Pete Rose on Trial: The American people are Fucking Idiots

The BBQ Pit
1

Not that that’s surprising news. Yes, I watched ESPN’s Trial of Pete Rose last night, along with the SportsCentury about him.

As for the trial, Bill James came off as an ill-informed gasbag/asshat, who has a grudge of some kind against Bart Giamatti. It was quite satsifying to see Alan Dershowitz utterly destroy what little credibility James had. It was an especially good bit when James said that Giamatti was planning to suspend rose for something other then betting on baseball, but then refused to say what that was.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

On the SportsCentury episode I learned that Rose is to put it kindly, nothing but scummy no good gutter trash. In addition to fucking anything that didn’t have a cock, and then flaunting that fact around Cincinnatti, despite his wife’s pleas not to, he also used corked bats in his last few seasons while chasing Ty Cobbs hits record. It was also interesting that none of his teamates who were interviewed for the SportsCentury said anything about Rose being a team player, but instead gave the impression that Rose was all about himself. Big shocker there.

But despite my high hopes, the jury voted 8-4 to let Rose into the Hall of Fame, many for quite ludicrous reasoning… I did find it interesting that no mention seemed to have been made of the fact that in every major league clubhouse there is a big sign which clearly states that betting on baseball is illegal and the consequences if one is caught.

As for those of you who will no doubt bleat that the Doud report is nothing but a vendetta or that the evidence is flawed, I will ask you the same questions that Faye Vincent did on the SportsCentury program: If Rose didn’t bet on baseball, where is his defense? and saying *I didn’t bet on baseball * doesn’t even come close. How does Rose explain the betting slips made out in his own handwriting? Saying I didn’t bet on baseball doesn’t cut it. How does Rose explain his thumbprint on a betting slip? Saying I didn’t bet on baseball doesn’t cut it.How does Rose explain the telephone calls made from Riverfront stadium to a known bookie? Saying I didn’t bet on baseball doesn’t cut it.

And for those that say that Rose has suffered enough, bullshit. he’s made more money since he was banned then he did during his entire career.

And the sad thing is, that all Rose would have to do is admit that yes, I did bet on baseball. It was a dumb thing to do and it was the wrong thing to do and I apologize.

That’s it.

He wouldn’t have to pay a fine or anything.

But he will never do that 'cause he is an egomaniacal scumbag.

Major League Baseball has taken a step backwards with the whole All-Star Game determining home field for the World series fiasco, and if they reinstate Rose without a public apology from him, they will take 100 steps back, by saying that as long as the fans want you back, it doesn’t matter if you break babseballs most important rule.

2

It’s one of the few subjects on which Bill James, a good man, is completely irrational.

3

From what I saw, those who voted in favor of Rose must have been escorted from the room during the parts about Rose betting on baseball and the implications, which he had to know about, of being caught doing so.

How do I know this?

Because otherwise they wouldn’t have said “He was a good player, he should be in.” They would have said “Regardless of his proficiency in baseball, he broke The Rule. For that,his lifetime banning is appropriate.”

4

BogieBlanca; do these names mean anything to you?

Babe Ruth; left his first wife and children in poverty, womanized, gambled (although not on baseball), drank himself pretty much to death. However. He was an AMAZING baseball player.

Ty Cobb. What an unbelievable dickwad. Again, fantastic player.

The list goes on and on. The only difference was, those guys were not around in this era of a celeb not being able to shit in private without someone telling the world, and the world judging.

The question is: Does a baseball player gain the Baseball Hall of Fame based on his accomplishments, or his public fuckups? If the answer is accomplishments, then, I’m sorry, Pete Rose deserves to be in there. He was an outstanding player, he always gave everything he had to the game, and he set many records. The fact that he’s an ass has nothing to do with what kind of player he was.

FTR; he bet on his team to win. How the hell is he supposed to throw that?

5

Oh, yes. One other thing. Rose was informed that he would be able to re-apply after 2 years of his ban. As a couple of other players (no coke-sniffin slime balls banned 7 times named here) re-applied, and their “lifetime ban” was dismissed, he agreed to go along with it. But there was never any actual proof. Which is still necessary to determine guilt. That is, it was this morning. Heaven only knows what’s going to happen to THAT particular right.

6

Ty Cobb bet on baseball, yet he is allowed in the Hall of Fame, despite being suspended for a year.

7

I second Maureen in the sense that it doesn’t matter what kind of person he was/is. Its not the “Nice Guy Hall of Fame” its the “Baseball HoF”. He was a terrific player. That said, I do believe he needs to issue a public apology admitting his mistakes and apologizing. Once that happens let the guy have his bronze plaque.

Oh and BogieBlanca just how does 12 citizens who don’t agree with you make “the American people fucking idiots”? Overeact much? Seems to me there’s only one person acting like an idiot in this thread.

Settle down Beavis.

8

Bzzzzzzt. Wrong. Ty Cobb was never proven to have bet on baseball - he was accused by Dutch Leonard, who made the allegations and then refused to attend a hearing with Landis. Cobb was cleared of the accusations, as was Speaker. He certainly never agreed to be banned for it.

