Pete Rose

elvis

Rookie
Sep 15, 2008
25,881
4,472
0
Should he be allowed in the hall of fame? should he be allowed to manage again?
 
Hall of Fame=Yes

Manage=No, just because I don't think he would be very good at it now, after all this time away from the game.
 
Since there's no proof that he bet against his team and it's only my gut instinct, I say let him in the HOF.

But not manage. He blew that one.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
Hall of Fame=Yes

Manage=No, just because I don't think he would be very good at it now, after all this time away from the game.

if the reds choose to hire him as manager, should baseball allow it?
 
Since there's no proof that he bet against his team and it's only my gut instinct, I say let him in the HOF.

But not manage. He blew that one.

I hear your point that you made in the other thread but since there is no proof I'm for letting him in the Hall.

I'm ambivalent about managing.
 
Hall of Fame=Yes

Manage=No, just because I don't think he would be very good at it now, after all this time away from the game.

if the reds choose to hire him as manager, should baseball allow it?

hmmmmmmmmmmmm,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,if they want to shoot themselves in the foot, I guess. I just don't think he would be very good. They let steroid users and criminals play professional sports, why not let Rose manage a team I guess.
 
I wouldn't have a problem with him taking a coaching gig, hitting coach maybe.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
Hall of Fame=Yes

Manage=No, just because I don't think he would be very good at it now, after all this time away from the game.

if the reds choose to hire him as manager, should baseball allow it?

hmmmmmmmmmmmm,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,if they want to shoot themselves in the foot, I guess. I just don't think he would be very good. They let steroid users and criminals play professional sports, why not let Rose manage a team I guess.

steroid users should be banned permanently imo. If Rose bet AGAINST the reds, I support the permanent ban.
 
No hall for mr Bets.

Besides, Mickey Mantle had the best Rose quote eva:

"If i played my career like him i'd have worn a dress"
 
No hall for mr Bets.

Besides, Mickey Mantle had the best Rose quote eva:

"If i played my career like him i'd have worn a dress"

I don't think Ray fossi thinks he wore a dress.
 
Should he be allowed in the hall of fame? should he be allowed to manage again?

No.

e19.gif
 
No hall for mr Bets.


Well, as I pointed out in another thread, BETS are apparently much worse than DRUGS (including steroids)....
In sports they are.

People do drugs to play better.

Betters throw games to make money.

Understand the difference?

BTW, Rose admitted he bet on games he was managing, he claims he was betting on his team to win. Nobody will ever know if that is the truth, but it's clear it effects the integrity of the game.
 
No hall for mr Bets.


Well, as I pointed out in another thread, BETS are apparently much worse than DRUGS (including steroids)....
In sports they are.

People do drugs to play better.

Betters throw games to make money.

Understand the difference?

BTW, Rose admitted he bet on games he was managing, he claims he was betting on his team to win. Nobody will ever know if that is the truth, but it's clear it effects the integrity of the game.

I disagree. The history of the game is tainted forever by steroids. Statistics are such an important part of baseball and these roid freaks have ruined it by cheating. I don't care if it was against baseball's rules or not. ONly reason it wasn't is because Selig is the biggest pussy in history.
 
No hall for mr Bets.


Well, as I pointed out in another thread, BETS are apparently much worse than DRUGS (including steroids)....
In sports they are.

People do drugs to play better.

Betters throw games to make money.

Understand the difference?

BTW, Rose admitted he bet on games he was managing, he claims he was betting on his team to win. Nobody will ever know if that is the truth, but it's clear it effects the integrity of the game.


I see.... And drugs absolutely IMPROVE the integrity of the game.... Got it.... You've heard of Gooden and Strawberry, just to mention a couple, right? One can only imagine what Mantle's stats might have been if he hadn't partied so much every night, given what they were as a party animal....

Yes, I understand completely the difference....

Let's suppose, as someone pointed out to me, that Rose bet on his team to win on Tuesday, and in Monday's game he kept the starter in well beyond the point he reasonably should have in order to save his relievers for Tuesday's game. That would mean that he threw a game he didn't bet on in order to win a game he did bet on, but with no legal consequences for the Monday game and no one the wiser.

Now, you want to tell me again how different all this makes it?
 
Five'll get you nine he doesn't get in.


He probably won't, so it's a suckers bet. There are too many who are stuck on his failure to admit to his crime and, therefor, his lack of remorse. Wonder how that's working out at the juice bar? Not quite the same standard, is it? It they had half the guts that the "druggies" (Straw, for example) had, they would take their lumps and admit that they don't deserve anywhere near the dazzling numbers they have in their stats. Maybe the kids would actually learn something about the game.
 
Well, as I pointed out in another thread, BETS are apparently much worse than DRUGS (including steroids)....
In sports they are.

People do drugs to play better.

Betters throw games to make money.

Understand the difference?

BTW, Rose admitted he bet on games he was managing, he claims he was betting on his team to win. Nobody will ever know if that is the truth, but it's clear it effects the integrity of the game.


I see.... And drugs absolutely IMPROVE the integrity of the game.... Got it.... You've heard of Gooden and Strawberry, just to mention a couple, right? One can only imagine what Mantle's stats might have been if he hadn't partied so much every night, given what they were as a party animal....

Yes, I understand completely the difference....

Let's suppose, as someone pointed out to me, that Rose bet on his team to win on Tuesday, and in Monday's game he kept the starter in well beyond the point he reasonably should have in order to save his relievers for Tuesday's game. That would mean that he threw a game he didn't bet on in order to win a game he did bet on, but with no legal consequences for the Monday game and no one the wiser.

Now, you want to tell me again how different all this makes it?
You are arguing to no purpose, I have said before you started posting here they should have banned all the juicers.

In any case, that is irrelivent to Rose, who knew full well that gambling was the one thing baseball never tolerates.

Rose knew full well that if he gambled on baseball while a manager he risked a lifetime ban, and he did it anyway.

End of story.
 

Forum List

Back
Top