Pete Rose poll on ESPN front page

[Roady]

Should Pete Rose's lifetime ban from baseball be reversed?

81%
Yes
19%
No
Discuss (Total votes: 170,988)

[Hoosier39]

25yrs is long enough for what he did. I say let the guy in while he's still here.

They should also take a poll of all members of the HOF and if they think he deserves in, then he should be put back on the ballot. Or somethin like that....

[ironmanfan]

25yrs is long enough for what he did. I say let the guy in while he's still here.

They should also take a poll of all members of the HOF and if they think he deserves in, then he should be put back on the ballot. Or somethin like that....

I think if they polled the existing members of the Hall of Fame, the overwhelming majority of them would be against it.

[Hoosier39]

I think if they polled the existing members of the Hall of Fame, the overwhelming majority of them would be against it.


I think you're right. And if that's correct, then it would tough letting him in when the majority are against it.

Then again, that might not be fair for Rose.

[Roady]

I think if they polled the existing members of the Hall of Fame, the overwhelming majority of them would be against it.

Let's take a poll to find out instead of guessing. :)
I have only talked to a handful of HOFers but never asked them about it.
How many have you asked?

[Hoosier39]

Let's take a poll to find out instead of guessing. :)
I have only talked to a handful of HOFers but never asked them about it.
How many have you asked?

I was listening to the radio a couple days ago and I think they said F. Robinson is very much against it. Not sure if that was all, but that's who I heard in the small clip. Very curious about the other members.

[Roady]

I was listening to the radio a couple days ago and I think they said F. Robinson is very much against it. Not sure if that was all, but that's who I heard in the small clip. Very curious about the other members.
I would be very curious to hear all of their opinions also.

[brianborsch]

If anyone should be let in, it should be Joe Jackson. He was proven innocent and he is still banned?! On top of that he is dead! Even a criminal prinoer's sentence is considered served at death, yet Joe Jackson is still banned years after he has passed?! Simply absurd. If Rose gets in, then Jackson better be allowed in too.

[Roady]

If anyone should be let in, it should be Joe Jackson. He was proven innocent and he is still banned?! On top of that he is dead! Even a criminal prinoer's sentence is considered served at death, yet Joe Jackson is still banned years after he has passed?! Simply absurd. If Rose gets in, then Jackson better be allowed in too.

There are a lot of good books written on the Black Sox. It is very interesting and I have wavered over the years between his innocence and his guilt.
He was found innocent in a court of law but the Commissioner had the right to ban him if he chose based on what the Commissioner believed at the time.
Right or wrong at least Landis made a decision unlike Selig does.

[godwulf]

If Rose had ever bet against a team that he was playing for or managing, I'd say let the lifetime ban follow him to the grave; that's not the case. Given the negative role that gambling played in Baseball's early days, it's understandable that MLB should have a bug up its butt, to some degree, about gambling - but attitudes about it have changed in the past fifty years, have they not?

In the early '80s, both Mantle and Mays were placed by Commissioner Bowie Kuhn on the "permanently ineligible" list for being associated in some way with a gambling casino.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2012/02/february-8th-mickey-mantle-is-threatened-with-a-lifetime-ban-from-baseball-and-subsequently-banned-for-working-at-a-casino/

Today, some MLB teams - and I'm thinking of my own team, the Diamondbacks in particular - have casinos as major sponsors.

I don't know, when people debate about who does or does not belong in the HoF because of off-field conduct - me, I always think about that racist nutcase Ty Cobb, and I think that puts certain things in perspective.

[Roady]

If Rose had ever bet against a team that he was playing for or managing, I'd say let the lifetime ban follow him to the grave; that's not the case.

I don't know, when people debate about who does or does not belong in the HoF because of off-field conduct - me, I always think about that racist nutcase Ty Cobb, and I think that puts certain things in perspective.

I agree about Rose.

You should do more homework on Ty Cobb. A lot of people let the book of a broke writer, later turned into a fantasy movie, influence their idea of Cobb. The same writer who wrote a totally different book about Cobb when Cobb was alive.
There is no evidence that Cobb was a racist. He used be praised by the early black players and there are many pics of Cobb with young black players such as Hank Aaron.

