-
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
First, the "cripple" was not black.
Second, the "cripple" called Cobb the N word. Guess only blacks can be offended by being called that word in your world.
Third, The "cripple" was missing one hand and part of another due to an accident. Guess his tongue still worked enough to yell racist things at Cobb though.
Fourth, In the 1920's Cobb leased a hunting preserve ieht over 12,000 acres in MaGruder, GA and built a house on it for a black man, named Uncle Bob Robinson, and his family to live there. They stayed rent free in exchange to watch over the land. Robinson always hunted with Cobb when Cobb visited. They were good friends.
Fifth, Nobody has provided actual proof that Ty Cobb was ever a racist and not one article ever written about the man during his life can be found to say otherwise.
Sixth, The headline of the Independent Journal Jan. 29, 1952 "Ty Cobb, Fiety Diamond Star, Favors Negroes in Baseball"
MENLOPARK (AP)—Tyrus Raymond Cobb, fiery old-time star of the diamond, stepped up to the plate today to clout a verbal home run in favor of Negroes in baseball.
Himself a native of the Deep South, Cobb voiced approval of the recent decision of the Dallas club to use Negro players if they came up to Texas league caliber.
The old Georgia Peach of Detroit Tigers fame was a fighter from the word go during his brilliant playing career. He neither asked for nor gave quarter in 24 tumultuous years in the American League. Time has mellowed the one time firebrand and he views the sport in the pleasant role of a country squire. He spoke emphatically on the subject of Negroes in baseball, however.
"Certainly it is O.K. for them to play," he said, "I see no reason in the world why we shouldn't compete with colored athletes as long as they conduct themselves with politeness and gentility. Let me say also that no white man has the right to be less of a gentleman than a colored man, in my book that goes not only for baseball but in all walks of life.”
"I like them, (Negro race) personally. When I was little I had a colored mammy. I played with colored children."
Seventh, for this mans name to be drug through the mud by uninformed zealots is shameful.
Here is a good article. Read it and learn from it.
Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
The murderer comment depends entirely upon state law. Colorado carries a maximum penalty of 35 years for first degree murder, and Utah has a minimum sentencing guideline of 15 years for murder. By contrast, Pennsylvania has life without parole as a sentence for second degree murder.
In any case, those released from prison are granted release under the parole system or the auspices of new evidence. Those are the guidelines for the crime. Rose's guidelines are a permanent ban that can only be overturned by the Commissioner of Baseball.
For those who insist Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, take solace in the fact that he is in *a* Hall of Fame: The WWE Hall of Fame.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
I have seen many a murder in my field of work do far less time than rose has served in this span. Taking a life does not equate to betting on baseball, I'm a firm believer the punishment should fit the crime. A lifetime ban should be held for people who egregiously break the moral codes of civilization. You meant to tell me rose is banned because he did what millions of citizens do everyday? Bet on sports? Grants he said he bet on his own team but to win! Never to lose! I've heard the arguments about him using players to hedge his bets but come on! Lifetime ban is excessive in his caseComment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
A few things to point out:
1) Rose spent zero days in jail for betting on the Reds. He did go to jail for five months for something else gambling related, but it wasn't for the incidents related to his ban from baseball.
2) The "millions of citizens" that you refer to do not have the capacity nor ability to "directly impact the outcome" of the games that they place wagers one.
3) Rose knew the rule beforehand, knew the consequences, and chose to ignore the rule anyway. Now that he's being punished according to the established rule and punishment, he's saying that he shouldn't be banned.
I really find it distasteful that you liken Rose's ban from baseball to a sentence for murder, but you chose that analogy, so I'll stick to it.
If Rose murdered someone and served the time appointed by the judge, deemed to be on good behavior, and eligible for parole, it would be up to a parole board and the governor of his state (assuming he was incarcerated in a state facility) to determine whether he should be released back into society. He didn't murder anyone.
