Home Sports Talk

Is what Jason Giambi did (and others are rumored to do/did) worse than Pete Rose??

I think so, and the players found guilty should be banned. however- what is your opinions?
Looking to Trade and Buy Tony Romo GU/Autos/RCS

Comments

  • 1420sports1420sports Posts: 3,473 ✭✭✭
    I was actually just talking to a fellow Rose fan on this. I may be biased as Rose is my favorite player, but I do not think his gambling was as bad as the steroid abuse is today. Just one man's opinion.

    I can understand how Bonds and Sosa fans want to deny the fact that they are using steroids. I never could say that I believe Rose bet on baseball, although I knew he had to have bet on baseball.
    collecting various PSA and SGC cards
  • Rose's betting on baseball did not help him get any of his hits.

    Giambi's taking steroids certainly helped him hit with more power, translating into at least a marginal boost in HR production.

    Seems pretty clear cut to me which is worse from a performance/player perspective ...
  • aconteaconte Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭
    I think so too.

    aconte
  • joestalinjoestalin Posts: 12,473 ✭✭
    What Rose did was worse, he urinated on the game and that effected the fans and the players and the
    the entire sport. Bonds and Giambi are only hurting themselves.

    All of them are cheaters however and their records should include a * or maybe a ch designation. A Cheater
    is a cheater no matter what.

    JS
  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    WOW WOW WOW, I actually agree with a JOE STALIN statement.


    There is absolutley no Question Pete Rose's situation is FAR worse than anything Barry Bonds and 85% of all other MLB players have "allegedly" done. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!

    However I do feel that Rose's on the field accomplishments should put him in Cooperstown.
  • dirtmonkeydirtmonkey Posts: 3,048 ✭✭
    If Rose urinated on the game, players like Giambi took a big $hit on the game... They not only cheated, but they also did many things that hurt the fans and other players too. Giambi gets big bucks which translates into higher ticket prices for their games and merchandise costs of Giambis. Further to all who may have collected cards of these cheaters and paid big money for them, they will likely drop and these collectors will be a$$ed out. It also makes it difficult for honest players to see cheaters prosper. It may have in turn pushed others to do the same. They not only cheated the game, its records & its fans, but they squated down and dropped a big steamy pile right on top of it.
    image
  • Rose broke the cardinal rule of betting on baseball, and so was banned for life. However, that is not the same thing as cheating, which is what steroid users are doing. Both are reprehensible, but Rose did not cheat.

    MLB survived the Rose situation perfectly fine - can you honestly say that the current situation (and MLB's cover-up/inaction) hasn't affected the sport's popularity at all?
  • I would laugh my a-- off if they kicked bond's out of baseball before he has a chance to break the HR record. And did anybody on earth really think Giambi wasn't on roids anyway? I mean, the guy starts out as a 145 pound skinny little twerp, and a few years later he's built like "The Rock", if you can smell what I'm cookin'!image
    Culpepper to ?, only God knows at this point!
  • Joe,

    I disagree with you on this for this reason only, and I may be wrong.

    If Pete Rose bet on the Reds to win, then he was betting on his team
    and trying his best for his team to win. Yes, betting is wrong, but Pete's
    job as a manager was not influenced in an adverse way (i.e. putting in a bad pitcher because he bet the Reds to lose).
    He was doing his best to make his team win. He in no way "cheated" to influence the outcome of the game.


    What Giambi did was cheat to influence the outcome of the game.
    Pete Rose did not cheat to win a game if he only bet on his team to win.

    Should the Yankees win over Boston in Game 7 when Boone hit the 11th inning home run off Wakefield now
    be removed from the books ? Giambi hit two home runs off Pedro that night.

    Olympic athletes have their medals taken away if they test positive for
    performance enhancing drugs. I believe that all of Giambi's records WHILE
    ON STERIODS should be wiped away from the major league record books.

    HE SHOULD PAY A PRICE FOR HIS ACTIONS !!!

    If he doesn't, Joe Jackson (who had great series statistics) will
    be turning over in his grave.

