Pete Rose Formally Petitions MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred for Reinstatement

[Papageorgio]

As usual, your logic is screwy. You are leading with your heart, and I fully understand that. But you are guilty of present-ism: trying to impose our standards back then. Won't work.

I am trying to apply today's standards to the 1980s in that today's standards allow proven steroid cheaters to play while Rose never cheated

That we know of.

 

[Pogo]

As usual, your logic is screwy. You are leading with your heart, and I fully understand that. But you are guilty of present-ism: trying to impose our standards back then. Won't work.

I am trying to apply today's standards to the 1980s in that today's standards allow proven steroid cheaters to play while Rose never cheated

That we know of.

Umm.... everything is "that we know of". Mother Theresa didn't deal heroin.... "that we know of".

 

[Pogo]

pete rose was an inspiration to me as a toddler as he was to countless others around the country to go out and play baseball as hard as you possibly can and work as hard as i could to be the best possible baseball player i could.its disgusting that anyone can possibly say he doesnt belong in the hall of fame when cheaters barry bonds and roger clemons are allowed on the ballot.

its disgusting that they dont allow a player like Rose into the hall of fame.you just dont find players like him anymore who during the REGULAR season,will go slide into second base HEAD first and go all out anymore like he did or in an all star game where they play it like its a party instead of serious game like he did.He was an inspiration to many such as myself in that regard and he is not a criminal.

if Rose isnt allowed into the hall because of his character,then cobb needs to be taken ouf ot the hall as well plain and simple.case closed.

First paragraph -- exactly.
I'm a kid learning the ways of the world -- should I:
(a) go out and put my all into it, seize opportunities, always play hard, always play to win and just work work work at it? or
(b) find some juice I can inject that will temporarily enable me to hit and throw harder?

Hmmm.. the guy who did (a) seems like the better course -- but he's the one that got banned and the others didn't.

That doesn't teach you about what the game requires -- so much as it teaches what the Business of Baseball does.

 

[Papageorgio]

As usual, your logic is screwy. You are leading with your heart, and I fully understand that. But you are guilty of present-ism: trying to impose our standards back then. Won't work.

I am trying to apply today's standards to the 1980s in that today's standards allow proven steroid cheaters to play while Rose never cheated

That we know of.

Umm.... everything is "that we know of". Mother Theresa didn't deal heroin.... "that we know of".

MLB never disclosed whether he bet or made managerial decisions based on his bets, which would be difficult to prove, however like the Black Sox he bet on baseball.

The rules are clear and distinct. You gamble, you are banned, permanently. Rose knew the rules, he gambled with his career and lost.

Steroid use is irrelevant, we are talking gambling. Rose no matter how great a player he was, he gambled, he knew the rules and he thought he was above the rules and bigger than baseball.

If you want to make a case that those that used steroids should not be allowed in the HOF, that is an entirely different topic.

 

[rightwinger]

As usual, your logic is screwy. You are leading with your heart, and I fully understand that. But you are guilty of present-ism: trying to impose our standards back then. Won't work.

I am trying to apply today's standards to the 1980s in that today's standards allow proven steroid cheaters to play while Rose never cheated

That we know of.

Umm.... everything is "that we know of". Mother Theresa didn't deal heroin.... "that we know of".

MLB never disclosed whether he bet or made managerial decisions based on his bets, which would be difficult to prove, however like the Black Sox he bet on baseball.

The rules are clear and distinct. You gamble, you are banned, permanently. Rose knew the rules, he gambled with his career and lost.

Steroid use is irrelevant, we are talking gambling. Rose no matter how great a player he was, he gambled, he knew the rules and he thought he was above the rules and bigger than baseball.

If you want to make a case that those that used steroids should not be allowed in the HOF, that is an entirely different topic.

Rose was banned from baseball not just the Hall of Fame

Those using steroids were welcomed back to play again and again and were allowed to keep their steroid inflated salaries, MVPs and Cy Youngs

The hypocrisy of the game is outrageous

 

[Synthaholic]

Can't agree on this one Jake. Pete Rose was one of the best players to ever put on a uniform and his attitude alone served as immeasurable inspiration to arguably millions.

The whole denial of the HoF is complete political posturing and has nothing to do with his accomplishments, which are sitting right there in the record books whether anybody likes who set them or not. If they want to pretend the HoF is some kind of moral award, they'll need to kick out a bunch of others already in there - like Ty Cobb.

But that's not what HoF status is, and it's completely disingenuous to pretend it is.

False. Pete Rose should never be inducted into the HoF. He knowingly, repeatedly committed baseball's Cardinal Sin.

At the entrance of every MLB clubhouse is a big sign that warns against gambling, and the consequences. He chose to ignore it and flaunt it. He thought he was bigger than the sport.

