clujer420 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 My educated judgment is that Pete Rose is a douche. He admitted way back when that he bet on baseball, and agreed to be banned for life, and ever since he's acted like it's everyone else's fault, and the banning was only temporary. I'm tired of him and I wish he would go away. If he clearly bet on baseball, why would Selig cave in and allow him to be back in the game? That makes no sense to me. Also, I was going to bring this up a few days ago (and I apologize if someone already brought it up), but how would you guys feel about having Pete as our manager? Personally, I would love it, and I think he would really give us the push we need. Anyway, this is cool news, and I'm happy they're finally, IMO, doing the right thing. Rock on Pete! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted August 12, 2003 Author Share Posted August 12, 2003 If he clearly bet on baseball, why would Selig cave in and allow him to be back in the game? That makes no sense to me. Also, I was going to bring this up a few days ago (and I apologize if someone already brought it up), but how would you guys feel about having Pete as our manager? Personally, I would love it, and I think he would really give us the push we need. Anyway, this is cool news, and I'm happy they're finally, IMO, doing the right thing. Rock on Pete! Hells no Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Hells no Hell no to the ultimate power the man placed bets in the dug-out on his own team - there is nothing more threatening to the integrity of the game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 If he clearly bet on baseball, why would Selig cave in and allow him to be back in the game? That makes no sense to me. Also, I was going to bring this up a few days ago (and I apologize if someone already brought it up), but how would you guys feel about having Pete as our manager? Personally, I would love it, and I think he would really give us the push we need. Anyway, this is cool news, and I'm happy they're finally, IMO, doing the right thing. Rock on Pete! I love Pete Rose. He belongs in the HOF and he can manage my team any day...................to those who think he hasnt been "punished", you are totally blind. He has been punished for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted August 12, 2003 Author Share Posted August 12, 2003 If he clearly bet on baseball, why would Selig cave in and allow him to be back in the game? That makes no sense to me. Also, I was going to bring this up a few days ago (and I apologize if someone already brought it up), but how would you guys feel about having Pete as our manager? Personally, I would love it, and I think he would really give us the push we need. Anyway, this is cool news, and I'm happy they're finally, IMO, doing the right thing. Rock on Pete! I love Pete Rose. He belongs in the HOF and he can manage my team any day...................to those who think he hasnt been "punished", you are totally blind. He has been punished for years. putting him into the hall of fame would instantly take away all "punishment" he's ever received you need a punishment that fits the crime. being banned from the hall and baseball fits the crime of damaging the integrity of the game by gambling on it. period Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 complete MLB denial story even now, read towards the end, even now - Rose refuses to admit his violation of the most basic rule of baseball. "we made mistakes..." Who is "we"? Is he royalty speaking in the royal "we"? He goes from this unpsecified "we" and unspecified "mistakes" to "I love baseball." I bet you love baseball, Mr. Rose, and you do not belong in the MLB and certainly not as a member of the HOF. All of his baseball accomplishments are in the hall. The membership in the select HOF is not there as it should not be. Besides the fact of hsi betting on baseball, there is the other matter - his felony conviction for scamming at autograph sessions and other baseball related things. He served his time in the pen and that is behind him, the legal ramifications - but this is yet another area where he besmirched the game and for that he does not belong in the HOF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 his felony conviction for scamming at autograph sessions and other baseball related things. How do you scam somebody at an autograph session? The people pay their money, he signs his name, and that's that. What do you mean by "scam"? To my knowledge, he served time for tax evasion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesox247 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 No way he should be in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 How do you scam somebody at an autograph session? The people pay their money, he signs his name, and that's that. What do you mean by "scam"? To my knowledge, he served time for tax evasion. the scam was pocketing the money and not reporting it - which is tax evasion as you point out, and that is a scam, a scheme to get money and not report it, as I said, and baseball (i.e. autograph sessions) was the means to the scam and tax evasion is theft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 How do you scam somebody at an autograph session? The people pay their money, he signs his name, and that's that. What do you mean by "scam"? To my knowledge, he served time for tax evasion. the scam was pocketing the money and not reporting it - which is tax evasion as you point out, and that is a scam, a scheme to get money and not report it, as I said, and baseball (i.e. autograph sessions) was the means to the scam and tax evasion is theft YEAH, none of us have ever done that before right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Pete Rose's accomplishments are honored in the Hall of Fame. Pete Rose the person is not. That is just fine with me. I don't think you can say Pete has paid his price if he still refuses to admit his transgressions against the game. To me that is the same as Pete spitting in the face of baseball and saying "I am popular enough to do it and get away with it". The only way I could live with re-instating Rose under certain conditions and limitations, but I am not behind it. To me, IF they let him back in, he needs to admit past