Home Sports Talk

Someone, please someone tell me why Pete Rose isn't in the Hall of fame!!!!

Pete Rose is what he is, Babe Ruth was what he was, Ty Cobb was what he was, Tris Speaker (no saint) was what he was, Willie Mays (with his casino affiliation) was what he was, there are probably more dirty players in the Hall of Fame than we even are privy to knowing what their dirt was. Pete Rose is no exception. He isn't in the hall because his situation became public. Barry Bonds will probably go in the hall, same with Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and (Lord I hope not) Palmeiro. What about Sheffield (I didn't like him even when he was with the Dodgers/Marlins/Padres/Brewers/Braves). I simply believe that Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame for what he did for baseball and on the diamond. Positive or Negative, I would like you thoughts.
«1

Comments

  • mnmcoinmnmcoin Posts: 2,165
    I too believe it should be based upon stats and playing ability only, however in our day and age the stigmata of having bet on baseball will ultimitely keep him out of the hall.

    morris <><
    "Repent, for the kindom of heaven is at hand."
    ** I would take a shack on the Rock over a castle in the sand !! **
    Don't take life so seriously...nobody gets out alive.

    ALL VALLEY COIN AND JEWELRY
    28480 B OLD TOWN FRONT ST
    TEMECULA, CA 92590
    (951) 757-0334

    www.allvalleycoinandjewelry.com
  • BoopottsBoopotts Posts: 6,784 ✭✭
    Fay Vincent once said that every guy who ever puts on a uniform knows the rule: You gamble on baseball and you're out for good. No exceptions. I'd feel bad for Pete, except a) he seems like a total tool, and I think it's kind of funny that the all time hits leader has to buy a ticket to Cooperstown like all the rest of us, and b) I rarely feel sorry for anyone if they know what the punishment will-- or even can-- be for breaking a rule and decide to do so anyway. Pete made a choice, and that's fine. But now he suffers the consequences.

    This is one of those topics that actually hits home for me. Not the 'Pete Rose' part of it, per se, but the idea of taking your medicine when you screw up. For about four years I had a business partner, and as often happens we became pretty close friends. We'd go fishing together, lend each other our vehicles when one of us had a break down, and so on. Wyatt wasn't part of my inner circle of friends, really, but our relationship had a personal as well as a business side to it.

    Anyway, Wyatt's life started deteriorating in about 2000, he got involved in recreational narcotic use and so forth, and in August of 2003 he went back to his apartment and strangled his girlfriend. Apparently she was preparing to leave him, and Wyatt just flipped out. Knowing what I know about his childhood, which was bad enough to make Jerry Springer blush, and the abandonment complex he'd developed as an adult, I could understand-- at least in part-- what happened. But when the judge came down with a 30 yr. sentence with no chance of parole I couldn't feel sorry for him. Now remember, this is someone I knew-- and knew very well. But in the final analysis we've all got to be held accountable, and I see no reason why Pete Rose should be an exception to that.
  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭
    MLB makes exceptions for players all the time - the recently Steve Howe being the perfect example of it.

    Evidence never supported that he bet on his own team, or that he did so while he played. I have no problem banning Rose from ever participating in any form of baseball again, but he should be in the hall.
  • JrMacdaddyJrMacdaddy Posts: 506 ✭✭
    F Pete Rose and the goat he rode in on. No reason he should be in the HOF. He bet, he got caught, he has to pay the penalty.
  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭


    << <i>F Pete Rose and the goat he rode in on. No reason he should be in the HOF. He bet, he got caught, he has to pay the penalty. >>



    He has 4256 reasons to be in the hall, but he should be inducted but still banned frmo baseball.
  • BoopottsBoopotts Posts: 6,784 ✭✭


    << <i>MLB makes exceptions for players all the time - the recently Steve Howe being the perfect example of it.

    Evidence never supported that he bet on his own team, or that he did so while he played. I have no problem banning Rose from ever participating in any form of baseball again, but he should be in the hall. >>



    So far as I know baseball has never made an exception for somone who bet on the game. If they have at some point done this then I would definitely reconsider my position.
  • DeutscherGeistDeutscherGeist Posts: 2,990 ✭✭✭✭
    The Steve Howe incident is different from Pete Rose. The biggest no-no in baseball is gambling. They could not emphasize that any more. It is a baseball rule--A very big rule. Every player is made aware of this rule and is clearly stated in every clubhouse. You gamble--your out. It is the one big rule of all rules, so that is why they are not lenient on it.

