Since the "steroid era" of the 1990's with home run numbers skyrocketing, there has been a heated debate about whether players accused, or proven guilty, of steroid use should be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. This year was no exception and with Social Media growing in popularity daily, shots are fired much easier!
Roy Halladay tweeted on Wednesday morning his very strong opinion on the matter, taking a shot at Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds:
Roger Clemens did not take the shot lightly and even fired back a shot at Roy Halladay, accusing Halladay of using amphetamines by a "strength coach".When you use PEDs you admit your not good enough to compete fairly! Our nations past time should have higher standards! No Clemens no Bonds!— Roy Halladay (@RoyHalladay) January 6, 2016
Both Clemens and all-time home run leader, Barry Bonds, have had plenty of accusations and have vehemently denied the allegations. However, most of us baseball fans believe that they, along with plenty of other players, former and current, have taken banned substances in order to further their career and earn another payday.
Not everyone believes that Clemens and Bonds should not be in the Hall of Fame though. BYB writer Alexis Garcia has been at the forefront of this whole conversation even suggesting that it's time to put Bonds and Clemens in Cooperstown. Alexis wrote in BONDS & CLEMENS DESERVE COOPERSTOWN,
"I really don’t care that Bonds and Clemens doped. Or that they are Hall of Fame level a-holes. It may seem wrong today, but it’s hard for me to justify punishing them for taking part in an action that the MLB and its fan base all but ignored in the late 90s when the game was struggling to regain relevance after the damaging 1994 strike."
Garcia was even back by FOX Sports guy Jon Morosi:
Very interesting take, but I personally disagree. For me, when it comes to Cooperstown, integrity has to come first. If Shoeless Joe Jackson was banned for life due to knowledge of a scheme, without even participating, and Pete Rose, the all-time hits leader, is banned for life for betting on baseball, why should a player with known or very strong suspected ties to PED use be elected in the HOF? I have to agree with Halladay on this one.
There is no doubt that by stats alone, Bonds, Clemens, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and soon Alex Rodriguez, among others, certainly are deserving of enough votes to be elected. They would have likely produced stats that earned them enough votes without the alleged PED use, but with the asterisk next to their accomplishments that many people bring up, it's going to be very difficult for most of these players to earn enough votes to be elected.
When it's all said and done, will either of these players, or any of the other of the alleged or proven, PED users get in? It's tough to say. I wouldn't necessarily be surprised either way, but if you broke the rules in a way that gave you an unfair advantage, should you be allowed to be enshrined amongst the best of the best? Not on my watch.
Someone had to say it Roy. I'm with you.
BYB Senior Writer
Thank you for your loyalty to Bleeding Yankee Blue.
Please shop at the BYB store!
On Twitter: @BleednYankeeBlu
On Facebook, LIKE Bleeding Yankee Blue!
Don't forget to check out the BYB Hub.