Actually, it’s OK if you’re rich (athlete or not). Look under Grubman, Lizzie.
Zev Steinhardt
If an athlete hits someone with a car or has 80 pounds of pot in their car, they will be punished by society as that’s a crime against society.
Regarding proof, the proof for me is the signed document by Pete Rose agreeing to the lifetime ban. If he didn’t bet on baseball and the Reds, why agree to a lifetime ban? The punishment for betting on baseball is one year. There must have been proof or Pete thought they had proof.
I bet Nate Newton would disagree.
I really have no interest in baseball, tho when I was a wee lad the Big Red Machine was quite the thing. And individual baseball games are not a thing I ever bet on.
But in my mind, even if he bet on baseball, doesn’t it make a difference how he was betting.
Why is there any problem if he was betting on his team to win? (At least straight up, and not manipulating a pointspread.)
Or if he was betting on the outcome of 2 other teams?
IMO, hall membership should be based solely upon on-field accomplishments. Not whether the guy was a saint or an SOB in other aspects of his life.
And let him participate in baseball in any manner he wishes - or someone else wishes to pay him. What other “offenses” merit lifetime expulsions in other sports? I think there is something “un-American” in denying any possibility for rehabilitation.
from the article:
If he were not punished, then that’s a matter to take up with the law, not the NFL. Just because Newton got off with the authorities is no reason for MLB to abandon it’s own rules.
Regarding the distinction between betting on your own team to win or lose, as a manager it doesn’t matter which way you bet, it’s equally wrong. If you have money to win this game, but didn’t bet on tomorrow’s game, then you will pull out all of the stops to win, to the potential detriment of the teams’ long term healthy. For example: Bringing in a closer to work 2 or 3 innings if he normally works only one. As for a player betting on two other teams, that’s why the punishment is different from betting on baseball vs. betting on your own team.
And what Rose did was on the field as he was a manager. It did happen between the lines.
Dinsdale, it doesn’t matter if Rose was betting on his team to win or lose. Since he can influence the outcome. If he’s betting that the team will lose, then obviously he can make a bunch of bad calls and cost his team the game. If he bets on his team to win then he might try harder to win that game, but at the team’s expense. Maybe he sends in a star pitcher that has already thrown a lot that week. While the pitcher does fine and wins that game, in a month or two when the team is trying to make a run, they can’t use the star pitcher because he threw his arm out earlier in the season when Rose sent him in to win that game (and his bet).
I have no problem with the ban, and don’t want to see Selig undo Giamatti’s ruling.
Zev, as much as I respect you and MR. James, I’ll have to agree with astorian here, as well as those who are dismayed worse PEOPLE are in the HoF.
The Baseball Hall of Fame was initially set up to recognize extraordinary accomplishments of a player on the field. Whether or not the person is a decent all-around guy doesn’t seem to be the point; after all, Ty Cobb is in the Hall and he was a vicious, despicable human being.
Here’s what I would if I were commissioner:
-
Reinstate Pete Rose’s eligibility for the Hall of Fame. His accomplishments as a player should be acknolwedged.
-
Maintain the ban on having any kind of professional employment in major league baseball. This would mean that Pete Rose would still not be able to get hired as a manager, coach, executive, or even “advisor”. This would still be the most appropriate punishment for Rose’s wrongdoings.
The reinstatement of his eligibility would be conditional to his coming clean about what he did.
And yes, I realize that my post is in opposition to the Honorable Zev Steinhardt, but it is my opinion, nonetheless.
Suppose Rose’s wrongdoings had been exposed after he had been elected to the Hall of Fame? Would his name have been retracted?
Don’t get me wrong…I’m not making light of what Rose did. Gambling on baseball by a player, manager or coach is a serious problem, one that could have ruined baseball in the early 20th century. But no one can deny that Rose was an extraordinary baseball player, and it would be appropriate for the Hall of Fame to recognize those accomplishments.
