PDA

View Full Version : If Pete comes to town...


mike squires
01-06-2004, 12:39 AM
Considering what Pete Rose has admitted to and if Pete Rose came to town for an autograph signing, would you go? I would have a hard time doing it consdering he's only doing this for the money...but I'm afraid I woud cave in. Just to have the all time hits leaders signifature in the book. I liked the way he played the game....I would also have to consider bringing a ball and try and pass a 20 to him for an extra signiature. :D:

34 Inch Stick
01-06-2004, 10:24 AM
I don't understand why so many people are concerned about Pete Rose when it is clear that he is not concerned about his fans? Pete Rose is only concerned with money and Pete.

Dadawg_77
01-06-2004, 10:31 AM
Honestly I think Pete Rose is one of the most overrated players in baseball. I wouldn't be surprise if he is reinstated next that he doesn't make the hall. A lot of people feel cheated on this one.

KingXerxes
01-06-2004, 10:49 AM
I can't stand Pete Rose.

If this guy is able to get into the Hall of Fame and - God forbid - back into baseball I'll be furious.

Do words mean anything anymore? Do rules mean anything? When you are told day in and day out that if you bet on the game of baseball you will be banned from it, and then you go out and bet on it (while managing a team no less) are you no longer subject to what is probably the Cardinal Rule of all professional sports?

There seem to be three camps on this clown. The first camp is the predictable pack of idiots who have defended Rose through out this entire debacle. They - up until yesterday - still contended that Rose never bet on baseball because he kept denying it. I wrote this group off a long time ago as being without an ounce of brains.

The second group seems to think that while he did bet on the games, baseball should separate "the man" from "the player". The fact that he has more hits than any other player means that he absolutely should be in the Hall of Fame. While this contention would make sense if Rose committed heinous acts which didn't affect the game, the fact is that it's impossible to separate "the man" from "the player" because while he was still intimately involved as a "player" in "the game", "the man" committed acts which totally impugned the integrity of "the outcome".

I find myself in the third camp, although I'm not exactly sure how large this camp is. While there is no doubt that he's baseball's all-time hit leader, in no way, shape or form should he be allowed admittance into the Hall of Fame. The very fact that he sits in the record books as the all-time hits leader is fine with me - it acknowledges his accomplishments well enough, but the fact remains that this self-centered moron jeopardized the integrity of major league baseball to fulfill his own deisres and should forever keep him out of the Hall of Fame. His cynical and pathetic attempts to look wounded only further my desires to see him shut out.

I am somewhat resigned to the fact that he'll gain admittance though, and my only hope is that his plaque says something like "While being baseball's all-time hits leader, Pete Rose was still banished from the game for betting on the outcomes of baseball games during his tenor as manager. Many fans wish this plaque did not hang in this hall at all."

WhiteSoxWinner
01-06-2004, 11:16 AM
As the King said, the only way I put him in the Hall in the near future is to have a plaque listing the accomplishments, but in bigger print either at the top or bottom of the plaque is to have "Bet on Baseball while Managing Breaking One of Baseball's Greatest Rules". Let people make up there own mind on the man, but it acknowledges his accomplishment.

Otherwise, I say put him in after he is dead. That way, he does not profit from him HOF induction.

CubKilla
01-06-2004, 11:20 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Honestly I think Pete Rose is one of the most overrated players in baseball.

I wish the White Sox had one of those overrated players within sniffing distance of 4000+ career hits.

voodoochile
01-06-2004, 11:59 AM
I might go to boo and spit on him, but that would just solidify his image as an outcast and someone to be pitied.

washington
01-06-2004, 12:27 PM
He charges 50 bucks for an autograph, if I wanted one I could get it cheaper on e-bay. Plus, while he pulled together a staggering number of hits, Ty Cobb (.366 lifetime BA) is the true "hit king" not Rose (.303 lifetimie BA), no matter how Rose bills himself.

washington
01-06-2004, 12:30 PM
Rose has also accomplished something that until now I thought was impossible: Become a bigger crybaby than Ron Santo.

doogiec
01-06-2004, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by WhiteSoxWinner
As the King said, the only way I put him in the Hall in the near future is to have a plaque listing the accomplishments, but in bigger print either at the top or bottom of the plaque is to have "Bet on Baseball while Managing Breaking One of Baseball's Greatest Rules". Let people make up there own mind on the man, but it acknowledges his accomplishment.

