>>>>I agree with you on Rose, but I do have some caveats. Rose did what he did as a ballplayer and nobody can take that away. His betting doesn't really seem to have been a factor in his play, so I say, sure. Let him in. Having said that though, there are some others that personally, I'd bar the gate. Mark McGwire comes to mind. Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa etc. etc. I would keep them out on the grounds that we have no idea whether they have the credentials had they played honestly. Unlike Rose, their actions did affect their play and as such, for my money, they do not get into the HOF.
>>>
>>>I heard someone on TV the other day, suggesting that ultimately the solution may be to have a special section in the HOF for the guys from the Steroids era, something like the asterisk in the record books.
>>
>>I think I'd hate that. "Hi folks, here's the regular section, and here's the special section for cheats." No, I don't think I'd like that at all. It taints the whole concept.
>
>Can't decide how I feel about it, but I think one of the problems is that no one really knows which guys were juicing and which weren't. We only know who got caught.
>
>I also think there's a bit of hypocrisy on this whole topic. After all, it's pretty well known that earlier players were using amphetamines and other stuff, but it hasn't keep them out.
>
>Tamar

Absolutely true. But we can only deal with what we know. I'm sure some have slipped by, but I still can't see catching somebody cheating and then rewarding him with a HOF berth.