    Perkdog,
    What is your logic or analysis behind why what Rose did was worse ?
    No smack here, I would just appreciate your perspective.
  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    zsz70,

    My personal opinion only. IF Pete Rose bet against the Reds....I dont know the details of his actions but one would assume he had to bet against his team one time or another maybe to get out of the "hole", in this case He could have pitched guys who might not have been ready for example. Maybe played guys that were not 100%, ect. ect. I cant base them on anything as I really did not follow the story all that much. OK Bonds alleged use of steroids. I truly believe that at least 85% of ballplayers could have allegedly used them. Cheating? Im not sure that it gives you that much of an advantage...Taking steroids does not make you bat .300 or hit 4 HR's in a game, or pitch shutout ball. The game is still a TEAM effort. Playing one position and batting third does not outweigh a managers influence on a baseball game.
  • dirtmonkeydirtmonkey Posts: 3,048 ✭✭
    Playing one position and batting third does not outweigh a managers influence on a baseball game.


    I disagree mainly because there was never anything I've heard to indicate Rose did anything "obvious" (if at all) to ever influence the outcome of a game by substituting the best available player with anything less. Further, playing one position and batting third certainly can outweigh anything the manager can ever do. The managers make decisions, but in the end it's the players performance than wins or loses the games. A pitcher can almost determine a game by himself on certain nights (granted, he needs the catcher but ya know what I mean).
    And yes, steroids does make quite a difference. Granted, there are players that may have just as much strength that have not used 'roids, but they had to work harder and for a longer period of time to obtain the same results. There are other benefits offered through steroids that I have heard of such as making it easier to play through pain and motivating players or making it easier to focus.
    image
  • JS is absolutely right. This steroid thing is disgusting and will also taint baseball. But what Rose did was far worse than what these steroid hounds have done.

    Rose's actions are way more wide-reaching than the actions of Bonds, Giambi, et al. A handful of steroid hounds going unchecked, and you can still have baseball. A handful of Rose clones going unchecked, and baseball as we know it disappears and becomes as legitimate as WWE.

    I have said it here before and I'll say it again. The whole, "he only bet on his team, so its ok" argument is so flawed. He didn't bet Reds games every day. He was very selective. He played them when he had his best lineup out there or if his bullpen was fully rested. How do you think he managed on the days that he didn't bet on them? Perhaps holding back a certain key reliever because he knew he would be betting the Reds the next day? You have to look at this from a bettor's perspective (because that's exactly what Rose was), and not just from a baseball fan's perspective.
  • The steroid scandal has already hurt baseball more than Rose's banning ever did. You can argue about which is worse, but in terms of negative impact on the MLB, this is much worse - and this is just the tip of the iceberg ...
  • The Rose case was an isolated incident, unlike this steroid case where we are unsure of the sheer volume of players involved. Now if instead if it just being the story of one hugely idiotic manager, it was the story of Rose and 8-10 of his own players, or Rose and 4-5 other managers working together, I think you'd agree that the betting ring would have had a much worse effect on baseball.

    Let me put it this way. If we found out tomorrow that Alex Rodriguez, Albert Pujols, Pedro Martinez, Roger Clemens, Eric Gagne, Mike Piazza and others, or that Joe Torre, Jack McKeon and Bobby Cox were betting on baseball, betting on games involving their own teams and affecting the outcome of games and admitted to such, that story would blow this steroid story away. And THAT is why Rose had to be banned and made an example of, to try and prevent anything like what I described above from ever happening. Because that would kill baseball faster than anything else.
  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭
    Rose's actions didn't directly affect the game like these cheaters.

  • aconteaconte Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭
    YES!!!!

    Bonds and all the other Roiders cheated the game!

    aconte
  • perkdogperkdog Posts: 30,658 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You guys that think Players that allegedly juiced outweighs what Rose did absolutely crack me up. Thank You for the laughs.


    PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A manager absolutley outweighs any one player as far as a baseball game is concerned. If you ever played ball you would know this....(Im not talking little league either)
  • Why is it laughable? We're talking about one manager betting on baseball, compared with an ever-growing number of players, including former league MVPs, admitting they cheated while playing. When Rose was banned, no one suggested revising the Reds W/L record during his time as manager. In this situation, however, one of the key questions is what to make of tainted players' records. That alone should be sufficient proof that Rose's situation pales in comparison to this one MLB is currently facing.