Otherwise, I say put him in after he is dead. That way, he does not profit from him HOF induction.

I agree completely. A lifetime ban is just that, a lifetime ban. After he's dead, let the veterans committee debate the merits of his baseball playing career vs. his crimes against the game, and then make the decision. Then he makes no money off the induction and doesn't have the pleasure of the ceremony. Joe Jackson should now be eligible, he served his ban.

If I ever see Rose on some shopping channel selling baseballs autographed "Pete Rose HOF 2005" for $100 each I'll puke.

MarqSox
01-06-2004, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes

I find myself in the third camp, although I'm not exactly sure how large this camp is. While there is no doubt that he's baseball's all-time hit leader, in no way, shape or form should he be allowed admittance into the Hall of Fame. The very fact that he sits in the record books as the all-time hits leader is fine with me - it acknowledges his accomplishments well enough, but the fact remains that this self-centered moron jeopardized the integrity of major league baseball to fulfill his own deisres and should forever keep him out of the Hall of Fame. His cynical and pathetic attempts to look wounded only further my desires to see him shut out.
This camp may be bigger than you realize see the poll in the Parking Lot. Still, camps 1 and 2 are depressingly large.

idseer
01-06-2004, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by MarqSox
This camp may be bigger than you realize see the poll in the Parking Lot. Still, camps 1 and 2 are depressingly large.

i sometimes vacilate on the question of rose's hof eligebility.

one on hand, purely baseball-wise it seems he should be there for obvious reasons. his gambling didn't affect his own play (as far as we know). the gambling effect on baseball was all after the fact.

on the other hand, he's such a despicable character i don't want him to achieve the hall and tarnish the hall's ideals.

on the OTHER other hand, the hof is a sham anyway. it's really a hall of popularity and not worth spit even tho it includes most of the greats.

one thing i am absolutely sure on is this creep should never be allowed to participate in any way in the game of major league baseball again .... dead OR alive!

jabrch
01-06-2004, 01:55 PM
The HOF is loaded with criminals, racists, drunks, spouse abusers, lazy baseball players and, flawed players. There are bat corkers, spitball throwers, gamblers, and tax cheats.

Pete Rose was one of the best players in the game. He never threw a game. He never manipulated an outcome. He always played 100%. I have no problem voting Pete into the HOF. In fact, having the all-time hit-leader not in the HOF somewhat invalidates Cooperstown itself. I went to Cooperstown a few years ago and felt that Pete's presence should be there. He is a huge part of the game for the 60s and the 70s.

voodoochile
01-06-2004, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
The HOF is loaded with criminals, racists, drunks, spouse abusers, lazy baseball players and, flawed players. There are bat corkers, spitball throwers, gamblers, and tax cheats.

Pete Rose was one of the best players in the game. He never threw a game. He never manipulated an outcome. He always played 100%. I have no problem voting Pete into the HOF. In fact, having the all-time hit-leader not in the HOF somewhat invalidates Cooperstown itself. I went to Cooperstown a few years ago and felt that Pete's presence should be there. He is a huge part of the game for the 60s and the 70s.

How do you know he never threw a game? Or how about this? He missed the deadline to bet on a Reds game, so when the team fell behind by a couple of runs he used the bottom of the bullpen saving the good guys for tomorrow when he could make his bet?

No, it's not throwing a game, but it might have influenced outcomes.

You bet on the sport you are playing/managing, you should not be eligible for any awards, ever, period. You open that door a crack and it could be a very bad thing...

