People, people, people. How many times do we need to go over this? It seems that every time we have another steroids revelation and talk turns to how that affects the player's Hall of Fame qualifications, all of the Pete Rose people come out of the woodwork to say that Pete should get in if the Steroids Guys are in.A whole batch of them came out in the comments for this post about Sammy Sosa's Hall of Fame chances.
What many people fail to realize is that the rule Rose broke is more important to baseball than any rule about steroid use.
Let's think about why we love sports more than, say, the circus. You go to the circus and you see highly-skilled people doing amazing things that none of us could dream of doing. You think walking a tightrope with a lion waiting underneath is any easier than hitting a slider? It's not the same, though, because there is no competition.
What separates sports from every other form of entertainment is that you don't know what's going to happen. You have two sides each giving 100 percent to beat the other, and we want to see what's going to happen. We live for the unscripted, jaw-dropping moments like Kirk Gibson's homer in the 1988 World Series, or LeBron James' game-winning shot in this year's Eastern Conference finals.
If anything affects the integrity of the unknown outcome, the whole thing falls apart. You've got professional wrestling. Or the ballet.
Which brings us to Rule 21, which is posted within the clubhouse of every major and minor league baseball team, and has been for nearly 90 years. Part of that rule reads...
(d) BETTING ON BALL GAMES. Any player, umpire, or club official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has no duty to perform shall be declared ineligible for one year.Pretty simple. Pretty straightforward.
Any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible.
Doesn't matter if Pete Rose was betting on the Reds or against the Reds. If he's not betting on them every single day, and if he's not betting the same amount every single day, his decisions are going to be affected by his bets. (Does he bring out that reliever for a fourth consecutive day because he's got a little extra on this game?) Also, he sends signals to the gambling community with his betting patterns. (Pete bet on the Reds the last three days, but he's not betting on them today!) And betting on baseball put him in a position to throw a game. Let's say Pete got in deep with some bookies and couldn't pay up. They say, "Well Pete, I can think of a way we can make this debt go away..."
Steroid users, by contrast, were no threat to the integrity of the game. If anything, they were trying too hard to win. I'm not saying using steroids is right. I'm just saying it's a different kind of wrong than gambling, a wrong that should be punished, but not one that jeopardizes the entire fabric of what makes sports work.
Finally, don't blame sportswriters for Rose not being in the Hall of Fame. Blame Major League Baseball. It's their rule. They enforce it. Commissioner Bart Giamatti imposed the penalty, and it's been upheld by Fay Vincent and Bud Selig. Rose's name has never appeared on a ballot that's been in the hands of a baseball writer (and there's no spot for a write-in to answer your next question).
Frankly, I'm so tired of listening to the Rose argument that I have a solution. Although I wouldn't mind if he never went to the Hall of Fame, I also wouldn't mind if he got in with the following conditions: His plaque would say that Rose "bet on baseball and accepted a lifetime ban," and he'd never be allowed to wear a big-league uniform or draw a paycheck from organized baseball again.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-17-2009 @ 1:28PM
Matt Snyder said...
Amen.
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 2:22PM
Robert Silver said...
Right on! The supporters of his eligibility have never grasped the central issue. It is not about the relative morality of a player. An 8 year old boy or an 85 year old man have the right to believe the outcome of a game their team is playing is as pure as the heart and soul they pour into being a fan. That's the reason for the rule. pete knew the rule. Pete broke the rule. Pete gets what the rule says he gets.
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 3:07PM
Sarah said...
Is this really an article?? How could anyone honestly say that steriods don't affect the INTEGRITY of the game? That's a joke.
I'm not a Pete Rose enthusiast by any means, but what he did is equal to what all these men are doing.
Rose broke the rules as a coach, and how many times have we seen coaches get into the hall of fame based on their coaching, not their playing? Rose should be inducted to the hall of fame for being one of the best hitters of the game, not because of his job as a coach.
Steroids affect the integrity of the game just as much. I'm 18. How am I supposed to look my son in the eye and tell him that Barry Bonds is the all-time home run leader? I can't. His record is a lie. His "legacy" is a lie. Every stat from this era can't be trusted because if that player used steroids, they're fake stats. Stats that shouldn't exist.
All these players are grown men. They know the rules, they know the difference between right and wrong, and I believe the policy should change. One strike and your done. There is no excuse for them breaking the rules and then from now on, the first time they get caught they should be given a lifelong ban from baseball. I guarantee that would end the entire steroid problem.
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 3:25PM
Jeff Fletcher said...
