Inductees to the Baseball Hall of Fame were announced yesterday to a little more fanfare than usual.
Not because of who was elected but how they were elected.
ESPN's Dan Le Batard has gained a lot of attention for his unusual voting method.
He gave his ballot to Deadspin.com and had the website's readers vote for whom they would like to see in the Hall of Fame. Some 30,000 people placed their votes essentially in Le Batard's name.
Le Batard was bringing attention to what he feels is a broken system.
Baseball Hall of Fame voting has always been under a lot of scrutiny for a lot of different reasons. The biggest reason is that there has never been a unanimous selection for the Hall of Fame.
Not Babe Ruth (95.13%), not Ty Cobb (98.23%) and not even Hank Aaron (97.83%).
The highest percentage was Tom Seaver's 98.84.
This year was no exception.
Greg Maddux appeared on 97.2 percent of the ballots. If anyone over the past two decades is a unanimous Hall of Famer, it's Maddux. The reasons for not voting for certain players goes far beyond whether they are good enough players.
Some rank players on if they deserve to be a "first ballot" hall of famer, which all three of this year's selections (Maddux, Tom Glavine and Frank Thomas) were. "If Joe DiMaggio didn't make it the first time, then this guy shouldn't."
Others look at the fact that players like Ruth, Cobb, Aaron and even Willie Mays, didn't receive 100 percent of the votes, than no one should.
Another, more selfish reason, is a writer's personal feelings.
There's always been speculation that Eddie Murray took longer than usual to get into Cooperstown because he didn't treat the writers very well.
And the most recent reason that is becoming more prevalent is to not vote for players associated with the "Steroid Era."
This appears to be the reason Maddux didn't receive unanimous selection and is why first timer's Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens received a little over 30 percent support this year.
Bonds and Clemens are clearly two of the best players of all time but their strong connection to steroid use in the late 90's and most of the 2000's has smeared their reputation, and apparently the reputations of players like Maddux.
Personally, while I have a problem with what the evidence suggests they did, I don't have a problem if they were eventually voted into the Hall of Fame. That goes for anyone in the "Steroid Era."
Until baseball officially bans them from the game, as they did with Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson, they are eligible for Cooperstown. If baseball has a problem with what they did, then the powers that be should change the rules and, as Kenesaw Mountain Landis did to the 1919 Chicago White Sox, ban them from the game.
The subjectivity of the vote appears to grow larger and larger by the year and it's something that Le Batard is trying to bring attention to. There should be more defined rules and logic to electing members of the Hall of Fame.
It should be geared more towards a player's performance and impact on the game rather than the ego of a writer. Ironically, the ballot Le Batard officially cast was almost the same as longtime baseball writer, Tim Kurkjians.
That could be the reason why so many HOF voters are upset.
The people got it right.
It should be a simpler process. Sort of like the segment on Le Batard's show, "Si? or No?"
afitzpatrick@blythevillecourier.com