Joe Posnanski talked with Hall of Fame president Jeff Idelson. He clarified the integrity clause of the guidelines for voting for Hall of Fame membership:

“Baseball has historically been held to a very high standard, right or wrong,” he says. “There’s a certain integrity required when it comes to baseball’s highest honor, which is being inducted into the Hall of Fame. The character clause exists as it relates to the game on the field. The character clause isn’t there to evaluate and judge players socially. It’s there to relate to the game on the field. … The voters should have the freedom to measure that however they see fit.”

I told him that this was fine to say now … but that there could come a time in the near future when the career home run king (Barry Bonds), a man with a case as the greatest pitcher in baseball history (Roger Clemens), and several other players who seem to have slam-dunk Cooperstown credentials but are shadowed by indistinct and blurry steroid rumors could be denied the Hall of Fame. And the Hall of Fame could be denied them as well. How comfortable is he with some of the greatest players in baseball history not being elected to the Hall of Fame?

Answer: Very comfortable. It seems clear to me from what he says here that the Hall of Fame has no problem with the exclusion of known steroid users or even strongly suspected steroid users.

First, that answers questions about Babe Ruth and others who showed less than outstanding character off the field. Second, as Craig Calcaterra points out, anyone on the fence about how to vote on steroids now has clear guidance. This makes it a lot harder for sportswriters to vote for PED users.

Of course, writers can ignore this issue, too. After all, Gaylord Perry is in the Hall.