Rose bet on Cincinnati Reds baseball games, as a player and manager of the Cincinnati Reds. The penalty for such an action is a permanent ban from the game. Since he agreed to a ban, in lieu of a full investigation, a clause was included that Rose is eligible to petition the Commissioner of Baseball for reinstatement. He's filed two such petitions. Neither time has the Commissioner at the time determined Rose should be reinstated. If Selig doesn't allow Rose back into baseball, it will be up to the Rob Manfred (the next Commissioner) to read Rose's petition and decide whether to accept it or not.
The reality is that the clause was likely included in the agreement to allow Rose to be reinstated, should new evidence support his claims of innocence. Unfortunately for Rose, his book admitted to gambling on games, not only as the Reds manager, but also during his time as a player. It's unlikely that the admission a decade ago helped his cause, since he actually admitted to a something (betting as a player) that was often cited by fans as a defense ("Rose never bet on games while he played!") of his lower degree of guilt.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
I'm not the judge jury or executioner In this case. We can agree to disagree, rose is the most prolific base hitter in mlb history. He deserves to be in the hall biased on this Merritt alone. My line of work has seem a lot of people get away with doing a lot worse. It is what it is but in my opinion rose is hof worthy after serving his ban for over 20 years.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
I believe Rose will get in the HOF eventually.
I believe it will be after his death.
That is the best MLB will do for him I believe. I don't think they will ever put him in while he is alive because that would let him claim the victory. He insulted too many people with his arrogance for the many years he denied doing it before finally admitting to it in his book.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
<a href="<iframe width=" 560"="" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/GYEGUzV-tOs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="">"><a href="<iframe width=" 560"="" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/GYEGUzV-tOs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="">Comment
-
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
A large part of the law is based upon the concept of precedent. The precedent for Rose's infraction is limited, but clear:
1943 William B Cox was banned for life for betting on his own team
That's the only precedent of an individual being banned singularly for betting on his own team. To this day, Cox has never been reinstated, so the precedent facing Rose is 71 years and counting.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
Pete Rose was very much a student of baseball history. He knew who the great players were, their milestones, and he took great pride in passing many of those players, ultimately passing Cobb's hit total.
He knew all about the 1919 Black Sox and their permanent ban from baseball. He knew Buck Weaver was banned for life for simply knowing about gambling but not reporting it. He knew Joe Jackson was banned even though he hit .375 in that Series.
I have read that Major League ballplayers are continually reminded of the very strict, uncompromising rules against gambling, including signs in locker rooms, and so on. Pete Rose knew that gambling was a very serious offense in the eyes of Baseball.
And... he did it anyway, many many times, over many seasons. He knew the rules very well, he knew the consequences very well, and he did it anyway. Now, he doesn't think HE should be subject to the consequences of his actions because he is Pete Rose and he has 4,200+ base hits.
If you don't like the fact Pete Rose is not in the Hall of Fame, blame one person and one thing: Pete Rose and his arrogance.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
Yes, he deserves to go in the hall for his play. When they make his plaque they need to add a line at the end saying he was banned from baseball for betting while as a manager.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
Correction. Per his own book, he bet on games while he played, as well. His stats may deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, but his permanent ban from the game prevents him from being enshrined until an MLB Commissioner agrees to lift the ban.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
With the HOF being so watered down with good but not great players I don't think it makes much difference anymore.
I would have to believe that more and more fans think the HOF is becoming less and less relevant.Comment
-
Re: Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page
+1. Any "Hall of Fame" inductee ought to be one of the very best of the best - not just a popular player with pretty good stats. I believe the notion that some folks seem to have gotten - that two or three players have to go into the Hall every year or "something is wrong" - has contributed to the lowered standards and decreased fan interest. Hey, everybody loves a good ceremony, with a dose of nostalgia, and, yeah, it feels good to publicly honor some guy whom you used to love to watch play The Game...but succumbing to all that has increasingly turned the Hall of Fame into the Hall of I-Played-Too!Jeff
godwulf1@cox.netComment
Tweet
Comment