Should Pete Rose be reinstated?

Printable View

09-20-2006, 07:24 AM
Bloodline666

Should Pete Rose be reinstated?

We all know the controversy that's been cooking since 1989/1990-ish, when Pete Rose was permanently banned from Baseball for gambling.

And to those who are scratching their heads as to why betting on baseball games results in a lifetime ban from the sport, the reason why is because gamblers fixed the 1919 World Series by basically bribing 8 Chicago White Sox players with loads of money to throw the 1919 World Series.

But one must realize: back in those days, gamblers were basically crooks. Today's gamblers are nothing compared to what they were back then. The reason: Today, gambling's more legal now than it was back in 1919.

Also, another related controversy is whether or not he should be in the Hall of Fame. He is the all-time hits leader, but the fact that he is banned from baseball for gambling is what's keeping him out of the Hall of Fame. Should he be in the Hall of Fame?
09-20-2006, 07:28 AM
fantasyjunkie

no , he should not be reinstated.
09-20-2006, 07:36 AM
eestlinc

pete rose can rot in hell, he should not be reinstated, but he should be in the hall of fame with a big display about his gambling as well as his amazing baseball accomplishments.
09-20-2006, 04:02 PM
Ender

Should be in

It makes sense that Major League Baseball (C) would want to keep him as far away from their sport as possible. I don't blame them for that. I frankly don't want him anywhere near baseball at any level.

On the other hand, the baseball hall of fame in Cooperstown is not called the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame, but rather the National Baseball Hall of Fame and is officially operated by private interests (the same goes for the basketball hall of fame which is not officially an NBA body). MLB saw the opportunity to promote the game by working in cooperation with the Hall of Fame, but it does not strictly own or run it. The Hall of Fame has agreed to not induct anyone who has been banned by MLB, but that decision is completely arbitrary, and IMHO at odds with their motto: "Preserving History, Honoring Excellence, Connecting Generations".

From that standpoint, Pete Rose IMO, should definitely be allowed in. He is the all-time hits leader, was one of the game's great competitors, and most importantly is part of the history of the game, not just because of his gambling, but because he played for 24 seasons (that's a little less than 1/4 of MLBs entire history!), 8 playoff teams, 6 of whom made it to the world series, 3 of which won it all, including Cincinnati's famous "Big Red Machine" of the 70s, was an All-Star 18! times, won three batting championships, played more career games than anyone in history, and much more. Furthermore, he is a bridge between my generation and my father's, a guy admired by fans my father's age because of his skill and the way he played the game, and whom I was able to see and appreciate at the end of his career. So in terms of "Preserving History, Honoring Excellence, Connecting Generations" the one black mark against "excellence" should in no way take away from the fact that in every other way he explempifies everything the Hall of Fame claims to be about.
09-20-2006, 05:48 PM
Rainecloud

No; he should sign a contract with World Wrestling Entertainment.

He is in their Hall of Fame, after all. Pfft.
09-20-2006, 06:24 PM
Kirobaito

I believe that he should. That's all I'm going to say.
09-21-2006, 04:50 AM
Bloodline666

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rainecloud

No; he should sign a contract with World Wrestling Entertainment.

He is in their Hall of Fame, after all. Pfft.

Pete Rose vs. Kane! WrestleMania 23! BOOK IT! :D
09-21-2006, 05:02 AM
fire_of_avalon

If you're going to denote what he did wrong and make it abundantly clear that the only reason he's in there is because a lot of people complained about it, sure.

I don't understand what the big deal is. If he hand't been such a disgrace to the sport, there would be no question of whether or not he should be a Hall of Famer. Because he is a disgrace, one has to consider if that type of behavior should be permissable in such a venerated position.
09-21-2006, 06:36 AM
PeTeRL90

Why do steroid users get second chances, but not Petey?

