So Bud Selig is reportedly "seriously considering lifting Pete Rose's lifetime suspension from baseball," according to the New York Daily News.According to the report, some Hall of Famers have been lobbying Selig to reinstate Rose, which would make him eligible for the Hall. And the report claims that Hank Aaron's statement that Rose belongs signals Selig's chage of heart.
He would thus have to be elected by his peers, the 65 living members in the Hall of Fame, not all of whom agree with Aaron, [Joe] Morgan and [Frank] Robinson that Rose has done his time. It's hard to say if he would get the necessary 75 percent for election. "I know there are still guys who feel strongly against him," said one Hall of Famer, "and I don't know if that would change even if Selig clears him."Now, Selig certainly isn't above checking the winds of public opinion before setting his sail. Earlier this month, in a Q&A session with the Baseball Writers' Association of America, Selig said Rose's case was "under review. I do spend some time discussing it, but it's not appropriate for me to say more."
I have two issues with the latest development, if true.
1. Why should the opinion of former players and teammates, even Hall of Famers, carry so much weight? Players are famously biased and at times ignorant of the game's rules. How many players have defended Barry Bonds and spoken of their admiration of him?
These guys aren't considering what's best for baseball. They are trying to help out a guy they like. The Hall of Fame shouldn't be just about being a great player; integrity, sportsmanship and character are specifically given as qualifications.
2. Pete Rose bet on baseball. He bet on games in which he managed.
Period.
As Jeff Fletcher pointed out last month, Rule 21 states that "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."
This is not some obscure rule. It is posted in every clubhouse in baseball. Pete Rose saw it every day.
So Rose first insisted he didn't bet on baseball but nonetheless agreed to be "declared permanently ineligible" in his agreement with then-commissoner Bart Giamatti, with the right to apply for reinstatement.
That was in 1989. Then, 15 years later, to try to further his case, Rose admitted in his book My Prison Without Bars that he bet on Reds games while managing the team.
Case closed. He violated Rule 21. Permanently ineligible.
If the Hall of Famers really want Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame, then they should be lobbying the Hall itself to rescind its 1991 rule change that made those ineligible in baseball also ineligible for induction to the Hall of Fame.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 10)
7-27-2009 @ 11:15AM
bb8832119 said...
i weigh in on Pete's side. yes it was proven he did bet on games he was involved in. he bet to win, not to lose, and no one has accused him of or provided any proof he did anything to cost his team a single game. maybe ALL players should be required to bet on their team everyday to win. regardless, if baseballs all time hits leader is not in the "hall" who should be?
Reply
7-27-2009 @ 12:35PM
fouritiswritten said...
i agree pete rose is all bnaseball and a good guy / the only mistake is reading the columns of AOL sportswriters who with jay marrioti are washed up jounalists that can't get a job some hwere else
7-27-2009 @ 12:41PM
Phil said...
Case closed. He violated Rule 21. Permanently ineligible
He doesn't deserve it. There's no such thing as being eligible because you express remorse over violating the rule. Certainly, the one player that deserved a 2nd chance was Joe 'shoeless' Jackson. He was never guilty in the first place, and he never got a 2nd chance. Why should Rose. He's was a gifted player who went bad.
Reinstatement would send the wrong message to younger players. Keep him out!
7-27-2009 @ 1:35PM
autumnwriter said...
Betting on his own team to win doesn't exonerate him. First of all, the rule that he broke doesn't parse on which side a bet is placed. Second, as manager he had the ability to affect the results of the game over another game by using certain pitchers, platooning certain players, etc. That would not only affect the particular game but other future games if he couldn't use the same pitchers right away. It would also affect the odds he might get if he made his team look better on certina games as oppoosed to others. There are so many variations of betting: point spreads, over/unders, etc. Whatever is decided in Rose' case will be precedent. By doing what he did he severely threatened the integrity of any game he managed.
7-27-2009 @ 3:04PM
tinyreef said...
who should be in the Hall? players that follow the rules. simple as that. numbers, even in baseball, need to be put aside for the better of the game. like many note, letting him in merely glorifies or validates that kind of behavior.
7-27-2009 @ 7:14PM
kolachekid said...
A reading of the no betting rule determines there should be no betting on baseball- win or lose.
7-27-2009 @ 8:50PM
bullsf6512 said...
Betting on your team to win doesn't mean a thing unless you bet on them to win every night for the same amount. If you don't bet on them one night or bet less, it can be taken as the same as betting on them to lose. It can show you don't have confidence in your team or that your not gonna play your best players that night. Bookies look at betting patterns more than just if you bet to win or lose.
7-27-2009 @ 11:53PM
enigma7 said...
Im with you. All players make mistakes. Betting on your team can be no worse than gulping or shooting up performance enhancing drugs which were taken in an effort to better one's ability to contribute to wins for their teams. The incentive and the goal is the same. How can you have a Hall of Fame and not include the most prolific hitter that ever played the game. UNBELIEVABLE!!
7-27-2009 @ 11:15AM
tonytiger18 said...
