Buy or Sell: Pete Rose should be allowed back into baseball?

[hometowndawg]

The players on steroids are doing way more to hurt the game then Pete Rose ever did. Pete played the game how it was suppose to be played. Granted he did commit the "unforgivable" violation of gambling. But what makes it so different than cheating to try to win games.

[FISHDAWG]

ENORMOUS BUY

[FlabLoser]

Let Bracky Brett decide.

[Spider-Man]

Buy

[SheltonChoked]

HOF yes

Regular baseball (i.e. Manager, Front Office) No

[sleepy dawg]

Sell. Apples and Oranges. Betting on your sport is not cheating in and of itself. Steroid use is. However, cheating goes on in baseball almost every pitch. Whether the catcher is trying to trick the Ump into calling a strike when it was a ball, or the pitcher is doctoring the ball, etc. No other sport cheats more than baseball. It's part of the game. There is no sportsmanship in baseball, you do what you have to to win and try not to get caught.

Betting on games you're playing in is far different. He has admitted to betting on his games every night. Even if he was only betting on his team to win, there can be no tolerance here. There's too much room for point shaving, and fixing games for people in sports who do this. Especially once they have an addiction, or have lost a lot of money. Whether you're a player, an official, or anyone else who can directly affect the game, there has to be a zero tolerance here. And with Pete betting every single night, he got what he deserved.

That said, he's without a doubt one of the best players ever to me. No one has ever been more entertaining to watch. It's sad, but he deserves it.

[FISHDAWG]

betting to win > ped's

[reddog]

buy!

[drunkernhelldawg]

Buy.

[maroonmania]

HOF yes

Regular baseball (i.e. Manager, Front Office) No

I agree, as long as there is no evidence he bet AGAINST his team then he should be in the HOF right now. And as competitive as Rose is I can't believe he would ever bet to have his team throw a game. However, just the fact that he bet at all on MLB games, especially ones he was associated with, is enough that he should never be allowed back in to participate in a MLB organization in any way.

[sleepy dawg]

betting to win > ped's

It's easy for you to look at it that way, but betting is betting. You can't bet on your game, whether it's to win, lose, to cover, or not to cover.

[ckDOG]

I don't really care. MLB is tainted anyhow. The better question would be whether or not Vegas issue a line on a Pete Rose managed game...

[DownwardDawg]

Easy buy!

[FISHDAWG]

It's easy for you to look at it that way, but betting is betting. You can't bet on your game, whether it's to win, lose, to cover, or not to cover.
I know but cheating is cheating in the same way betting is not allowed ... so the question remains which is worse ? ... cheating gains an advantage, betting gains no advantage

[WeWillScrewItUp]

I buy it without a second guess.

[sleepy dawg]

I know but cheating is cheating in the same way betting is not allowed ... so the question remains which is worse ? ... cheating gains an advantage, betting gains no advantage

To say betting on a game youre playing in has no affect is being blind. What if he bet for his team to lose? You can't just say it was okay for him because he only bet on his team to win and he happened to be an amazing ball player. Just like you can't say it was okay for Giambi to be on steroids while playing because he had some disease. If you can bet on your team to win, then you can bet on your team to lose, win, cover, or not cover the spread, and the same rule would apply for refs and umps. Betting has to be zero tolerance across all sports, and it is for a reason that many are blind to simply because this one guy they love who only bet on his team to win.

Also, we really don't know if he only bet on his team to win. That's just what he told us, after he lied for 20 years about it. Similarly to all these steroid guys, you can't trust a word they say.

[hometowndawg]

Betting has to be zero tolerance across all sports.

Steroids also needs to be zero tolerance then. If cheating is cheating, call it a cheat. Automatic life ban!

[Bullmutt]

Big buy! The only way betting (on the part of anyone) should be illegal is if a player is found to be betting against his own team or shaving points, etc. That gets the irreversible death penalty.

Performance wise, if Rose didn't have a HOF- worthy career, how many players have? He competed as hard as anyone ever has!

[Ronny]

..at least the steroids guys were using so they could play the game better.

Rose, like a lowlife thug, bet on his own team. That had nothing to do with game enhancement. It had everything to do with mobbed-up bullshit.

