There is nothing like the Baseball Hall of Fame, or more precisely the people who run the Hall of Fame. They are a joke, a farce, a disgrace, a travesty, a humiliation. You get the idea. If Jane Forbes Clark didn’t own the place, she would have been booted out the back door years ago, banished in a cloud of shame.

Clark, who inherited her fortune, and her cronies held their latest election Sunday, and the board-appointed 16-man electorate put Jack Morris and Alan Trammell in the Hall.

And for the seventh time in seven tries, these addle-brained voters succeeded in keeping Marvin Miller out of the Clark asylum. That has been Clark’s primary goal for three decades, and the board-appointed voters seem to get better at it with each success.

Ten years ago Miller asked that he no longer be put on a Hall ballot, but Hall officials ignored him, just as their voters had. It’s our ball, they said in effect, and we’ll play with it when we want.

In Sunday’s election, Miller received 7 of 16 votes. Twelve votes were needed for election. Is it possible that there could be another group of baseball-knowledgeable people of whom more than half would say Miller made no impact on baseball that was worthy of the Hall of Fame?

Fay Vincent, the former commissioner, came to know Miller late in his 95-year-old life. Vincent was one of the people Miller called before he died in 2012.

“The tragedy is what it says about the people in baseball,” Vincent said of the vote. “I don’t think they want to honor him because that would be honoring the union. They don’t want to acknowledge what the union has done for baseball.” Then Vincent added, “Do they want to go back to the days when the players had no rights?”

David Glass, for one, would quickly answer that question in the affirmative. He is the owners of the Kansas City Royals and is as staunch a right-wing conservative as there is among the owners. Glass, who has previously voted no on Miller in these elections, wouldn’t vote for Miller for dog catcher.

Glass was one of a half-dozen owners and management executives on the voting panel. HOF officials knew what they wanted and they knew what they were getting.

Knowing is important to Clark because she depends on major league owners to survive. Their donations are vital to Clark because they sustain the Cooperstown museum, which is a great place to visit except for the people who run it.

The irony in Clark’s campaign against Miller is Miller has done far more for baseball than Clark has ever done. But then, she’s not in the Hall of Fame either, except when she goes to her office.

Ignorant owners might think Miller undermined their status and their control of M.L.B. by forcing the creation of free agency through the grievance procedure. But teams are more valuable than ever, proof of which is in the prices owners get when they sell their teams.

That would never have happened without Peter Seitz’s 1975 decision in the Messersmith-McNally grievance decision won by Miller and his general counsel, Richard Moss. Bowie Kuhn, the commissioner at the time, said free agency would kill baseball. Too bad he didn’t stick around to see what it has done for baseball.

But the Hall of Fame continues to bow to the owners and stack its voting panel with owners and management executives.

Players have been known to withhold votes from Miller; they did that in Miller’s first two times on a Hall ballot when Hall of Fame players made up the voting panel. Why they didn’t vote for Miller remains a mystery, but their failure has created the nonsense that exists today and will continue to exist until at least 2019 when Miller is next eligible to be on the ballot.

The Hall’s committees can’t get their act together. The historic overview committee, which compiles the ballot, keeps putting Miller on it, and the committee that votes keeps rejecting him.

The voting committee this time consisted of owners Glass, Bill DeWitt of St. Louis and Bob Castellini of Cincinnati; executives Paul Beeston of Toronto, John Schuerholz of Atlanta and Sandy Alderson of the New York Mets; HOF Manager Bobby Cox and HOF players Dave Winfield, George Brett, Rod Carew, Dennis Eckersley, Robin Yount and Don Sutton and media members Steve Hirdt, Bob Elliott and Jayson Stark.

Had Miller been elected this time, Peter Miller, his son, had said no one from the family would have appeared in Cooperstown for the induction ceremony in July.

Peter Miller, who lives in Japan, didn’t have much to say in our e-mail exchange about the vote. What does it say, I asked, about the Hall of Fame and its 16-man panel of voters?

