Pete Rose in Hall of Fame

"While morally reprehensible, Rose's actions did not affect anyone in the sense that aside from his unwritten responsibility to be held to a certain standard of honor, it was a "victimless" crime. As long as he played (and managed) to win and bet on that alone."




Here is the problem with a manager who is actively betting on his own team.

Does it cloud his judgment when he bets on his team them to win? Does he then make managerial decisions in the best interest of the team, or to win his bets?

Does it signal to the bookies when he decides one day not to bet on his team to win? A not bet is in a way, a bet on his team to lose.

I think you fail to see the impact of a manager actively and addictively betting on games, how that can influence his decision making, how he could go deeply in debt due to the habit, and then fall prey to fixing a game to get even, or under pressure from the bookies may fix a game, etc.

Talk to members of G.A. and get their opinion on Rose and his perpetual lying, unwillingness to give up gambling, etc. and see if it effected only Rose.

It tarnishes baseball, and for that reason alone a case can and will be made for him to not get in the hall.
 
Quote from ArchAngel:

Probably technically correct in some states, but has anyone been prosecuted and found guilty of battery for spitting on anyone?

Will grant you that it doesn't matter if technically it's on the books it's a crime, just curious if you know of any prosecutor that would waste tax payer dollars litigating something like that.

But no - spitting on an ump is NOT worse than using drugs or betting.

Anyway, here's the salient issue though - the league rules and EVERY contract in baseball (that means ALL of the contracts that Rose signed) explicitly say that betting on baseball will result in a permanent ban from baseball.

That section of the league rules is also posted prominently in EVERY dugout and locker room. That ban even extends to baseball related events - Pete Rose couldn't even be included in an event held at an Atlanta game that was to honor various former players without first obtaining special permission because of his ban.

There is no such rule/contract clause regarding drug use or other activities. An inequity? Absolutely. Should it be corrected? Absolutely. Not by waiving a magic wand and ignoring Rose's flagrant disregard for baseballs' cardinal rule but by filling the gap and instituting similar lifetime bans of those caught using illegal drugs or steroids, on field battery,
More...

I didnt say you would be prosecuted, I said it would land you in jail ( as in you can most definitetly get arrested ).... and you are hand picking what i am saying...there is most definitely a rule agaisnt STERIODS ( in every sport )..im sure it is posted along side the betting rule ( i have no idea )...there is most definietly a rule agasint using a corked bat ....these help you with ur numbers; betting doesnt...how can you argue these are not as worse...:confused:

spitting on another individual on the playing field while kids and fans are enjoying a game is very degrading to that individual...sorry you feel that rose betting for his team is worse than that...
 
What Alomar did had no direct inflence over that game, nor the outcome of other games, as it was a one time incident.

Rose bet on games for a long time as a manager, and likley as a player.

We don't know that he did or did not fix a game or game, but I wouldn't put it past him.

Look at his track record: He is a liar, a compulsive gambler, and a felon.

Why would we believe him when he says "I didn't fix a game."

There is a difference between actions impacting the sport and its integrity as a whole in the way Rose did, and a one on one personal conflict like Alomar and an umpire.

The steroid rule is not the same as the gambling rule.


Quote from ElCubano:

I didnt say you would be prosecuted, I said it would land you in jail ( as in you can most definitetly get arrested ).... and you are hand picking what i am saying...there is most definitely a rule agaisnt STERIODS ( in every sport )..im sure it is posted along side the betting rule ( i have no idea )...there is most definietly a rule agasint using a corked bat ....these help you with ur numbers; betting doesnt...how can you argue these are not as worse...:confused:

spitting on another individual on the playing field while kids and fans are enjoying a game is very degrading to that individual...sorry you feel that rose betting for his team is worse than that...
More...
 
Quote from ARogueTrader:


The steroid rule is not the same as the gambling rule.
More...

got ya.....it may not be the same punishment, but it does affect the outcome of the game thats why there are rules agsint it....to think an individual known to use a corked bat in an actual game ( How many games will never be known ) will one day be in the hall of fame.....This not only affects the game it affects his numbers in getting into the HALL OF FAME.....once again the hall of fame is about ur numbers and PETE has the numbers and his betting as a manager didnt help his numbers...he worked his ass off to get them....you guys are trying to debate his integrity or morals...CAN ANYONE COME FOWARD and say he didnt have the numbers to make the HALL??
 
There are other players (who didn't break the league's long standing cardinal rule) that aren't in the Hall even though they certainly have the numbers to belong there, e.g., Ron Santo.

And how do you know that he didn't bet on baseball while he was a player? He's had such a long history of gambling, it's impossible to presume otherwise at this point.

Certainly you're not taking his word for it are you? Afterall, he has such a stellar track record of telling the truth!!
 
Quote from ArchAngel:

There are other players (who didn't break the league's long standing cardinal rule) that aren't in the Hall even though they certainly have the numbers to belong there, e.g., Ron Santo.

And how do you know that he didn't bet on baseball while he was a player? He's had such a long history of gambling, it's impossible to presume otherwise at this point.

Certainly you're not taking his word for it are you? Afterall, he has such a stellar track record of telling the truth!!
More...

you can say that about anything...How long has Sosa been using a corked bat and he most certainly looks like he has used or is using steriods ( im not taking his word; he actually got caught using the bat )....my point is betting most certainly didnt help ROSE obtain his numbers; he got them by being a great player ( hence the reason he should be allowed in the HALL)...If Sammy a person that has been caught outright cheating has been given a chance why not ROSE....ROSE bet on the game and u can assume anything u want as far as him throwing the game or not...SOSA got caught and one day may in fact have his name in the HALL how can his home run record stand after being caught with a corked bat ....now now, that doesnt seem right to me..Does it to you???
 
Again the problem is this:

We don't know if Pete was betting on games as a player, and possible doing what he could to fix the outcome.

He could have easily as a player in a tight situation in a meaningless game helped to change the outcome of a game where he had bet against his own team.

He has proven that he is not to be trusted, and that he is unwilling to stop gambling.

Quote from ElCubano:

you can say that about anything...How long has Sosa been using a corked bat and he most certainly looks like he has used or is using steriods ( im not taking his word; he actually got caught using the bat )....my point is betting most certainly didnt help ROSE obtain his numbers; he got them by being a great player ( hence the reason he should be allowed in the HALL)...If Sammy a person that has been caught outright cheating has been given a chance why not ROSE....ROSE bet on the game and u can assume anything u want as far as him throwing the game or not...SOSA got caught and one day may in fact have his name in the HALL how can his home run record stand after being caught with a corked bat ....now now, that doesnt seem right to me..Does it to you???
More...
 
Quote from ARogueTrader:

Again the problem is this:

We don't know if Pete was betting on games as a player, and possible doing what he could to fix the outcome.

He could have easily as a player in a tight situation in a meaningless game helped to change the outcome of a game where he had bet against his own team.

He has proven that he is not to be trusted, and that he is unwilling to stop gambling.
More...

so we are banning a guy that may have or may have not cheated; and we may allow another guy that has cheated to better his number....
 
Is Sosa the issue, or is Pete?

Quote from ElCubano:

so we are banning a guy that may have or may have not cheated; and we may allow another guy that has cheated to better his number....
More...
 
Quote from ARogueTrader:

Is Sosa the issue, or is Pete?
More...


None of them is the issue the issue is WHO GETS INTO THE HALL AND FOR WHAT REASONS....it cant be ok for one and not the other...does this make sense to you???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top