While rampant disregard of the rules can be laid at the feet of MLB, the Hall is solely responsible for it’s admission standards. And to that end, Jane Forbes Clark is the person who abdicated the Hall’s responsibility for ensuring standards are applied equally to all candidates.
It's not a standard, tbh. It's voters minds. All of these guys were on the ballot. It's not like they kept juicers and wackos off the ballot. 66% of the voters supported Bonds and Clemens, and last year Schilling drew 71%. 75% is hard. Even "wrong track" doesn't get 75%.
I think one the things Ortiz had that others didn't was his personality and storyline. Honestly, can you find anyone in baseball who felt he was a jerk? The post-season results are legendary, from Games 4 and 5 of the 2004 ALCS to the 2013 grand slam against the Tigers that saved that series. Add in "this is our f'ng city", maybe even surviving the shooting too, and I don't think it is a mystery why slightly more voters (about 10%) were more inclined to say the only evidence against him was subject to too much skepticism to hold it against him. Sure, Bonds and Clemens were acquitted, and everyone on earth recognizes those two have accomplishments comparable to any "inner circle" hall of famer while Ortiz doesn't, but 10% of the voters held something against them that they didn't against Ortiz. Probably grudges more than anything rational.