But that’s the only part of the ban Selig should lift. Everything else should remain; after all, Rose should pay some price for what he did.
Are using performance-enhancing drugs a crime against the sport?
If a player takes steroids, he has incredible performance gains for a while, but in a couple of years when the team is trying to make a run, they can’t use their star player because he’s dying in a hospital with cancer or dead of a stroke or something. Using steroids artificially influences the outcome of games much more than gambling does. If it’s fair that Pete stays banned, then I want to see every single player that has ever used steroids gone forever too.
What other possible offenses would justify a lifetime ban?
Murder? If a convicted murderer serves his sentence and is released, is he prohibited from being hired as a coach or a scout?
Drug use - intended to give yourself a personal advantage. Gambling is in an entirely different category? Bullshit.
College players take graft, and shave points, but are allowed to play pro.
I view the Pete Rose situation as an organization taking advantage of a public opportunity to take a stance on an isolated prominent situation, which allows them to turn a blind eye to a multitude of other crap that goes on unregulated.
But, I really don’t watch any team pro or college team sports. Maybe the golf majors. That’s about it.
Not much of interest in the sports section either, other than Gil Thorp. How bout them Mudlarks?
Also Dignan - was he alleged to have bet on his own team? Would there be a problem if he bet on 2 other teams?
If gambling is supposed to be a bad thing, I’m always a little surprised to see lighthearted wagers btween public officials come playoff time.
**
Actually that’s not so clear either. The Hall of Fame has (regretably) never stated exactly who it was to honor. Some people, for example, thought the HoF should have included people like Eddie Grant, a Giants player who gave his life in World War I. The statement that it was initially meant only to cover on-field accomplishments is not correct.
And Cobb, while hated almost universally in the sport (when he died in 1961, only three people from baseball went to the funeral of arguably the greatest hitter of his time up to Ted Williams), did not violate any rules (there were no rules against his actions at the time).
Zev Steinhardt
**
Wow! I’m honorable. 
**
To my knowledge, there are no provisions to remove an elected member of the Hall. However, there is nothing stopping the Hall’s Board of Directors from correcting that.
**
The Hall does recognize his accomplishments. There are displays there that commemorate various events from his career (most notably his 44 game hitting streak). He just wasn’t awarded membership.
Zev Steinhardt
Whatever they do, they should be consistent.
Anything else is hypocritical, and the Baseball Hall of Fame means nothing if they are just a bunch of hypocrites with subjective and selective rules.
If you ban gamblers from baseball, then you have to ban Babe Ruth, and Ty Cobb, both of whom were known to everyone to be gamblers, and they even gambled on baseball.
Either let in Pete Rose, or kick out Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb for sure, and any other player that we find out gambled. The last 30 game winner Denny McClain should not be in it either, since he too gambled.
There are probably a hundred old baseball players who gambled, and should also not be in it.
A thorough background check should be made of every player now in the Hall of Fame, to see if we can find any evidence that they gambled, and if so, boot them out!
Lets see what kind of Hall of Fame you self-righous people will have when Pete Rose, Babe Ruth, and Ty Cobb are not in it.
I dont know anything about Michael Jordan, other than he was supposed to be a good basketball player. But if we find out that Michaeal Jordan has gambled, then he should never ever be allowed in the Basketball Hall of fame, or ever to be allowed to be connected or associatiated with anything connected with basketball the rest of his life. Makes sense to me. Ban them all, or keep them all. what is so hard about that?
O.J. was formally tried by a judge and a jury, and O.J. was found to be innocent. There would be no reason to keep O.J. out of the football hall of fame.
O.J. , in contrast to the likes of Rose, Ruth, and Cobb, is apples and oranges.
Please state from where you know that Babe Ruth bet on baseball? For that matter, please state where you know that Ty Cobb bet on baseball. In Cobb’s case, there was some suspicion on him and Tris Speaker. However, both were cleared of any wrongdoing by Commissioner Landis. In Ruth’s case, however, I’m not aware of any allegations of betting on baseball. Please provide a cite.