[johnsontravis@ymail.com]

But how does he get into the hall of fame even if unbanned? He is past his eligibility so they would have to make a special exception etc. It isn't like getting unbanned is his golden ticket.

[Roady]

But how does he get into the hall of fame even if unbanned? He is past his eligibility so they would have to make a special exception etc. It isn't like getting unbanned is his golden ticket.

Veterans committee

[helf35]

I have seen interviews with Bench and Schmidt and I know they both want him in. I'm sure the majority of the guys that played with him would like to see him in. I think the real question is what are the guys opinions from the 80's go present day?

[Skizzick]

I was listening to the radio a couple days ago and I think they said F. Robinson is very much against it. Not sure if that was all, but that's who I heard in the small clip. Very curious about the other members.
Robinson is a known curmudgeon who has been very vocal about Pete not getting into the Hall. Unfortunately he's on the Veterans Committee. I doubt the others are that against it, especially considering Joe Morgan is one of them.

[godwulf]

Now that you mention it, I remember now Mike Schmidt ruffling some feathers, to say the least, when he talked about Pete Rose's situation in his own HoF acceptance speech.

And I will do some further "homework" on Cobb, and I sincerely hope that what I said about him turns out to be wrong.

[Mark17]

If Rose had ever bet against a team that he was playing for or managing, I'd say let the lifetime ban follow him to the grave; that's not the case.

If Rose bet on his own team some of the time, but not all of the time, then the games he was betting on them, he was more apt to use his better players, leave his best starters in there, go to the bullpen earlier, and so on.

The games he did not bet on his own team, he'd be more likely to give his best guys a rest, pull a top starter early to save his arm, maybe go with a lesser reliever if the game wasn't close.

So I'd say, when you bet on your own team some of the time, the games you don't bet on them, you are, in a sense, betting against them.

[earlywynnfan]

I've always said to put Rose in the HOF and stamp on his plaque "Bet on baseball as a manager."

Jackson took the gamblers' money, that's pretty guilty in my book.

Ken

[Roady]

If Rose bet on his own team some of the time, but not all of the time, then the games he was betting on them, he was more apt to use his better players, leave his best starters in there, go to the bullpen earlier, and so on.

The games he did not bet on his own team, he'd be more likely to give his best guys a rest, pull a top starter early to save his arm, maybe go with a lesser reliever if the game wasn't close.

So I'd say, when you bet on your own team some of the time, the games you don't bet on them, you are, in a sense, betting against them.

That is an outstanding point and one I not given any thought to.
Thanks for the lesson. :)

[Skizzick]

If Rose bet on his own team some of the time, but not all of the time, then the games he was betting on them, he was more apt to use his better players, leave his best starters in there, go to the bullpen earlier, and so on.

The games he did not bet on his own team, he'd be more likely to give his best guys a rest, pull a top starter early to save his arm, maybe go with a lesser reliever if the game wasn't close.

So I'd say, when you bet on your own team some of the time, the games you don't bet on them, you are, in a sense, betting against them.

Fair point, but even if they wanted to keep the lifetime ban from being associated with a team, why can't they just put him in the Hall of Fame. It is a separate organization from the MLB anyway. They only keep Rose and Jackson out of the Hall of Fame at the behest of the MLB.

[ShaimOnYou]

This is really simple.

Just elect California Governor Jerry Brown as Commissioner of MLB. He's as dumb as a rock, liberal as all get up, will never support anything built on a foundation of moral values, and elevates the word "wasteful" to a whole new atmosphere. Heck, he constantly supports legislation which breaks the laws of the state he's swore to govern! But he's got a bleeding heart for anyone who cries "foul" no matter how wrong or weak that individual's platform is. Pete would be reinstated within hours of Brown's appointment.

Back to the argument. Peter Edward Rose. He is ignorant, arrogant, and abused his privileges as a manager while breaking the Cardinal sin of the game he's supposed to love and respect. Problem is, Pete Rose is too numb between the ears to even understand what is involved with displaying "respect" for the game.

