This is what I was trying to point out earlier when Rose came out; what does the latter have to do with the former? If we're going to argue "everyone was doing it" and "it was kinda banned but not enforced" and all that stuff (which I agree with), what does that have to do with Rose? Rose was consciously breaking rules at the time that had basically been baseball's original sin for decades. It's not like it's something he can plead ignorance on, or point to a pervasive culture at the time that he got swept up in. That said, I have no problem with Rose in the HoF; the thing that should stand (and seemingly bugs him even more than being left out of the Hall) is his lifetime ban from MLB (no coaching, managing, announcing, etc.). The Hall is a separate entity and should put him in if people vote him in. You're right in that they're two totally different cases, but I don't see why either is a huge deal. I guess I should have separated the two thoughts and really only focused on the roiders. I just don't think the Hall is some sacred thing that only the pure of heart are allowed to grace.