    P.S. Now that Bonds' testimony has been publicized, you can stop using the word "alleged" image
  • absolutely not. Pete Rose knew gambling was illegal, and he knowingly broke the rules

    steroids have not been illegal in the MLB until a few years ago. bad, unethical, immoral? yes. illegal? not when they allegedly took them
  • At least with Bonds, the suspected period of use includes last season ...

    edited to add: The Anabolic Steroids Control Act of 1990 placed anabolic steroids into Schedule III of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) as of February 27, 1991. (see link)
  • I totally agree with Kevin - What Rose is worse! And I am a huge Pete Rose fan, but using players to cover your bets or affect the entire outcome of the game for his own personal benefit is the absolute worse thing that a MLB person can do.

    Speaking of Kevin, do you live in Tampa? I was just there and went to Mons Venus - WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'd go broke if I lived in Tampa
  • dirtmonkeydirtmonkey Posts: 3,048 ✭✭
    steroids have not been illegal in the MLB until a few years ago. bad, unethical, immoral? yes. illegal? not when they allegedly took them


    Ummm, they are illegal "within the law". Were not talking about something he did that merely broke MLB rules, but their use is against the law unless a doctor prescribed them because his body had a problem producing testosterone which isn't the case.
    image
  • DirtyHarryDirtyHarry Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭
    No, it is equal. Screw the much revered institution of baseball, one way or another, and you should be penalized. That does not change perceived greatness of any one player. They just have to take a risk as to whether or not they want to be immortalized by the "game" and the public. Cheaters, gamblers and liars will not be. Regards.
    Proud of my 16x20 autographed and framed collection - all signed in person. Not big on modern - I'm stuck in the past!
  • Rose bet on some games that passed into oblivion.

    Steroid users are affecting records.

    Statistics are what keep baseball going.

    Steroid use is worse.


  • << <i>absolutely not. Pete Rose knew gambling was illegal, and he knowingly broke the rules

    steroids have not been illegal in the MLB until a few years ago. bad, unethical, immoral? yes. illegal? not when they allegedly took them >>

    agreed.
    and Pete knew what he was doing was wrong.
    Barry said he did not even know that
    the Cream he used for his arthritis had
    steroids in it.

    imageimage
  • bxbbxb Posts: 805 ✭✭
    Babe Ruth was an alcoholic and a womanizer, as were many of his contemporaries in the hall of fame.
    Ty Cobb was a racist, as were most of his contemporaries in the hall of fame.
    Pete Rose bet on baseball games, as did less famous players.
    Willy Mays refused to sign an autograph for me when I was a kid; he wasn't the only one.
    At least 50% of all current major league baseball players use or have used illegal steroids and/or uppers.

    None of these examples casts a nice light on the great game.

    Shall we ban them all, or will we continue on with our exercise in situational ethics, in which each person, each society, decides what is morally and legally acceptable, and what is right and what is wrong fluctuates based on the rules of the day? Should we just close down the hall of fame, or should we focus only on what happens between the white lines and say, we are all human, we all make mistakes, but these guys could really play baseball well?

    My $0.02.
    Capecards
  • aconteaconte Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭


    << <i>At least 50% of all current major league baseball players use or have used illegal steroids and/or uppers. >>



    Of all the things you listed this is the only one that affected the numbers achieved on the field
    by major leaguers. This is why the current baseball era is now known as the juice ball era. It is
    also why Barry Bonds is sometimes confused as the Mets mascot. The affect on the game is
    tremendous. It shows how the court of public opinion has already found Bonds guilty which is
    important to know.

    aconte
  • Atheletes that use steroids or other illeagal drugs are wrong. Drug use is more serious and morally wrong. Much more so than gambling.

    That said, Nothing can be worse for the health of the game of Baseball than allowing gambling to occur within its ranks. Kennesaw Mountain Landis and the owners realized it many years ago. They made examples of the Black Sox and made it clear to everyone that forever more, it would absolutely, positively, not be tolerated under any circumstances.

    Only a collosal moron (Rose) would break the rules and he deserves whatever penalty he gets. As long as Shoeless Joe Jackson remains banned, so should Rose. And to allow Rose to have anything to do with a major league team again would be catastrophic.

    Baseball will always have players with poor moral character. There always has been and always will be cheaters, boozers, drug users, racists (black and white), and criminals. The game can survive them all. To allow gambling to exist without the most extreme penalty as a deterent will destroy Baseball.

