PDA

View Full Version : Who's the bigger villian: Rose or Bonds?



metsbats
11-19-2007, 08:25 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7456666


Interesting article on Fox sports posing the question who is baseball's biggest villain Pete Rose or Barry Bonds.

I'm surprised of the choice.

To me Bonds would be the bigger villain because he broke one of Baseball's most hallowed records allegedly on steriods however Pete Rose broke Ty Cobb's (another candidate for Baseball's biggest villains) all time hit record on pure natural ability.

What do you think?

David

staindsox
11-19-2007, 09:55 PM
My vote is for Rose because he was a manager when he was gambling. Even if he only bet on his team to win, he could overuse his bullpen to needlessly over-protect a win to cover his betting, which would deplete the bullpen, which may me needed later in close games in which Rose wasn't betting. As much as I despise Bonds, he's a solo act...Rose could sink an entire team as a manager. I vote for Rose because his crimes were in the capacity of a manager.

Rob L
11-19-2007, 10:08 PM
My vote is for Bonds. He was only able to break baseball's most hallowed record by cheating.

Although what Rose did as a manager was despicable, his record as a player was second to none. Plus, it wasn't like the team he was managing was possibly bumped from playoff possibilities because he may have over-extended his club to win a bet (the Reds sucked).

Just my 2 cents.

rob L

tym
11-19-2007, 10:18 PM
Great question!

Back in the day there are a number of stories of players taking speed, pre 1970's, bottles of green/blue pills for anyone that wanted one sitting out in the open.....and those who didn't. I think that a person that manages a team and has the ability to call how the game gets played and is a known gambler is probably a little more of a problem then one that did roids.

Bonds could play the game (field and hit for average), he has tanted the HR record but based on the world series championships his teams has not won, not much of a issue. The 1990-2000 cheat that is the next generation of speed is roids.
Regards,
Ty

tym
11-19-2007, 10:44 PM
oh and one other thing....I have sat down to dinner with Pete Rose....good man, but driven to say the least.

I dont know how anyone can say that he did or didnt do speed during his player days with out really knowing him is beyond me, and if he did thats not natural....

Regards,
Ty

bigjimsguitars
11-19-2007, 10:57 PM
Not even close to me, Bonds is the bigger villian. Betting is an illness or addiciction and he never bet against his team! As already stated, Rose played the game naturally and not enhanced and played it with every fibre of his being.

Bonds, well....

tym
11-19-2007, 11:09 PM
Naturally? okay forgot you were there.....and you are probably right he never did anything in pill form to get amped for a game :) like all those other guys during his period, wasn't illegal, but wasn't natural. 1999 steriods werent illegal either.....

To me the fundamental problem is about leadership, not drugs. Bonds did not have the influence on a game that Rose had as a manager and what Rose did was against MLB policy when he did it.

I am done with this thread, it really doesn't matter what we think at the end of the day they where both great players that screwed up and tainted baseball while they were at it.
Regards,
Ty

godwulf
11-19-2007, 11:18 PM
My vote is for Rose because he was a manager when he was gambling. Even if he only bet on his team to win, he could overuse his bullpen to needlessly over-protect a win to cover his betting, which would deplete the bullpen, which may me needed later in close games in which Rose wasn't betting. As much as I despise Bonds, he's a solo act...Rose could sink an entire team as a manager. I vote for Rose because his crimes were in the capacity of a manager.

To my mind, this is really a stretch. What you're saying, in effect, is that Rose might have hurt his team by trying too hard to win certain games, potentially and in theory causing his team to lose certain other games, resulting in...what? A losing season? Would he have made enough money gambling on those games to have compensated him for getting fired for being a losing Manager? If I were a team owner, I wouldn't give a damn for any Manager of mine who wasn't willing to bet his own money on the team he helmed.

Bonds is not only the bigger villain by a wide margin, he's the worst thing to happen to Baseball in living memory.

33bird
11-19-2007, 11:21 PM
Barry Size 8 head Bonds for sure. Rose bet for his team to win. Bonds cheated for all of his best seasons, and for sure effected the outcome of more games by juicing than Rose ever did by betting on his own team.
Greg

skyking26
11-19-2007, 11:22 PM
Without reading the other posts, I will answer giving my own unswayed opinion.