    A player with a drug addiction is not the same thing. Baseball made gambling the biggest offense. Drug addiction is treated much like it is in the greater part of society. It is a sickness, the court orders treatment, the person is put on probation, perhaps the judge gives a second chance for a person that relapses in their addiction and so on. Baseball never said once you use drugs, you are out.

    You can argue that baseball rules should be this and that--that's fine. The point is, gambling is a huge offense in MLB because the people in charge made it that way. It must be followed. If the people in charge want to make drug addiction a no tolerance rule as well, then it must be done and implemented in the proper procedural way. While lying, spouse abuse and coming home drunk are not good character traits, MLB never stated in its rule book that it had a no tolerance clause for those things.

    So, baseball is following the set of rules it has to work with and being consistent about it. I am not arguing that there are not other issues that are in poor taste or destroy the integrity of the game, but until MLB makes rule amendments, all MLB baseball players are subject to what the current rules are.

    Steroid use was not illegal in MLB until recently. Any player that violates that rule now is being dealt with. Whoever did it in the past is off home free because no rule in baseball stated it was illegal as strange is it may sound to us. I thought if something was illegal in the country should make it illegal in its institutions too.
    "So many of our DREAMS at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we SUMMON THE WILL they soon become INEVITABLE "- Christopher Reeve

    BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭


    << <i>
    Steroid use was not illegal in MLB until recently. Any player that violates that rule now is being dealt with. Whoever did it in the past is off home free because no rule in baseball stated it was illegal as strange is it may sound to us. I thought if something was illegal in the country should make it illegal in its institutions too. >>



    While there was no steroid policy in place, using steroids was (before the policy in 03) viewed the same way as cocaine use or any other substance deemed illegal by the US government. A player could no sooner use steroids than they could a line of coke.

  • stevekstevek Posts: 29,032 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>MLB makes exceptions for players all the time - the recently Steve Howe being the perfect example of it.

    Evidence never supported that he bet on his own team, or that he did so while he played. I have no problem banning Rose from ever participating in any form of baseball again, but he should be in the hall. >>



    Axtell, I still haven't figured out yet if you just intentionally act stupid or you really are stupid. Anyone who follows baseball even a little bit knows Rose already admitted he bet on his own team. Since you never believe almost anything anyone says here, below is pasted from the Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia.

    <<< In August 1989, three years after he retired as an active player, Rose agreed to a lifetime ban from baseball amidst accusations that he gambled on baseball games while playing for and managing the Reds; some accusations claimed that he bet on, and even against, the Reds. After years of public denial, in 2004 he admitted to betting on, but not against, the Reds. After Rose's ban was instated, the Baseball Hall of Fame had specifically stated that individuals who are banned from the sport are ineligible for induction; previously, those who were banned had been excluded by informal agreement among voters. The issue of his possible reinstatement and election to the Hall remains a contentious one throughout baseball. >>>

  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭
    My mistake, I didn't hear that in 2004, as part of his apology, he claimed to have bet on his own team.

    Like I said, he should be in the hall, while still banned from baseball. His betting on the game did nothing to take away from his remarkable achievements on the field, and those who say so are delusional at best.

    You don't get the moniker for hustling if you are throwing games. You don't have home plate collisions at an ALL STAR GAME if you don't love the game with your soul. And you sure as hell don't set the all time hits record if you are throwing games.

    Pete Rose, while a severely flawed individual, absolutely belongs in the hall of fame.
  • stevekstevek Posts: 29,032 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>My mistake, I didn't hear that in 2004, as part of his apology, he claimed to have bet on his own team.

    Like I said, he should be in the hall, while still banned from baseball. His betting on the game did nothing to take away from his remarkable achievements on the field, and those who say so are delusional at best.

    You don't get the moniker for hustling if you are throwing games. You don't have home plate collisions at an ALL STAR GAME if you don't love the game with your soul. And you sure as hell don't set the all time hits record if you are throwing games.