Comparisons to Ty Cobb are irrelevant. Ty Cobb was an awful person, and a proud bigot. But he didn't gamble on baseball. Besides that, he played the majority of his career before the Black Sox Scandal that made gambling the one thing that would get you banned from baseball.

Rose has continued to stick his thumb in baseball's eye over the years. Every Cooperstown induction, he sets up a little stand down the street to sell signed baseballs. He has been asked every year to stop yet refuses. He truly is scum.

Not being in the HoF does nothing to diminish his remarkable achievements on the field. He has not been struck from any record books, or had any hits taken away. He was a great ballplayer, and everyone acknowledges that. But the HoF is for players who played the game with integrity, as well as talent. Peter Edward Rose does not qualify.

 

[Synthaholic]

The ban does have to do with his accomplishments: his breaking the rules outweigh his stats. His induction wait for him to RIP.

Not even then.

 

[Synthaholic]

He has done his time. Steroid infused assholes can be inducted to the HOF, but not Rose.

You fundamentally do not understand the gravity of his actions.

 

[Synthaholic]

Can't agree on this one Jake. Pete Rose was one of the best players to ever put on a uniform and his attitude alone served as immeasurable inspiration to arguably millions.

The whole denial of the HoF is complete political posturing and has nothing to do with his accomplishments, which are sitting right there in the record books whether anybody likes who set them or not. If they want to pretend the HoF is some kind of moral award, they'll need to kick out a bunch of others already in there - like Ty Cobb.

But that's not what HoF status is, and it's completely disingenuous to pretend it is.

Having been raised close to Cincy, Pete Rose was MY hero as a kid. I wanted to be a ball player just like him.

He unarguably changed the game. Watch old films from before he came up in '63 -- there was no such thing as the head-first slide. He brought that in, and now it's standard.

I recall he'd run to first base when drawing a walk too. Everything about his attitude was just full of life.

Ultimately HoF status isn't supposed to be about what you did after your playing career; it's supposed to be about what you did during it.

And he gambled during it, and then as a manager, when he had control over which pitcher was in, which players were in.

 

[Synthaholic]

He has done his time. Steroid infused assholes can be inducted to the HOF, but not Rose.

By gambling, it is suggested that Pete Rose might cheat

Those using steroids did cheat. So did the commisioner and the owners in making obscene profits off of pumped up players

There is a great deal of difference on a manager than a player because of the power managers have. Choosing the wrong reliever to face a hitter or calling plays which could change to outcome of the game depending on which team you gambled on presents an unacceptable conflict of interest which no one else has to that extent.

Huh. Maybe you do understand.

 

[Synthaholic]

The biggest problem I have with MLB not reinstating rose is that it's all but documented fact that they looked the other way when players were juicing, because it helped the sport itself recover from the negative consequences of the strike and revived its popularity.. Ultimately making it more MONEY.

But rose is forever branded with a scarlet A.

It's kind of ridiculous.

Owners and the league made record profits off of bogus home runs. And they condemn Rose for "cheating"

Steroids were not illegal or against baseball's rules at the time of Sosa/Maguire/Bonds. Gambling was the ONE rule that everyone knew you could not violate.

 

[Synthaholic]

A manager betting on games challenges the integrity of the game and MLB. Yeah...steroids, drugs and so on...they stain the game...but it does not threaten the integrity like gambling...an action that can affect the outcome of a game or a season...or even the odds of a game. Rose had insider knowledge and the ability to cheat for profit (yes, I know - he supposedly never bet against the Reds, but honestly...I think he did and that is why the punishment is so harsh). Mr. Hustle was a focused man who did everything to win...don't you think that quality would extend to gambling?

I didn't quote your last sentence because he should never be eligible.

 

[Papageorgio]

As usual, your logic is screwy. You are leading with your heart, and I fully understand that. But you are guilty of present-ism: trying to impose our standards back then. Won't work.

I am trying to apply today's standards to the 1980s in that today's standards allow proven steroid cheaters to play while Rose never cheated

That we know of.

Umm.... everything is "that we know of". Mother Theresa didn't deal heroin.... "that we know of".

MLB never disclosed whether he bet or made managerial decisions based on his bets, which would be difficult to prove, however like the Black Sox he bet on baseball.

The rules are clear and distinct. You gamble, you are banned, permanently. Rose knew the rules, he gambled with his career and lost.

Steroid use is irrelevant, we are talking gambling. Rose no matter how great a player he was, he gambled, he knew the rules and he thought he was above the rules and bigger than baseball.

If you want to make a case that those that used steroids should not be allowed in the HOF, that is an entirely different topic.

Rose was banned from baseball not just the Hall of Fame

Those using steroids were welcomed back to play again and again and were allowed to keep their steroid inflated salaries, MVPs and Cy Youngs

The hypocrisy of the game is outrageous

I didn't say it wasn't hypocritical, but that doesn't excuse Rose's actions.

