Results 11 to 20 of 32
Thread: Pete Rose and HOF
Hybrid View
-
04-22-2015, 04:03 PM #1
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Posts
- 1,016
Re: Pete Rose and HOF
When Manfred mentioned that in his interview regarding Rose, the point was supposed to be that it's ALWAYS up to the Hall whom they choose to accept into their fraternity. It was the HOF's choice in 1991 to not admit anyone on the permanently ineligible list. It was their way of saying "Our hands our tied (on Rose)"... even if it was their own bindings that held them.
I'll always be in the apparent minority on this topic, but I think that's moreso because those who want Rose in are more passionate about it than those who don't think he should be.
Rose repeatedly and arrogantly violated and ignored Rule 21 Misconduct Section:
(d) BETTING ON BALL GAMES. Any player, umpire, or club official or
employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in
connection with which the bettor has no duty to perform shall be declared
ineligible for one year.
Any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall
bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which
the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible.
In 2007, Rose admitted that he gambled on the game and that the report prepared by John Dowd was entirely accurate. This was after years of defamatory remarks made against Dowd.
Much like how Ryan Braun got someone fired by claiming the positive test was a result of operator mishandling of the specimen, Rose did his best to discredit Dowd in the public space.
The biggest issue I have with individuals who say Rose "only be on the Reds to win," I really hope they'll take the time to read this piece from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/sp...hass.html?_r=0
Rose didn't bet on the Reds "every night," as he claimed. Instead, he selectively and seemingly systematically, bet on the Reds to win those games that he had confidence in them to win.
Rose deserves to be permanently banned from the game. If the HOF decides to admit Rose, that's their decision to make. If the HOF continues to force MLB's hand, MLB should respond as it always has: in the ongoing ban of Peter Edward Rose Sr for gambling on a team that he played for and managed.
-
04-22-2015, 05:33 PM #2
- Join Date
- Sep 2012
- Posts
- 1,036
Re: Pete Rose and HOF
The All Time Hits leader should be in the Hall of Fame as a player.
-
04-23-2015, 11:02 AM #3
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Posts
- 224
Re: Pete Rose and HOF
Chronic gambling is an addiction, a disease similar to alcoholism. It should be looked at as a disease that has gone untreated rather than an intentional disobedience to the rules. The Black Sox gambling was intentional and not an addiction. Steroid use is intentional and not an addiction.
-
04-23-2015, 05:28 PM #4
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Posts
- 1,016
Re: Pete Rose and HOF
As there are today, there were other alternatives to gambling on one's own team. Even if one argued that baseball was the only major sport to bet on during the months between the end of the NHL and start of the NFL seasons, a gambling addiction is more of an excuse than a reason: Rose didn't need to bet on the Reds. That was a choice. He didn't need to bet on baseball . That was also a choice.
If you're going to claim that gambling addiction works similar to alcoholism, I offer an anecdote as a comparison:
In 2006, I was at a local wine/cheese bar. The gentleman next to me decided to strike up a conversation based upon my drink of choice (Glenlivet 15 that night). He told me that his doctor told him that he should give up alcohol altogether, but knowing that it would never happen, the doctor told him to drink gin instead of whisky, since he had developed major liver problems.
The reason for that anecdote is that, while someone with a gambling addiction, much like an alcoholic, may have some physiological or psychological need to wager on events, that need doesn't mandate that the wagers always are represented by specific sports or events. Those with gambling addictions will place wagers on ANYTHING. Rose knew that betting on baseball games would lead to suspension, and betting on games he influenced would lead to a permanent ban from the game. He could have bet on how many fans would come through the gates, he could have bet on the number of sunflower husks on the ground by the fifth inning, he could have bet on the number of birds to fly close enough to players to influence their positioning (player moves to avoid bird or flails their arms to prevent being "attacked"), etc.
The things Rose could have wagered on that wouldn't have gotten him banned from the game are likely innumerable, but he had to bet on the one thing that would lead to being banned, if caught: Peter Edward Rose Sr bet on baseball games in which he was both a manager and (sometimes) a player.
-
04-24-2015, 04:46 AM #5
Re: Pete Rose and HOF
Regards, Tony
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
~I'm sorry, I can't hear you....my World Series Ring is making too much NOISE! - Alex Rodriguez~
-
04-24-2015, 06:27 AM #6
Re: Pete Rose and HOF
Regards, Tony
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
~I'm sorry, I can't hear you....my World Series Ring is making too much NOISE! - Alex Rodriguez~
-
08-02-2015, 11:34 PM #7
Re: Pete Rose and HOF
He belongs in the HOF but put a paragraph on his plaque saying what he did and why he is banned from baseball.