transgressions, show remorse (real remorse), agree to certain community service work to help baseball (of MLB's choosing) and agree to a penalty or waiting period before he is eligible for the Hall of Fame. Obviously that part may not be possible if the Hall won't change the 20-year eligibility rule. He should also not be allowed to be employed by a team in a decision making role (i.e. manager, GM, etc.). But IF and only then, would I his return be acceptable in my opinion. And for the record, I liked Pete as a player a lot and think he could do a lot of good thigns for baseball, but I just don't think you can open that can or worms or what will you say to the next guy? Sorry, you gambled, but you weren't as good a player as Pete Rose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmr31 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Pete Rose's accomplishments are honored in the Hall of Fame. Pete Rose the person is not. That is just fine with me. I don't think you can say Pete has paid his price if he still refuses to admit his transgressions against the game. To me that is the same as Pete spitting in the face of baseball and saying "I am popular enough to do it and get away with it". The only way I could live with re-instating Rose under certain conditions and limitations, but I am not behind it. To me, IF they let him back in, he needs to admit past transgressions, show remorse (real remorse), agree to certain community service work to help baseball (of MLB's choosing) and agree to a penalty or waiting period before he is eligible for the Hall of Fame. Obviously that part may not be possible if the Hall won't change the 20-year eligibility rule. He should also not be allowed to be employed by a team in a decision making role (i.e. manager, GM, etc.). But IF and only then, would I his return be acceptable in my opinion. And for the record, I liked Pete as a player a lot and think he could do a lot of good thigns for baseball, but I just don't think you can open that can or worms or what will you say to the next guy? Sorry, you gambled, but you weren't as good a player as Pete Rose. You make some excellent points, Rex. Did i just say that? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 To my understanding, Pete Rose had, and maybe still has, a gambling disease. Unfortunately, he was never really treated for it. I honestly don't know if he has bet on baseball or not, but I would still let in Rose in either case. It's proposterous to deny Rose on the allegation of betting, when the Sammy Sosa's, Barry Bonds' and Mark McGwire's will get in because of steroid use. But, MLB doesn't want to hurt their image. Have to bite the bullet soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 try confession of betting - proven he's bet - read the Giamatti report that he agreed to on the advice of counsel - how anyone can speak of "allegations" of betting with Rose, I can't fathom - do you also speak of his "alleged" conviction for tax evasion? I am not being sarcastic, I am just wondering - the man signed the confession and accepted a lifetime ban - maybe as that was when some of you were not born or infants you don't grasp that - there is nothing "alleged" about his gambling, his placing bets using phones in the locker room and dug out, gamblers in the locker room, gambling on his own team betting on baseball is the #1 sin in baseball and how any student of the Chicago White Sox, or the Cincinnati Reds for that matter, can not understand that, well, I can't fathom that either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 try confession of betting - proven he's bet - read the Giamatti report that he agreed to on the advice of counsel - how anyone can speak of "allegations" of betting with Rose, I can't fathom - do you also speak of his "alleged" conviction for tax evasion? I am not being sarcastic, I am just wondering - the man signed the confession and accepted a lifetime ban - maybe as that was when some of you were not born or infants you don't grasp that - there is nothing "alleged" about his gambling, his placing bets using phones in the locker room and dug out, gamblers in the locker room, gambling on his own team betting on baseball is the #1 sin in baseball and how any student of the Chicago White Sox, or the Cincinnati Reds for that matter, can not understand that, well, I can't fathom that either If his case was that black and white, the public and MLB wouldn't even entertain such proposals for him ebing let back into baseball. There would be no trials on ESPN, there would be no conversations at all. It isn't such a clear case as you make it out to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Fainter Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 I was alway against his reinstatement. Now, I'm too tired ane too indifferent to comment. But, pleeeease, don't ever say that he was a good manager. He was awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 but I just don't think you can open that can or worms or what will you say to the next guy? Sorry, you gambled, but you weren't as good a player as Pete Rose. that is the point................ what happen to the next case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wsc425 Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Negative, Rose did not get reinstated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
innersanctum Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 I have a question about his gambling. Did he gamble on baseball as in the Astros vs. Cubs (obviously choosing the Astros) or did he bet on the Reds to lose a game against any other team? I think that makes a world of difference on where he should be ranked on the "Banned For Life Tree." If he bet on his own team to win, that only says he had confidence in his team to be better than the team they were playing. Still don't see the harm. If he was betting on other teams, well, athletes since have done the same. Give him a break! That being said, if he did bet on the Reds to lose, let him stay in exile! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 I have a question about his gambling. Did he gamble on baseball as in the Astros vs. Cubs (obviously choosing the Astros) or did he bet on the Reds to lose a game against any other team? I think that makes a world of difference on where he should be ranked on the "Banned For Life Tree." If he bet on his own team to win, that only says he had confidence in his team to be better than the team they were playing. Still don't see the harm. If he was betting on other teams, well, athletes since have done the same. Give him a break! That being said, if he did bet on the Reds to lose, let him stay in exile! Betting on the Reds to win would be just as bad for two reasons. 1. Betting on your team to win could still change the way you manage a game. It could change the way you handle pitchers. You could leave a pitcher in longer than he needs to be contributing to an injury, for example. 2. The mere perception that betting on games can be harmful to the game, whether he actually was or not. That is why the rule is emphasized so much. There is no gray area. You don't gamble on baseball, period. If the public thinks gambling is going on, they will question the outcome regardless of if it is true or not, affecting the integrity of the game. Betting on other teams is also bad because of #2 above. Add to that, the fact that he could be placing bets based on inside information he has received from friends, colleagues, etc. If he knew a pitcher was hurting, that would be an advantage. There are lots of ways inside information could either affect the outcome of the game, or give him an advantage to make money. Again, in either case, all it takes is the perception that something might be fishy to hurt the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 try confession of betting - proven he's bet - read the Giamatti report that he agreed to on the advice of counsel - how anyone can speak of "allegations" of betting with Rose, I can't fathom - do you also speak of his "alleged" conviction for tax evasion? I am not being sarcastic, I am just wondering - the man signed the confession and accepted a lifetime ban - maybe as that was when some of you were not born or infants you don't grasp that - there is nothing "alleged" about his gambling, his placing bets using phones in the locker room and dug out, gamblers in the locker room, gambling on his own team betting on baseball is the #1 sin in baseball and how any student of the Chicago White Sox, or the Cincinnati Reds for that matter, can not understand that, well, I can't fathom that either If his case was that black and white, the public and MLB wouldn't even entertain such proposals for him ebing let back into baseball. There would be no trials on ESPN, there would be no conversations at all. It isn't such a clear case as you make it out to be. cerb, that Rose bet on baseball is fact. He signed the Giamatti statement and there is more than enough evidence out there, You think the commissioner of baseball banned the all time hits leader for fun? The evidence was massive and overwhelming and that is why Rose signed on to a lifetime ban. Whether he should be admitted to the HOF is debatable but what is not debatable is whether he bet on baseball. If the "ESPN wouldn't do a show on it" is your argument, don't ever take a class with me as your professsor. You can find people who deny the Holocaust and there are tv shows on that. Fact is fact, and Rose bet on baseball. Whether that makes him Hall worthy or not is the question, not the issue of fact. What Rose signed with advice of counsel is what in law is called "Admissions of Fact." That is not debatable; Rose bet on baseball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 My problem with Rose, besides the fact that he bet on baseball--and Rex talked about it a little already--is his total and utter stubbornness. In interviews he is always pushy, always easily offended, never willing to admit anything. He acts like he was set up on this whole thing, and he is out to right a wrong. If he wasn't such an asshole and just said yeah I did it, I'm sorry it was a mistake, then maybe, maybe I might feel differently about whether he should be in the hall. But he is always demanding, always defiant. He has autograph sessions in Cooperstown on the day of inductions, he snaps at reporters who try and ask him about his gambling history. This man is deserving of sympathy? I can think of a lot more causes more worthy of rallying behind than whether this jerk gets a plaque on a wall in upstate New York. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 The only way Rose should be allowed into the HOF is if you separate Pete Rose the player from Pete Rose the manager. His playing stats are certainly worthy and he never, to anyone's knowledge, bet on the game as a player. If you look at it in that light, then just maybe... empahsis on "maybe"... he should be inducted. However, Pete Rose should never be allowed to hold a position of authority in baseball again. Never a GM, or mananger, or team owner/partner. Maybe as a batting coach would be ok, but not even as a 3rd base coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 i picture rose on a cell phone placing bets while coaching the advent of 21st century technology gives rose all kinds of new ways to get his bets down on the playing field or in the dugout if you are betting $5,000, press 1 if you are betting $10,000, press 2 if you are telling everyone to swing at the first pitch, press 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiff Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 The only way Rose should be allowed into the HOF is if you separate Pete Rose the player from Pete Rose the manager. His playing stats are certainly worthy and he never, to anyone's knowledge, bet on the game as a player. If you look at it in that light, then just maybe... empahsis on "maybe"... he should be inducted. However, Pete Rose should never be allowed to hold a position of authority in baseball again. Never a GM, or mananger, or team owner/partner. Maybe as a batting coach would be ok, but not even as a 3rd base coach. "...Floyd lifts one to right field, this one's gonna drop. McEwing will score--wait a minute, Rose holds McEwing at third! He would easily have scored, but for some reason Rose gave him the stop sign. Tom, you really have to question that decision, with two outs, and the tying run almost assured of crossing home plate... Now Rose is whispering something to Joe....did he just slip him a twenty?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.