As fan that grew up with the players of the 60's and 70's as our idols, Pete Rose was one special player. He was feisty, competitive, and made his teams -- the Preds and then the Phillies, much better.
I rooted for the Yanks, so the ultimate compliment to an opposing player, I hated his guts when he kicked the Yanks butts in the 76 World Series!!
In essence, he has paid for his stupidity off the field; he has been punished.
But on the field, the all time hit leader, one of the best base stealers, disruptive force for the other teams, world series champion, etc., etc.
This guy belongs, period!!!!
If the current hall of famers are lobbying for him, then that is good enough for real fan.
Reply
7-27-2009 @ 12:22PM
excontroller said...
Dude, it was '77 when the REDS kicked your butts! "76 was the Fisk homer in Fenway...and the REDS won THAT Series, too. Hey, I don't give a DAMN if he bet on games, he didn't affect their outcome! He said he always bet on the REDS to win. Knowing how he played, I'm sure that's true!
7-27-2009 @ 12:59PM
tonytiger18 said...
You are mistaken.
The Yanks lost to the Reds in a four game sweep in 1976. The Yanks beat the Dodgers in 77 ( Remember Jackson hittng three dingers) and they also beat the Dodgers in 78.
The Reds beat the Red Sox in 75.
Regardless, Rose was instrumental in that sweep along with Bench, Morgan,and the rest of the big Red Machine.
The following year the Yankees signed Reggie, the straw that stirred the drink and the year of the SON of SAM, the Bronx is burning.
Sportswriers have ther place; but, to determine the eligibility of a player into the hall of fame, the best judges of a player's value should be their own peers.
7-27-2009 @ 5:31PM
william said...
If That your reasoning then baseball would have to go back and reinstate everyone, who has done anything wrong back in and make then eligeiable for the Hall also. Like Shoeless Joe.
7-27-2009 @ 11:18AM
iamparman said...
Unless Shoeless Joe Jackson get's reinstated, Pete Rose and the current crop of steroid junkies should'nt ever get consindered
Reply
7-27-2009 @ 11:47AM
O'Henry said...
Trying to fix a game like Joe Jackson did & betting on your team to win is as different as night & day. Doing steriods is another thing.
7-27-2009 @ 11:23AM
Linda Davila said...
He earned it, now let him in.
Reply
7-27-2009 @ 11:25AM
greg said...
Ed Price, you are a complete idiot. Why don't you mention players like Fergie Jenkins (HOFer), Denny McClain, Steve Howe, etc. who were repeatedly in trouble with drugs and the law but they were never permanently banned. I guarantee players and managers have been betting on baseball since baseball has been around. You're just a moron who can't think for himself and is first to jump on the PC bandwagon. IDIOT!!!
Reply
7-27-2009 @ 2:03PM
rayjay2007 said...
I agree Ed Price should be ban from writing about baseball, a game he prob. never played!
Pete Rose was the greatest hitter of all Time!!!
Pete Rose belongs in the hall of Fame because of his playing record!!! Baseball needs more player who played the game like pete did!!!
7-27-2009 @ 11:41AM
robram17 said...
Pete should be in the HOF, but not until after he takes his last breath on earth. I would not want him to be able to enjoy the privilege of the inclusion.
You can doubt his character but not his numbers.
Reply
7-27-2009 @ 11:42AM
yayabats said...
Baseball is a game and a business. To hold it up as something else in these days is pure demogogary. Rose is one of the few players who made it on skill not talent. It is not whether I like a player or not, it is what they have done on the field, was their effort and performance on the field equal to the efforts and performances of the best there was. It is without doubt Rose's effort and performance, especially lacking much in the way of natural ability are equal to any of those already included. Yesterday Ricky Henderson was inducted, a player of pure talent and not much skill. Nothing against Ricky, he has fought learning disabilities and the demons in his head all his life, but has returned almost nothing to the community he comes from and certainly was not a role model player. Rank players as players, leaving ranking them as human beings for some higher power. Hold the owners, and politicians who continue to allow unfair business practices in baseball, who allowed racism to rule, who treated some great human beings as slaves and less than human as property. When we hold ourselves and society as a whole to such standards perhaps then also athletes can be held. Steroids a skurge yes, but the hunger of the owners, the public for power hitters, for super humans ruled. You ask too much of an athlete. They were gifted and this gift put them in a place only in the last 40 years to make an incredible living, and we ask them because of a gift and our need for heros to rise above themselves, this is unfair.
Reply
7-27-2009 @ 6:38PM
drumbodave said...
Bravo on your insight & opinion! Pete was the consummate player, by which all players and future players should take note on his raw desire & ability. Don't vote him in as a manager, vote him in as one of the best players in baseball, His many records still stand today 20+ years later. He would hit, and run like no other you will see in any of your lifetimes, he would dive head first into anyone in his path to the bag, eating a 1/2 pound of dust along the way, not like these overpaid princesses of today who barely break stride to catch a foul ball these days. come one people, let the guy in!!!!