I personally think I prefer Rose and feel that his off the field gambling sickness should not be held in account to what he did on the field. I see him in the Hall one day. Bonds, however, used drugs to enhance his abilities and inflate his numbers. I view that altogether differently...

RK

Rob L
11-19-2007, 11:30 PM
I think we need to separate Rose as a player and Rose as a manager. As a player, one of the best; as a manager, a gambling addicted problem. Comparing a manager to a player to determine who is the bigger villian is like comparing apples to oranges.

Now, let's see what happens when Bonds becomes a manager :)

Rob L

tym
11-19-2007, 11:35 PM
To my mind, this is really a stretch. What you're saying, in effect, is that Rose might have hurt his team by trying too hard to win certain games, potentially and in theory causing his team to lose certain other games, resulting in...what? A losing season? Would he have made enough money gambling on those games to have compensated him for getting fired for being a losing Manager? If I were a team owner, I wouldn't give a damn for any Manager of mine who wasn't willing to bet his own money on the team he helmed.

Bonds is not only the bigger villain by a wide margin, he's the worst thing to happen to Baseball in living memory.

I tried to stay out...but you are assuming he didn't impact the point spread...also he lied and said he didn't gamble in the beginning, then changed that and said he didn't bet on his team. Once proven a liar he is done, and the MLB rules were in place, his team or not. He bet, he broke a known rule.

I will always have both in my collection, they will always both be tainted...they get what they deserve. But Rose was supposed to set a example for the younger players he manged and follow the rules that were published, and Bonds....well he was wrongfully doing what others did before him. He didn't invent roids!
Respectfully,
Ty

tym
11-19-2007, 11:41 PM
I think we need to separate Rose as a player and Rose as a manager. As a player, one of the best; as a manager, a gambling addicted problem. Comparing a manager to a player to determine who is the bigger villian is like comparing apples to oranges.

Now, let's see what happens when Bonds becomes a manager :)

Rob L

Good point. But corrupt rule breakers don't appear over night. A man is measured by all the acts he has performed while on this planet, remember his slide in the 1970 all star game that ruined his so-called friends career? Thats the Fosse event. Take the time to look at issues during his playing days as well and you will find things that are questionable.

Rob L
11-20-2007, 12:05 AM
Good point. But corrupt rule breakers don't appear over night. A man is measured by all the acts he has performed while on this planet, remember his slide in the 1970 all star game that ruined his so-called friends career? Thats the Fosse event. Take the time to look at issues during his playing days as well and you will find things that are questionable.

True, it shows he was a hard nosed player but he wasn't breaking rules in his playing days (that we know of, of course). Hell, Ty Cobb was a liar and a cheat when he was a player (and subsequently a manager) but he is not villified the way Rose is. That being said, the Fosse hit in the All Star Game was brutal. BTW, I hope I am not sounding like a Rose homer because I never liked the guy in his playing days or now.

Rob L

tym
11-20-2007, 12:16 AM
True, it shows he was a hard nosed player but he wasn't breaking rules in his playing days (that we know of, of course). Hell, Ty Cobb was a liar and a cheat when he was a player (and subsequently a manager) but he is not vilified the way Rose is. That being said, the Fosse hit in the All Star Game was brutal. BTW, I hope I am not sounding like a Rose homer because I never liked the guy in his playing days or now.

Rob L

No you are not, nor do I like one over the other in the end. Having met them they both have room for growth.

I find it hard to believe he didn't bet until he moved to mngt though, thus I think he probably broke the rules as a player too. It has not be proven that Bonds took roids after baseball made them illegal, or for that fact during the illegal period yet. I think we can assume he did based on physical growth factors and the numbers, but the same can be said for Rose and his gambling addiction.

But you got to admit this is a very compelling topic to debate :)...oh and yes Cobb!

cheers,
Ty

staindsox
11-20-2007, 12:31 AM
To my mind, this is really a stretch. What you're saying, in effect, is that Rose might have hurt his team by trying too hard to win certain games, potentially and in theory causing his team to lose certain other games, resulting in...what? A losing season? Would he have made enough money gambling on those games to have compensated him for getting fired for being a losing Manager? If I were a team owner, I wouldn't give a damn for any Manager of mine who wasn't willing to bet his own money on the team he helmed.

Bonds is not only the bigger villain by a wide margin, he's the worst thing to happen to Baseball in living memory.