    Pete Rose, while a severely flawed individual, absolutely belongs in the hall of fame. >>



    No problem...just some late night chop busting by stevek image

    Hey, regardless of what happens with Rose, I'll never forget how he helped my Phils to a World Series victory in 1980. The Phils I don't think could have done it without him. It's just a shame that Rose can't see the obvious that he is an addicted gambler and get some help for it...taking steps such as this would go a long way in helping him get what he says he wants, but unfortunately what he wants now is both his gambling and reinstatement to baseball...as long as he continues gambling, reinstatement simply isn't going to ever happen I don't believe.
  • fab4fab4 Posts: 280 ✭✭


    << <i>While there was no steroid policy in place, using steroids was (before the policy in 03) viewed the same way as cocaine use or any other substance deemed illegal by the US government. A player could no sooner use steroids than they could a line of coke >>



    that is so true. but a player using coke would get 20 chances to get rehab and to get clean. so why shouldn't a player have several chances to rehab from steroids (bonds,palmerio,sosa,mcgwire) before trying to take all the records they have acomplished.

    as far as rose goes i am and always have been a big pete rose fan, but his gambling was an illegal activity since he bet with a bookie as the only legal venue is las vegas.

    pete rose excepted a life time ban from baseball so no sympathy
  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942
    People can just pretend that he is in the HOF in their own minds, he still has the stats from his playing days
    that made him a great player.

    Sort of like the invisible asterisk that will go beside the names of the steroid players records. Not officially
    recognized but still there as far as many people are concerned.

    I think it is probably too late for Rose to ever get in, after a certain number of years doesn't the selection
    process go to some veteran players committees and away from the current sportswriter voters?

    I hear the veteran committee is hard core anti gambling.
  • fiveninerfiveniner Posts: 4,111 ✭✭✭



    -------------------------
    DeutscherGeist



    You said it all .I fully agree.
    Tony(AN ANGEL WATCHES OVER ME)
  • 1420sports1420sports Posts: 3,473 ✭✭✭
    About a month ago, I was fortunate enough to have dinner with Brooks Robinson. Besides it being an unbelievably cool experience, Brooks said there is no way he thinks he ever gets in. Ever.

    I am a huge Rose fan, but Mr. Robinson said something that I pretty much accept. I think Pete accepts it as well, but there is that hope.

    Much like Steve had pointed out, Pete will always be loved in Philly .... and pretty much everywhere else.
    collecting various PSA and SGC cards
  • fab4fab4 Posts: 280 ✭✭
    1420

    i spent a few hours with brooks robinson a few years ago when he was in dallas for an old timers game, and have talked to him on the phone since. he is one of the nicest people around.
  • WabittwaxWabittwax Posts: 1,984 ✭✭✭
    HOF or not, Pete Rose cards still make me money on Ebay. His cards sell as well or better than other HOFers from his era so the public already considers him a HOFer in their minds. I don't care if he ever gets in as long as I can turn $5 into $50 by grading his cards.
  • WeekendHackerWeekendHacker Posts: 1,445 ✭✭
    Pete's last year of eligibility disappeared last year, his 15th year of eligibility after retirement. He will be eligible on the veterans’ committee ballot beginning in 2014 or 2015.

    On a different note, comparing steroid drug use to cocaine drug use, it's not the same. Yes, they are both taken by choice, but one is used to intentionally enhance performance, recovery from injury, strength training and enhance muscle recovery from lifting weights - the other is used solely for recreational purposes. Although I've never taken either substance, I have no personal experience with these, but why else would someone consume cocaine?

    Gambling, like any substance abuse (cocaine, alcohol, marijuana, heroin), is an addiction. There are two types of addiction, psychological and physical. Addictions are all thrown into the same pot (no pun intended) called a 'disease.' I only agree with this half heartedly - after all, you don't acquire this disease, you make a choice to commence the activity that one eventually becomes addicted to. Yes, some individuals are predisposed to weakness and therefore addiction, but they have to make a choice to commence the activity in the first place.

    Pete belongs in the hall, I don't really care if he is banned from the game, but how on earth can you have the all time hit king not in the hall of fame.
  • Pete Rose has the numbers for the Hall--always has, always will. The amount of writers that refused to vote because Pete Rose wasn't allowed probably cost a couple of guys--Bill Madlock and someone else if I recall, any chance of getting consideration on more than one ballot

    With that said however, gambling is the forbidden sin in baseball. Remember, this is the same sport that considered throwing Willie Mays and Mickey Mantle out of the Hall because they were doing promotions for casino openings in the early to mid 80's.
    Next MONTH? So he's saying that if he wins, the best-case scenario is that he'll be paying for it two weeks after the auction ends?