That said, he is also pretty much a harmless guy, and his sins against the game are like anything else. You do the crime, you do the time. He's done his, hasn't he? 25 years and counting. He will probably never fully accept what he did as heinously criminal against the game because his brain doesn't grasp it in it's most simple form, in black and white in the MLB baseball rule book. To him, there was never any intent to "cheat the game" by betting on them, only desire to win some coin because he was "betting on his men", and thinking he could beat the house as an insider. Wrong? Sure. Harmful to the game? In undiscovered secrecy, not really if truth be known. Certainly could have been if he eventually changed his managerial practices to increase his chances of winning. But there is no proof he ever did that. And evidence uncovered actually supports the argument against that, that he in fact didn't do anything other than just bet on teams (and pitchers) he "thought would win that day".

In his defense, he wasn't sophisticated enough from the neck up to engage in a gambling system to cheat the game. Even if he was, in light of ALL the evidence found against him, he didn't. I personally don't believe he ever considered cheating MLB by modifying the outcome of even one single game for financial gain, other than to win it outright. WHY would he? He was "The HIT KING", just a highly driven super-competitive A-personality type who achieved the pinnacle of success as the all-time hit leader in MLB. Baseball made him famous, rich. His personality carried with it the desire for more competition after retirement as a player. So, as many do, he turned to gambling. After all, he was "the man" and knew he could "beat the house"! Why would he turn on it in a nasty way? He is more likely guilty of riding his fame by carrying entitlement with his success to do as he saw fit. Self-proclaimed as "baseball's best ambassador", it simply doesn't cross his wiring to destroy the fabric of the game by cheating the outcomes of the very reason it exists: To play the games and be the best! So in HIS MIND, what harm did he cause the game by betting along with his efforts to win?

Yes, he broke the rules, and he's paid and is STILL paying a humiliatingly long sentence for it. At this point, what is there left to gain from keeping him banned? The point has been made. The "lesson" established for all to have as an example to refer to until the end of eternity. Reinstate the poor simpleton louse, for he knew not what he had done. I've met Pete several times. He's actually a really nice louse. A character, but a nice guy who will take time to talk to you ALL ABOUT baseball. He has apologized for what he did. I think he gets it now. After all, it is his life. It would be merciful to see the people in charge of it not make it his death.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

If Rose had ever bet against a team that he was playing for or managing, I'd say let the lifetime ban follow him to the grave; that's not the case.

As Mark17 mentioned, when you don't bet the same amount on your team in every game they play, you're betting against the team any time you choose to bet less on them. This is the same concept as bet sizing in blackjack.


In the early '80s, both Mantle and Mays were placed by Commissioner Bowie Kuhn on the "permanently ineligible" list for being associated in some way with a gambling casino.

For one, Kuhn's decision to ban them for working in casinos was ridiculous. Mantle had been retired for 14 years and Mays for nine. Neither had any direct influence on the outcome of baseball games. By contrast, Rose set the line-up, made in-game strategy decisions, decided the pitching staff, etc... Oh, and he even bet on games while he was a player, by his own admission in his book My Prison Without Bars.

It was obvious that Kuhn was wrong in his decision, since Peter Ueberroth removed the ban as soon as he became commissioner. By contrast, Fay Vincent didn't reverse the Rose decision, nor has Bud Selig. Also, if Selig decides to reinstate Rose as his last act, I hope the next commissioner immediately bans him again. If Selig were going to reinstate Rose, he should have done it well before he decided to retire.

[brianborsch]

Just make it easy. Rose messed up. Bad. He should be kept out. Just like Bonds, McGwire, Arod etc. Examples need to be made if we don't want history to repeat. They all cheated or broke the rules knowingly. That in my opinion omits your entrance into the HOF.

[ShaimOnYou]

Wow, tough crowd. I guess the poor louse should just go crawl under a rock somewhere and dry up.

That's OK, I'm a Ty Cobb fan anyways. I always prefer a racist, a guy accused of killing another human being, and someone who had very few (if any) real friends at the time of his death. Why? Because he never bet on baseball, by golly! Yep, that's my kind of man. Rose can rot.