“It confirms their desire to do what they believe is in the best interests of the owner of the HOF and the owners of Major League Baseball clubs,” he replied. “My father’s contributions to human freedom and to the sport and business of baseball are well-documented. They do not require a plaque in the HOF to be remembered.”

“Do you have any reason to think some of the voters didn’t vote for your father because of his desire not to be on the ballot?”

“I have no way of knowing anything about the panel members’ motivations.”

In announcing the results of the election, the Hall pulled the same stunt it did in 2013, disclosing incomplete results. It announced 14 votes for Morris, 13 for Trammel, 11 for Ted Simmons and 7 for Miller, nothing for the other six candidates.

If the absence of vote totals was to avoid possible embarrassment, the Hall should abandon the foolish practice of holding these elections at all, at least for the players, who have already been through years of elections on the writers’ ballot.

One apt example:

Trammell was on the writers’ ballot for 15 years. He received fewer than 100 votes in each of his first eight years on the ballot. He exceeded 200 votes only once. He had relatively little support from hundreds of writers, but now he’s in the Hall of Fame.

One other example: Ted Simmons didn’t receive enough votes in his first year on the ballot to be on it a second year. This week he fell one vote short of being elected. Simmons was always a nice guy, but there are lots of nice guys who aren’t in and don’t belong in the Hall of Fame.

Read on for more criticism of the Hall of Fame.

BBWAA SEVER TIES WITH HOF? NOT THIS WEEK

In my decades of covering baseball, I have found lots to enjoy but also lots to criticize. The Hall of Fame is in the latter category, and I finally took a step this week to try to do something about it. I didn’t succeed, but I tried.

I sent an e-mail to Jack O’Connell, secretary-treasurer of the Baseball Writers Association of America proposing that the BBWAA sever its ties with the Hall of Fame and no longer vote in HOF elections.

I did something similar in 1991 and nearly succeeded. However, a sharp-minded writer from Chicago, Dave Nightengale, saw that the assembled writers seemed to be prepared to vote for my motion and moved to table it so the entire membership, not just the writers at the meeting, could vote by mail.

I knew that would kill my motion and it did. Now for the 2017 update. This was my e-mail to O’Connell:

I would rather be at the meeting to do this myself, but in my absence, would you please present this proposal, making it clear it’s coming from me, not you, although I would welcome your joining me.

It is time to end our participation in Hall of Fame voting, and I introduce a motion to that effect. The way Hall officials have treated BBWAA efforts to make changes in the voting format simply and clearly shows how little regard they have for the BBWAA.

Two years ago a BBWAA committee studied Hall of Fame activity and proposed that the maximum number of candidates writers could vote for be raised from 10 to 12. The Hall’s board of directors rejected the proposal.

Last year an overwhelming majority of writers, 90 percent, wanted writers’ ballots made public two weeks after election results were announced. The Hall’s board of directors rejected the proposal.

That rejection was contrary to writers’ desire for transparency but squarely in line with the Hall’s desire for secrecy. Four years ago, when three managers were elected unanimously, the Hall refused to disclose how many votes the seven other candidates received.

Four years later they are still maintaining that secrecy. I recently called to get the numbers for a column I was writing and was told that information has not been and will not be disclosed.

The BBWAA wasn’t involved in that vote, but we are responsible for the Hall’s most important vote and keeping results secret is 180 degrees from what we practice.

These acts of the Hall of Fame board are not new. In 1991, for example, when Pete Rose became eligible for the writers’ ballot, we were not allowed to decide for ourselves if Rose should be elected. The Hall changed the rules and declared that no one on the permanently ineligible list, which Rose was, was eligible to be elected to the Hall.

These examples show what Hall officials thinks of us, and we should show them what we think of what they think of us.

Writers believe that voting in HOF elections is prestigious because we hold a unique position in a popular activity. I understand that thinking. In reality, though, we are mere pawns in a private enterprise in which we have no say.

This was O’Connell’s response, sounding like one of those writers who enjoy the prestige of voting:

“A proposal at a BBWAA meeting must be presented in person. I will not be that person. I know you have done a lot of work here, but unless you can arrange for someone else to make the proposal, it will remain in this email.”

