Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should Pete Rose be in the Hall of Fame?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Well as soon as baseball turns into football using what the NFL does might have some point to it. Since MLB is not NFL it doesn't really matter how the NFL decided to disciplines its players. IF we were to follow this logic then have the thugs in the NFL who have been arrested or accused of crimes would be permanently banned since that is what LAndis did back in the 20's. So who sets the precedent? MLB who made rulings in the 20's after being around for 50 years or so or an upstart football league still formulating its rules and continues to this day to waffle on its principles?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Ubiquitous
      Well as soon as baseball turns into football using what the NFL does might have some point to it. Since MLB is not NFL it doesn't really matter how the NFL decided to disciplines its players. IF we were to follow this logic then have the thugs in the NFL who have been arrested or accused of crimes would be permanently banned since that is what LAndis did back in the 20's. So who sets the precedent? MLB who made rulings in the 20's after being around for 50 years or so or an upstart football league still formulating its rules and continues to this day to waffle on its principles?
      I think that the principle to follow here is the principle of progressive consequences for progressively more severe acts.

      What Rose did represents a POTENTIAL threat to the game. A suspension is warranted, but (A) nothing Rose did brought DIRECT harm to the game, and (B) no act of Rose reflected the INTENT to fix or throw games.

      What Jackson did was an ACTUAL ATTACK on the game; his actions caused a dishonest World Series to take place. He did nothing to expose the fix, allowing it to play out.

      A lifetime/permanent ban ought to occur only for the worst of offenses. Taking bribes and fixing games is the worst thing a player can do; it should carry a stiffer penalty than gambling, but no fixing. That's how it's done in business. That's how it's done in the criminal justice system. All of these institutions subscribe to the concept of PROGRESSIVE discipline; the more severe the act, the more severe the penalty.

      Rose has deserved a lengthy suspension, but a permanent ban is not called for. The fact that Rose has lied about his actions for years before admitting them is NOT a reason to heighten the penalty; Rose has been treated as a guilty party ever since 1989. His suspension should be lifted at some point, preferably at a point where he will be too old to want to work in baseball, but it still should be lifted, and he should then be eligible for HOF induction.
      "I do not care if half the league strikes. Those who do it will encounter quick retribution. All will be suspended and I don't care if it wrecks the National League for five years. This is the United States of America and one citizen has as much right to play as another. The National League will go down the line with Robinson whatever the consequences. You will find if you go through with your intention that you have been guilty of complete madness."

      NL President Ford Frick, 1947

      Comment


      • Yes and baseball for a long time made gambling one of the most severe acts. you don't just get lifetime sentences for murder there are several other ways in which you can get sent away for life.

        Pete Rose wasn't just some player betting on a few games. He was a manager of a major league team betting on his own team. The implications of that whether you can realize them or not are huge. In the 40's they took the Phillies away from their owner and kicked him out of baseball because he was betting on his team why should Rose get different treatment then that? Rose filled out the lineup card, picked the pitchers, made the substitutions, and had imput on who to sign and who to call up.

        Comment


        • Pete Rose not being in the Hall of Fame is an absolute joke. One of only 2 people in history to get 4,000 hits. Top on the career hit list. A .303 career average, 14,053 at bats.

          A 44 game hitting streak, and a total of 3,562 games played. All records except for the career average and hitting streak (which is tied for 2nd highest all time)

          :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy

          Comment


          • Originally posted by DonLarsen2011
            Pete Rose not being in the Hall of Fame is an absolute joke. One of only 2 people in history to get 4,000 hits. Top on the career hit list. A .303 career average, 14,053 at bats.

            A 44 game hitting streak, and a total of 3,562 games played. All records except for the career average and hitting streak (which is tied for 2nd highest all time)

            :grouchy :grouchy :grouchy
            But the issue, of course, is not Rose's ability or accomplishments. It's the idea of bestowing an HONOR on someone who is still beind DISCIPLINED for violating rules.

