And why would you believe that? Because he said so? He also said he never bet as a manager or as a player, and lied about both of those.
In all likelihood he’s telling the truth about betting against the Reds, but “fool me once, same on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me three times, I’m a Pete Rose fan”.
But, put him in the Hall. Hell, if he hadn’t been betting against the Reds, he might have had even better numbers.
This. 1000x this. I don’t understand people who are trying to compare it to PEDs. PEDs may alter stats to a certain extent, but gambling on games while you are a manager or player threatens the entire viability of a sport. People simply aren’t going to come to games which may be fixed - I mean look at how the popularity of boxing has basically taken a nose dive. The Black Sox scandal of 1919 scared MLB completely shitless - they were deeply frightened that the league may fold due to knowledge that games were being fixed - so they acted incredibly decisively in dealing with that. Once people think something is fixed, they don’t tend to see it something worthy of their time and effort (yes, a few counter-examples like “pro wrestling” present themselves, but that’s based on things like storylines and whatnot, not the sporting itself).
Anyways, I think perhaps delinking entry into the Hall of Fame from the other aspects of baseball inclusion is wise - after all Rose did do all those great things while playing. Then again, I believe the Hall is a completely joke anyways, so do what you will.
Think about it this way. When Rose was a manager, say he bet on tonight’s game, but he didn’t bet on tomorrow’s game (maybe tomorrow’s game is against a better pitcher). It seems to me that the incentive to wear out a great bullpen arm (who may have already pitched a few games in a row prior to tonight) to win tonight’s game may be far greater than perhaps saving that arm for future games in the week.
And maybe if a position player needs a rest, you wait until tomorrow to give that day off to him rather than tonight, which you may normally have done… if you hadn’t bet to win. 162 game seasons tend to make the questions of when did you bet on your team to win more salient.
Players using corked bats get in, despite that being a crystal-clear rule. Rose was a good player, let him in.
Rose was a great player, keep him out.
As other posters have noted, you don’t have to bet against your team in order for your betting to have a detrimental effect on the games.
I am also exceedingly unimpressed with the “other players did bad things too” argument. The steroid crowd, for instance, can wait a helluva long time for Hall induction as far as I’m concerned.
Still, I’d like to see Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame at some point for his tremendous achievements as a player. Two problems: the thinking currently seems to be that he’d have to be reinstated without qualification, meaning that he could have unlimited contact with MLB and potential employment in the game, which I find revolting. Secondly, what other skeletons are lurking out there?
Really? Betting on baseball is the Number One Cardinal No-No in baseball and Rose knew it. He did fucking everything wrong and he deserves to pay for it for the rest of Time.
I guess a person’s ire towards Rose will be determined by how negatively we view such things. My personal opinion is that it doesn’t matter a whole lot if he was ultimately trying to win. Calculations like yours is done all the time. If there are no bets on it, we don’t really care that much so I’m trying to look at it from that point of view.
Did A Rod used to play on a baseball team? I thought he was AL all the way.
That’s exactly the point. In the game that he doesn’t have a bet on it, he wouldn’t be trying as hard to win. He would be holding back his best effort to save it for the game that he does have a bet on. He would be willing to sacrifice winning the game that he has no money on in order to have a better chance to win the one that he does.
Yeah, you’re right! This is absolutely the same thing!
Here’s the rule for corked bats:
Here’s the rule for gambling:
You’d better notify everyone that these rules are really the same!
I think it’s a bit funny that they don’t care so much about cheating. I don’t run MKB, but if I did, cheating would result in a lifetime ban.
If you can show me that Rose bet exactly the same amount of money on the Reds to win every game you might convince me it was harmless.
But the day he changes the amount of the bet, or the day he doesn’t bet on his own team, that’s the day the bookies are looking for.
I get that Rose wanted action. He should have stuck to betting on horses.
So when he used up his best players because he had money riding on the game, that was OK? Should we ask Mario Soto about that? How about the nights that he didn’t lay a bet on the Reds? You don’t think that corrupted the game in any way? It tipped off the gamblers that Pete didn’t intend to win that night, which is virtually indistinguishable from throwing the game.
The only rule in Major League Baseball that is posted in every locker room in every stadium, the rule that quite literally saved professional baseball, was the one he broke. I cannot for the life of me figure out why he has so many people carrying water for him.
In conclusion: no. Not only no but HELL NO.
Also, the ban isn’t a lifetime ban. It’s a permanent ban. The distinction is important, because there are people (even in this thread) that think he should get in only after he dies. Nope, not even then. Never.
This.
His stats are meaningless if the game meant so little to him.
I don’t think many are disputing he violated an important rule, we’re just debating how severe the consequences should be. I think putting him in the Hall of Fame and keeping a lifetime ban from MLB activities strikes a good balance. Reasonable minds can differ, however.
Moved to the Game Room.
I’m with Doors. Gambling threatens the fundamental integrity of the sport in ways that PED use, or other forms of cheating to win, simply don’t. Even if you disagree with this, the rule is very clearly posted in every clubhouse.
I would also point out that, although there is no doubt that his performance on the field would ordinarily make him a no-brainer Hall of Famer, his status as the “Hit King” exists only because at the end of his career, he was managing himself and thus got to keep playing regularly for several years after he no longer deserved to. Not against the rules, but indicative of an attitude that put himself above the team.
And I think it is bizarre to suggest that he should go into the HoF while other aspects of the ban remain in place. “He isn’t allowed to play, manage, coach, scout, sell peanuts, or clean the urinals in a major league ballpark…all we’re going to do for him is give him the highest honor we could possibly bestow.” Kind of like arguing that Edward Snowden should receive both a life sentence and the Congressional Medal of Honor.
There are worse guys than Pete Rose in the HoF right now. Orlando Cepeda smuggled drugs in Puerto Rico. There are dozens of hall of famers who allegedly played more games drunk than sober. Does that have a significantly less damaging effect to the integrity of the game than betting on your team?
Perhaps most damning, Ty Cobb admittedly bet on games. There was evidence that he and Tris Speaker knew about and bet on fixed games. Cobb said, “There has never been a baseball game in my life that I played in that I knew was fixed.” Why would he qualify that statement with “that I played in?” And yet, I have never heard any serious discussion of removing Cobb or Speaker from HoF.
http://espn.go.com/classic/s/2001/0730/1233060.html
The stuff about Mario Soto was interesting. I never heard that. 19 games on 3 days rest in one season is outrageous and there’s no excuse for that. I still put Rose in the HoF. His addiction made him a terrible manager, but he was one of the best players in the history of the game and that’s what the HoF is for.
I remember Rose from the latter part of his playing career forward. I was never a Reds fan, and don’t have any particular attachment to him as a player, manager, or person. From what I know about him, it seems that the guy is pretty much a dick.
He’s also a 17-time all-star, 3-time batting champion, and all-time leader in hits. Lots of ballplayers throughout history have been dicks; lots of players have broken lots of rules.
It’s not a “Hall of Goodness”, it’s a"Hall of Fame", and Pete Rose belongs in it.
So should Joe Jackson, and any number of players from the ‘PED Era’.