Which begs the question how many times did Rose intentionally throw Reds games so he could win his purse.

That's the question I want answered (but will never be answered because Rose is a habitual liar).

[Todd4State]

I think the real problem is the Hall of Fame. This was the first year I can remember that a player wasn't voted in- and it's because the media has made it a joke with their vigilante voting. It has become such a joke that I don't think players really care anymore about it. They would rather have the 1-2 more years of a million dollars over a plaque in a museum in the middle of nowhere. Can't say that I totally fault them for that logic.

On Rose- why can't a player who has been banned be voted into the HOF? Same with Shoeless Joe Jackson. I would put a thing on their plaque mentioning that they were banned from baseball though. I actually do believe Rose when he says he only bet on his teams to win. Number one- he was WAY too competitive to bet against his team. Number two- if he did bet against the Reds, it would have shown up during the investigation. Plus, if he did try to throw games- it would be really hard to do it without it being just totally obvious. The reason Rose was lying was because he was attempting to save his ass.

I think the steroid users- you have to lump them into two groups. The first being the guys that did steroids before they were illegal and those that did them after they were banned from the game. To me, the guys in the first group- McGwire, Bonds, Palmeiro, Clemens- technically they didn't do anything against MLB rules. Why should they be punished in retrospect? That's like arresting Anheuser Busch during prohibition for making beer before prohibition. And these players like Hank Aaron and whomever else that are pissed because they had their records broken- they can't sit there and tell me with a straight face that if I came up to them with some magic pill that would help make them better players that they wouldn't have taken it in the 60's. I'm sure Babe Ruth would have. And to those that say- "well, steroids are illegal to have in the US"- well, as far as the HOF goes there are several players in there that have used illegal drugs before in their life. There are players that have been arrested before in the HOF doing illegal things that aren't drug related. Heck, amphetimines were probably more prevalent in the 70's than steroids ever were.

But now the players in the second group- it's a little bit different now since steroids are against the rules. I don't think they should be banned from baseball unless they just leave no other option like it looks like A-Rod might do. I think his agents and lawyers will step in before it gets to that point though. They shouldn't be banned from the HOF either. Again, I do think it should be mentioned that those players used steroids during their career on their plaque should they indeed make it.

The other thing about the HOF- they're OK with letting Gaylord Perry and Don Sutton in. Two guys that pretty much admitted to doctoring up baseballs. How is that any different than a guy doing something to make him a better player by taking a pill? Perry and Sutton probably prolonged their careers by cheating just as much as Giambi did.

But the HOF might as well have Fay Vincent running it. It's just totally outdated and basically all it does is glorify guys that played from the 1880's-1970's and Negro League players. I'd much rather them go the Basketball HOF route and let too many guys in than what they are doing now. There's no college baseball people in the HOF, no Japanese players like Sadaharu Oh, no Cuban players, and somehow they don't think guys like Dale Murphy belong in the HOF because he "didn't hit 500 home runs".

Honestly, if I'm Bud Selig, I'm looking at ways to fix the HOF. They have a field there called Doubleday Field. Get two teams to play a real MLB game there, tell ESPN to hype it up like it's the women's final four. Update the voting to include REAL baseball people and get rid of the media vote completely. Just make it more inclusive.

[State82]

Buy in bulk. There was never any evidence that he wagered on his team to lose, only to win. As competitive as Rose was, I would never believe otherwise. Let him back in. And there is NO way he doesn't belong in the HOF.

[gravedigger]

Not in a million years. He knew it was the capital sin. It happened before and he thought he was bigger than the game. Love his play and I have no issue.

He gets nothing else but admiration for his efforts.

[Dawgpile]

Buy, with a standing order to buy....

What the likes of Rose and Joe Jackson did to the game pales in comparison what the 'juice generation' has done to the game.

[Will James]

Pete Rose is overrated as an offensive player. Durability? Amazing. Longevity? Absolutely. But he couldn't touch Joe Morgan, his teammate for a number of years, as an offensive weapon.

Hes a hall of famer for sure, but is NOT an elite talent.

[Jack Lambert]

Yes and he should be there before any of the Steriod freaks. Pete was a great player.