12-12-2002, 06:18 PM
If there truly is proof, then no - keep him out, because that means not only did he do it, but he's been lying about it all this time to the fans, and to himself. If noone can provide any kind of serious evidence, let him the fuck in already. Assuming he's innocent, his name's been dragged through the mud already so he'll forever have an "alleged gambler" moniker.
What I don't understand is this has been going on for 13 years - you mean to tell me that in all this time, noone could step forward with actual proof? Sure, in today's paper it's claimed there is evidence - then why not just present it already? It's not like he's tried to get reinstated before, I think this is just the closest he's come since it's being said that Selig just might do it. So many people say he shouldn't be let in - then why not provide substantial proof as to why to shut everyone up and close the case instead of dragging it on for yeas?
What I don't understand is this has been going on for 13 years - you mean to tell me that in all this time, noone could step forward with actual proof? Sure, in today's paper it's claimed there is evidence - then why not just present it already? It's not like he's tried to get reinstated before, I think this is just the closest he's come since it's being said that Selig just might do it. So many people say he shouldn't be let in - then why not provide substantial proof as to why to shut everyone up and close the case instead of dragging it on for yeas?