Isn't steroid use worse than gambling?
09-21-2006, 06:46 AM
eestlinc

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeTeRL90

Isn't steroid use worse than gambling?

no, for the reason I stated above. He should still be int he hall of fame, though. just put a big display about his failure and shame as well, as an example to all who come after showing the downfall of a great athlete.
09-21-2006, 06:51 AM
PeTeRL90

Oh there's no doubt that he should be in the Hall of Fame. After all, if I remember correctly, they elect you into the Hall for what you do ON the field, not off.
09-21-2006, 06:52 AM
eestlinc

of course Shoeles Joe Jackson isn't in the Hall of Fame either. there is the argument that gambling compromises the very credibility of the game and baseball simply wants to erase all evidence of gamblers because it is such a shame.
09-21-2006, 07:05 AM
Bloodline666

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeTeRL90

Why do steroid users get second chances, but not Petey?

Isn't steroid use worse than gambling?

Actually, steroid use IS worse than gambling. With steroid use, there is no question that cheating is involved. Gambling, on the other hand, is subjective. I mean, sure, if Pete Rose bet AGAINST his own team, it would be easy for him to jeopardize the integrity of the sport by throwing games and/or playoff series. But he admitted to betting IN FAVOR of his team, so I don't see how he could cheat in the games he's betting on. And besides, this was before the homers started skyrocketting at an alarming pace. Not to mention, pulling a slot machine, placing down chips in a game of Poker, buying a lottery ticket have nothing to do with sports, period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeTeRL90

Oh there's no doubt that he should be in the Hall of Fame. After all, if I remember correctly, they elect you into the Hall for what you do ON the field, not off.

You are exactly right. And it is for this reason alone that I even brought up this poll to begin with.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eestlinc

of course Shoeles Joe Jackson isn't in the Hall of Fame either. there is the argument that gambling compromises the very credibility of the game and baseball simply wants to erase all evidence of gamblers because it is such a shame.

Ahh...the infamous Black Sox scandal that is the 1919 World Series...He has the stats to make the Hall of Fame. But alas, a lifetime ban for his role in throwing the 1919 World Series. He denied his involvement up until his death, when he spoke the following:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoeless Joe Jackson

I'm about to face the greatest umpire of all, and He knows I am innocent.

But wait...he was banned for life, wasn't he? That means he's banned from baseball for the rest of his life, doesn't it? He's dead, isn't he? That means...his ban from baseball is OVER!

And besides, the Baseball Hall of Fame's new rule in 1991 that no one banned for life would be inducted was made retroactive. Pete Rose, Shoeless Joe Jackson, etc. were banned for life BEFORE that new rule was established
09-21-2006, 07:31 AM
eestlinc

betting on baseball games while you are a palyer, manager, or owner is the worst you can do. even if Pete Rose only ever bet on his own team, any day he decided not to bet on his own team would be a pretty good indication to bookies that he thought his team would lose that day. Besides, even if he really was gambling just on other sports with the most innocent intentions, as a manager of a pro baseball team if his losses start to accumulate (as they almost always do) suddenly a pro manager finds himself beholden to bookies. Say he can't pay off and the bookie says "well, if you lose the next three games I'll forgive the debt." The moment anyone ina position to control baseball games begins gambling the entire integrity of the competition is called into question. You never know whether the game is being thrown or not.

With steroids people are cheating, but they are only trying to get an extra advantage through illegal means. People get advantages through legal means all the time and that is perfectly normal. Albert Pujols or Tony Gwynn hit better than almost everyone else because they study their swings and make minute refinements. Most players are unwillin to study to such a degree. So Barry Bonds takes steroids to gain an advantage, another thing others are unwilling to do. What Barry "might have done" is shameful and illegal and will cost him in the long run, but you dont lose faith in the fact that the Giants are always trying to win because of it. Stroids make your stats suspect and untrustworthy, but the game is still a competition to be the best. Once teams or players start throwing games for money then the sport is no better than scripted events like pro wrestling or tv sitcoms.

In all locker rooms the number one rule posted is NO GAMBLING. every player, manager, trainer, owner knows that rule. It is the one thing you can do that can never be forgiven. All involved know this. Pete Rose chose his path for whatever reason but with the full knowledge that if he got caught he would be banished forever. Maybe he thought he would be forgiven, or never caught, but he took that chance and he should pay the price.