Just to see where you stand....what is worse

[sturg1dj]

for me its betting....for me it could potentially make you try to lose, where as cheating is bad, its still an attempt to win

[StanTheMan]

Well, baseball's own punishments state that Gambling is the worst...

You don't get a lifetime ban for stealing signs or corking your bat.

There is not a sign in every major league clubhouse linking anything to an instant lifetime ban, except for the gambling one.

You also don't get a 50 game suspension for gambling, like you do for PED's... it is lifetime ban instantly for gambling. If PED's happened before 1919 it might not be this way, but it is. So many reasons...... I voted Gambling worst.

[cardsfanatic]

I assume you're asking for our opinions and not asking us to recite the MLB rulebook. To me, it depends on the gambling infraction. If the player is betting on his team to win then I don't really have an issue with it. If he's betting against his team and rigging games then he deserves his ban and I have no pity for him.

Since that's not in the options I won't vote. As I don't like any of the choices.

[StanTheMan]

I assume you're asking for our opinions and not asking us to recite the MLB rulebook. To me, it depends on the gambling infraction. If the player is betting on his team to win then I don't really have an issue with it. If he's betting against his team and rigging games then he deserves his ban and I have no pity for him.

Since that's not in the options I won't vote. As I don't like any of the choices.

I don't know about that fanatic.....

Betting on your team EVERY game, and for the SAME amount, could even remotely be considered to be an act which would not alter your play/managing/though process etc.

And even that could be argued... say, if you get in the hole for $100,000 and start a pitcher out of order, plunk an opposing batter for no reasons other than your wager that night, etc. Only if you win one, lose one, win one lose one, and you never get UP or DOWN more than one bet, could you say that gambing MIGHT not have an affect on a player or manager. And that of course is NOT how it works out.

Gambling is Gambling... there really is no gray area, imo.

[Old Sweater]

Voted Gambling.

Not the corked bat but spitballs and stealing signs is just part of the game to me. The HOF wouldn't have near the membership if they excluded all the players that stole signs. IMO

[Mattingly]

The greatest sin of all baseball sins: gambling on the game.

[KCGHOST]

The greatest sin of all baseball sins: gambling on the game.

Don't think so. Throwing games for money is far more serious.

[redlegsfan21]

Breaking Traditions or Commitments for money.

[redlegsfan21]

The greatest sin of all baseball sins: gambling on the game.

The spirit of the rule though was to prevent players from throwing games.

[Westlake]

Agree with KCGHOST. Throing games is the worst. Out of the options listed... I dont care about any of them.

[cardsfanatic]

I don't know about that fanatic.....

Betting on your team EVERY game, and for the SAME amount, could even remotely be considered to be an act which would not alter your play/managing/though process etc.

And even that could be argued... say, if you get in the hole for $100,000 and start a pitcher out of order, plunk an opposing batter for no reasons other than your wager that night, etc. Only if you win one, lose one, win one lose one, and you never get UP or DOWN more than one bet, could you say that gambing MIGHT not have an affect on a player or manager. And that of course is NOT how it works out.

Gambling is Gambling... there really is no gray area, imo.

Not sure I follow. If you are betting on your team to win then you are obviously going to do everything you can to win the game. If you are taking steroids then you are doing so to be a better player and helping your team win. Same with spitballs, corked bats and so forth. It's all against the rules and I'm not condoning any of it, but I can't get all up in arms about any of it either. Now, betting against your team/throwing games? That's an offense that is worth getting bent about.

[redlegsfan21]

Someone once said "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying."

[Mattingly]

Don't think so. Throwing games for money is far more serious.

So say I'm a player for Team A. If I'm playing Team B, and I gamble on this, that's what I presume you're referring to (throwing games). If I gamble on a team to win (my team) or my team to lose, what's the difference? You're still gambling on the game itself.

I'd also consider it dishonorable to gamble on a game of which you have no involvement in.

The spirit of the rule though was to prevent players from throwing games.

So you'd be upset if a player bet only for his team, but more upset if he'd bet against his own team? What if a player bet both for and against his own team?

[StanTheMan]

Not sure I follow. If you are betting on your team to win then you are obviously going to do everything you can to win the game.

Agreed

But........ would it not be out of the question, in fact I would argue that it would be impossible to avoid the following.... especially for managers who bet on their games.

You bet on your team and do everything you can that night to win the game, INCLUDING making a decision (pitching selections come imediately to mind) that may be a detriment to your team's ablility to win a future game.

All because you secretly had $ on a game. To do that (and you probably don't always know whether you hurt your team the next day/game or if you did not) to your team is just plain disgusting.

And I am quite sure Rose did it many times. Sure, just my opinion, but how could you bet tons of games and NOT do that to your team on multiple occassions?

You've jeapardized your teams ability to win games based on your own desire for monetary gain.

Compare that to PED"s? Say that I took them to be a better hitter/pitcher etc. I don't see how it affects the team negatively, other than perhaps increasing your injury risk, or risking suspension and removal from the team. Whether or not the PED"s work for you is not part of the equation really... it's akin to a batting stance change, trying a new pitch, etc. It may work, it may not. And don't get me wrong... I HATE the juicers with a passion!

I certainly don't alter how YOU play, or make different decisions about when and where other players play/hit etc. becasue I am on PED's.

Gambling can do that to a manager.

What about nights that the manager did NOT bet on the game at all? Not only is that a de facto bet AGAINST your team, but how often would said manager hold back a player (again, pitchers are the easy target here but field players could be in the mix as well) and NOT use him, SAVING him for the next game, when he was betting some $$?

