Should players who used steroids be in the Hall Of Fame?

I do think that not all sports are possible to have steroids in their system. One of this for body builders. Besides, the use of steroids have side effects in the body.

The HOF voters are extremely petty and fickle and subject to only their own standards of judgment. Guys like Pete Rose are kept out more on principle than on anything else. And it seems they've collectively decided that shrouded in suspicion means an invisible asterisk with "no" being the only answer acceptable. Not to get too far off topic here, but it reminds me of a few months ago, the whole Lance Armstrong debate and taking away his titles. People were adamant for many, many years that Armstrong was cheating. Their evidence: Because so many others were cheating, he had to be cheating! Well, assuming that's true and that cheating was widespread, then he was still playing on a level field. He was just better than those other cheaters. The same is often said in baseball. It's not called the "steroid era" only because of Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, and a few other players. It's called that because it's widely believed that damn near everybody was juicing. There are many guys still playing who have been caught using, big names and potential future Hall of Famers like A-Rod and David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez. It amounts to inflation. And if they want to keep one out, they have to keep all out. There's no other standard that makes sense. I say let them in.

What did the old timers say? If you are not cheating , you are not trying. In the Hall we have players who have tried ans succeeded in " enhancing' their play way before steroids. To me I would let Sosa and McGuire in but not Clemens or Bonds but it because of personal reasons , not the roids. I always say unless they can prove that these players took something to improve their eyesight I say let them in.