I was not going to Orlando, Fla, to present the proposal. Let the writers continue voting. I won’t miss it.

Four weeks ago, when the Hall of Fame announced the ballot for its “Modern Baseball Era” election, I speculated that the 10-man ballot had been rigged so that no one could get in the way of Marvin Miller’s long delayed election. Miller had appeared on a Hall’s veterans ballot six times and had been rejected six time.

In Miller’s 10- year period of rejection during his lifetime (he died in 2012), he saw Bowie Kuhn elected to the Hall, one of the most undeserved elections in the Hall’s history. Red Barber, the renowned baseball announcer, once declared that the three men who had made the greatest impact on baseball were Babe Ruth, Jackie Robinson and Marvin Miller. He did not mention Bowie Kuhn, the baseball commissioner from 1969 to 1984.

Another election is upon us, and I have to admit I’m not so sure about my November speculation. If the Hall’s historical overview committee rigged the ballot to ensure Miller’s election, why have Hall officials once again stacked the 16-man electorate with owners and management officials, the types who have always voted against Miller, or have never voted for Miller?

Among the 16 voters are owners Bill DeWitt of St. Louis, Bob Castellini of Cincinnati and David Glass of Kansas City, who I think would rather have the Royals lose Game 7 of the World Series than see Miller get in the Hall of Fame.

Joining DeWitt, Castellini and Glass in Sunday’s meeting and vote in Orlando, Fla., are John Schuerholz, vice chairman of the Atlanta Braves; Paul Beeston, president emeritus of the Toronto Blue Jays, and Sandy Alderson, general manager of the New York Mets.

A seventh Miller rejection would require only five of those six voters to spurn Miller because a candidate needs 75 percent of the electorate, or 12 of the 16 voters. Five no votes would leave only a maximum of 11 votes for Miller.

To be sure, I don’t know how the six management members will vote. I don’t know how owners and club executives have voted in past elections when Miller was on the ballot. But it seemed to be pretty clear from the outcomes of those elections that Miller did not get the votes of owners and club executives.

In fairness, I should recall that in his first two times on the ballot, in 2003 and 2007, Miller failed to get 75 percent of the vote from the players he represented as executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association. In those elections, the electorate consisted of players in the Hall of Fame.

In the first election, Miller received 35 of 81 votes, or 43.2 percent. In the second, the Hall of Famers gave Miller 51 of 84 votes, or 60.7 percent.

Why didn’t the players vote for Miller? Can anyone understand why players do what they do?

More than one person has told me that players who are in the Hall don’t want anyone else joining them. They don’t want to share their prestige. I was once told that Robin Roberts, one of three players who recruited Miller to head the union, was said to be upset with Miller because, the HOF pitcher said, Miller said he wouldn’t take the players out on strike. I would guess that Roberts heard what he wanted to hear, but Miller never made such a promise or commitment.

I also have heard this story. After the first election, Reggie Jackson encountered Terry Miller, Marvin’s wife, who berated him for not voting for her husband. Jackson reportedly defended himself by saying he thought the Hall of Fame was only for players. Terry Miller set him straight, and in the 2007 election Jackson voted for Miller.

The Hall’s board of directors changed the voting format after Miller’s second election. They put the ballot before a committee of 12 voters for his next two appearances on the ballot, and then changed the committee to 16 voters. Miller complained that whenever he got close to election, the Hall’s board changed the format.

Whether intended or not, that was true some years, but the 16-man voting format remained in place for the 2013 election after Miller fell one vote short of election in 2010.

Besides the six owners and executives, this year’s voting committee includes six HOF players: George Brett, Rod Carew, Dennis Eckersley, Don Sutton, Dave Winfield and Robin Yount; HOF Manager Bobby Cox and three media members: Bob Elliott, Jayson Stark and Steve Hirdt

On the ballot with Miller are Steve Garvey, Tommy John, Don Mattingly, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Ted Simmons, Luis Tiant and Alan Trammell.

