Petition to remove the HOF voting privilege of Paul Ladewski?

[Dave Visbeck]

I feel the HOF voting honor bestowed on the Columnist, Paul Ladewski, is completely undeserved ... and should somehow be revoked. The man showed no sensibility in his decision to send in a blank 2007 ballot. His doing so with his ballot seems nothing more than a self-promoting showmanship scheme that attempts to upstage the National Baseball Hall of Fame and the game of baseball itself. It is terrible that the man dismissed his obligation to some terrific players that should not of been passed over for consideration in such an irrational and non-caring way, as done by Mr. Ladewski with his 2007 ballot. How could he honestly overlook the players that were well deserving by standards already set for placement in the National Baseball Hall of Fame?

First off, one player certainly overlooked by Columnist Ladewski, has to be Tony Gwynn. Mr. Gwynn is a man of impeccable character and a player that was exceptional in being fan friendly. His statistical numbers speak for themselves. Tony Gwynn was a player that was gifted with baseball skills and leadership shown to be that of the highest caliber in his time.

Also, of course, is "Mr. Durability and Dependability" himself -Cal Ripken Jr. - a man blessed with a desire to compete day-in and day-out without exception ... through pain and with true grit. He had many very good years at shortstop with the Orioles - far more than anyone would expect for a man of his size. As time went on for Mr. Ripken ... he became a modern marvel ... and then became the "Iron Man" after playing more consecutive games than the Yankees' own beloved hero and fan favorite that was beloved by all ... Lou Gehrig's unbelievable 2130 consecutive game streak ... that was passed by Cal, for a mere 502 more games! "2632" alone ... spells out HOF.

Both of these players deserved more than the arrogant back-turning to sensibility that was shown by Mr. Paul Ladewski, in dismissing his voting obligation completely for them and for every other player involved. Not only dismissing an obligation to the 2007 HOF class of candidates ... but also the former players of baseball, the current players ... and lastly ... an obligation to us - the everyday fans ... that follow baseball daily, and appreciates its history. What true fan wouldn't cherish the position of a vote caster for baseball's best that he dismissed without regard. If Mr. Ladewski wants to make a personal statement about today's baseball issues ... he did it in the wrong way. Do it in the column you write instead.

You owed a vote made for all of us that couldn't vote. You should of shown a ballot that shows rational thinking instead ... not one that shows you are not abusing your privilege of being a voter to the National Baseball Hall of Fame. The honor Columnist Ladewski has, should be taken away in my opinion.

******************************

Does it matter to you one way or another? What do you think?

[Jace]

I agree completely with your sentiment

His "I am presuming all players guilty until they prove to me they are innocent" standard is some of the most flawed logic I have ever heard, and it sounds like he's just trying to get attention. Look, its the conscience of baseball Paul Ladewski! As if steroids in baseball started in the 90s, anyway


I officially sign your petition

[Rice14]

I think he has a right to turn in a blank ballot, but it should be a silent protest. The fact he wrote a column about it reeks of self serving attention grasping.

Just one more reason why the people reporting on the news shouldn't be making it as well.

[cliftonite]

This guy is nothing more than an attention whore. Who has ever heard of Paul Ladewski before this?

[Jace]

Originally Posted by Rice14

I think he has a right to turn in a blank ballot, but it should be a silent protest. The fact he wrote a column about it reeks of self serving attention grasping.

Just one more reason why the people reporting on the news shouldn't be making it as well.

I agree that he has a right, but whoever gave him that vote also has the right to take it away for him using it idiotically. He is hurting the HoF chances of players outside his guilty "steroid era" (like Rice and Gossage) by increasing the number of ballots submitted while not actually voting for anyone. Its almost selfish, like he doesn't care because he's too busy being holy

[just-blaze]

What was his reason for not voting?

[dabomb2045]

I wish these writers would get off their high horses......ever heard of INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY???

[JeffWeaverFan]

Originally Posted by cliftonite

This guy is nothing more than an attention whore.

Exactly...

[RhodyYanksFan]

Just another case of the writer wanting to be written about. He's an ass.

[edwardthomas34]

A blank ballot because of the steroid era?What about players who didn't play in that era such as goose,rice,blyleven and others?

