Selig considering reinstating Pete Rose?

[Invader3K]

Surprised there was no thread on this yet. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4358260 "Despite a report that he is "seriously considering" reinstating Pete Rose, MLB commissioner Bud Selig has not changed his thinking, sources told ESPN on Monday. The New York Daily News reported that Selig was taking a new look at the ban for baseball's all-time hits leader. Hank Aaron's support for Rose's Hall of Fame inclusion, which he mentioned at this weekend's ceremonies in Cooperstown, N.Y., is a strong indication of Selig's possible action, the Daily News reported. "I would like to see Pete in," Aaron said. "He belongs there." So, what do you all think?

[topper09er]

I am against ever reinstating Rose ever, even after he dies. A penalty existed before he decieded to gamble, he knew what it was and did it anyway. It was not like after Rose got caught they decided to ban him for life, it was a precidant that was already established. Removing the ban would be like letting someone out of jail for murder after 5 years because they said they were sorry (after repeatedly lying). The penalty existed and he knew it and just expects that there should be no consequences for his actions? Tough, his numbers are still in the book, hes just not in the HOF. No sympathy for him at all.

[bigredrobbo]

Character aside, to not have a category leader present in the hall, seems like a mistake. I'd have a lot less of a problem with Rose getting in than I would, say a Bonds or Clemens. But then, even Gaylord Perry wasn't entirely clean and he's in. As a man, I don't have to like Pete Rose (and i don't!), but as a ballplayer, his achievements merit inclusion. His problem would appear to be that not only did he lie, but he can't remember WHEN he lies and when he subsequently denies comments he made that were the truth!

[owbc]

I guess I don't see what the big deal with reinstating him is. It's not like he's going to get into the HOF, and even in the unlikely event that he could get the votes, it's not like his numbers are tainted by steroids like everyone else from 1990 on. Rose is one of the all time greats and he loves baseball. He's paid a steep price and he deserves to be part of the game again. It's not like he actually is a murderer, he just had a gambling problem. I would sign him as a hitting coach, he's been working with A-rod for awhile.

[UeckerAddict]

If Cap Anson and Ty Cobb can be in the Hall, I see no reason why Pete Rose should be barred. Heck, Anson was the ringleader and instigator in the push for creating a color barrier. Who was really a greater detriment to the game, him or Rose?

[clancyphile]

If Rose is reinstated, then Shoeless Joe Jackson should be, too.

[T B0NE 10]

I personally would be in favor of letting Rose in, but if it would make it easier for Bonds, McGuire, A-Rod and other roid users to get in I am not a fan

[sbrylski]

The Hall has character. I like it as is.

[lodiness]

The Hall has character. I like it as is.

How does the Hall have character when a bunch of writers can vote a guy in just because they like him. There are voters who won't give a guy a vote, just because Babe Ruth wasn't a unanimous decision. If players were rude to the media, they don't make it. Do you think that Sheffield will get in? According to his numbers he should. Then you have to wait to be voted in my your peers (Rice). It's just a screwy system to me. Why can't they just go by the numbers adjusted to the era that the guy played in? To me it seems like there is no clearly defined way to get into the hall.

[Invader3K]

Well, the thing to keep in mind is that reinstatement doesn't necessarily equal entry into the Hall of Fame. His only way in, if reinstated, would be for the veteran's committee to vote him in. Their are probably quite a few veterans who dislike Rose and wouldn't vote for him.

 

Personally I think it's silly for the all time hits leader to not be in the Hall for an indiscretion at the end of his career. As pointed out, there are people who did worse things than him in the Hall. I think there's even a couple avowed KKK members.

 

I guess I think he's been punished long enough. Would it really hurt anything if someone wanted to give him a job again, or let him participate in official on field events?

[RobertR]

I have no doubt that Pete Rose would get inducted, if eligible. Probably not in the first year, but within a few years. I don't get the "Cult of Pete" but it's out there.

 

I'm vehemently against Pete Rose being reinstated. His accomplishments are celebrated in the Hall of Fame museum. Frankly, that's the more impressive part of the place than a bunch of plaques on the wall. His place in the history of baseball is secure and acknowledged. What he doesn't have is a plaque on the wall honoring the man. Heck, I wouldn't even be against his sentence being commuted if I believed that Rose had legitimately changed. I don't believe any of his faux apologies. The guy in an unrepentant gambler, liar, and publicity hound with no interest in the good of baseball beyond his own selfish interests. If he had done something like join Gambler's Anonymous (because when your gambling gets you banned from your profession, you have a problem), did charity work, lectured on the dark side of gambling, and kept a low profile otherwise, I might believe he was honestly changed. Instead, the guy shows up during Hall of Fame week to sign autographs, runs his mouth, and will do signings in casinos.