            I think that the suspension should be lifted, and Rose should then be put up for a HOF vote. I cannot support the idea of enshrining players who are under suspension at the time of their enshrinement. But I think that there needs to be a differentiation between Rose and the Black Sox. The Black Sox threw games and took bribes; this is far, far more serious than betting on one's own team.
            "I do not care if half the league strikes. Those who do it will encounter quick retribution. All will be suspended and I don't care if it wrecks the National League for five years. This is the United States of America and one citizen has as much right to play as another. The National League will go down the line with Robinson whatever the consequences. You will find if you go through with your intention that you have been guilty of complete madness."

            NL President Ford Frick, 1947

            Comment


            • The thing with Rose that amazes me is how many people go to bat for him. An aweful lot of fans are absolutely NUTS that this guy isn't in the Hall of Fame. And why? As far as I can tell, he's one of baseball's great self-centered, self-important, self-promoting jerks. :noidea
              Visit my card site at Mike D's Baseball Card Page.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Fuzzy Bear
                But the issue, of course, is not Rose's ability or accomplishments. It's the idea of bestowing an HONOR on someone who is still beind DISCIPLINED for violating rules.

                I think that the suspension should be lifted, and Rose should then be put up for a HOF vote. I cannot support the idea of enshrining players who are under suspension at the time of their enshrinement. But I think that there needs to be a differentiation between Rose and the Black Sox. The Black Sox threw games and took bribes; this is far, far more serious than betting on one's own team.
                I agree with your post, except to note that I'm no longer clear on whether Rose bet on his team at all, or bet on them to win every time he bet. Pete shows many signs of compulsive gambling, including breaking serious rules in doing so. He adamantly refuses to acknowledge he has a problem. With his history, can baseball afford to let him in a position of responsibility unless he forswears gambling and gets treatment for same (or gets too old and decrepit to be considered for such a role)? I think the answer to that has to be no! Cooperstown rightly values its relationship with MLB, and inducting him prior to the time he's reinstated or too old to be in a responsible position in the game would be an unnecessary slap in MLB's face. Once Pete's no longer a threat to be in a responsible position in the game (or is reinstated), then MLB's continuance of the suspension could reasonably be argued to be unduly punitive under the circumstances, giving Cooperstown reason to defy MLB if need be.

                Jim Albright
                Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
                Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
                A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by jalbright
                  I agree with your post, except to note that I'm no longer clear on whether Rose bet on his team at all, or bet on them to win every time he bet. Pete shows many signs of compulsive gambling, including breaking serious rules in doing so. He adamantly refuses to acknowledge he has a problem. With his history, can baseball afford to let him in a position of responsibility unless he forswears gambling and gets treatment for same (or gets too old and decrepit to be considered for such a role)? I think the answer to that has to be no! Cooperstown rightly values its relationship with MLB, and inducting him prior to the time he's reinstated or too old to be in a responsible position in the game would be an unnecessary slap in MLB's face. Once Pete's no longer a threat to be in a responsible position in the game (or is reinstated), then MLB's continuance of the suspension could reasonably be argued to be unduly punitive under the circumstances, giving Cooperstown reason to defy MLB if need be.

                  Jim Albright
                  Rose did indeed join Gambler's Anonymous, but that was before he admitted to betting on baseball, which he did in his last book. He has a gambling problem, period, and that is beyond just betting on games he participated in in some way, shape or form.
                  They only proved what they had to prove in the investigation. Who knows how deep this actually went?
                  Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
                  Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
                  Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
                  Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
                  Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

                  Comment


                  • Pete Rose should stay banned and I have always felt Michael Jordan's father was killed because of gambling but the NBA covered it up.......

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Captain Cold Nose
                      Rose did indeed join Gambler's Anonymous, but that was before he admitted to betting on baseball, which he did in his last book. He has a gambling problem, period, and that is beyond just betting on games he participated in in some way, shape or form.
                      They only proved what they had to prove in the investigation. Who knows how deep this actually went?
                      Even if Rose went to Gambler's Anonymous, he has been quoted as refusing to give up gambling--which isn't a real acknowledgement of his problem.