WhiteSoxWinner
01-06-2004, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
He never threw a game. He never manipulated an outcome. He always played 100%.

How do you know? The guy lied for 14 years maintaining his innocence. He repeatedly called the people who had proof of his gambling liars. Now, just because Rose came clean, we are supposed to believe that he never threw games or manipulated an outcome because he says so? How do we know he isn't lying about that, too?

jabrch
01-06-2004, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
How do you know he never threw a game? Or how about this? He missed the deadline to bet on a Reds game, so when the team fell behind by a couple of runs he used the bottom of the bullpen saving the good guys for tomorrow when he could make his bet?

No, it's not throwing a game, but it might have influenced outcomes.

You bet on the sport you are playing/managing, you should not be eligible for any awards, ever, period. You open that door a crack and it could be a very bad thing...

Nobody who played with, for him, or against him has levied charges that he did such a thing. There is no evidence that he did. Even the commish has never mentioned that as a possibility. I don't know that he didn't any more than I know that the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny do not exist - you can not prove a negative statement like that. But I can be 100% convinced of it. Until anyone shows me a shred of evidence, or even a credible accusation from someone involved that he did anything negative to influence the outcome of games, I will not believe that happened.

WhiteSoxWinner
01-06-2004, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
Nobody who played with, for him, or against him has levied charges that he did such a thing.

A lot of those same guys that played with and against Rose stood by him when Rose kept denying the charge that he gambled. A lot of them said there was no way Pete Rose gambled on baseball. Now Rose admitted he did. Those guys that played with and against him have no way of knowing. I bet a lot of them look pretty silly now and would like to have a word or two with Rose.

Mike & Mike in the Morning on ESPN Radio tried to get a reaction from some of those guys that stood by Rose. I can't remember the player's name (I think it was Mike Schmidt, but they mentioned a few names) but he was quoted as saying that he was so upset that he said he could not talk then and would be available for comment later in the week. I really want to know what he and other players who stood by Rose have to say.

soxruleEP
01-06-2004, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
The HOF is loaded with criminals, racists, drunks, spouse abusers, lazy baseball players and, flawed players. There are bat corkers, spitball throwers, gamblers, and tax cheats.



Pete Rose should never be reinstated.

Buck Weaver was banned for life because he KNEW about the 1919 Fix not because he participated. Rose BET on games.

While it is true that there are a number of players in the HOF who were not angels (like almost every one of them), there are no players who were banned for life.

At least we know Joe Jackson didn't play in the Series like he was throwing it--but he still should not go in the HOF.

Pete Rose is scum--more for denying for 14 years that he bet on games than for betting on them. he doesn't deserve teh recognition.

voodoochile
01-06-2004, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
Nobody who played with, for him, or against him has levied charges that he did such a thing. There is no evidence that he did. Even the commish has never mentioned that as a possibility. I don't know that he didn't any more than I know that the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny do not exist - you can not prove a negative statement like that. But I can be 100% convinced of it. Until anyone shows me a shred of evidence, or even a credible accusation from someone involved that he did anything negative to influence the outcome of games, I will not believe that happened.

You'd have to go game by game and look at each one he bet on. I don't think that kind of detail analysis is even possible, but I could be wrong. Still, since he is the only one who knew he was gambling at the time, no one can say for sure what percentage of his decisions were at least partially influenced by his gambling or not gambling.

Use the closer for a 4th straight day in a 2 run game in the ninth? Is there money on the line? Does that affect the decision in any way?

What if the fact that he did gamble or did not gamble on a given game was "the straw that broke the camel's back" for a given game time decision? There is just no way to know.

It isn't so much he might manage to lose on a day when he didn't gamble, but would he do as much to win as on days he did and would he go all out to win no matter the cost later in the season on days he did gamble?

Pete did it. Pete lied about it. Pete potentially damaged the game. Pete should never be allowed to participate in any way shape or form ever again in MLB - and yes, that includes the HOF, IMO.