 

Pete Rose needs baseball more than baseball needs Pete Rose.

 

Robert

[RobertR]

FWIW, I don't believe Shoeless Joe Jackson should be linked to Pete Rose at all. I have some sympathy that the players were working for a skinflint owner, but the Black Sox accepted money, including Shoeless Joe by his own testimony, and actively engaged in a conspiracy to throw games. I have sympathy for Buck Weaver, but not for anyone who accepted money.

 

There's certainly no proof that Pete Rose every actively tried to throw a game. Although whether he managed the same way in games he had money on vs. games he didn't is an open question.

 

Robert

[topper09er]

If Cap Anson and Ty Cobb can be in the Hall, I see no reason why Pete Rose should be barred. Heck, Anson was the ringleader and instigator in the push for creating a color barrier. Who was really a greater detriment to the game, him or Rose?

I think people focus on the whole character thing too much. Rose is not banned because he has "poor character" and is a degenerate lying gambler. No one has ever been banned for having poor moral standing or being considered an all around jerk or racist or whatever. He is banned because before he decided to commit a certain action there was already a policy in place that said if you commit this certain action you are banned from baseball for life. It just so happens that this was an act which is associated with poor character, ie betting on a team you have control over. His ban also has absolutely nothing to do with his playing career. No one has ever debated that he doesnt belong in the HOF because his career wasnt good enough. There are many people who have been banned in MLB history who had bad playing careers also. It is purely coincidental that he has the most hits, and if you look in the record books you will see Rose is listed 1st in hits (as well as PA and ABs) and the 1974 NL MVP is still Pete Rose. Everyone alreadly knows his playing accomplishments are HOF worthy so why does it matter to have him in there, who cares, I dont get why the fans care? Its just a personal honor for him and not really that big of a deal IMO because it is obvious his career is HOF worthy.

 

Again, the issue is not well there are other jerks in there so why not Rose, or the hit king should be in the HOF. It is that there was a policy in place, he knew it and risked it anyways and got caught. If you ignore the policy then what is the point of it. I am all for giving people 2nd chacnes when they are young and stupid, but when you are 47 years old, get caught and lie about it for 15 years too bad.

[davego]

I really have issue with him spending 18 years or so saying he didn't bet baseball...then just before Paulie has his moment, this tool has to push his new book and "admit" to betting on baseball. I use to be for reinstatement...that tipped me the other way.

[pitchleague]

Then you have to wait to be voted in my your peers (Rice).

Rice was voted in by the writers in his final year of eligibility, not by his peers.

[1992casey]

The Hall of Fame isn't under the commissioner's control. If they wanted to, they could decide to admit players who've been banned from the game. Maybe that's the more appropriate route to take rather than laying any decision on the commissioner.

[topper09er]

1992casey[/b]]The Hall of Fame isn't under the commissioner's control. If they wanted to, they could decide to admit players who've been banned from the game. Maybe that's the more appropriate route to take rather than laying any decision on the commissioner.

This is not true, the HOF does not allow anyone on the permanent suspension list to be elected. Therefore, Rose would need to be removed from the permanent suspension list which can only be done by the commissioner. Pete Rose accepted a spot on the permanent suspension list voluntarily is exchange for MLB never making public their specific findings regarding how he gamlbed as a manager (Rose claims that rather than betting on a certain few games and possibly saving pitchers etc. for those games he just bet on every single game and managed the same way he would have if he hadnt bet on the games. If this was true there was no reason for Rose to be concerned about his specific gambling trends because the evidance should just show he bet on every game. Pete Rose also claimed that he never bet on any games ever, but we all know how true that was). So Rose would need Selig to remove him from the permanent suspension list for the HOF to consider him.

[1992casey]

the HOF does not allow anyone on the permanent suspension list to be elected

 

Right. What I was suggesting is that it might be possible (and perhaps appropriate) that the Hall change this standard.

[topper09er]

Then its just a debate about whether whoever is in charge of the HOF should "reinstate" Rose instead of Bud. It is still the same debate just different debators.

[RobertR]

Pete Rose values his choice to gamble freely and behave like a lying jerk more than he values getting into the Hall of Fame. That's the conclusion I have come to that's consistent with Pete Rose's action.

 

If Pete Rose truly wanted to be in the Hall of Fame, he could be. That would involve mending his ways and admitting his problems in an honest way. He obviously has no interest in doing any of that, and as far as I'm concerned he made his bed and he can lie in it.

 

Robert