                      With all the lowlifes Pete dealt with to gamble, and the fact they've got reasons to sell him out such as revenge, troubles with the law, or good old fashioned greed (God knows, this bunch had a lot of all three), why hasn't anybody come forth to say Rose bet against his team if in fact he did it? Given how unacquainted with concepts such as truth the folks in this group are, I'm amazed one of them hasn't done so even if it's a lie. There's a buck to be made telling that story. The simple fact such a story isn't out there after so long should tell you the reason for it is simple--it never happened. Pete's "friends" have shown themselves quite willing to sell Pete down the river in their own self interest, and nobody could pay enough to keep all those scum quiet this long. Pete's no angel, but he only deserves to be condemned for those trespasses supported by evidence.

                      Jim Albright
                      Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
                      Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
                      A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by CoasttoCoast
                        Pete Rose should stay banned and I have always felt Michael Jordan's father was killed because of gambling but the NBA covered it up.......

                        So the NBA got involved in a police investigation and hushed it up? So Michael Jordan's father was killed because why? He didn't have the money to pay the debt or because he didn't want to pay?

                        Comment


                        • I watched Pete Rose when I was a kid and always felt he was a great ball player. He was a throwback to the old time players.

                          There were 2 incidents I did not care for but I do not hold it against him.

                          The Ray Fosse collision in the all star game which shortened his career and the fight with Buddy Harreson in the playoffs against the Mets.

                          I do believe based on his numbers and his career on the baseball field Pete Rose should be in the hall of fame!

                          I also feel shoeless Joe jackson should be in the hall of fame as well as he played his best during that infamous scandel ladened series.

                          He was unjustly accused!

                          The owner was a cheap skate.

                          Comment


                          • Charlie Hustle

                            Growing up, Pete Rose was one of my favorite ballplayers. He always played hard and always had that attitude about him. That cocky, I'm the man thing and I can do whatever. This attitude, I'm sure, got him into gambling, and at the same time, got him disliked by many in and around baseball. Now, would the same punishment hold true, for a mild mannered ballplayer, who quietly went about his business, but bet on baseball ?

                            I don't know if Pete bet on his own teams to win or lose. I don't know if he bet on just the other games. He got the most out of his players and they played over their heads, most of the time. They always finished higher in the division then people predicted. Pete's win at all costs attitude tells me that if he bet on his own club, he bet on them to win, because winning was everything to Pete Rose. Go to the Hall of Fame sometime and you will see him in there: Alltime Hits Leader; Pete Rose.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Rennie Stennett
                              Growing up, Pete Rose was one of my favorite ballplayers. He always played hard and always had that attitude about him. That cocky, I'm the man thing and I can do whatever. This attitude, I'm sure, got him into gambling, and at the same time, got him disliked by many in and around baseball. Now, would the same punishment hold true, for a mild mannered ballplayer, who quietly went about his business, but bet on baseball ?

                              I don't know if Pete bet on his own teams to win or lose. I don't know if he bet on just the other games. He got the most out of his players and they played over their heads, most of the time. They always finished higher in the division then people predicted. Pete's win at all costs attitude tells me that if he bet on his own club, he bet on them to win, because winning was everything to Pete Rose. Go to the Hall of Fame sometime and you will see him in there: Alltime Hits Leader; Pete Rose.
                              Gamblers do not bet on who wins or loses, they bet against a line on the game's outcome. They also really don't care about the actual teams playing as much as how well they've done against the spread in recent history. That's besides the point, though.
                              Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
                              Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
                              Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
                              Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
                              Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

                              Comment


                              • Actually when a gambler bets on baseball they do care who wins or loses because that it how the bet pays off. There is no spread like in football in baseball. Their is no Yankees -3 or Cubs +2. It is more like Yankees 60, Tigers 180. So if the Tigers win and you bet $100 on the Tigers to win then you just won 180 plus you $100. If you bet the Yankees to win then you won $60 plus you $100.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X