    What Rose did with respect to the game was worse.
    Collecting PSA and BGS 500 HR & 3000 Hit Club Baseball
    HOF Quarterbacks Football
  • Happy birthday Jason!
  • cincyredlegscincyredlegs Posts: 2,032 ✭✭✭
    I grew up watching Pete play as a kid in Ohio. He was, has been and always be my favorite player. However, I don't believe he should ever be allowed in the HOF......EVER. Here is a common flaw people are missing (including myself for a long time).

    First, I don't ever believe Pete ever bet against the Reds or did anything to influence the game. Maybe I am naive but my gut tells me he didn't.

    Second and most important, the people Pete was placing bets with were not the Catholic Priests down the street. These were "bad guys" and probably associated with the mob somehow. So, let's say Petey goes on a losing streak and now he is down $1M. Pete doesn't have that much cash. Now Bruiser and Tommy "Two Times" pays him a visit. "Pete, since you don't have the money, you are going to throw the next 2 games or, we are going to break your legs, your son's arms and beat your wife". This isn't fantasy..........read up on the mob.

    This is exactly the reason not betting on baseball is the sacred rule and MLB HAS to have a zero tolerance. Once these guys get into the game, you lose ALL integrity. What's worse is Pete is a student of the game. He knows ALL the rules let alone this one. What drove him to be an all-time great also was his down fall.

    So, which one was worse.................Pete was.

    Mark
    Project:

    T206 Set - 300/524
  • grote15grote15 Posts: 29,694 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I grew up watching Pete play as a kid in Ohio. He was, has been and always be my favorite player. However, I don't believe he should ever be allowed in the HOF......EVER. Here is a common flaw people are missing (including myself for a long time).

    First, I don't ever believe Pete ever bet against the Reds or did anything to influence the game. Maybe I am naive but my gut tells me he didn't.

    Second and most important, the people Pete was placing bets with were not the Catholic Priests down the street. These were "bad guys" and probably associated with the mob somehow. So, let's say Petey goes on a losing streak and now he is down $1M. Pete doesn't have that much cash. Now Bruiser and Tommy "Two Times" pays him a visit. "Pete, since you don't have the money, you are going to throw the next 2 games or, we are going to break your legs, your son's arms and beat your wife". This isn't fantasy..........read up on the mob.

    This is exactly the reason not betting on baseball is the sacred rule and MLB HAS to have a zero tolerance. Once these guys get into the game, you lose ALL integrity. What's worse is Pete is a student of the game. He knows ALL the rules let alone this one. What drove him to be an all-time great also was his down fall.

    So, which one was worse.................Pete was.

    Mark >>



    Great post, Mark. And right on target.

    Here is an article just recently written by Fay Vincent on the topic, as well.

    Vincent on Rose & the HOF


    Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
  • gregmo32gregmo32 Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭
    Also consider, along those lines, if Pete is placing bets with mob sources, but only on the Reds to win, what can the bookie (and his mob connections) infer on the nights Pete chooses not to bet on the Reds?

    I am buying and trading for RC's of Wilt Chamberlain, George Mikan, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, and Bob Cousy!
    Don't waste your time and fees listing on ebay before getting in touch me by PM or at gregmo32@aol.com !
  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,064 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Also consider, along those lines, if Pete is placing bets with mob sources, but only on the Reds to win, what can the bookie (and his mob connections) infer on the nights Pete chooses not to bet on the Reds? >>


    Exactly. This is why the "Pete never bet on the Reds to lose!" line doesn't hold any water. Just because he's not intentionally throwing games doesn't mean things are fully on the up-and-up. Does Pete handle things differently knowing he's got money on a game? Does he blow out his bullpen to try and win 1 game because of a bet when that could hurt his team for the next 3?
  • cincyredlegscincyredlegs Posts: 2,032 ✭✭✭
    I think Pete betting for the Reds to lose is plausible but I don't think it happened. Just my gut feeling. I can't prove it one way or the other. He was to much of a competitor. Also, I don't think Pete got into any trouble paying his debts. What I was referring to is IF he had gotten into trouble which has happened to people. This is why MLB has to rule with an IRON FIST on this rule. I remember watching a program where he actually kept tens of thousands of dollars in his freezer.......he pulled it out and said "this is my cold hard cash".

    Mark

    Project:

    T206 Set - 300/524
Sign In or Register to comment.