The never-ending Pete Rose debate
 

Should he be let into the Hall of Fame?

I used to think he should be. I agreed with the whole "Hall of Fame is based on baseball, not morals," argument, but I have slowly been changing my opinion.

The Hall of Fame isn't missing out on Pete Rose, Pete Rose is missing out on the Hall of Fame. Leaving him out is not a disservice to baseball. Pete Rose as a player will always remain prominent in the history of baseball. They can't delete his records, but they don't have to celebrate him.

What it comes down to is that Pete Rose is a disgrace to baseball. First he bets on baseball then lies about it forever. Then, he finally comes clean and says "People make mistakes, please forgive me," but he was still lying. Why, after all of this, does Pete Rose deserve to be recognized by Major League Baseball?

Baseball does not have to try to delete Pete Rose out of its history. It can still honor all of his stats, his records, his great plays, but it doesn't have to immortalize him as one of baseball's legends.

At this point, the only reason I see why Pete Rose should be reinstated is if Major League Baseball removes the "No betting on baseball" rule. Most, if not all of the argument for Pete Rose being in the Hall of Fame is based around betting on baseball not being that bad. Well, frankly, he broke the rules and unless the rules are changed, it should remain.

If YOUR Hero doesn't agree with me on this, I am going to be pissed.

The dude bet on EVERY SINGLE REDS GAME. no i would not vote him in.

I'm sure Joe Morgan would swap him for Ryne Sandberg

He never threw a game, he bet on his time, thinking he could make money when they won. Who cares who he bet for.

He gambled on baseball.

Micheal Jordan has had tons of Gambling problems become revealed since he retired, does he deserve to be shut out?

That's the thing. If you look at the HOF, you have dirtbags, racists, womanizers, assholes etc. And when they start letting steroid era people in, you'll have cheaters. I understand your point, but I feel like what happened between the lines says he obviously should get in. The HOF is a judge of your skill on the baseball field, not your character as evidenced by some of the people in.

I think they'll let him in, but not until after his death.

I would vote for him.

BUT, the fundamental error there is that being a racist, dirtbag asshole is not against the rules of baseball. I just think there is a difference between simply being a bad person off the field and purposely, and repeatedly breaking the rules of the game and threatening the sports integrity. If baseball got rid of that rule, my opinion would change slightly, but as long as they have that rule, you can't make a double standard.

Great post. You actually made me rethink my ideas there. You makea good point, there is a difference. I still think even though he broke the rules, that Charlie hustle shouldnt be in. There has never been a player that was a better ON field role model. He wasnt the biggest or strongest, but he Hustled his way to beign the best. Although he is a scum off the field, Pete Rose the Player is one of the best, and a aplayer I tried to be like on the field in College.

You're 100% correct.

This is how I see it now after all these years.

Had Pete Rose come clean right off the bat and begged for leniency/forgiveness, than I could see people having a real debate on it. Pete Rose however has altered his stance over the years so much and so many times that he no longer has any credibility. People tend to give other people a second chance, in fact that's why there is still a % of people that say he should be in, but he's used up his chances. Let's not forget that he wrote a book and made money off the controversy, that to me is another unsavoury characteristic. He's got the WWE Hall of Fame anyway, he should be satisfied with that.

Also note, in his book he "came clean," but he was still lying about the most important part. He isn't really hiding anything else, but it is still the principle.

I would think he should be in because of his accomplishments on the baseball field. However, I don't feel bad for him, since he denied and denied for sooooo long then finally comes out and admits to it when he can make a buck off a book.

I really don't care either way, I don't think it is a huge deal anyway. Being a hall of famer is great and all but there is plenty of really good players who are just as good as people in the hall who aren't there

Plus of course, like BCWWF said, he broke a rule. No gambling. I hear people say "Ty Cobb this, Ty Cobb that", but he (as far as I know??) never broke any rules of baseball.

Meh, I think its all pretty pety. Yeah Rose shoulda admitted it but hey, the MLB hardly has a clean record itself, ask Satchel Paige.


Anyway, I think its stupid MLB don't recognise his achievements, and as someone mentioned I think it'll be interesting to see what happens when McGwire, Palmeiro, Sosa et al turn up on the ballot, certainly I'd argue they deserve to be boycotted for as long as Rose is.

McGwire was eligible last season and was not voted in.

So the Sammy Sosa's and Barry Bonds' of the world shouldn't be HOF candidates either since they spent a career pumping their bodies with steroids.

He bet on his own team. Big deal. More crimes in the world than gambling. How it's even illegal in the U.S still is pure nonsense.

It gives the HOF less credibility when people like Pete Rose aren't in it.

Rob, baseball has a big black mark on it because of gambling. It's not like this rule was just tossed in the rules without a reason. This cannot be ignored, this rule cannot be broken. (Black Sox scandal)

This is why I can't stand MLB. MLB thinks baseball is this holy sport that only gods amongst men can play. Pete Rose is one of the greatest players of all time. The Hall of Fame is made for the greatest players of all time. Why not put him in? Hell, so he gambled on baseball. I don't think that does ANYWHERE near the damage the steroids are doing to baseball and I damn well guarantee that they will let the roid-monkeys in the HoF.