And Cobb was never suspended for a year about it. He was suspended for beating up a fan though. Your opinion on the subject would hold more water if you could get your facts straight.

Rose harmed the integrity of the game. He deserves his punishment and any commissioner that reinstates him should rot in hell.

Rose’s fuckups were not like leaving his wife or anything. They harmed the integrity of the game. Gambling almost destroyed the game. Remind me which offense Ruth or someone else did that harmed the integrity of the game? They didn’t. That’s why he’s banned and that’s why gambling is so taboo.

9

Just so you don’t think that Cobb and Speaker were totally innocent in that matter, let the record show that both of them quit managing immediately after that incident.

Landis tended to let the big fish get away while nailing the small timers whenever possible. He knew where his bread was buttered.

10

The betting slip shows a schedule that never occurred during that season. How can it be real?

11

Maybe, maybe not. But it was a pure he said-she said affair. Landis forced Cobb to retire while he conducted the investigation. The only evidence was Leonard’s word, and he refused to participate with Landis’ investigation. So Landis had no evidence and he re-instated Cobb.

12

Wrong. Scroll to number 18. In fact, just read the whole FAQ.

13

Tell me, Neurotik, how does beating the crap out of a fan not “harm the integrity of the game?” You’re applying double standards because of your personal feelings.

14

Um…no, I’m not. Tell me how it DOES harm the integrity of the game - rather than the integrity of the player.

15

My point, Neurotik, is that there was definitely something that went down, and it was dirty enough to end the baseball careers of two managers with long and distinguished careers as players.

Truth is, if Landis hadn’t let them off so easily they would be in the same position as Pete Rose is in right now.

Remember that “Not Guilty” isn’t quite the same as “Innocent”.

16

But Landis had no evidence. MLB does have evidence against Rose. Whether you think the evidence is sufficient or not, at least he has it.

So you are saying that Landis should have banned Cobb even though he had no evidence?

I’m aware that “Not Guilty” is not the same as “innocent” but for the intents and purposes of punishing someone they are the same.

17

Because he was wearing a uniform and was at the park when it happened. He was representing his team as a Major League Baseball player. He beat up a lot of guys. That was just one.

Now ask yourself your own question…and make it about Pete Rose. Truly- (and dammit, think more than 10 seconds before you answer the way you want to just to prove your point) did what Pete Rose was accused of doing change the way you felt about the game? Or about him? Did you suddenly think “Baseball is fixed.” Or “Goddammit; the asshole just embarrased his team/sport.”

Did you not still love the game? Do you not still love it now? And if not, I’m willing to bet it’s got a lot more to do with the f***ing strike than Pete Rose. Now

18

rasn frackn preview/submit buttons…

THAT is what I call “harming the integrity of the game” is what was supposed to be on the end of that.

19

Once again, how did that harm the integrity of the game rather than just him? Here’s a hint, the integrity of the game has to do about the competitiveness on the field, not the niceness of the people playing it. The only things that come close to betting are steroids and corking the bat. And they aren’t that close.
**

Well, considering I was 9 at the time, I didn’t really understand what was going on. Nor did I really have a grasp of who he was outside of just another manager. I was an AL kid. I don’t think I was affected either way.

If it happened now, though, I would certainly have doubts as to the integrity of the game. It only takes one guy, especially a manager, to fix a game.
**

Indeed I do. But again, Rose happened before I was really aware of what the implications were. Baseball took the correct course of action and is helping to keep things clean by showing that it will carry out its proscribed punishment for gambling. It’s a good thing. Baseball is in the right, Rose and his supporters are in the wrong.

20

From Neurotik’s link: “The possibility exists that decisions won’t be made in the team’s best interests, but rather because of the money riding on the game. If a manager bets on a game, he may bring a player off injured reserves sooner than he should in order to win, or he may pitch a reliever without enough rest, not caring that he won’t be able to pitch for several extra days. If a betting manager gets in large debt to bookies, he can clear his account by merely revealing inside information about the team. The opportunity for corruption is greatly increased. This is not to suggest that Rose compromised the Reds in any way. The chance that such impropriety could result is the reason for such a strict taboo on betting baseball.”

They were running a poll on this on ESPN.com for a few days, and the vote 80-20 that he should be in. Disagreeing with Bogie (and myself) doesn’t make the 80% “fucking idiots,” but I’d bet a large portion of my anatomy that a large proportion of that group doesn’t know the pertinent facts – that is: (1) it is very, very likely that Rose bet on his own team. (2) he agreed to the lifetime suspension; whether or not he assumed it was actually temporary was his business. (3) He refuses to admit that he bet on baseball – basically, he refuses to compromise at all. If he just said, “yes, I bet on baseball and I’ve been lying about it for years, and I’m sorry,” he’d be in the Hall in no time . . . but he can’t even give us that.

He’s a cheater and a liar, and he expects to be let out of the agreement he made for nothing. MLB has no obligation to him at all.

(That said, I don’t judge him nearly as harshly as the OP seems to. Life is hard – lying is harder, gambling is fun, and both are tough to stop once you get started. I just wish he’d come clean.)