Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

[sylbry]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

To bring a good point back up that was said earlier:

It's the Hall of FAME, not Morality.

There are reasons why each member of the HOF is in there, it's because they were beyond good at what they did. Pete is the all time hit leader, so its obvious that he was beyond good at hitting right? So he should be in. He didnt cheat to get those hits. He didnt use PED's. He did it right. He just happened to do something on the side that was away from his moments at the plate.

Time heals all wounds.

If you think about it, that is what is happening here. The people who were outraged by Rose initially are losing interest and others who adamantly supported his ban are being replaced by a new generation who only see his performance, not his transgressions.

Makes me wonder how McGwire, Sosa, Clemens and the rest will be perceived in 20 years.

[cohibasmoker]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

Joe Jackson and Pete Rose BOTH paid their dues and they should be allowed into the Hall of Fame.

If the Commissioner is worried about the integrity of the game, who's he kidding? Hey Commissioner, what about the guys who took steroids under your watch?

Jim

[tacprc]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

Yeah, I have a problem with Selig making this decision.

He allowed the 1994 World Series to be canceled.

Note: That act may have doomed the Montreal Expos franchise.

He used his position to have the Milwaukee Brewers -- the team that he owns -- moved to the NL Central division.

He allowed baseballs to be juiced.

He allowed steroids to happen.

[jbsportstuff]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

I'm all for Rose being in the HOF. I hate the fact that he bet on baseball...and also that he lied about it.

However, I watched him play and give his all to the game. He played to give his team the advantage....head first slides, hard slides, sacrificing self. Plus..he's the hit king.

[cjclong]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

The rule was plain, and Rose knew it, that if you bet on baseball you are banned. It seems to me that some compromise could be worked that he is allowed in the HOF where his numbers show he belongs and is continued to be banned from baseball otherwise. I think that would be a fair compromise. I understand rules would have to changed to allow it. I'm not a Rose fan, but I think that would be fair. If he doesn't like that, who cares. Betting nearly destroyed baseball in the past and it can't be allowed by those in the game. As for the steroid crowd. at least they were trying to win. We'll see how they are viewed later.

[redoctober]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

Yeah, I have a problem with Selig making this decision.

He allowed the 1994 World Series to be canceled.

Note: That act may have doomed the Montreal Expos franchise.

He used his position to have the Milwaukee Brewers -- the team that he owns -- moved to the NL Central division.

He allowed baseballs to be juiced.

He allowed steroids to happen.

I cannot agree more in regards to your Bud Selig comments. It continues to be an absolute joke what has happened on his "watch." This is what happens when the owners appoint a fellow owner to be the "commissioner."

An absolute mockery of what a commissioner should be, yet he will not be replaced for years to come.

[suicide_squeeze]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

OK, my turn


Here is what I know about Pete Rose:

He is stubborn as a mule.

He thinks he knows baseball as well if not better than anyone in the game.......an arguable point indeed.

He always gave 110% on the field.

He was one hell of a teammate.

He has a personality like a soapdish.

He was a HIGHLY competitive person.

His competitive nature led him into a spiraling out-of-control gambling habit.

He surrounded himself with trashy friends, which was intended as he needed to do his gambling deeds underground.

He was a ladies man.

He was one of the greatest baseball players to ever play the game.

He has more hits than anyone in the history of the game.

He corked his bats towards the end of his career to gain an advantage he thought he was losing with age.......(this is probably more of a psychological advantage than anything else, tests have proven).

He is anything but politically correct.

He doesn't know the meaning of contrition, being humbled, or accepting someone else's opinion on what he did that was wrong.

He doesn't understand that what he did was the ultimate sin in baseball lore......(and this is because he never had any intent of doing any harm to baseball).

He's not smart enough to do any damage to baseball.



He belongs in the Hall Of Fame..........he has paid enough for his wrongdoings and personality flaws.

[Bobby Jenks]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

He is also selling t-shirts and hoodies on his site. Good thing he apolgized.

The only thing he is sorry about is that he got caught.

Why should he be sorry for anything besides getting caught? He bet his team would win, he never coached his players to throw a game. The Rose-Jackson debate is invalid because Jackson actually may have been involved in the throwing of a game. Giving that the commissioner was a total prick and he was found not-guilty. It may seem wrong in your eyes, but you are looking at the rule aspect of it, not the practicality of the incident. Lane Kiffin boasts about his team with words, Rose boasted about his with money.