[Roady]

Wow, tough crowd. I guess the poor louse should just go crawl under a rock somewhere and dry up.

That's OK, I'm a Ty Cobb fan anyways. I always prefer a racist, a guy accused of killing another human being, and someone who had very few (if any) real friends at the time of his death. Why? Because he never bet on baseball, by golly! Yep, that's my kind of man. Rose can rot.

Ty Cobb was not a racist and not any proof can be found that proves he was.
Every uneducated person who watched that stupid movie based on the book written by that broke writer needs to do some homework.
That same author wrote a totally different book about Cobb when Cobb was alive after spending a lot of time with him.

[yankees506]

Rose should not die without being in the hall of fame, murderers at times don't have to serve 20 year sentences. Enough is enough he deserves his day in Cooperstown (not having to sign autos down the street)

[ShaimOnYou]

Ty Cobb was not a racist and not any proof can be found that proves he was.
Every uneducated person who watched that stupid movie based on the book written by that broke writer needs to do some homework.
That same author wrote a totally different book about Cobb when Cobb was alive after spending a lot of time with him.

Ty Cobb was a one-of-a-kind racist.

He hated all mankind. ;)

[Roady]

Ty Cobb was a one-of-a-kind racist.

He hated all mankind. ;)

According to that fantasy book written by that chareton.

I guess I get tired of mans name being trashed and ruined by people spreading a rumor.

Ty Cobb was a warrior on the field. He likened it to going to war.
That doesn't make him a racist.

[Roady]

According to that fantasy book written by that chareton.

I guess I get tired of mans name being trashed and ruined by people spreading a rumor.

Ty Cobb was a warrior on the field. He likened it to going to war.
That doesn't make him a racist.

....charleton I meant.

[Skizzick]

According to that fantasy book written by that chareton.

I guess I get tired of mans name being trashed and ruined by people spreading a rumor.

Ty Cobb was a warrior on the field. He likened it to going to war.
That doesn't make him a racist.

No, likening baseball to going to war doesn't make a man racist.

However, beating up a crippled black spectator does.

[Roady]

No, likening baseball to going to war doesn't make a man racist.

However, beating up a crippled black spectator does.

You would be better served learning the truth instead of spreading rumors.

[Roady]

First, the "cripple" was not black.

Second, the "cripple" called Cobb the N word. Guess only blacks can be offended by being called that word in your world.

Third, The "cripple" was missing one hand and part of another due to an accident. Guess his tongue still worked enough to yell racist things at Cobb though.

Fourth, In the 1920's Cobb leased a hunting preserve ieht over 12,000 acres in MaGruder, GA and built a house on it for a black man, named Uncle Bob Robinson, and his family to live there. They stayed rent free in exchange to watch over the land. Robinson always hunted with Cobb when Cobb visited. They were good friends.

Fifth, Nobody has provided actual proof that Ty Cobb was ever a racist and not one article ever written about the man during his life can be found to say otherwise.

Sixth, The headline of the Independent Journal Jan. 29, 1952 "Ty Cobb, Fiety Diamond Star, Favors Negroes in Baseball"
MENLOPARK (AP)—Tyrus Raymond Cobb, fiery old-time star of the diamond, stepped up to the plate today to clout a verbal home run in favor of Negroes in baseball.
Himself a native of the Deep South, Cobb voiced approval of the recent decision of the Dallas club to use Negro players if they came up to Texas league caliber.

The old Georgia Peach of Detroit Tigers fame was a fighter from the word go during his brilliant playing career. He neither asked for nor gave quarter in 24 tumultuous years in the American League. Time has mellowed the one time firebrand and he views the sport in the pleasant role of a country squire. He spoke emphatically on the subject of Negroes in baseball, however.

"Certainly it is O.K. for them to play," he said, "I see no reason in the world why we shouldn't compete with colored athletes as long as they conduct themselves with politeness and gentility. Let me say also that no white man has the right to be less of a gentleman than a colored man, in my book that goes not only for baseball but in all walks of life.”