It's exactly the point and you missed it. Why didn't he bet on his team every day if he really thought they would always win? The days he didn't bet, in essence, he thought they would lose. As a manager, Rose had control over whether he won OR LOST. At least Bonds always tried to win. John Dowd, the special prosecutor in the Rose case, was convinced he could have proven that Rose bet AGAINST his team too, but Rose signed a document to ban himself from baseball and end the investigation. I hate Bonds, but at least he cheated to always win...we can't say the same with Rose and none of us can say for sure. The person who knew the most about it, Dowd, thinks he DID bet AGAINST the Reds too.

Also, for the record, they did win a World Series in 1990, the year after they dumped Rose, so they must not have sucked that much.

Rob L
11-20-2007, 12:37 AM
Ty,

Interesting point re: whether Bonds took steroids before baseball made them illegal or after (and Bonds is innocent until proven guilty, shoe size not taken into consideration :) ). One thing that this whole steroid thing has been bugging me is the fact that so many think that it was ok until they were banned by MLB. No one seems to remember that distributing or using steroids (without a VALID perscription) was a felony offense prior to the MLB making them illegal. If the Feds had ever looked into this, many a player may have been carted off before MLB's sanctions.

I can't wait for the Mitchell report to come out. It will be very interesting to see how things wash out. It should be coming out any time.

Take care,

Rob L

OaklandAsFan
11-20-2007, 12:39 AM
LOL Bonds didn't cheat to win ballgames he cheated to pad his stats and make himself better than the "white boy" that was getting more press than him. He is less of a team player than Arod ever was or will be.

bigjimsguitars
11-20-2007, 12:43 AM
Part of addiction is the denial, ergo, he lied (Rose). Barry knowingly and with intent, injected substances that gave him an unfair advantage to break records and if I recall correctly LIED about it.

Bonds is the biggest Villain and it ain't even close. At the same time, the owners, trainers and all those who aided and abetted the Bonds of the game are also responsible and accountable and they too need to be brought forward to be slogged.

tym
11-20-2007, 01:01 AM
Ty,

Interesting point re: whether Bonds took steroids before baseball made them illegal or after (and Bonds is innocent until proven guilty, shoe size not taken into consideration :) ). One thing that this whole steroid thing has been bugging me is the fact that so many think that it was ok until they were banned by MLB. No one seems to remember that distributing or using steroids (without a VALID prescription) was a felony offense prior to the MLB making them illegal. If the Feds had ever looked into this, many a player may have been carted off before MLB's sanctions.

I can't wait for the Mitchell report to come out. It will be very interesting to see how things wash out. It should be coming out any time.

Take care,

Rob L

Rob, I have thought about the prescription card, hoping it wouldn't get played in this debate :)

I don't know, roids are a drug and drugs have known to make people do things they wouldn't normally do (like any other addiction - note to Big Jim), maybe at this trial Barry will find that old prescription paperwork he forgot to mention at the last grand jury inquiry and all will be okay :)

Both screwed up....and in the end both tainted the game and thus both will be part of the great debates along with Shoeless Joe Jackson and his crew long after we are dust.

Cheers,
Ty

Rob L
11-20-2007, 01:14 AM
Ty, I do believe you are right. We are definitely living through one of the defining moments in baseball and this will be talked about long after we are dust. Definitely an interesting time and it does create lively debates:confused:

Rob L

Carlevv
11-20-2007, 01:41 AM
Its hard to say who's the bigger vilan. Who's to say Pete never did anything? Im sorry but you dont play that hard for that long and not take painkillers, amphetimines so on and so forth. Common sense would indicate that. Steroids are performance inhancing just as any other drug out there including HGH, painkillers, and amphetimines. How many pitchers did Bonds go deep off of that were on some kind of drug or using pine tar to doctor the ball. Thats cheating too.........

David
11-20-2007, 01:57 AM
Say you're manager every game and and can bet on every game. If you bet on your team to win some games, that means the other games you are essentially betting that your team will lose. Besides-- and it's a big besides-- John Dowd has said he believes Rose bet against the Reds.

ahuff
11-20-2007, 08:23 AM
I've only read a portion of the posts. So my answer may have already been covered.

I am a person that did not like either player during any portion of their career. I only say that, so that you know that I am not a fan of either.

