Should Ripken have been unaimous?

[cjclong]

There are some players who simply and obvioulsy deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Obviously Babe Ruth did. The fact that some didn't vote for him was ridiculous. I'm not putting Ripken in Ruth's class of course, but I think there are some players who clearly belong in the Hall and not to vote for them indicates a motive of something other than electing a qualified candidate to the Hall. Also the idea of a palyer having "one biig year" in some category indicating sterioid use is silly. First we can find a lot of examples of the one big year from players in the 1920's, 30's 40's and 50's before anyone was using steriods as far as we know. Second, if a player was using steriods and it helped him why would he stop. One of the top examples of a big year is Maris who hit 61 homeruns in '61 and never hit as many as 40 before or after that. Are we going to accuse him of taking steroids that one year? The idea of not voting for a player who has never been accused of taking steriods is like saying we are going to imprison the entire population of the country because a few people commit murders. If you used that stupid logic you could say we couldn't vote Ruth or Aaron into the Hall because they could have used corked bats most of their careers and baseball didn't saw their bats in half every few days to check. Somebody who wants attention can always find a reason to protest something. The guy ought to have his voing rights revoked if he's going to use his vote as a protest rather than doing his job.

[flaco1801]

believe me, first ballot hall of fame induction is an honor. the players arent concerned about how many ballots they get, they just want in and the sooner the better. they are in the club, they dont gather each year and compare the ballots they recieved. heres a clue, Nobody is ever gonna be 100 percent. glad to see mcguire get what he deserves. Jeff

[CansecoPower33]

It amazes me how little support Joey Belle received.