"I like them, (Negro race) personally. When I was little I had a colored mammy. I played with colored children."

Seventh, for this mans name to be drug through the mud by uninformed zealots is shameful.

Here is a good article. Read it and learn from it.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/43506-ty-cobb-was-not-a-racist

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Rose should not die without being in the hall of fame, murderers at times don't have to serve 20 year sentences. Enough is enough he deserves his day in Cooperstown (not having to sign autos down the street)

The murderer comment depends entirely upon state law. Colorado carries a maximum penalty of 35 years for first degree murder, and Utah has a minimum sentencing guideline of 15 years for murder. By contrast, Pennsylvania has life without parole as a sentence for second degree murder.

In any case, those released from prison are granted release under the parole system or the auspices of new evidence. Those are the guidelines for the crime. Rose's guidelines are a permanent ban that can only be overturned by the Commissioner of Baseball.

For those who insist Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, take solace in the fact that he is in *a* Hall of Fame: The WWE Hall of Fame.

[yankees506]

The murderer comment depends entirely upon state law. Colorado carries a maximum penalty of 35 years for first degree murder, and Utah has a minimum sentencing guideline of 15 years for murder. By contrast, Pennsylvania has life without parole as a sentence for second degree murder.

In any case, those released from prison are granted release under the parole system or the auspices of new evidence. Those are the guidelines for the crime. Rose's guidelines are a permanent ban that can only be overturned by the Commissioner of Baseball.

For those who insist Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, take solace in the fact that he is in *a* Hall of Fame: The WWE Hall of Fame.

I have seen many a murder in my field of work do far less time than rose has served in this span. Taking a life does not equate to betting on baseball, I'm a firm believer the punishment should fit the crime. A lifetime ban should be held for people who egregiously break the moral codes of civilization. You meant to tell me rose is banned because he did what millions of citizens do everyday? Bet on sports? Grants he said he bet on his own team but to win! Never to lose! I've heard the arguments about him using players to hedge his bets but come on! Lifetime ban is excessive in his case

[danesei@yahoo.com]

I have seen many a murder in my field of work do far less time than rose has served in this span. Taking a life does not equate to betting on baseball, I'm a firm believer the punishment should fit the crime. A lifetime ban should be held for people who egregiously break the moral codes of civilization. You meant to tell me rose is banned because he did what millions of citizens do everyday? Bet on sports? Grants he said he bet on his own team but to win! Never to lose! I've heard the arguments about him using players to hedge his bets but come on! Lifetime ban is excessive in his case

A few things to point out:

1) Rose spent zero days in jail for betting on the Reds. He did go to jail for five months for something else gambling related, but it wasn't for the incidents related to his ban from baseball.
2) The "millions of citizens" that you refer to do not have the capacity nor ability to "directly impact the outcome" of the games that they place wagers one.
3) Rose knew the rule beforehand, knew the consequences, and chose to ignore the rule anyway. Now that he's being punished according to the established rule and punishment, he's saying that he shouldn't be banned.

I really find it distasteful that you liken Rose's ban from baseball to a sentence for murder, but you chose that analogy, so I'll stick to it.

If Rose murdered someone and served the time appointed by the judge, deemed to be on good behavior, and eligible for parole, it would be up to a parole board and the governor of his state (assuming he was incarcerated in a state facility) to determine whether he should be released back into society. He didn't murder anyone.

Rose bet on Cincinnati Reds baseball games, as a player and manager of the Cincinnati Reds. The penalty for such an action is a permanent ban from the game. Since he agreed to a ban, in lieu of a full investigation, a clause was included that Rose is eligible to petition the Commissioner of Baseball for reinstatement. He's filed two such petitions. Neither time has the Commissioner at the time determined Rose should be reinstated. If Selig doesn't allow Rose back into baseball, it will be up to the Rob Manfred (the next Commissioner) to read Rose's petition and decide whether to accept it or not.