Don't weaken the rules designed to enforce the integrity of the game.

Johnny Mostil
01-06-2004, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
You bet on the sport you are playing/managing, you should not be eligible for any awards, ever, period. You open that door a crack and it could be a very bad thing...

Just curious--do you think Paul Hornung should not be enshrined in Canton?

voodoochile
01-06-2004, 02:20 PM
Originally posted by Johnny Mostil
Just curious--do you think Paul Hornung should not be enshrined in Canton?

Not familiar with the details, but if there is credible evidence that he gambled on the games he played in or played to lose, then I have no problem with kicking him out.

Johnny Mostil
01-06-2004, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
Not familiar with the details, but if there is credible evidence that he gambled on the games he played in or played to lose, then I have no problem with kicking him out.

Hornung was suspended in 1963 for betting on the Pack to win. He served the season-long suspension--the NFL doesn't (or didn't) have lifetime bans for gambling--and returned to the game (and made it to the NFL Hall). I don't know what other gambling he may have done. I'd like to see somebody do a story comparing Rose and Hornung. (Maybe somebody has and I haven't seen it.)

voodoochile
01-06-2004, 02:30 PM
Originally posted by Johnny Mostil
Hornung was suspended in 1963 for betting on the Pack to win. He served the season-long suspension--the NFL doesn't (or didn't) have lifetime bans for gambling--and returned to the game (and made it to the NFL Hall). I don't know what other gambling he may have done. I'd like to see somebody do a story comparing Rose and Hornung. (Maybe somebody has and I haven't seen it.)

Interesting. Of course now I KNOW he should be kicked out. No Packers belong in the HOF :D:

I think it could have been different for Pete too. If he admitted it when it happened, sought counseling and tried to get his head on right, that would be different - much like they do with guys who test positive for drugs. But, Pete didn't do that. He denied and denied and denied until the last possible minute and then confessed in the sleaziest way possible - where people have to pay to read about it.

Did Hornung gamble after the suspension?

WhiteSoxWinner
01-06-2004, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by Johnny Mostil
Hornung was suspended in 1963 for betting on the Pack to win. He served the season-long suspension--the NFL doesn't (or didn't) have lifetime bans for gambling--and returned to the game (and made it to the NFL Hall). I don't know what other gambling he may have done. I'd like to see somebody do a story comparing Rose and Hornung. (Maybe somebody has and I haven't seen it.)

I guess the prime difference is that baseball has the ban and football doesn't. The point is moot about Hornung being the Football HOF because there is no lifetime ban. He served his punishment.

Now, with regard to Rose, I say put him in after his death. At that point, he has served his lifetime ban as his life is over. That way too, he does not profit from his induction,

Johnny Mostil
01-06-2004, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by WhiteSoxWinner
I guess the prime difference is that baseball has the ban and football doesn't.

Yes, but voodoo's original post, to which I was responding, concerned any athlete who gambled on his sport. I'd still like to see a story on Hornung and Rose. It might also answer, as I can't, voodoo's question on whether Hornung continued to gamble after his suspension.

Paulwny
01-06-2004, 07:16 PM
It appears the lying continues, from the AP


January 6, 2004, 12:52 PM EST


MIAMI -- One of Pete Rose's former gambling associates disputes the career hit leader's claim that he never bet on baseball from the Cincinnati Reds' clubhouse.

Thomas Gioiosa, who once lived in Rose's Cincinnati home and now owns a health-supplement store in Ormond Beach, Fla., said in a telephone interview Tuesday that he often saw Rose wager on baseball before games.

"I was there, and we did it every day," Gioiosa said

PaleHoseGeorge
01-06-2004, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by Johnny Mostil
Hornung was suspended in 1963 for betting on the Pack to win. He served the season-long suspension--the NFL doesn't (or didn't) have lifetime bans for gambling--and returned to the game (and made it to the NFL Hall). I don't know what other gambling he may have done. I'd like to see somebody do a story comparing Rose and Hornung. (Maybe somebody has and I haven't seen it.)

