The rumor I’ve heard is that Rose (or Linder) have found some information (possibly related to the collusion scandles of the 1980’s) that, if publicly released, could force the Selig family out of baseball.
Wait!!! Stop the presses –
According to the Reds’ website, this report is bogus:
http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/cin/news/cin_press_release.jsp?ymd=20030812&content_id=478930&vkey=pr_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin
(I hope so – I have to admit, when I saw this thread title, I burst into tears)
Yahoo says MLB is saying it isn’t true.
FWTW.
And here’s ESPN
Please please please let it not be true.
Who do I have to bribe? Would $1.14 be enough?
Julie
[url=“http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/story?id=1594520”]MLB** is saying it isn’t true, as well.
That, for those of you who like to click on working links, is here.
Of course, Bud Selig is still the juiciest pimple on the backside of a neo-Nazi crack whore.
Julie
Well, Bob DuPuy who’s denying it is Selig’s lapdog.
BP has stated that they stand by their story.
And really, who would you be more likely to believe?
JC, on something like this I don’t know the biases etc. enough to believe either party. I’m going with MLB because the idea that Pete Rose got reinstated is fugly to me and I dunwanna believe it.
Think of me as someone who has no idea what groups in this (ie. BP, MLB, etc) have credibility/standing and what groups have none.
Amen to that. Can’t we ban him from baseball??
I notice that MLB’s denials are of the “non-denial denial” type. You notice they aren’t saying Rose won’t return to baseball next year, or that he’ll have to admit first to betting on MLB games.
And on preview, I gotta go with JC: my money’s on the Baseball Prospectus, hands down. MLB’s run by a bunch of weasels, and Selig is the Head Weasel.
My apologies to any weasels who might be offended by this comparison.
Here’s an interview with the guys who broke the story. They’re defending the truthfulness of it.
I’m afraid I must agree with my new baseball wife here.
He broke the rules, he broke one of the BIGGEST rules ever…He knew the consequences beforehand.
Too frequently in this day and age, people are allowed to skate through, to escape culpability, to be reprimanded only to have their punishment revoked, when the consequences are set forth. Pete Rose shouldn’t have broken the rule, and we wouldn’t be in this mess…our dreams not shattered.
Pete Rose did us all a great disservice, and for that, he should pay. Letting him off the hook sends the wrong message to the public, to the team that he was coaching, and to our children.
~J
::cough:: baseball husband ::cough::
::refrains from running nekkid thru thread as proof::
Oh, I’d trust the guys at BP with no hesitation over the idiots at MLB. I’m just hoping like hell that they just happen to be wrong this once.
I’m sure they’ve been wrong before, right? RIGHT?
crickets
Sob.
Julie
I think Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, with the plaque recommended by Fay Vincent:
I think the HOF’s rule prohibiting people on the permanently ineligible list lessens the hall’s importance as a historical institution. Sure, it’s meant to be a celebration of everything good and wonderful about baseball, but I think that it should also demonstrate a committment to keeping it that way. One of the best ways to do this would be to include players and instances that brought disgrace on majopr league baseball. As someone else suggested on another message board I read, Rose’s plaque can hang between Eddie Ciccote’s and Joe Jackson’s.
That being said, Pete Rose should never be reinstated by Major League Baseball as long as he lives. He should never be allowed to manage a team, to serve as an executive, to appear at any MLB events except as an audience member, to throw out any first pitch, to rake the infield, to mop tobacco juice out of the dugout, or to wash players’ jockstraps. His actions called into question the integrity of the game, and that is something that the sport absolutely cannot afford to compromise.
Rob Neyer of ESPN has an excellent article about the question here.
I’m on record as hating Pete Rose since the 1970 All-Star game when he bulldozed my childhood hero Ray Fosse, separating his shoulder and in effect ruining his career. My distain for him increased when Rose bitched about the end of his 44 game hitting streak instead of giving credit to the pitcher, Gene Garber if memory serves, who stopped him. And that’s just for his baseball playing, without getting into his assholic behavior since then. Damn Rose all to hell.
You know, Rose wasn’t that awful as a manager. Not Hall of Fame caliber, not even Manager of the Year caliber, but not awful nonetheless:
Year League Team G W L WP Finish
+----+-----------+--------+-----+----+----+------+------+
1984 NL West Cincnnti 41 19 22 .463 5
1985 NL West Cincnnti 162 89 72 .553 2
1986 NL West Cincnnti 162 86 76 .531 2
1987 NL West Cincnnti 162 84 78 .519 2
1988 NL West Cincnnti 134 75 59 .560 2
1989 NL West Cincnnti 125 59 66 .472 5
+----+-----------+--------+-----+----+----+------+------+
TOTAL 786 412 373 .525
]
He basically managed four full seasons and parts of two others. In the four full seasons, he finished second each time. Second isn’t awful. And his career winning percentage is over .500. He was mediocre, perhaps even passable as a manager.
The only way I would EVER support letting Pete Rose back into baseball is if MLB got rid of the Yankees, the Braves, and Barry “Dickhead” Bonds in exchange.
Harumph.
No, it won’t. Shouting it in boldface doesn’t make it correct. The rule is that if you bet on a game “in which you have a duty to perform” (play, coach, or manage), you will be banned for life. Betting on other baseball games brings a penalty of at least a year, but not a lifetime ban.
The evidence that Rose bet on games involving Cincinnati is less convincing than the evidence that he bet on baseball.