Again, you could not have bet as many games as Rose had, and not have done this many, many times.

Hurting your team's chances TODAY, because you have money on TOMORROW's game, and you want player X, Y or Z to play THEN, not tonight.
Just as disgusting, really.

[StanTheMan]

Someone once said "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying."

But there are of course, VERY different levels of cheating.... stealing a sign, for instance, and say, gambling,throwing a game, and some of the more other heinous acts previously posted.

Tomorrow, steal one box of pens, and one ream of paper from work.

The next day, steal EVERY Pen, and EVERY sheet of paper in the building.

Report to Human Resources the next day, and ask if they see a difference!

[Whitesoxnut]

Of them all none has been as widespread and damaging to baseball as juice. When that rat Giambi said that 90% of ballplayers have juiced I didn't believe him at the time. But I do now. I would now say a majority of Pro MLB players have juiced at one time or another, and many still do suck up HGH.

Because why not? There is no test for it, just like there wasnt for 'roids until '05. And even then what were the odds of getting caught during the off-season? I'd say the use of PEDs was, and is, rampant. And I think many of the records of the current age are drug related.

Even with greenies. The worst thing that can happen to a player getting caught for the first time is a warning. When you look at Buddy boys methods of dealing with PEDs it actually looks like a program to gradually wean players off the stuff without actually hurting them, or even worse, the paychecks of MLB teams.

In today's game gambling is almost nonexistent where'as PED us is systemic. There is no comparison in other words.

[StanTheMan]

Excellent points, all, WhiteSoxNut....

Certainly this topic would be different if this board, and this thread were created in 1920, instead of current day.

[dl4060]

Of those listed, gambling is the worst. One of the problems I have with gambling is that it leads to the line becoming blurred. I don't know whether Rose bet on every game or not, or whether he only bet on the Reds to win. If a manager places three bets a year on his own team to win, he probably won't be against his team. If he bets all the time, it makes it more likely that he sneaks one in the other way. It would not surprise me if Rose did actually bet against the Reds occasionally. We may never find out, as I think it would damage him in the public eye more than anything yet revealed.

[cardsfanatic]

I honestly don't know how a manager could bet against his team. Not that they're not capable of that. But what bookie would take that bet... and if it got out that a manager bet AGAINST his team then you know there'd be serious action that way.

I just don't see how it'd be possible. It's like playing a game of 21 and doing a "miss or make" for the ball. Who would honestly take "make" since the person shooting has all of the chips and can miss on purpose? Same thing applies here. Who would take Rose's bet AGAINST the Reds when they know he held all of the chips?

[nerfan]

Someone once said "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying."

- Mark Grace

Gambling... if you bet on your team okay, fine, whatever.
If you bet against or throw games for your team- that's bad.

I voted steroids because gambling was unclear...

I stole signs in HS and got away with it. But I still only batted .300 with no homers.

[Dirt Dog]

I voted gambling. Whether you are betting on your team to win or lose, it is still wrong. Even though betting on your team to do well doesn't come off as harsh as betting against your team, but at the end of the day it is.

If he bets all the time, it makes it more likely that he sneaks one in the other way. It would not surprise me if Rose did actually bet against the Reds occasionally. We may never find out, as I think it would damage him in the public eye more than anything yet revealed.

When Pete didn't bet on his team, I wondered how many people knew about it and they would bet against the Reds. Maybe he just didn't think his team was going to do well depending on who was pitching for the Reds or the other team's pitcher was that much better.

If Pete is truthful and he said he bet on his team every game, it's hard to believe that Pete would bet on his team to win every game, unless he had a major drinking problem or he was disillusioned. Seems like there would be some action going the other way every now and then. Oh do tell...

[FrenchyLefebvre]

Voted for steroids because "throwing" games was not an option.

The steroids have, obviously, done much more harm to the game than Rose did. (I say Rose because, other than the throwers, don't know of any other concrete gambling cases by players).

Here's why, IMO: If there are any Reds fans reading, do you recall Rose pulling "Grady Little-Pedro" type decisions which had Reds fans, talk radio, and columnists scratching their heads wondering what he was smoking?
(I honestly wouldn't know, being in Philly, so am curious).

Do you remember any questionable moves/non-moves by Rose? Did he look dumber, or more drastically crazy, than the managers we normally curse for their "stupidity"?
I don't know, but between just us here, I'd bet that Bobby Cox was on the take with some of the zany decisions he's made in the post seasons see 1993 NLCS, Otis Nixon bunting twice. (Tongue in cheek here, but I have wondered).

I'm not defending the moron, but am really curious as to why no players of the games have come forward in all this time -- especially considering the trend of former athletes "dishing the scoops", tapes of all those games having always been readily available for scrutiny, newspaper column archives...

I'd think Mario Soto would have had something to say all these years.

While the possibility is certainly there, of course, I just wonder what games/moves his harshest critic can look back on and honestly "wonder" about? And how do people feel about Maris & Ruth's records being eclipsed in the history books? Aaron's record? This is why I think the illegal drugs are at least as bad, if not worse than gambling. "Legitimate" is legitimate, right?

PS Dizzy Dean was Einstein compared to Rose. Pete just has no sense whatsoever. Great at baseball and that was it. I think his brain cell has just been knocking around in there loose all these years and could only absorb baseball while doing so.

[west coast orange and black]

nascarfn5 : someone once said "if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying."

nerfan: mark grace

attributed to whitey ford about 40-odd years earlier.

[west coast orange and black]

"gambling on baseball", the game's cardinal sin, received my vote

[Old Sweater]

Throwing games and gambling is the same thing. Who do you think the players is throwing the game for?