There is an obvious difference. The people who run football are smart enough to know the only reason for having a hall of fame is to PROMOTE the sport and the heroic deeds of its enshrinees. Only the idiots who run baseball could ever create a hall of fame to DEFAME many of the heroes their own sport created.

Morons. ****ing morons.

There is absolutely no evidence that football players as a group are any more pure of motive than baseball players. Yet only baseball singles out one specific type of bad behavior, betting, and issues empty proclamations about lifetime bans. There is more money bet on football in a single weekend than an entire season of baseball. Let's get serious about the integrity of the game bull**** baseball's neanderthals are trying to sell to the rest of us.

Rose is a hall of fame ballplayer. If Cooperstown is too stupid to do its job, to hell with their fake shrine in the fake home of baseball. Who needs their ****? I feel sorry for Rose for wanting so bad to get in. **** them.

TornLabrum
01-06-2004, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
The HOF is loaded with criminals, racists, drunks, spouse abusers, lazy baseball players and, flawed players. There are bat corkers, spitball throwers, gamblers, and tax cheats.

Pete Rose was one of the best players in the game. He never threw a game. He never manipulated an outcome. He always played 100%. I have no problem voting Pete into the HOF. In fact, having the all-time hit-leader not in the HOF somewhat invalidates Cooperstown itself. I went to Cooperstown a few years ago and felt that Pete's presence should be there. He is a huge part of the game for the 60s and the 70s.

How many people in the HOF bet on games and lied about it for 14 years?

TornLabrum
01-06-2004, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by Johnny Mostil
Just curious--do you think Paul Hornung should not be enshrined in Canton?

What do the rules involving betting on league games for the NFL (1 year suspension) have to do with the rules for MLB (permanently ineligible)? Apples and oranges.

TornLabrum
01-06-2004, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by WhiteSoxWinner
I guess the prime difference is that baseball has the ban and football doesn't. The point is moot about Hornung being the Football HOF because there is no lifetime ban. He served his punishment.

Now, with regard to Rose, I say put him in after his death. At that point, he has served his lifetime ban as his life is over. That way too, he does not profit from his induction,

The wording of the rule is not "lifetime." It is "permanently ineligible." Permanent means that, not just lifetime.

SluggersAway
01-06-2004, 08:27 PM
Pete is one helluva great ball player. No one since has come even close, drugs and all.

The man has heart. He gave it an hundred and ten percent like only the best can.

We all have character flaws. Mistakes along the way are inevitable.

And only one guy knows what it is like to be Pete Rose.

He is a Hall of Famer. Period.

He is a man always truly doing the best he can.

I'd be proud to count him as a friend.

All the best.

TornLabrum
01-06-2004, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
There is an obvious difference. The people who run football are smart enough to know the only reason for having a hall of fame is to PROMOTE the sport and the heroic deeds of its enshrinees. Only the idiots who run baseball could ever create a hall of fame to DEFAME many of the heroes their own sport created.

Morons. ****ing morons.

There is absolutely no evidence that football players as a group are any more pure of motive than baseball players. Yet only baseball singles out one specific type of bad behavior, betting, and issues empty proclamations about lifetime bans. There is more money bet on football in a single weekend than an entire season of baseball. Let's get serious about the integrity of the game bull**** baseball's neanderthals are trying to sell to the rest of us.

Rose is a hall of fame ballplayer. If Cooperstown is too stupid to do its job, to hell with their fake shrine in the fake home of baseball. Who needs their ****? I feel sorry for Rose for wanting so bad to get in. **** them.

George, go back and read your baseball history. The National Association (baseball's first professional league) was wrecked in part because of gamblers getting to players and having them throw games. (In those days it was called hippodroming.)