    Forget blocking him; find out where he lives and go punch him in the nuts. --WalterSobchak 9/12/12



    image


    Looking for Al Hrabosky and any OPC Dave Campbells (the ESPN guy)
  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    He agreed to a lifetime ban. Pete Rose agreed. That's a useful starting point in answering your question.
    I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
  • ConnecticoinConnecticoin Posts: 12,863 ✭✭✭✭✭
    IMO, his conduct following the release of his recent book keeps him out of the HOF for good.
  • WondoWondo Posts: 2,916 ✭✭✭
    Just because MLB has banned his participation in its activities, does not mean that Rose cannot be in the Hall of Fame. These are two distinct, albeit symbiotic, entities.
    Wondo

  • Writer11Writer11 Posts: 738
    Why is it that people want Pete Rose in the Hall so badly and to keep Barry Bonds out so badly?

    Both have a laundry list of despicable acts. I just don't understand why people love Rose and hate Bonds.

  • JrMacdaddyJrMacdaddy Posts: 506 ✭✭


    << <i>Just because MLB has banned his participation in its activities, does not mean that Rose cannot be in the Hall of Fame. These are two distinct, albeit symbiotic, entities. >>



    Incorrect


    Why isn't Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame?

    As stated in the National Baseball Hall of Fame's Rules for Election, "any player on Baseball's ineligible list shall not be an eligible candidate" for consideration by the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA) or the Baseball Hall of Fame Committee on Baseball Veterans. Pete Rose was placed on Major League Baseball's ineligible list in 1989 by Commissioner A. Bartlett Giamatti. In order for Rose to become eligible to Hall of Fame voters, the following criteria must be met:

    He must apply to the office of the Commissioner for reinstatment to Major League Baseball.
    He must be reinstated by the Office of the Commissioner.
    He would then be an eligible Hall of Fame candidate for the BBWAA Screening Committee. (See rule 3 of the rules for election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame by members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America.)
    If Pete Rose were to be placed on the BBWAA ballot, he would have to receive votes on at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the ballots cast in any one election to be elected to membership in the National Baseball Hall of Fame.

    Throughout his career, Pete Rose was a generous supporter of the National Baseball Hall of Fame, donating more than 20 artifacts to the Museum's collections. Many of these artifacts are on display in the Museum.



    Rules for Election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame by Members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA)
    1. Authorization — By authorization of the Board of Directors of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, Inc., the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA) is authorized to hold an election every year for the purpose of electing members to the National Baseball Hall of Fame from the ranks of retired baseball players.

    2. Electors — Only active and honorary members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America, who have been active baseball writers for at least ten (10) years, shall be eligible to vote. They must have been active as baseball writers and members of the Association for a period beginning at least ten (10) years prior to the date of election in which they are voting.

    3. Eligible Candidates — Candidates to be eligible must meet the following requirements:

    A baseball player must have been active as a player in the Major Leagues at some time during a period beginning twenty (20) years before and ending five (5) years prior to election.
    Player must have played in each of ten (10) Major League championship seasons, some part of which must have been within the period described in 3 (A).
    Player shall have ceased to be an active player in the Major Leagues at least five (5) calendar years preceding the election but may be otherwise connected with baseball.
    In case of the death of an active player or a player who has been retired for less than five (5) full years, a candidate who is otherwise eligible shall be eligible in the next regular election held at least six (6) months after the date of death or after the end of the five (5) year period, whichever occurs first.
    Any player on Baseball's ineligible list shall not be an eligible candidate.
    4. Method of Election

    BBWAA Screening Committee — A Screening Committee consisting of baseball writers will be appointed by the BBWAA. This Screening Committee shall consist of six members, with two members to be elected at each Annual Meeting for a three-year term. The duty of the Screening Committee shall be to prepare a ballot listing in alphabetical order eligible candidates who (1) received a vote on a minimum of five percent (5%) of the ballots cast in the preceding election or (2) are eligible for the first time and are nominated by any two of the six members of the BBWAA Screening Committee.
    Electors may vote for as few as zero (0) and as many as ten (10) eligible candidates deemed worthy of election. Write-in votes are not permitted.
    Any candidate receiving votes on seventy-five percent (75%) of the ballots cast shall be elected to membership in the National Baseball Hall of Fame.
    5. Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

    6. Automatic Elections — No automatic elections based on performances such as a batting average of .400 or more for one (1) year, pitching a perfect game or similar outstanding achievement shall be permitted.