If any of these players is elected, it most likely will be Morris. He came close near the end of his 15-year run on the writers’ ballot. In his last four years he received 311, 382, 385 and 351 votes. In his next-to-last year on the ballot he received 67.7 percent.

The new metrics that younger writers have jumped on work against Morris, but the older members of the voting committee aren’t very likely to be influenced by them. Brett, Carew, Winfield and Yount played against Morris in the American League and know how good he was.

As for Miller, if any of the voters, particularly the management voters, want to leave him off their ballots because of what he did in creating free agency and causing salaries to soar, they have a ready-made excuse. In 2008, after three embarrassing rejections, Miller asked the Baseball Writers Association to leave him off the ballot.

HOF officials, however, put him on the 2009 ballot and subsequent ballots despite the strong objection of Peter Miller, Marvin’s son. Peter Miller has said clearly that if his father is elected, no family will appear in Cooperstown in July to represent Miller.

I may turn out to be wrong about the rigged ballot, but if Hall officials were serious about electing Miller despite his wishes, they had a way of doing it without rigging the ballot. They could have replaced some of those six owners and executives with former executives of the Players Association: Richard Moss, Don Fehr, Gene Orza.

They also could have chosen a neutral observer, Fay Vincent, the former commissioner, who has a high regard for Miller and his place in baseball history.

But if any of those former baseball participants had been given one or more spots on the voting committee, Miller might have actually been elected, and Jane Forbes Clark, the narrow-minded HOF board chairman, might have suffered a stomach ache.

One of baseball’s four royal families has just added another jewel to its crown. Aaron Boone, brother of Bret, son of Bob and grandson of Ray, has introduced pinstripes to the Boone family coat of arms

This Boone was named manager of the Yankees last Friday, as strange as it may seem for a television analyst who has never sat in a dugout, major league or minor, as a manager or even a coach.

In his new position, he is the latest manager to become part of the trend that has consumed Major League Baseball. The game has been overrun by analytics, and they have prompted general managers, with ownership consent, if not encouragement, to assume control of the dugout as well as the front office.

The day may be near, if it isn’t here already, when the general manager fills out the lineup card in his office and sends it down to the manager in his office. To be sure, this is not Billy Martin’s baseball.

The Yankees epitomized the new era in their search for a manager to replace Joe Girardi, who was a victim of this new day. It mattered not that he managed a young, inexperienced team with an undermanned starting rotation not only to the playoffs but also to one game from the World Series. His contract was allowed to expire because the Yankees wanted a manager whom General Manager Brian Cashman could control.

After Cashman fired Girardi he cited Girardi’s lack of communication and connection with the clubhouse. A club executive implied a similar problem. When I suggested that maybe the Yankees should have fired Cashman instead of Girardi, the executive responded, “You weren’t in the clubhouse.”

The Yankees obviously were well rehearsed with their reason for firing Girardi so they could hire a malleable manager instead.

Consider the roster of candidates they interviewed for the job and also consider the time they took in naming the new manager.

They interviewed six men. Two of them, Boone and Carlos Beltran, had no managing or coaching experience on any level. The Beltran interview came so soon after he played his last game as a player that he hardly had time to remove his wrist bands.

Rob Thomson, Chris Woodward and Hensley Meulens had coaching experience. Eric Wedge was the only candidate with managing experiences. It was not known how Cashman chose the candidates.

Also not known was why the Yankees took so long to choose the new manager. Rarely have teams gone into December without a manager.

The Tampa Bay Rays made Kevin Cash their manager Dec. 5, 2014, but they didn’t know they needed a new manager until Joe Maddon exercised the opt-out provisions in his contract Oct. 24. San Francisco named Frank Robinson manager even later, Jan. 24, 1980, but Dave Bristol had been the Giants’ manager until they fired him Dec. 9.

Usually, though, clubs want to get the new man on board as soon as possible so he can participate in planning for the ensuing season. However, with the general manager occupying the center seat at the large table in the conference room surrounded by his metrics men, there might not even be a seat for the manager.