One act doesn't excuse the other.

Steroids and those caught using them is a big issue for me. It is an issue that baseball has mishandled from day one.

 

[Synthaholic]

betting on his team is just as suspect.

This is what so many do not get.

Do you leave that reliever in just a bit longer in this game you're winning than you normally would because you have a big bet riding on it? How does that affect his ability to come back and pitch tomorrow?

So many little things in baseball - that's why it is the greatest sport.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The ban does have to do with his accomplishments: his breaking the rules outweigh his stats. His induction wait for him to RIP.

Not even then.

Nonetheless, I have no doubt it will happen.

 

[Synthaholic]

Pete Rose was banned because his gambling "might" lead to cheating.

False. Pete Rose was banned because he broke the #1 rule in baseball. Repeatedly.

 

[rightwinger]

The biggest problem I have with MLB not reinstating rose is that it's all but documented fact that they looked the other way when players were juicing, because it helped the sport itself recover from the negative consequences of the strike and revived its popularity.. Ultimately making it more MONEY.

But rose is forever branded with a scarlet A.

It's kind of ridiculous.

Owners and the league made record profits off of bogus home runs. And they condemn Rose for "cheating"

Steroids were not illegal or against baseball's rules at the time of Sosa/Maguire/Bonds. Gambling was the ONE rule that everyone knew you could not violate.

They are still illegal and we still have players like Ryan Braun winning MVPs using them and being welcomed back with huge contracts

10 years later a look at every MLB player suspended for PEDs MLB Sporting News

Pete Rose broke the rules and was punished. It is time to reevaluate whether his crime was heinous enough to warrant a lifetime ban

 

[rightwinger]

Pete Rose was banned because his gambling "might" lead to cheating.

False. Pete Rose was banned because he broke the #1 rule in baseball. Repeatedly.

The reason we have Rule #1 is because it "may" lead to cheating

Those doing PEDs DID CHEAT.....they won games they should have lost, they won awards they shouldn't have won, broke records they shouldn't have broken and received contracts they didn't earn

That level of cheating vastly exceeds what Pete Rose was accused of

 

[NLT]

Having been raised close to Cincy, Pete Rose was MY hero as a kid. I wanted to be a ball player just like him.

You are a ball player scat, Aaron told me so

 

[Pogo]

As usual, your logic is screwy. You are leading with your heart, and I fully understand that. But you are guilty of present-ism: trying to impose our standards back then. Won't work.

I am trying to apply today's standards to the 1980s in that today's standards allow proven steroid cheaters to play while Rose never cheated

That we know of.

Umm.... everything is "that we know of". Mother Theresa didn't deal heroin.... "that we know of".

MLB never disclosed whether he bet or made managerial decisions based on his bets, which would be difficult to prove, however like the Black Sox he bet on baseball.

I don't understand why you keep going to this "never disclosed" well. It's right here. This strawman will not stand. We already did this and you're still trying to prop him up. Learn to Google.

And no, it's not "like the Black Sox" -- the BS weren't betting; they were throwing, for bettors.

The rules are clear and distinct. You gamble, you are banned, permanently. Rose knew the rules, he gambled with his career and lost.

That's true. So keep him out of MLB in accordance with those rules, I'm good with that. That's why I included that line in the poll. It's how I voted.

But the Hall of Fame is a different animal. A Hall of Fame (any HoF) is supposed to be a showcase of the most extraordinary who ever indulged in that activity, and Pete Rose absolutely meets that criterion as well as anyone ever has. If you exclude him from that listing, then you don't have a Hall fo Fame; you have a sham. Then again that may be what you want.

Again, it comes down to this: involvement with Major League Baseball (Inc.) and inclusion in the Hall of Fame .... are two entirely different and unrelated concepts. One does not preclude the other. That is, again, assuming your "Hall of Fame" is that, and not a sham.

Steroid use is irrelevant, we are talking gambling. Rose no matter how great a player he was, he gambled, he knew the rules and he thought he was above the rules and bigger than baseball.

If you want to make a case that those that used steroids should not be allowed in the HOF, that is an entirely different topic.

Roger Maris got an asterisk by his season home run record on the basis that he had more games to make 61 than Ruth had to make 60. That's a legitimate qualification. How many extra HRs did Barry Bonds or Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa or A-Roid hit that they could not have hit without juice? Nobody can quantify that of course but it's a safe bet (pardon the pun) that somewhere in all of that the outcomes of some games were affected.

Rose, by contrast, only affected the outcomes of games with his competitiveness and burning desire -- which is what the Game is supposed to be about.

Here again we're comparing apples to apples -- performance on the field in both cases. When you start claiming he didn't actually do what he did on the field (even though it's a matter of record) because he did this other thing off the field, you have left the launchpad of rationality. The records already exist. There's no way around that.