Yesterday was the announcement revealing who had been voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.. For only the 8th time since the Hall's inception no player was elected in the Hall. There were plenty of players that have achieved significant goals, such as all time home run leader Barry Bonds were on the ballot, however the perception that they used performance enhancing drugs or PED's which is taboo today kept many writers from casting a ballot for them. Now none on the players eligible for the first time this year, ever failed a drug test nor were they convicted, but the perception of use runs rampant. I really enjoyed reading the following comment from a writer and it does bring us the QOD:
"To ignore the historic accomplishments of Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, for example, is hard to justify. Moreover, to penalize players exonerated in legal proceedings -- and others never even implicated -- is simply unfair. The Hall of Fame is supposed to be for the best players to have ever played the game. Several such players were denied access to the Hall today. Hopefully, this will be rectified by future voting."
Should the perception, without proof, of a player to have used PED's exempt them from the Hall of Fame?