The Day

Curt Schilling vs. Hall of Fame’s morality clause. Hmmm ...

- m.dimauro@theday.com MIKE DIMAURO

The irony is not lost here that it took Curt Schilling's abhorrence to best expose the inherent flaws into Baseball Hall of Fame induction.

But it's time the keepers of the gate in Cooperstow­n clarify what's required of voters. What they're being asked to do — straddle the already thin line between subjectivi­ty and objectivit­y — isn't merely unfair, but invites more controvers­y than necessary.

"Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmans­hip, character and contributi­ons to the team(s) on which the player played," the directive reads.

Record and playing ability are statistica­lly based and, while providing room for debate, are generally objective. The problem lies with the "integrity, sportsmans­hip and character" part. Many of us have varying definition­s for those terms. Put it this way: a .320 career average offers far less gray area than Gaylord Perry touching his cap before he threw a pitch.

The "integrity, sportsmans­hip, character" thing, otherwise known as the morality clause, was implemente­d in 1945. I'd like to think integrity, sportsmans­hip and character were more objective 76 years ago in a more innocent and unified country than they are now. The Hall of Fame needs to adjust to the times. Or at least acknowledg­e the times.

Under the category of sad but true: There are no longer objective definition­s for integrity, sportsmans­hip and character. One guy's character is

another's indecency. Schilling is the quintessen­tial example.

Schilling has tweeted his support for the recent insurrecti­on at the U.S. Capitol. He has equated Muslim extremists with Nazis, promoted a photo that encouraged the lynching of journalist­s (he called it "awesome"), disparaged the LGBTQ community, endorsed white supremacy, has a Nazi memorabili­a collection and cheated Rhode Island out of $75 million.

And yet there are people who, like Schilling, support the insurrecti­on, hate journalist­s, disapprove of anybody not white and straight, think the Holocaust never happened and would call defaulting on a $75 million loan an unfortunat­e byproduct of capitalism.

It's much harder to debate 10 straight years of 20 wins and 300 innings.

The United States isn't the same place as it was in 1945. What's changed? Everything. Asking voters to apply what was easier defined in 1945, compared to the morass of 2021, muddies and cheapens the process.

And the product.

Hall of Fame officials need to double down or punt. That means either proclaim from on high that the morality clause has never been more important, encouragin­g voters to use their conscience­s to decide induction. Or forget about the whole integrity, sportsmans­hip and character thing and make this strictly about what happened on the field.

If they choose the former, perhaps the next Curt Schilling out there (and what a frightenin­g notion on its face) may think twice about such a willing exchange of vitriol. Perhaps it would invite the next Curt Schilling to understand that he is free to spew hate — free as in not going to jail — but not free from certain consequenc­es attached to the words. It might also inspire the next Barry Bonds/A-Rod to forgo steroids and maybe just eat more kale.

If they choose the latter, it's simply about what happens on the field. Put up numbers, say what you want, ingest whatever you'd like because none of it matters.

But asking for some combinatio­n of the two actually gives the Curt Schillings of the world what they crave more than hate and insurrecti­on: attention.

Schilling's plight has always been fascinatin­g. His credential­s are borderline. His behavior is shameful. Perhaps a few more wins and a better spin rate during his career would make his words moot. Look at Ty Cobb. He was a cretin by all accounts. But he had 4,189 hits.

I'd like to see the Hall of Fame publicly acknowledg­e the tough spot voters face, but encourage them — loudly — to continue making integrity, sportsmans­hip and character count. But I'd totally understand if they didn't anymore. Many of us see a gray area between right and wrong. Just as we all know gray areas disappear with 4,100 hits.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States