    7. Time of Election — The duly authorized representatives of the BBWAA shall prepare, date and mail ballots to each elector no later than the 15th day of January in each year in which an election is held. The elector shall sign and return the completed ballot within twenty (20) days. The vote shall then be tabulated by the duly authorized representatives of the BBWAA.

    8. Certification of Election Results — The results of the election shall be certified by a representative of the Baseball Writers' Association of America and an officer of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, Inc. The results shall be transmitted to the Commissioner of Baseball. The BBWAA and National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, Inc. shall jointly release the results for publication.

    9. Amendments — The Board of Directors of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, Inc. reserves the right to revoke, alter or amend these rules at any time.



  • WondoWondo Posts: 2,916 ✭✭✭
    JrM,

    You are absolutely correct in your post. However, the rule not to allow inelligible MLB players for HOF consideration if a Hall of Fame rule, not an MLB one. If the Hall wanted to put Rose in, MLB would technically not be able to stop them. Although, of course they would.
    Wondo

  • Things are so funny, first off, Pete Rose bet on baseball, and I do not care, the ONLY way I would care, is if he bet AGAINST his own team, if he bet for his team to win, it is not like he can really fix a game. What would he do, put the best team out on the field each and everyday, which is what people always want anyways. As a manager, Pete is a HOF no no, as a player, he should be in there. He never should have lost his 15 years of eligibility, because he was NEVER eligible as of yet.

    Also, it is funny, how everyone considers alcoholism and drug addiction as a "disease," but when it comes to being addicted to things like smoking and gambling, it is said person's fault, and it is so easy to give it up. I mean, unless you tie someone up, shoot them full of heroin, and that person becomes addicted, then one cannot fault that addict, but how often does that happen? Alcoholics and drug addicts KNOW what can happen, but it is a "disease." So, I guess in Pete Rose's case, it was not in anyway a "disease," it was him committing the ultimate sin of baseball. Steve Howe, the man had 484395739 chances, and each time his "disease" allowed him back, does anyone see a double standard? Granted, Pete Rose should not have bet on baseball, but if all other addictions are considered a disease, then so should his, and he should be in, because he did not know any better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Also, Pete Rose agreed to a lifetime ban, but from what I always hear, it was with the knowing that he would be back in baseball after a year's time. And what is so wrong about Pete making a few dollars more from a few bets, AS LONG AS IT WAS NOT AGAINST HIS OWN TEAM, sure, he made some money in his career, not quite as much as he would be making now, but I can guarantee that baseball made a whole hell of alot more money off his efforts. I also applaud Pete Rose for coming out with his book at the time he did, baseball used him for all he was worth, so I do not blame him one bit for using them!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭


    << <i>Why is it that people want Pete Rose in the Hall so badly and to keep Barry Bonds out so badly?

    Both have a laundry list of despicable acts. I just don't understand why people love Rose and hate Bonds. >>



    Bonds cheated the game and himself to get his numbers.

    Rose, did not cheat the game to get his numbers.


    I think this is why there is such a distinct difference in how the 2 players are perceived.
  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942
    Also, Pete Rose agreed to a lifetime ban, but from what I always hear, it was with the knowing that he would be back in baseball after a year's time

    Not correct.

    . And what is so wrong about Pete making a few dollars more from a few bets, AS LONG AS IT WAS NOT AGAINST HIS OWN TEAM


    Well, lets see. He could be making deals with players on other teams to throw a game so he
    could have an advantage etc.
  • Then if Pete would make deals with other players, then those players would be just as guilty, and Pete should be out of baseball in any form, but I never heard he did, so that thought is out of the question!!!! As I said, I always hear gambling is a "disease," but it is not in Pete's case!!!!
  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942


    << <i>Then if Pete would make deals with other players, then those players would be just as guilty, and Pete should be out of baseball in any form, but I never heard he did, so that thought is out of the question!!!! As I said, I always hear gambling is a "disease," but it is not in Pete's case!!!! >>




    Then if Pete would make deals with other players, then those players would be just as guilty, and Pete should be out of baseball in any form, but I never heard he did, so that thought is out of the question!!!!


    Just because you never heard that he did there is still the possibility that he or anyone else could
    conspire that way to throw games. Why would you want to allow that kind of possibility? That is why gambling on baseball is a big no no.
  • If baseball really cared about the man who practically gave his life to it, then they would have found him counseling to help control his gambling addiction!!! Steve Howe had more chances than I can count on my hand, I believe it was 11, I may be incorrect!!! The Hall of Fame and MLB are two separate entities, they go together, but are different. One can go into the HOF as a player, manager, broadcaster, and I believe an owner. Sure, Pete should not go in as a manager, but as a player, he should be, I never saw any proof that he gambled as a player. From the knowledge that I know, he did this all as a manager!!!!!!!!!

