Nelvin
Nelvin
Joined: Dec 14, 2015
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 1
December 15th, 2015 at 5:20:30 PM permalink
I really don't think Pete Rose should continue to be banned from Baseball just because he had a gambling addiction. Michael Vick had dogs fighting to the death/killed and even he eventually was let back into football. Somehow in this crazy world, dogs fighting to the death/killing them is a lesser crime than a gambling addiction.
Rigondeaux
Rigondeaux
Joined: Aug 18, 2014
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 2537
December 15th, 2015 at 5:30:16 PM permalink
Quote: kewlj

I don't accept this rational, NokTang. To accept this rational is accepting a lot of assumption as fact and that is not the standard.

Furthermore the assumptions made go completely against Pete Roses nature. This man is one of the most competitive people there is. He is or was trying to win every game, both as player and coach. Winning and losing mattered to him. Records mattered to win.



So it stands to reason, he might fudge the long term interests of his team to win this particular game, so that he could beat the bookie and win two competitions at once. Seems very consistent with a hyper-competitive personality.

Thing about this is, it is not about morality or what is fair to Pete Rose. Doesn't matter that other guys have been worse human beings and done worse things. Corruption related to gambling has the potential to devastate a sport, like nothing else. So it is in the interest of the sport to say, "this is the one thing that won't be forgiven until you die."

The only argument against that, I think, might be that the pay is so good now that gambling profits aren't enough to entice most players. So maybe it's not really a threat anymore.
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14232
December 15th, 2015 at 6:14:48 PM permalink
Quote: Nelvin

I really don't think Pete Rose should continue to be banned from Baseball just because he had a gambling addiction. Michael Vick had dogs fighting to the death/killed and even he eventually was let back into football. Somehow in this crazy world, dogs fighting to the death/killing them is a lesser crime than a gambling addiction.



Nelvin? Really, Kentry?

Goodbye.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
mcallister3200
mcallister3200
Joined: Dec 29, 2013
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 2856
December 15th, 2015 at 6:29:46 PM permalink
I think the assumption that Pete Rose will have his ban lifted and be inducted after his death is a fair punishment. He knew what he was doing affected the integrity of the game and potential consequences (or should have.)

I think saying he deserves to be in the HOF but doesn't deserve to see it in his lifetime is a fair punishment IMO. He was banned (seems like a final ruling, not a "backoff" :)

Or if he comes out and says he is gay or a woman he will be in within 5 years, he can lie about his sexual orientation if he really wants in the HOF. I kid, but really it would work. Would be PC thing to do then and MLB would be afraid of backlash if didn't let him in, the gambling thing would be a non issue then.
kewlj
kewlj
Joined: Apr 17, 2012
  • Threads: 214
  • Posts: 4422
December 15th, 2015 at 7:10:16 PM permalink
Quote: mcallister3200

I think the assumption that Pete Rose will have his ban lifted and be inducted after his death is a fair punishment. He knew what he was doing affected the integrity of the game and potential consequences (or should have.)

I think saying he deserves to be in the HOF but doesn't deserve to see it in his lifetime is a fair punishment IMO.



One of the problems is that it isn't only Pete Rose who is being punished. Baseball fans are being punished. What about those older long-term fans from Cincinnati, who want nothing more in their final days that to see their hero, one of the best in the game honored for his contributions on the field. They paid for that right by supporting baseball with their hard earned dollars.

I mean come on, Pete has been disgraced. Continuing the ban is now nothing more than a personal vendetta. The former commissioner went as far to say, that it is now more about the fact that Pete lied for all those years. Yes, Pete Rose is a liar. He also apparently has a gambling addiction, much the same as Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley and numerous other professional athletes. I mean come on.....is it about the person's character or is about acknowledging and honoring his abilities on the baseball field.
muleyvoice
muleyvoice
Joined: Nov 14, 2015
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 135
December 15th, 2015 at 7:59:10 PM permalink
Quote: kewlj

One of the problems is that it isn't only Pete Rose who is being punished. Baseball fans are being punished. What about those older long-term fans from Cincinnati, who want nothing more in their final days that to see their hero, one of the best in the game honored for his contributions on the field. They paid for that right by supporting baseball with their hard owned dollars.

