Commissioner Bud Selig is considering lifting Pete Rose's lifetime baseball ban. Should he?
Pete Rose should be reinstated...the old lifetime ban is far beyond the punishment meted out by federal courts. Gambling is an addiction and should be recognized as such by baseball. How many times have some players used drugs and still were allowed to reenter baseball? This is America--how about a second chance!!
Chuck
Newburgh, IN
#1 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:19 PM EDTSelig is the worst... only in baseball would they consider ending a lifetime ban.
#2 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:23 PM EDTSelig is the worst... only in baseball would they consider ending a lifetime ban.
It depends. My friend Rick was banned for life from a bar in San Diego at least half a dozen times.
Gambling is not illegal in most states. What should he apologize for? As long as he bet on the Reds to win (that was his job as manager) and not lose, where is the wrongdoing or even perceived wrongoing? Granted wasn't the smartest thing he's done because he should have realized what the reaction would be when it got out, but come on - lots of people in and out of the game have done much worse (crimes, steroid use, etc). Bring Pete back!
#3 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:23 PM EDTAs long as he bet on the Reds to win (that was his job as manager) and not lose, where is the wrongdoing or even perceived wrongoing?
Betting on baseball games by active players, coaches, or managers is in violation of the major league constitution's misconduct clause. Betting on games (other than one's own team) brings a one-year suspension; betting on one's own team brings a lifetime suspension.
Players could easily get into debt with a bookie and be tempted to throw games in order to square accounts with said bookie. Pete Rose is known to have sold at least 20 bats with the promise that each was the one he hit 4192 with. He did this in order to make money to repay gambling debts.
There are plenty of sports to bet on (horses are popular) without a player betting on his own sport. It's against the rules, and no player is bigger than the game. Pete Rose thought he was, and that's what got him into trouble.
Gambling is an addiction as is alcoholism and is physical/emotional. Rose bet on the game not the players records. Using steroids is a choice to deliberately cheat the other players and long standing statistics. Steroids have been harder to catch and some players will get through who are undeserving.
I love the legal beagles that excuse the cheating because there were no written rules against steroids, growth hormone and the rest. The problem is there ARE laws that these cheaters broke to get an "edge" on their fellow players. They knew then and know now it was unfair. If they did not believe so, they would simply say that they did it because it was not "against the rules." You cannot have it both ways. If they try to hide the truth, they know they are CHEATERS. None of Pete Roses actions changed the outcome of any game. ALL of the actions of Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds and the rest of the drug hounds DID change the outcome of MANY games.
More fallout from the doping catastrophe. The bar is lowering. Hey, he may have gambled, but at least his numbers as a player are clean and legit.
#4 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:24 PM EDTWith all of the performance enhancing drugs in baseball inflating numbers on potential future (and maybe current?) Hall of Famers that TRULY cheated the game, the ban was ridiculous in the first place. However, I understand punishment for this, but a lifetime ban on someone who, as a player, did not cheat the game? I certainly hope Mr. Selig lifts the ban on one of the best players ever, whose records, that were set without PEDs, may never be broken. I would like to thank Mr, Selig for the consideration.
#5 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:27 PM EDTIf Pete Rose is reinstated, then Mr. Selig should reinstate the "Black Sox 8" (which includes Shoeless Joe Jackson). Rose did more to harm the spirit and game of baseball than the eight players of the Chicago White Sox who were banned when evidence at the time did not support the allegation that they were "fixing" the 1919 World Series.
#6 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:35 PM EDTBut the difference was the Black Sox 8 threw the games. Anybody who fixes the games should be ban from baseball.
#4: At least, your comments have some basis in logic. #2 bozo has no clue whatsoever since gambling is illegal in most states and has no sense of ethics either (a lawyer?). #3 has even less of a clue. Bottom line is that Pete did himself in by ignoring MLB rules.
Steriods were not against MLB rules when most "violaters" were outed and scorned. Pete Rose may have been one of the finest players of MLB history. As a "small ball" fan, I loved the way he played. But, as a manager, Rose broke the league rules governing gambling and forever cast a dark fog over his previous legacy. And then he denied, lied and lied over and over again. Even after all the evidence was in and he was banned, he refused to admit his guilt for more than 15 years. Pete's arrogance and ego were his own worst enemies as he demanded his reinstatement. In the end, he agreed to his status as permanently ineligible in return for the league's agreement to not continue its investigation into his his gambling charges and possible mob contacts. He could request reinstatement after one year. That's the bone they (MLB) threw to the dog (Rose).
If Bud Selig bases his decision on good sense and a sincere respect for the rules of the game and its history, he must act on the reinstatement of "Shoeless Joe" Jackson as his first move. Joe's Black Sox teammates should still be in the same limbo as Pete. Most baseball historians agree that the illiliterate Joe was not complicit with his teammates as they threw the 1919 World Series. Considering that he batted .375 with 12 hits, made no errors and even threw a runner out at home, Jackson's production should have been proof enough that he was not involved. Selig should study Jackson's case and do right by him before considering the fate of Pete Rose.
Think about this, Bud!! Joe Jackson died 30 years after KM Landis, the first baseball tyrant, declared the Black Sox permanently ineligible even though a court of law found them not guilty. Joe knew that he was innocent of the charges and had to live out his life with that darkness hanging over him.
Do the right thing, Bud. Reinstate Shoeless Joe and fast track his admission into the HOF. His 12 year lifetime .356 BA, which is third highest in MLB history, alone qualifies him. If evidence that he was trying to warn the idiot Comiskey about the Black Sox plot proves to be correct, his legacy and family should be remunerated by MLB.
On the other hand, Pete was caught gambling red handed. His failure to come clean delayed his official banishment until August 1989. Even in admitting his wrongdoing, Rose showed no remorse. If he had shown some respect for everybody's intelligence by admitting that he illegally gambled from the outset, he may not have ruined his legacy.
So, Bud! Which lesson do you want to give to our nation's youth concerning ethics in our national pasttime? Can MLB and America's baseball fans accept that it's OK to knowingly break established MLB rules against gambling? The essence of any sport is in fair play. Surely Pete's advocates will say that he played with honor, but fail to recognize how much more important a baseball team's manager is than any one player. He's the leader and role model for a few dozen players on his team's roster. Pete Rose failed miserably in his capacity as the Reds' manager because he allowed his gambling addiction to soil his and the team's reputation.
Since I respect Hank Aaron and the other Hall of Famers that have been speaking up on Pete's behalf, I would suggest that a committee of HOFers still alive, such as Hank, Stan Musial, Frank & Brooks Robinson, etc. be formed by MLB that could study and make recommendations concerning cases such as Jackson's and ultimately, Rose's.
This committee could also become the Commissioner's vehicle to handle the long term effects of the steriod and doping era. If you try to do this alone, Bud, I wouldn't want to be you! Major League Baseball will go on whether you do something or not. But when issues like this confront the respectability of the sport, the man in power will form his legacy by what he does rather than what he does not do.
If you need help, my name is logged in on Newsvine.
Tell the IRS it's a crime, they get their tax money on winnings. Put Petey in the Hall!!! He wasn't on the juice.
#7 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:43 PM EDTI saw Pete last Spring in Las Vegas signing autographs. I should say "selling" autographs. He was selling baseballs that said "I admit that I gambled on baseball." I have always been against reinstating him to the HOF. I may be mellowing out as I get older and have actually seen the man in person. He was the best overall baseball player I ever saw, and I've been watching baseball since the early 60's.
He did a terrible thing. He has admitted it several times and still admits it every time he sells one of those baseballs. I feel he has paid his debt and suffered the shame and embarassment long enough. I feel we should take the high road and let the man into the HOF. I am sure he will be more appreciative than anyone can imagine.
Never mind making him apologize AGAIN publicly. Give the man some dignity.
#8 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:44 PM EDTI grew up thinking Rose was a god. It broke my heart when I found out he bet on baseball. And I still think he should be in the Hall. He earned it.
#9 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:55 PM EDTIt is long past due. Pete Rose absolutely deserves to be reinstated. What he did was wrong, no doubt, however, pails in respect to the outrageous actions of players over the past few years. And worse yet, the owners and promoters turning a blind eye.
Welcome back Charlie Hustle! You deserve to be in Cooperstown.
#10 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:58 PM EDTPut the man where he belongs: The Baseball Hall of Fame. To all the moralistic, unforgiving individuals who would deny him: check your closets and count the bones. We have all sinned. Rose was a magnificent player, just as Roger Maris was, and both belong in the BHF.
#11 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:10 PM EDTI have been saying for years that there is a good solution. Allow him to be enshrined with a plaque and descriptions of his on field feats. Put a sentence in like,.... banned from the game for placing bets on baseball while a manager. The penalty would be for him to not be allowed to partake in an induction ceremony. Simply hang his plaque with no fanfare, no speeches and no special ceremony.
#12 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:15 PM EDTThe Black Sox scandal is an entirely seperate issue. Those guys admitted to taking money from a known gambler. Some of the players got mad because he didn't pay the full amount and later said that they decided to not "throw" the rest of the series. The facts are, they accepted money and purposfully altered their performances in some of the earlier games in the series to cause the White Sox to lose. Maybe that would add another layer to the re-enstatement process. For me personally ...Would Joe Jackson be in the HOF if he would never have participated in the scandal? If so then I would be for allowing him, or any of the others, to be enshrined as great players but without the traditional ceremonies.
Pete Rose suffers from a disease just like alcoholism or drug abuse. Without naming names, there are alcoholics and drug addicts in the hall of fame. I have to think Pete Rose, being the competitor he is, did not bet against his team. He was not charged with cheating, a criminal offense in Ohio, but with tax evasion.
As demonized as Pete Rose has been made, he was an outstanding baseball player and one who came from one of the poorest communities in Cincinnati. He was not exceptional, but his work ethic was. He truly is a next door neighbor success story and how easily it is to lose it all by making bad choices. America's youth need to hear the story. Besides, he never bet on baseball while he played. He holds the record for most career hits. Possibly a record that may never be broken. He deserves to be in the hall of fame.
Yes, he bet on baseball, but those who think he's the only one who bet on baseball better are gullable. Mr. Rose isn't the smartest person in the world and subsequently was caught. God had a plan for Mr. Rose and the plan probably save this American icon's life.
#13 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:15 PM EDTThe ability to forgive is an important characteristic of a virtuous person. People that commit violent crimes get less punishment that Pete has received. Serving 20 years of a lifetime ban seems reasonable.
Let Pete back into baseball and let him throw out the first pitch at the first Phillies home game in this years World Series.
#15 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:26 PM EDTI say no because "Charlie Hustle" hustled the fans for years -- going all out when he had money on the game. Some will say you don't know that for sure -- and that is exactly the point -- you don't know! And NO, he doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt because it is a fact that he did gamble on games he played in. He should serve as an example for all future "Hall of Famers".
#16 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:32 PM EDTMy you seem angry. Pete Rose did mess up, but Ty Cobb messed up way more. Ruth has some issues as well. Could you deny either the hall of fame? Of course not. There are many others who deserve to be in the hall of fame as well. Pete Rose is not a likeable character, but he didn't cheat to get the most career hits. We haven't banned McGuire, Bonds, Palmero, etc. They cheated and caused the outcome of games to be swayed due to their juicing. Careful how thee judge, lest ye be judged.
The lifetime ban is overly harsh and ridiculous. Rose should be in the hall of fame. He was hands-down the hardest working baseball player ever. The greatest injustice here is denying him entry in the HOF for something he did after his playing days were over.
#17 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:34 PM EDTThere is a sign in every locker room that states gambling is prohibited and clearly states what the penalties are. Pete Rose new what he was doing was wrong by baseball standards and did it anyway. He should be banned from baseball and NEVER be enshrined in the Hall of Fame. We should live by the rules and the Commisioner should have the courage and integrity to stand firm just as every Commisioner has done before him. If rose gets in then Buck Weaver should be aquited! NO TO ROSE IN THE HOF
#18 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:35 PM EDTRose SHOULD be reinstated. The released information indicates he bet FOR the Reds not against. Wasn't that his job as manager... to WIN games??? If he had bet AGAINST the Reds and had influence on them losing that would be a different story altogether.
#19 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:37 PM EDTwhich part of your sentence "...HE BET..." are you missing???
The rule is in place so that there can be no conjecture. It's assumed, by default, that if one bets, they maintain a bias and are throwing games.
So then, we'll compund our error.
We have to start somewhere... or, in this case, at least try to maintain some integrity.
juicing and betting are mutually exclusive. Another day, another conversation. Tipping signs and betting... make every ticket holder look like a fool.
If Pete would show some contrition, on his own and not forced, then he should be considered for reinstatement. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like he'll ever do it without coercion.
#20 - Mon Jul 27, 2009 1:43 PM EDTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Saving...
I think that Pete Rose should be re-instated, but, with the proviso that he admit everything, apologize and PSA's against gambling.