He should 100% be voted in.

Gambling on your own team is not a small offense, really. It is one thing if he just gambled on random shit, but when you gamble on your own team you make different decisions..."Maybe I'll leave the star reliever in another inning even though he needs rest"..."The star player is injured but he could hit a home run so he will play."

Personally, I think that as it stands, Pete Rose is as guilty as Jose Conseco. He broke the rules and hurt the integrity of the game. Why does he belong in the hall of fame?

Yeah to be honest betting on your own team is probably second worst in the whole gambling thing behind actually arranging to fix matches, its a fundamental conflict of interests and disrespectful to everyone else involved.

I don't see a problem in having so much confidence in your own team then you'll put money on yourself winning. Nothing like the Sox scandal in my book. Rose didn't throw matches.

Rob, BCWWF said it pretty plainly. Even if he doesn't realize it, he can put his self interest ahead of that of the team. He could leave guys in too long, take out guys at the wrong time. All of this is already second guessed in baseball to infinity to begin with when it comes to managers decision, now throw in the fact the guy is betting on the game he's managing. There's no way that can be allowed. He knew it too. It's not like he bet on it and then was told "hey you can't bet on baseball". It's a rule that you do not break... I take that back, it's more like a baseball commandment. "Thou shalt not bet".
Also, when does something become OK simply because it's not (in your opinion) as bad as something else done in the past.

When somebody dies, it is respectful to remember the good in them.

Well, Pete Rose is still alive, and he will have to continue to deal with this.

Wait until he dies, then put him in the HOF and remember the good about him.

ALSO... Let me just add that you're taking his word on it that he never bet against his team. Firstly that would make him a terrible gambler as no team would ever win 162 games BUT here's the thing, his story has changed so much since the beginning of this, that anything he says now can't be taken as being 100% credible. He has lied so much that if he 'came clean' again and said OK I did bet against my team I wouldn't be the least bit surprised. In fact I believe it is the real truth that has yet to be acknowledged.

Gaylord Perry, Whitey Ford, and Don Sutton are all in the Hall of Fame. All three admitted to cheating during games and Perry and Sutton both got caught and suspended for it.

So you go ahead and tell me how many of Pete Rose's 4256 hits were illegally earned and I might listen to this high and mighty bullshit about the integrity of the game.

It's about breaking THE rule of baseball. All I'm doing is advocating MLB's side of the decision.

What is THE rule of baseball? THE rule of baseball is to score more runs than the opposition.

you said it.

Rob I don't see how you can argue against such an obvious conflict of interest here. Sure Rose didn't throw matches but as I said, he put a vested interest into it and compromised his integrity and essentially his worth as a player on the field and a team-mate.

Can we be sure Rose never threw a game?

You know very well what I meant by that. Your boy Petey, is a big cheaty

I doubt we'll ever know if he ever purposely fucked up tbh, he'd never admit it anyway, and even if he did he'd probably skew the facts or just plain lie.

Can we be sure nobody else in the hall of fame bet on their own games?

Statements like that hold no validity

If you ban Rose for betting then alright, but you can't ban him because "he might" have bet againest his own team.

Its pretty funny to me, since baseball has this "high and mighty" attitude towards all other sports, calling itself "America's Game" (when it isn't the most popular sport in America) etc. When in reality, it is one of the more poorly run, and more corrupt sports there is.

Its also funny because Rose is out for breaking a gambling rule, where as Mark McGwire is on the ballot but not being voted in. (Technically he broke no rules I guess, but you know) So I say, put him on the ballot and let the voters decide. Its pretty obvious they made the right choice about McGwire, why not let them decide?

He should be in.

I agree that what Rose did was awful, but the precedent has already been set that admitted cheaters can get into the Hall of Fame. If Rose hadn't bet on baseball, he still would have 4256 hits. How many wins or strikeouts would Gaylord Perry have if he didn't throw vaseline balls?

The Hall of Fame is supposed to honor and commemorate a player's accomplishments on the field. Pete Rose earned every single one of his accomplishments.

Can you be sure about a million other players didn't?

In response to what Supreme is saying, then I would say that the wait until he dies idea would make sense. Just saying.

I just think it is funny because, as Hero noted as well, people act like he should be in because it's not that big of a deal. In some ways, I can see how it isn't that big of a deal, but it is an obvious rule.

Also, I've never thought about Supreme's last post that he did all of this as a manager, not a player. That might change things a little bit, but I still do stand that he broke a rule and unless that rule is changed, the punishment should stand.

Maybe Bush will give him a pardon.

Rules get broken all the time. And the rules don't mean shit if they don't apply to everyone. If you let known drug takers in then how is gambling worse being that performance enhancing drugs is a form of cheating?

Gambling didn't keep him out of the WWF Hall of Fame :shifty:

I think the big thing with Rose is, he wants to become a manager again. I'd say no to that, but still allow him to be in the Hall. Well actaully, like I said earlier I'd let the voters decide...they already made the right choice on Mark McGwire

I bet Barry Bonds doesn't go into the hall even though he deserves it.