Zev Steinhardt
**
On baseball? Please provide proof. McLain has done a lot of things to not be proud of, but I don’t recall betting on baseball being one of them.
The point with McLain is moot anyway, since he’s not getting into the Hall and he can’t hold a baseball position because he’s in jail.
**
Cite, please. If there’s one thing Organized Baseball can be accused of, it’s being overzealous in the prosecution of those who bet on baseball. Hell, Buck Weaver was banned for simply knowing about a plot and not telling! Baseball even suspended Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays for simply accepting employment at a casino. Mantle and Mays!
If there really were “a hundred old baseball players who gambled,” Organized Baseball would be on it.
Zev Steinhardt
Hey Zev, don’t forget, McClain suddenly “hurt his thumb”, I think it was during the 72 playoffs, by “falling off the couch”. Rumor around here is that he didn’t pay a debt. I think he cavorted with the Giacalone bunch, who were probably involved in Hoffa’s disappearance.
Maybe not everyone is aware but baseball his this rule:
Every player, coach, manager, and maybe trainer, has included in their contract the provision that if they gamble on baseball they are banned for one year. If they gamble on their own team, they are banned for life. There are prominent signs in both English and Spanish all over the clubhouse. It’s an industry rule. As far as I know, no other stipulation is so widely distributed.
This rule was put in place before Pete Rose was even born. They are not picking on him. It’s ludicrous to have rules if you suddenly end them because someone popular or who slid head first got caught.
Even basketball is apples and oranges. NBA rules have no bearing on what MLB should do. Isiah Thomas had some shady dealings with some local gamblers and there’s been speculation that he was involved in gambling on NBA games. Isiah choked a local TV reporter who was investigating it. Again, it’s just speculation by a writer, but I think it was Armen Keteyen (sp?) brought it up recently in a book. It wouldn’t surprise me if David Stern swept this and any Jordan wrongdoings under the rug. But the point is, that’s the NBA, not baseball.
This is not about being a good person or citizen. It’s about doing the one thing that baseball says you cannot do.
Gosh, so Bill James is full of beans yet again! Gosh, THERE’S a surprise!!!
I DON’T think the Dowd report was hooey. I’m SURE that Bart Giamatti had Pete Rose dead to rights. Face it, Rose fans, if Pete had even a TOE (never mind a leg) to stand on, he could have gotten a high profile lawyer to take his case pro bono, and sue the pants off major league baseball.
Instead, Pete meekly accepted his banishment from baseball, and never tried to take legal action. Instead, he’s spent 13 years working the press, waging a PR war, to get back in the game. To me, that says “I’m guilty. I KNOW I’m guilty. EVERYBODY knows I’m guilty. But I bet I can still win, in the end, through sheer gall and determination. The fans love me (the idiots!), the sportswriters love me (I kissed their backsides my whole career, they’re kissing mine now)… sooner or later, the commish will fold and give me exactly what I want.”
Am I inconsistent in saying Pete deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, but NOT to work in baseball? I don’t see how. I think a man can belong in BOTH the Baseball Hall of Fame AND in Federal prison.
To use a crude analogy, suppose there’s a policeman who’s won a number of commendations, plaques and medals for heroism on the job (one time, he ran into a burning building and saved two kids’ lives). Sadly, Internal Affairs finds evidence he’s been taking payoffs from some bookies to look they other way when they’re doing business.
Should this cop go to jail? Probably. Should he be fired, and barred from EVER serving as a policeman again? DEFINITELY. But should his commendations and medals be taken away? NO! He earned those through his actions, and he’s entitled to those honors. He has every right to be proud of the good things he did. So by all means, let him have his awards. But he’s PROVEN through his actions that he doesn’t deserve to be a cop again.
So, again, I say this: let Pete have his plaque in Cooperstown. But don’t ever the lying slimeball work in baseball again, no matter how much he and his supporters whine.