The reality is that the clause was likely included in the agreement to allow Rose to be reinstated, should new evidence support his claims of innocence. Unfortunately for Rose, his book admitted to gambling on games, not only as the Reds manager, but also during his time as a player. It's unlikely that the admission a decade ago helped his cause, since he actually admitted to a something (betting as a player) that was often cited by fans as a defense ("Rose never bet on games while he played!") of his lower degree of guilt.

[yankees506]

I'm not the judge jury or executioner In this case. We can agree to disagree, rose is the most prolific base hitter in mlb history. He deserves to be in the hall biased on this Merritt alone. My line of work has seem a lot of people get away with doing a lot worse. It is what it is but in my opinion rose is hof worthy after serving his ban for over 20 years.

[Roady]

I believe Rose will get in the HOF eventually.
I believe it will be after his death.
That is the best MLB will do for him I believe. I don't think they will ever put him in while he is alive because that would let him claim the victory. He insulted too many people with his arrogance for the many years he denied doing it before finally admitting to it in his book.

[beachpetrol]

<a href="<iframe width=" 560"="" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/GYEGUzV-tOs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="">"><a href="<iframe width=" 560"="" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/GYEGUzV-tOs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="">

[beachpetrol]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYEGUzV-tOs

[danesei@yahoo.com]

I'm not the judge jury or executioner In this case. We can agree to disagree, rose is the most prolific base hitter in mlb history. He deserves to be in the hall biased on this Merritt alone. My line of work has seem a lot of people get away with doing a lot worse. It is what it is but in my opinion rose is hof worthy after serving his ban for over 20 years.

A large part of the law is based upon the concept of precedent. The precedent for Rose's infraction is limited, but clear:

1943 William B Cox was banned for life for betting on his own team

That's the only precedent of an individual being banned singularly for betting on his own team. To this day, Cox has never been reinstated, so the precedent facing Rose is 71 years and counting.

[Mark17]

Pete Rose was very much a student of baseball history. He knew who the great players were, their milestones, and he took great pride in passing many of those players, ultimately passing Cobb's hit total.

He knew all about the 1919 Black Sox and their permanent ban from baseball. He knew Buck Weaver was banned for life for simply knowing about gambling but not reporting it. He knew Joe Jackson was banned even though he hit .375 in that Series.

I have read that Major League ballplayers are continually reminded of the very strict, uncompromising rules against gambling, including signs in locker rooms, and so on. Pete Rose knew that gambling was a very serious offense in the eyes of Baseball.

And... he did it anyway, many many times, over many seasons. He knew the rules very well, he knew the consequences very well, and he did it anyway. Now, he doesn't think HE should be subject to the consequences of his actions because he is Pete Rose and he has 4,200+ base hits.

If you don't like the fact Pete Rose is not in the Hall of Fame, blame one person and one thing: Pete Rose and his arrogance.

[Buccaneer Madden]

Yes, he deserves to go in the hall for his play. When they make his plaque they need to add a line at the end saying he was banned from baseball for betting while as a manager.

[danesei@yahoo.com]

Yes, he deserves to go in the hall for his play. When they make his plaque they need to add a line at the end saying he was banned from baseball for betting while as a manager.

Correction. Per his own book, he bet on games while he played, as well. His stats may deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, but his permanent ban from the game prevents him from being enshrined until an MLB Commissioner agrees to lift the ban.

[Roady]

With the HOF being so watered down with good but not great players I don't think it makes much difference anymore.
I would have to believe that more and more fans think the HOF is becoming less and less relevant.

[godwulf]

With the HOF being so watered down with good but not great players I don't think it makes much difference anymore.
I would have to believe that more and more fans think the HOF is becoming less and less relevant.

+1. Any "Hall of Fame" inductee ought to be one of the very best of the best - not just a popular player with pretty good stats. I believe the notion that some folks seem to have gotten - that two or three players have to go into the Hall every year or "something is wrong" - has contributed to the lowered standards and decreased fan interest. Hey, everybody loves a good ceremony, with a dose of nostalgia, and, yeah, it feels good to publicly honor some guy whom you used to love to watch play The Game...but succumbing to all that has increasingly turned the Hall of Fame into the Hall of I-Played-Too!