    Also, again, how can he lose his HOF eligibility, when he was NEVER eligible in the first place? Baseball used him as a tool, he agreed to a lifetime ban, and he agreed, thinking he would be back in a year's time, and I heard that a million times. Nobody will never know the full truth to it, since Giamati died.
  • JrMacdaddyJrMacdaddy Posts: 506 ✭✭


    << <i>You are absolutely correct in your post. However, the rule not to allow inelligible MLB players for HOF consideration if a Hall of Fame rule, not an MLB one. If the Hall wanted to put Rose in, MLB would technically not be able to stop them. Although, of course they would. >>



    Correct. Up until the HOF put these rules in place there was nothing keeping Joe Jackson out of the HOF. He could have been voted in but I believe it was one of those "unwritten rules" that kept him out.
  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942
    Sure, Pete should not go in as a manager, but as a player, he should be, I never saw any proof that he gambled as a player. From the knowledge that I know, he did this all as a manager!!!!!!!!!



    Same man, the sins of one era are overlooked for the pure glory of another era.

    Good grief. Sorry, I don't buy this line of reasoning at all.
  • Never thought someone with a disease can be considered a sinner!!! I guess Gamber's Annonymous is a waste of time and effort, because they do not have a disease!!! Hell, Steve Howe is a saint compared to the disgrace which is Pete Rose, is that the thought!!! Also, you are saying, just because he bet as a manager, that he "must have" done so as a player? I guess society does believe in guilt until innocense is proven!!!!
  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942
    If baseball really cared about the man who practically gave his life to it, then they would have found him counseling to help control his gambling addiction!!!


    Kind of hard to help someone who hides their addiction and when finally confronted with it denied for years
    that it ever took place and then finally admitted it when he had a book to sell.


    A person that needed help but obviously had problems beyond just the gambling. Not a class act.



  • << <i>Good grief. Sorry, I don't buy this line of reasoning at all. >>





    "If the glove don't fit, you must acquit," that is a line of reasoning I do not buy, yet, it was bought in a court of law, so therefore, O.J. is not in jail. I never saw Pete Rose go to court for anything other then tax evasion, perhaps that sinner outta prove what he did and did not do in court!!!!!!
  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942


    << <i>Never thought someone with a disease can be considered a sinner!!! I guess Gamber's Annonymous is a waste of time and effort, because they do not have a disease!!! Hell, Steve Howe is a saint compared to the disgrace which is Pete Rose, is that the thought!!! Also, you are saying, just because he bet as a manager, that he "must have" done so as a player? I guess society does believe in guilt until innocense is proven!!!! >>

  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942
    Also, you are saying, just because he bet as a manager, that he "must have" done so as a player?


    I never said that at all. I think you need to slow down a little and read more carefully.


  • << <i>If baseball really cared about the man who practically gave his life to it, then they would have found him counseling to help control his gambling addiction!!!


    Kind of hard to help someone who hides their addiction and when finally confronted with it denied for years
    that it ever took place and then finally admitted it when he had a book to sell.


    A person that needed help but obviously had problems beyond just the gambling. Not a class act. >>




    Pete Rose is or was addicted to gambling, there are heroin addicts that probably still say they can kick the habit anytime they want. Fact is, Pete Rose is out of baseball, because he gambled, before he ever said that he did. Baseball should have sought him counseling even if he did not admit to it, perhaps he could have stayed in baseball then, if he started a program with a therapist. Make the rules like this, go to counseling whether you think you need it or not, we think you need it. If he did not attend, then bye bye Pete, if he did do it, ok, your disease will hopefully be overtaken and managed. How many athletes are sent to drug rehab, and still get to stay in the game while they are in rehab, or after they finish rehab. To an addict, gambling is like a drug also, and not many addicts tend to say they are addicted, usually takes an addict to admit to it, when they are in trouble and need help!!!!!!!!
  • MichiganMichigan Posts: 4,942


    << <i>

    << <i>Good grief. Sorry, I don't buy this line of reasoning at all. >>





    "If the glove don't fit, you must acquit," that is a line of reasoning I do not buy, yet, it was bought in a court of law, so therefore, O.J. is not in jail. I never saw Pete Rose go to court for anything other then tax evasion, perhaps that sinner outta prove what he did and did not do in court!!!!!! >>




    OK, if you say so. This whole conversation is getting more bizarre by the minute. image


  • << <i>Same man, the sins of one era are overlooked for the pure glory of another era.