In 1877, just the second year of the National League, several players (I can't remember if it was 3 or 4) were thrown out permanently for throwing the pennant to the Boston Red Stockings (today's Atlanta Braves), receving their money from gamblers. This nearly destroyed the NL except for it's president's (Williams Hulbert, owner of the Chicago White Stockings) firm action.

Hal Chase fixed games throughout the last half of the first decade of the 20th century and most of the second, receving his money from gamblers. This mess culminated in the Black Sox scandal, the investigation of which came out of a Grand Jury investigation of gamblers trying to rig a Cubs game the same year. The Black Sox were paid off by gamblers.

The rule on gambling on ball games has existed since the formation of the NL. It is a good rule. The integrity of the game suffered when gamblers were influencing the outcome of games. Pete Rose got his just deserts, and if Bud Selig caves in, he will do more to harm the integrity of the game than Rose did.

Rules are there for a purpose, and the gambling rule has a very important purpose. Rose got everything he deserved. I won't think any less of a Hall of Fame of which he is not a member.

TornLabrum
01-06-2004, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by SluggersAway
Pete is one helluva great ball player. No one since has come even close, drugs and all.

The man has heart. He gave it an hundred and ten percent like only the best can.

We all have character flaws. Mistakes along the way are inevitable.

And only one guy knows what it is like to be Pete Rose.

He is a Hall of Famer. Period.

He is a man always truly doing the best he can.

I'd be proud to count him as a friend.

All the best.

:chunks

SluggersAway
01-06-2004, 08:54 PM
Yesssssss.

I've induced vomiting.

I only pray for days like these...

May the next man or woman I make vomit be a politician!

Maybe that is asking too much, but i do know, if you mention the name 'Murray Rothbard,' every politician turns either blue or red in the face.

Try it, you'll see.

All the best.

http://aubreyherbert.blogspot.com

Johnny Mostil
01-06-2004, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
What do the rules involving betting on league games for the NFL (1 year suspension) have to do with the rules for MLB (permanently ineligible)? Apples and oranges.

One more time--voodoo said he thought anybody betting on his sport ought to be banned from it. That was when I got curious about his views on Hornung. Do you understand those apples and oranges, TL?

Daver
01-06-2004, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by Johnny Mostil
One more time--voodoo said he thought anybody betting on his sport ought to be banned from it. That was when I got curious about his views on Hornung. Do you understand those apples and oranges, TL?

Your still comparing apples to oranges,the NFL has no record of being accused of fixing a championship game,it has happened in MLB twice that is known of.Once bitten twice shy.

thepaulbowski
01-06-2004, 10:43 PM
Pete belongs in Cooperstown. It's the baseball hall of fame, not the moral hall of fame. Allowing him back into baseball is another subject, though.

TornLabrum
01-06-2004, 11:16 PM
Originally posted by thepaulbowski
Pete belongs in Cooperstown. It's the baseball hall of fame, not the moral hall of fame. Allowing him back into baseball is another subject, though.

Why does he belong in Cooperstown. He has done nothing but lie for the past 14 years and in the process dragged three Commissioners, and the person Baseball hired to investigate him through the mud, only to turn around now and say, "Sorry, I lied, and for $24.95, I'll tell you the whole story, or at least the part I care to spin."

I'd rather see Chick Gandil and Hal Chase in the Hall of Fame. They had no pretensions about being crooks.

washington
01-07-2004, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by TornLabrum
Why does he belong in Cooperstown. He has done nothing but lie for the past 14 years and in the process dragged three Commissioners, and the person Baseball hired to investigate him through the mud, only to turn around now and say, "Sorry, I lied, and for $24.95, I'll tell you the whole story, or at least the part I care to spin."

I'd rather see Chick Gandil and Hal Chase in the Hall of Fame. They had no pretensions about being crooks.

Exactly. He seems incapable of recognizing even that gambling on his team was wrong.