[staindsox]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

Why should he be sorry for anything besides getting caught? He bet his team would win, he never coached his players to throw a game. The Rose-Jackson debate is invalid because Jackson actually may have been involved in the throwing of a game. Giving that the commissioner was a total prick and he was found not-guilty. It may seem wrong in your eyes, but you are looking at the rule aspect of it, not the practicality of the incident. Lane Kiffin boasts about his team with words, Rose boasted about his with money.

First of all, Rose signed an agreement to be banned to stop the investigation. John Dowd, who headed it, believes had he been given more time, he would have proven Rose bet against the Reds. Even if we give Pete the benefit of the doubt here, the true problem is that he was the manager. THE REASON HE BET ON HIS OWN TEAM IS HE COULD PLAY A ROLE IN THE OUTCOME. He would be in a position to misuse how he plays his team to cover bets. That means when he uses his pen, rests his players, uses the bench, etc. For instance, he could overuse his bullpen on Monday by using five pitchers to overprotect a win to be sure he wins his bet. Then the pen is shot for Tuesday and Wednesday. Funny, they lose the two games, but Pete didn't bet on them. Even though he didn't make any money off a bet on those two losses, his gambling hurt the team; they just lost two of three.

Let's not forget spreads too. Not only could he misuse his team to overprotect a win, but he could put crummy players into the lineup late in the game to make sure the Reds didn't score too many runs. He basically point shave (run shave in this case) and since he is the manager, nobody would say anything other than a poor decision to use a certain player in a certain situation. He may have even lost some games doing this by trying to keep the game close.

Point is there are numerous ways to damage your team even though it appears your managing to win. It is bad enough that players have done it, but a manager betting on a game his team is playing is still the most criminal act in the game.

[33bird]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

I want to see it in writing where Dowd said that about Rose betting against the Reds. I've read everything about Rose that's available and I've never ever seen that. I'm not saying he didn't say that, but I've never seen or heard it. Please advise.

[staindsox]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

I want to see it in writing where Dowd said that about Rose betting against the Reds. I've read everything about Rose that's available and I've never ever seen that. I'm not saying he didn't say that, but I've never seen or heard it. Please advise.

Just Google it. It's all over the place. Dowd said it in an interview at least five years ago. I believe he later retracted it (to avoid any legal issues). The fact that he even said that on the record in the first place is interesting.

[33bird]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

You're mistaken. Just read that dowd said he thought if he could keep investigating he thought he might be able to prove that, and then later he apologized and said he never should have said that. Even Selig said that Dowd did a thorough investigation and nothing was ever found that he bet against his own team. I'm sure if he did bet against his team Dowd would have found it. Rose was not careful while betting and that was one of the main reasons he was caught. Was interesting thought that Dowd said he never bet on Soto or Gullickson when they pitched and bookies caught on to that and would bet the other side. That's why no principal in the game should bet for or against his team.

[redoctober]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

[quote=33bird;154584]Just read that dowd said he thought if he could keep investigating he thought he might be able to prove that, and then later he apologized and said he never should have said that. quote]


This is the amazing thing to me about the investigation. It REALLY bothers me that a supposedly "independent" investigator would say that he "suspected" anything!! This comment, even years later, shows a clear bias.

That said, it is clear that Rose was involved in betting on Reds games. However -- the investigator says years later that he believed that he could have proven more??? Come on... an investigator should be completely unbiased and should be professional enough to only comment on documented facts.


Either way, yes, Rose bet on baseball. However, IT IS TIME... let it go already and put him in!

[tacprc]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

I have never seen anyone offer any evidence that Rose did anything but try to win each and every Reds game.

[tacprc]

Re: Pete Rose possible reinstatement..

I have never seen anyone offer any clear evidence that Rose corked his bats or, more importantly, used a corked bat in a game.

Granted, this evidence would be hard to find -- short of a Chris Sabo-like bat explosion -- but I doubt that Rose would have done the corking himself so at least one other person must have been involved.

Note: There is nothing wrong with using a corked bat in batting practice - as Sammy Sosa said he did.

I have seen two alleged corked bats in two auctions, but there was no independent confirmation that 1) the bats were corked; 2) the corking dated back to 1985/86; or 3) Rose actually used the bats in a game.

Tommy Gioiosa said that Rose used a corked bat, but I don't believe that he provided any details. Moreover, Gioiosa is a convicted felon and not the most reputable source.