    Good grief. Sorry, I don't buy this line of reasoning at all. >>





    Who is to question what is a sin and what is not a sin? In Pete's diseased mind, he was not sinning, he was getting his high!!! I guess there is a double standard in society, as opposed to sport. Illegal gambling has a key word, illegal, anyone who has a poker party, makes a $5 bet with a friend, football or NCAA basketball pools, anything on the lines of that, is a sinner, and should go to jail, because laws are laws!!! Who is to say there is a difference in sports or in private!!!! I think having sexual relations with an underage child is sickening, and the courts should follow that too, but in the case of a female predator, is is overlooked because the boy was getting his gollies, whereas, if it was a man, said man should be castrated before he is ever found guilty in a court of law!!!
  • WeekendHackerWeekendHacker Posts: 1,445 ✭✭
    Baseball didn't hold up their end of the bargain. The Dowd report stated if Pete Rose accepted a lifetime ban from baseball, the Dowd report would b never be released to the public, well, guess what, the Dowd report was released and Rose is still banned from the game. Where is the fairness in that?


    Second note - All politically correctness aside - Proof that the Hall of Fame is separate from MLB as an organization; players from the Negro Leagues are in the hall of fame when they never played in the MLB. They are deserving for enshrinement for their contributions to Baseball. I am simply saying the MLB and HOF are completely separate organizations.


  • << <i>Baseball didn't hold up their end of the bargain. The Dowd report stated if Pete Rose accepted a lifetime ban from baseball, the Dowd report would b never be released to the public, well, guess what, the Dowd report was released and Rose is still banned from the game. Where is the fairness in that?


    Second note - All politically correctness aside - Proof that the Hall of Fame is separate from MLB as an organization; players from the Negro Leagues are in the hall of fame when they never played in the MLB. They are deserving for enshrinement for their contributions to Baseball. I am simply saying the MLB and HOF are completely separate organizations. >>



    You are correct, I expressed that also to some extent, (except the Dowd report and Negro Leagues), and Pete Rose was screwed, regardless of what he did!!!!
  • Writer11Writer11 Posts: 738
    hardcorehockeyfan,

    You sound like a passionate, knowledgeable fan. But I'm giving you two minutes for excessive use of exclamation marks !!!!!!

    image
  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭
    Banning Rose was Giamatti's claim to fame, and the sole reason he did so was so he'd go down in the history books as the man who brought down a legend.

    This had nothing to do with fairness, or justice, and everything to do with an egocentric commissioner who wanted to put his lasting stamp on the game of baseball.


    The fact Rose is not in the hall of fame is unbelievable.
  • 53BKid53BKid Posts: 2,174 ✭✭✭
    Baseball didn't go after Pete Rose. When the story broke, he had turned himself into the Commissionars office. Look it up.

    Word was in collectors circles that he had been selling off every possession he had including his MVP trophy, golden glove awards, etc. Why?, because he owed so much money on his gambling debts that his life had been threatened.

    HAPPY COLLECTING!!!
  • Pete Rose is in the hall of fame.

    Go to Cooperstown, you will see his name on the "MLB hit leader", he is also on display for the "NL game hitting streak of 44", he is on ther MVP displays

    So his contributions are recognized by MLB HOF. However he does not have a bust there, that's OK! He agreed to a life-time ban....
    "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind". - Gandhi
  • lol why did this old thread get recussitated.

    He isnt in the HOF cause he is a liar and a cheat and he bet on baseball, no doubt about it. Maybe when he is old, frail and dying they will elect him. Let him sweat a few more years.
  • 1420sports1420sports Posts: 3,473 ✭✭✭
    He'll get in ...


    collecting various PSA and SGC cards
  • stevekstevek Posts: 29,032 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Rose is addicted to gambling. Bottom line - The gambling means more to him than being in the Hall. The gambling means more to him than the game of baseball. That is quite obvious. Otherwise he wouldn't have jeopardized it all.

    Gambling addiction is a tough addiction. But until he quits gambling, and becomes a spokesman against gambling, there is simply no chance he will get elected to the Hall - case closed.
Sign In or Register to comment.