Sarah, don't confuse the integrity of the players with the integrity of the game.
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 3:45PM
danceez said...
Jeff, Sarah got it right. Steroids is cheating. All players with a history of steroid use need a * next to there name in the record books. * = Cheated by use of steroids. Also, anyone caught now need a year off from the game and can never be admitted into the HOF. They should be put into the Hall of Shame.
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 3:51PM
Sully said...
What people seem to forget is that he bet on the games "after" he was a player. He should go in based on his performance on the field. He never bet on baseball while he was playing, which would be horrendous, but did so as a manager. He is the all-time hits leader and should get in "NOW" because of that. How many players would not have the statistics to make the Hall of Fame had it not been for steroid use? That's where the difference lies. Pete made it with his ability and hustle, and people seem to forget that! What he did he did as a manager, and while as bad as that was, and yes it broke the rules, his stats during his "playing career" should get him in automatically! He has paid his dues!
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 5:39PM
wpwaterguy8044 said...
so if a betting person knows that the player is taking drugs to effect his play either good or bad then that doesnt compromise the game, bull crap, rose had or still has a disease called gambling habit the same as a person with a drug or drinking habit or addiction. he should have beem semt to rehab the same as strawberry or any other player who was treated for his illness
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 6:48PM
usmale09 said...
When you compare Pete Rose with some of these guys today, it's laughable. When he bet on games, it was for his team to win. Was it wrong? Yes, but it was after his playing days. If he should continue to be punished, then all the steroid users and dope addicts and boozers should be left out of the Hall too. He should be in on his merits as a player, long before the betting thing came up. To keep out the player with the most base hits in the history of the game is ludicrous.
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 7:14PM
can2215118 said...
If Rose was black, he would have been inducted already. The guy was great. So the Hall isn't accurate. The guys that have the records that Rose really has, is false.
Reply
6-17-2009 @ 8:40PM
Adam said...
For anyone who missed it - here was the most important part of the article:
Any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible.
Pete signed an agreement with mlb to be banned from baseball - in return baseball stopped looking into the matter and made no public ruling. So, take the matter up with Pete who voluntarily signed off on the order to kick him out of baseball.
And the other argument doesn't work either - they were investigating 1985-1987 - in 85 and 86 he was a player and part of that time he was also the manager. He should be banned from baseball.
On another note - don't worry about the steroid guys. They may be technically eligible - but the sports writers are going to make sure that those guys don't go anywhere near the hall.
Reply
6-18-2009 @ 6:32AM
bdyftns said...
Just because this idiot sports writer hates Pete Rose doesn't mean he's right. The punishment give Rose was far greater than the crime. Pro Football as a few players in the Hall Of Fame who also got caught betting.
Yea, steroids is a very good arguement. Why should cheaters of the game get into the 'Hall' but not Rose? If people are so naive to think that steroids, HGH, etc weren't around in the '50s and '60s, think again. Try reading this.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2005-05-03-steroids-house_x.htm
Reply
6-18-2009 @ 3:20PM
autumnwriter said...
I would have to say that trying to assign relative degrees of blame to the two infrations is splitting hairs. Both are unacceptable.
Reply
6-18-2009 @ 3:54PM
pyrojimh said...
Well done Jeff. Not only was Pete Rose a degenerate gambler, he was a prolific loser in a time when managers didnt have multi-million dollar contracts.The concept that he only bet on them to win is ludicrous.Rose's gambling patterns equate to betting on them to lose. Most Rose apologists have never read the Dowd report. Great player, but by HIS own actions he has rendered himself ineligible for life.
Reply
6-18-2009 @ 8:00PM
mdkin01 said...
"Steroid users, by contrast, were no threat to the integrity of the game. If anything, they were trying too hard to win." I quit reading your article when I got to this. You made sense until you said this.
Reply
6-18-2009 @ 10:39PM
Murph said...
Rose should never go in. NEVER ! even betting on your team to win doesn’t cut it in my book. How may times did he play some one who needed a day off and they went o for 4? Or lift a pitcher for a pinch hitter because he needed to win that game by two runs and the reliever gave up three in the top of the next inning and the reds lost? Or pitch someone on short rest just to get even that week and he got bombed? I could list 50 ways betting on your team could cost you that game and then the next three on top of that! The steroid junkies can all sit outside the hall selling autographs with Pete as far as I’m concerned too. Guys like Sosa, Bonds, Big Mac, and “Rocket” all made their millionaire beds. Go sleep in them
Reply