KingXerxes
01-07-2004, 04:04 PM
There is no doubt that the baseball Hall of Fame has characters of an unsavory nature in it. Cap Anson pretty much caused the color-line singlehandedly. Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker were accused of fixing games, and on and on. And if they were up for nomination today - one would have to take a serious look at them. But they're not up for nomination today - they're already in.

Pete Rose is the issue of the day, and - while it's still under baseball's control - they should see to it that he never gets in to the Hall of Fame.

To say that he should be put in the HOF because other disrepuatble jerks are already in it is like saying a convicted thief should be let out of prison because we know there are uncaught thiefs that are running around in society. Sorry but Ol' Charlie Hustle has been busted.

voodoochile
01-07-2004, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
There is no doubt that the baseball Hall of Fame has characters of an unsavory nature in it. Cap Anson pretty much caused the color-line singlehandedly. Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker were accused of fixing games, and on and on. And if they were up for nomination today - one would have to take a serious look at them. But they're not up for nomination today - they're already in.

Pete Rose is the issue of the day, and - while it's still under baseball's control - they should see to it that he never gets in to the Hall of Fame.

To say that he should be put in the HOF because other disrepuatble jerks are already in it is like saying a convicted thief should be let out of prison because we know there are uncaught thiefs that are running around in society. Sorry but Ol' Charlie Hustle has been busted.

Is there any player in the HOF who has been found guilty in the eyes of MLB of betting on the games they played/manged in?

If not, they shouldn't start a new policy now. Pete's loss, not mine. The sport is no worse for him being kept out of the Hall.

KingXerxes
01-07-2004, 05:29 PM
It had only been rumored about Cobb and Speaker.

To answer your question, nobody is in baseball's HOF that has ever been proven (or has admitted to) betting on games while still involved.

washington
01-07-2004, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes
There is no doubt that the baseball Hall of Fame has characters of an unsavory nature in it. Cap Anson pretty much caused the color-line singlehandedly. ..To say that he should be put in the HOF because other disrepuatble jerks are already in it is like saying a convicted thief should be let out of prison because we know there are uncaught thiefs that are running around in society. Sorry but Ol' Charlie Hustle has been busted.

In addition, just becasue guys in the HOF are lousy people because they were drunks, racists, etc., doesn't suggest that they deliberately rigged the outcome of games. Rose's gambling on games he managed does (even if he only bet on his team to win, as pointed out above).

RichFitztightly
01-07-2004, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by KingXerxes

The second group seems to think that while he did bet on the games, baseball should separate "the man" from "the player". The fact that he has more hits than any other player means that he absolutely should be in the Hall of Fame. While this contention would make sense if Rose committed heinous acts which didn't affect the game, the fact is that it's impossible to separate "the man" from "the player" because while he was still intimately involved as a "player" in "the game", "the man" committed acts which totally impugned the integrity of "the outcome".


I think for most people the conflict comes more from separating "the player" from "the manager." Somebody posted in this thread, and I completely agree, that there have never been any aligations whatsoever about Pete Rose gambling as a player.

In my mind, that's the key here. People have been inducted into the Hall of Fame as a player, regardless of what they did as a manager. Consequently, people have been inducted into the Hall of Fame as a manager, regardless of what they did as a player. I think in this case we can separate the two. Rose can be reinstated only to be eligible for the Hall. Reinstating him only as a player and not as anything else would accomplish that. No owner is going to sign him to a roster spot. The only thing he might get out of that ruling is a promotional spot on a minor league team.

As it stands now, I'm about 52% in favor of letting him into the Hall of Fame and 48% in favor of keeping him out of baseball forever. I certainly wouldn't be heart broken if my life passes and Pete Rose isn't in the Hall of Fame. On a related note, I'd be pretty heart broken if Pete Rose is in the Hall of Fame and Shoeless Joe Jackson never makes it.


P.S. this post was a little more eloquent the first time I wrote it. I guess I wasn't properly signed in the first time. Rookie Mistake.