Did Murray Chass do it again? Did he just go another full column without disclosing his position on the HoF’s Veterans Committee? Forget his sentiments about Marvin Miller, which don’t seem to be at all off-base. Why does he refuse to acknowledge his membership on the committee once again? One could argue that he deliberately withholds information about the committee (listed here) by saying
"the new veterans committee, made up largely of 61 living Hall of Fame players, has had Miller on its composite ballot (executives, managers and umpires) in 2003 and again this year. It rejected him both times."
There is no good reason for Chass to describe the makeup of the Veterans Committee in piecemeal fashion, when an extra phrase would have given readers information about the participation of former Frick and Spink winners on the committee. Why is this disclosure so hard for him?