll be replaced. They are still stuck in the "journalist-only" mode where they ignore people that make a living writing on the internet. That is to say that unless you work for a print medium, you're unlikely to get a sniff by the Baseball Writers.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Gallen5862

The thing about Pete Rose is that Pete Rose the player did not get caught doing something to tarnish his numbers. Pete Rose the player deserves a up or down vote on if his accomplishments deserve to be in the hall of fame. Pete Rose the manager violated the gambleing rules and was banned from baseball. Pete Rose the manager should not be put on the ballot for the manager side of the hall of fame, It was the manager that was banned from baseball not the player.

You really ought to read his book if you think that Pete the player didn't bet. In the book he says the first time he admitted publicly to anyone other than the guys taking the bets, was the 1986 playoffs. Pete played in the 1986 season. Pete the player was betting on games. Pete was just a manager when he was caught. But Pete the player was doing it too and has eventually admitted to it.

[alexad]

If he is not going to vote someone else should for him. It is not a right but a privilege. Another reason why baseball writers should not be the ones voting. TV and radio broadcasters should be given the same opportunity.
The Enquirer should FIRE him.

I honesty believe he sent a bad message about the city of Cincinnati. There are those deserving to be in the Hall of Fame and not voting is a SISSY way out!!!

[Joseph]

It's a priviledge, but is it an obligation?

I've got no problems with it. Probably better than turning in a blank ballot.

[Wonderful Monds]

For all the Redszone hand wringing over this, the rest of the Internet seems to approve of such moves.
http://m.deadspin.com/5972233/espn-w...teroid-problem

[Jpup]

There has been nothing linking Piazza, Biggio, McGriff, or Raines to PEDs. They should be in the HOF. Fay could have voted for those guys. If you can't vote, get out.

[Vottomatic]

I see nothing wrong with what he did. He basically thinks Clemens and Bonds are deserving even with PED's, but he wants to send a message by not voting them in first ballot. Nor are the other guys on the list first ballot guys. So Fay isn't voting.

No problem whatsoever with that.

Most of the complaining is simply that alot of posters simply don't like Fay.

[jojo]

Actually what Fay did was yell, "get off of my lawn!" and then he went inside to read old books about the good ole days when things were simple and baseball was pure.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by Jpup

There has been nothing linking Piazza, Biggio, McGriff, or Raines to PEDs. They should be in the HOF. Fay could have voted for those guys. If you can't vote, get out.

So what should he have done about the guys who DO have questions about PED's? He's clearly unsure about what to do with them. If he votes no on them and it turns out they should be in, he's hurting their chances. If he votes yes on them and it turns out they should NOT be in, he's helping them get in. I understand wanting to place votes for the other guys, but you can't vote for some players and abstain from the rest. You must select yea or nay for each. By submitting a blank ballot, he's not helping anyone only HURTING everyone. By not submitting one at all, he's not helping or hurting anyone.

And due to his conflict, he's seriously considering not voting at all anymore.

Personally, it seems like he's doing exactly what he SHOULD do. If he feels unqualified to make the decision...he shouldn't attempt to do so and hurt other deserving players chances. On the flip side, the players who are not linked to PED's shouldn't have their chances enhanced just because they aren't linked. Their chances should be only based on their individual merits and accomplishments, not a lack of faults. (clearly just my opinion)

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by Jpup

There has been nothing linking Piazza, Biggio, McGriff, or Raines to PEDs. They should be in the HOF. Fay could have voted for those guys. If you can't vote, get out.

I wouldn't say nothing. Piazza and Biggio have had their share of smoke. And it pains me to say this, but McGriff's late career renaissance after joining a team full of questionable suspects gives me some doubt as well.

[Red in Chicago]

Originally Posted by Jpup

There has been nothing linking Piazza, Biggio, McGriff, or Raines to PEDs. They should be in the HOF. Fay could have voted for those guys. If you can't vote, get out.

Raines may not have PEDS going against him, but he did have a slight problem with keeping coke in his pocket while playing ball. I'm guessing that's at least part of the problem some voters have with him.

[Raisor]

Raisor's new rule for Hall of Fame consideration: if you aren't good enough to get in on your first try, you aren t a Hall of Famer.

If you are a voter, and you think a player is a Hall of Famer, vote him in, don't make his wait out of some kind of caste system.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

I wouldn't say nothing. Piazza and Biggio have had their share of smoke. And it pains me to say this, but McGriff's late career renaissance after joining a team full of questionable suspects gives me some doubt as well.

This is exactly why Fay did the correct thing.

What is he supposed to do with "smoke" providing speculation or innuendo that somebody used PEDs?

Is Fay supposed to be the judge and jury as to whether somebody used PEDs based on public speculation?

Fay is a baseball writer. He has expertise in baseball performance. He is not an expert on PED use. He is not a judge and jury as to whether each candidate used. He has no way of evaluating how much PEDs influenced a particular player's performance.

I don't know how any individual sportswriter can deal with all these issues fairly. At minimum, the Hall must set out clear guidelines concerning PEDs and how they should be considered (or not considered) in the voting process.