[yanksphan]

Originally Posted by just-blaze

What was his reason for not voting?

He said he could not be confident who did and did not use steroids.

I can respect that - BUT - if you're not confident, relinquish your privelege to someone who IS confident.

By the way - he's getting exactly what he wanted, and this thread proves it.

[hobokenfish]

Originally Posted by yanksphan

He said he could not be confident who did and did not use steroids.

I can respect that - BUT - if you're not confident, relinquish your privelege to someone who IS confident.

By the way - he's getting exactly what he wanted, and this thread proves it.

Whatever his motives, I respect his decision. The entire era is tainted, and we should know more about it. At least he's consistent -- not pointing fingers at any one player, but rather saying that he won't vote until more facts are uncovered from the era. Perhaps he's just seeking attention, but I don't disagree with him.

[koko]

Then the 6 people who voted for Tony Fernandez should be revioked as well...I think this is a non-issue.

[Dannman103]

He has every right to turn in a blank ballot. There's no rule that says you have to vote for anyone...I can understand his point about the steroid era being tainted. There's no set minimum or maximum that you have to vote for. As for the column, isnt he a writer? Isnt he supposed to write about baseball?

[RhodeyYankee2638]

Originally Posted by Dannman103

Isnt he supposed to write about baseball?

He's suppoosed to write about the news, not make news. He states he can't vote because he isn't sure who did or didnt use steroids. Therefore, how can he vote in the feature since all the new nominees will have played in the steroid era?? If he isn't going to vote, why let him have the privledge in the first place?

[Dannman103]

Originally Posted by RhodeyYankee2638

He's suppoosed to write about the news, not make news. He states he can't vote because he isn't sure who did or didnt use steroids. Therefore, how can he vote in the feature since all the new nominees will have played in the steroid era?? If he isn't going to vote, why let him have the privledge in the first place?

The writers who have the privledge to vote have no obligation to vote for anyone...it is up to them to choose if there is anyone on the ballot worthy of their consideration.

I don't personally agree with the guy that there was no one to vote for, but he has every right to choose to send in a blank ballot. You may think he was wrong, but he has every right to take the stance he took.

As far as the column goes, I'm sure he wasnt the only Hall of Fame voter who wrote about who he voted for after the fact...or the only person who wrote about who he or she would vote for if they had a ballot. Save your rightgeous indignation for someone who really did something a little worse than exercising his right to choose who he votes (and doesn't vote) for.

[RhodeyYankee2638]

Originally Posted by Dannman103

The writers who have the privledge to vote have no obligation to vote for anyone...it is up to them to choose if there is anyone on the ballot worthy of their consideration.

I don't personally agree with the guy that there was no one to vote for, but he has every right to choose to send in a blank ballot. You may think he was wrong, but he has every right to take the stance he took.

As far as the column goes, I'm sure he wasnt the only Hall of Fame voter who wrote about who he voted for after the fact...or the only person who wrote about who he or she would vote for if they had a ballot. Save your rightgeous indignation for someone who really did something a little worse than exercising his right to choose who he votes (and doesn't vote) for.

Its not a right, its a privaledge

[yankeebot]

I just see this as more evidence of how poor the entire HOF voting system is and how badly it needs an overhaul.

[MPagliarulo]

I don't have a problem with Ladewski using his vote as a way of making a statement on steriods. While I don't agree with his decision to do so, I respect it. Far more egregious, IMO, are the 8 people that didn't think Ripken Hall-worthy... or the 13 people who didn't think Gwynn Hall-worthy. Let's revoke those guys' privileges.

[sprucemoose]

From today's ESPN Page 2 AM Jump:

One Hall voter refused to put a single name on his ballot -- not even Ripken's and Gwynn's -- because he feels every player in the "steroids era" is tainted by performance-enhancing drugs and there is no way to determine who was clean. I wholeheartedly endorse this style of logic. It's like with the Kennedy assassination. We don't know for sure who killed President Kennedy, so I assume everyone who was alive in 1963 may have had something to do with it. Sure, my relationship with older relatives has suffered due to my suspicions, but I'm not attending a reunion with a bunch of assassins.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...=amjump/070110