Despite these game-changing developments, Boone was ready and eager to jump ship and leave ESPN behind.

“I know it’s always been in his mind,” Bob Boone, Aaron’s father and a former manager himself, said when I asked him about his son’s desire to manage. “I think he’s always wanted to manage. He wanted to manage when I was managing.”

Bob Boone managed the Royals and the Reds for two and a half years each. Currently a Nationals vice president and assistant general manager, he has straddled the game as it had been played forever and the new analytics age.

“Older managers want to manage, but they are having a tougher time. Older guys are having a tougher time,” Boone said in a telephone interview last week. “There’s a lot of new stuff. Older guys will use it because they want to manage.” Meanwhile, Boone added, “We’re seeing younger guys getting the jobs, not the retreads of the past.”

Aaron Boone was the sixth new manager hired this off-season. His and the others’ age on opening day (date hired in parentheses):

• Gabe Kapler              Phillies           42        (Nov. 2)
• Alex Cora                   Red Sox         42        (Nov. 6)
• Mickey Callaway      Mets                42        (Oct. 22)
• Aaron Boone             Yankees         44        (Dec. 1)
• Dave Martinez          Nationals       53        (Oct. 20)
• Ron Gardenhire       Tigers             60        (Oct. 20)

Gardenhire is the only one of the group who has been a major league manager, having directed the Twins for 13 seasons, 2002-14. He is the lone exception in the group of new 2018 managers, both in age and experience. It remains to be seen how Gardenhire will manage under Al Avila, the 59-year-old general manager.

“It’s sort of a team management,” Boone said. “In this new wave it’s the way ownership wants it. It’s a matter of fact this is how we are going to play the game. The manager, general manager, scouts. It’s the wave of the future.”

If much of the decision-making process is taken out of the managers’ hands, it would seem general managers would have less reason to fire them if they don’t win. General managers, on the other hand, will always find reasons to fire managers, especially if the general manager’s job could be on the line.

As Boone noted, three teams this year fired their managers even though the teams won 90 games and played in the post-season.

Is that a job a father wants for his son?

“I think Aaron will handle that spectacularly,” Boone said. “His job at ESPN was getting to know all of the players. He doesn’t have managerial experiences, but he knows the players. He’s known them for six years.”

Boone cited another reason he thought Aaron would succeed as a manager – his reaction to a knee injury he suffered playing in a basketball game that he was prohibited from playing under terms of a $5.75 million contract he had just signed with the Yankees for the 2004 season.

“When he hurt his knee,” the elder Boone related, “he called me and asked what he should do. There was no other way to do it. He finished working out and jumped into a basketball game and hurt his knee.”

Instead of concocting a fanciful tale, as players usually do in those situations, Boone told the Yankees how he tore his knee ligament.

“It cost him $5 million,” the father said. “I’m proud of Aaron for doing it.”

BLAME NEW MANAGER FOR A-ROD?

There is another part to the Boone story that is worth retelling.

Boone’s injury forced the Yankees to find a third baseman and led directly to their acquisition of Alex Rodriguez from the Rangers. The Yankees might very well have wound up with Rodriguez at some point anyhow, but there was an urgency as the 2004 season approached and the Rangers provided the solution.

Three years earlier Texas had signed Rodriguez as a free agent, giving him a record-breaking $252 million for 10 years. But now the Rangers were about $75 million, 270 losses, three last-place finishes and an average of 33 games from first place into the contract, and it wasn’t looking too good.

Trade Rodriguez? Excuse us for not looking overly eager to do that, but where do we sign? So the Yankees sent the Rangers Alfonso Soriano and they got their third baseman. What the Yankees didn’t know was they were also getting Rodriguez’s steroids habit and the lies that accompanied it.

When Rodriguez exercised the opt-out clause in his contract after the 2007 season, the Yankees didn’t take advantage of the gift he was giving them. Instead, he suckered Hank Steinbrenner, then but not for long the team’s managing partner, into giving him a 10-year, $275 million contract, all because Aaron Boone had to play a pickup game of basketball.