At this point, I would say that Bonds is the bigger Villian. Both were great players long before their disasterous decisions. Rose was wrong in betting on baseball. He was wrong for not confessing it. He was right in finally admitting to it. Bonds was wrong for taking steroids. He was wrong for lying to people about it. He has not confessed.

Just a side point. I believe that if convicted, the Commish should remove his eligibility for the Hall of Fame. Shoeless Joe and Pete both had to suffer for their wrongs. In addition, the Hall has set specific guidelines to follow.

Rule #5 states it clearly. Character is to play a role in the voting process.

http://web.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers/rules.jsp

bigjimsguitars
11-20-2007, 10:02 AM
Frankly, I'm amazed that some can just miff it all off that Bonds used steriods and justify it away, well others are also, and other cheat, that's the era we are in and, so forth and whatever.

Hey I guess integrity is not an issue.....

godwulf
11-20-2007, 10:39 AM
Another angle: If Bonds is banned from Hall of Fame consideration, or if it even appears that he will be, that would not bode well for Rose's chances for enshrinement...simply because MLB would want to avoid any perception or charge that they were being "racist" in permitting Rose to be so honored, while denying it to Bonds.

I believe that the majority of fans have been expecting - and rightly so - that Rose would get in sometime in the near future...but if Bonds is banned, Rose is probably screwed.

bigjimsguitars
11-20-2007, 10:53 AM
Let's add a little perspective to this. How many of us have ever placed a bet, even if a gentleman's bet?

How many newspapers carry the "Morning Line", e.g., betting line?

Okay, how many of us have injected steroids or other performance enhancing substances that were not legally prescribed?

It's sad that there are those who can say, well it's what everyone in sports is doing and say it's not so bad. Sorry, but I will never agree to such thinking as it erodes the integrity of the game as well as us as a people.

I personally hope that Barry Bonds be made the poster boy of why it's bad to shoot-up steroids so all of the aspiring young players will see that it's not the way to go...let alone the risks to one's health.

It's not too late for Barry Bonds to become a great person and leader by admitting what he has done and then use is star power to go to the youth and tell them first hand why it was the worst decision or thing he has ever done and become the role model he could be.

I also agree that Barry Bonds should be banned from Baseball and never step foot into the Hall of Fame as it stands right now.

Again, it's all of the owners, commissioners, managers, trainers and whoever, who turned a blind eye to all of this (trust me, Barry is only the tip of the iceberg) who also need to be brought forward and flogged.

Baseball is a perfect game and doesn't need to be juiced to be made better and at some point temptation will be thwarted and once again the game will be played by those who have respect for it and be played the way it's supposed to be...maybe even in my lifetime.

joelsabi
11-20-2007, 09:23 PM
i think somewhere up in each locker room is a sign about no betting so I with Rose.

tacprc
04-25-2008, 06:12 PM
This is no brainer. Bonds is the bigger villian. He cheated in order to give himself an advantage over his competitors, to increase his fame, and to increase his wealth. He should be kicked out of the game along with all the other steroid users. Chuck Lumb, Pete Rose fan, Chicago

jwasserman
04-25-2008, 07:14 PM
who coud hate this face?
http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g28/wassermj/Vintage/rose.jpg

seriously though- noboby played harder than rose or loved the game of baseball more. it's a shame that he's been villified so much (though i understand why). he's a victim of his own demons. bonds is a victim of his own selfish ego

tacprc
04-25-2008, 07:23 PM
Did you recently purchase that photo on eBay? I saw one listed there during the past 60 days. Thanks. Chuck

jwasserman
04-25-2008, 07:26 PM
sure did. i was surprised it didn't draw more bidding. it's a really cool piece!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=350036659315

Did you recently purchase that photo on eBay? I saw one listed there during the past 60 days. Thanks. Chuck

tacprc
04-25-2008, 08:21 PM
OK. Thanks. I wasn't sure that it was real so I didn't bid.

4cuda9er
04-26-2008, 01:17 PM
Just curious..Do any of the Bonds' haters actually think that the players who held records in the past, had to hit against pitchers that were using roids....???
I don't condone Bonds for lying about his use, but it is very hard to fine players of his era who not using enhancers, hitters, or pitchers...There are actually retired players, who are admitting to using enhancers when they were playing, and stated that it was common practice. I was able to get one of Bonds 700 series HR Balls hit into the cove, and it made the ball more valuable to me knowing that he hit it off of Franklin, who's name was also included in the roid reports.

Gary