I mean come on, Pete has been disgraced. Continuing the ban is now nothing more than a personal vendetta. The former commissioner went as far to say, that it is now more about the fact that Pete lied for all those years. Yes, Pete Rose is a liar. He also apparently has a gambling addiction, much the same as Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley and numerous other professional athletes. I mean come on is it about the person's character or is about acknowledging and honoring his abilities on the baseball field.



I notice not many 200 hitters in the Baseball Hall of Fame despite being good family men and admirable citizens.
NokTang
NokTang
Joined: Aug 15, 2011
  • Threads: 56
  • Posts: 1314
December 16th, 2015 at 4:15:59 AM permalink
Quote: Gabes22


1) Yes he bet on baseball while he was a manager. From my understanding he bet on his team to win. However does that mean on days he bet for his team, as a manager did he make moves or save players in other games, or by not betting on a particular game, tip of certain players via those actions to put money on the opposition.



That was my summary, and the points made in the Dowd report which led to his suspension. The part you mention about the bookie betting on the opposition did in fact happen.

These don't allow us to conclude he didn't want to win every game as the poster mentioned. It just confirms that not betting every game is the same as betting against and threatens the integrity of the sport in general.
NokTang
NokTang
Joined: Aug 15, 2011
  • Threads: 56
  • Posts: 1314
December 16th, 2015 at 4:21:42 AM permalink
Quote: kewlj

He also apparently has a gambling addiction, much the same as Michael Jordan, Charles Barkley and numerous other professional athletes. I mean come on.....is it about the person's character or is about acknowledging and honoring his abilities on the baseball field.



I don't think Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley were involved in a pick six wheel at some obscure horse track and then had a runner cash the ticket.

The writers and/or MLB aren't allowing the on field accomplishments out weigh or to be separated by his gambling on baseball while a manager and betting against his team as manager. If you don't accept their decisions and rules, such is life. They have the power, you and I don't. Pete if you may recall, was actually making calls to the bookie from the clubhouse so obviously his mind wasn't strictly on the game he was involved in, not that that in and of itself is a "crime".
Asswhoopermcdaddy
Asswhoopermcdaddy
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 555
December 16th, 2015 at 4:42:43 AM permalink
I use to feel the same as most until I had an interesting debate with the family. Pete Rose bet on baseball and did so during the games as some have pointed out. Nevertheless, his ban seems inconsistent with all other bans. Players who beat their wives or children are allowed to return to the sport. Players who use performance enhancing steroids are allowed back. Why not Pete Rose?

The "integrity of the game" is often cited as a strong reason. I agree it was violated, but it was no more dangerous than PEDs or the PR damage from issues with one's personal life. So why make an example out of Pete Rose?

One of the issues in my family debate was whether as a result of gambling on the games, if Pete ever put his players in jeopardy whether it was to beat a spread or score more runs. Did he ever make a managerial call to keep a pitcher in there too long to stretch it out? Did he ever substitute a player for similar reasons.

That ambiguity is much harder to quantify. You might argue that PEDs are limited to one player's performance, health, and stats. Off-field family or personal issues are just that, "off-field". Pete is a manager, and he is responsible for the welfare of an entire team.

I like the argument that he never bet against his team. But since he didn't bet ever game, does that suggest he knew something? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Hey if you're going against the Yankees, why bet against them? And it is ironic that you ban his from baseball, yet you invite him to other baseball events. That's just hypocritical.

No other player has suffered as much. Give him a chance. What more can he do to repent?
terapined
terapined
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 5898
December 16th, 2015 at 5:00:04 AM permalink
There are a gazillion rules in baseball
Some are important rules
Some are minor rules

There is only 1 rule that is deemed so important, its posted on the wall in plain sight in every single clubhouse in the Major Leagues
The rule is no gambling on baseball
Every single player sees this rule on the clubhouse wall every single day.
As a baseball player, you cannot avoid seeing this rule every single day
This is the most important rule in baseball and Pete Rose broke it
He should be banned just as Shoeless Joe Jackson ban still stands

A few weeks ago, was walking down the strip and saw the Pete Rose Bar
Despite his ban, still a fan and stopped in to look at the baseball memorabilia and have a drink
WOV supports censorship. Bring back free speech challenging lies.

  • Jump to: