Thanks to the behind-the-scenes lobbying from some of the most influential Hall of Famers, commissioner Bud Selig is said to be seriously considering lifting Pete Rose's lifetime suspension from baseball.
The tip-off that Selig may now be inclined to pardon baseball's all-time hit king was Hank Aaron's seemingly impromptu interview session with a small group of reporters in the lobby of the Otesaga Hotel on Saturday. In declaring for the first time that he would want an asterisk put on the achievements of any steroid cheats elected to the Hall of Fame, Aaron brought up Rose, who, in August of 1989, was given a lifetime ban for gambling on baseball, saying: "I would like to see Pete in. He belongs there."
My personal feeling on the Rose situation is that, given his past, he should never ever be allowed to be in a position where he could impact or effect what happens on the field. That means no coaching, no managing, no front office position that touches on baseball operations, and no supervision or authority over anyone who does. But the fact remains that Rose remains a very popular figure among the fans -- he gets standing ovations simply by walking to a seat for which he bought a ticket at Great American Park -- and could probably do a lot to promote the Reds in particular, baseball at large, and the charitable organizations affiliated with those entities if given the chance. Such a thing could be accomplished if he were given a limited reinstatement. Such a thing would also likely cut down on the amount of shameless self-promotion in which he engages as well, because he likely wouldn't need to make an ass out of himself for a paycheck, and that's something that baseball should care about.
And yes, reinstatement means renewed eligibility for the Hall of Fame via the Veterans' Committee. I've gone back and forth on this over the years, but as of now I think Rose probably should be in the Hall of Fame. Why? Because at bottom, the Hall of Fame is a museum/historical society, and I don't like the idea of whitewashing history. Maybe you don't give him his big day on the podium like Rice and Henderson had yesterday, but not having his plaque up there bothers my sense of historical accuracy far more than having it up there would bother my sense of ethics. And obviously the plaque has to mention his bannination and the reasons for it. I realize that reasonable people disagree on this point, of course.
Of course this raises the question of what, if anything, a Rose reinstatement would mean for the steroids users. True, they're not banned and thus their eligibility for the Hall hasn't been technically affected, but I do think Rose being allowed back into the game would have an impact on them all the same. I say this because I can't help but think that, at the heart of many BBWAA members' feelings regarding steroids users, is the sentiment that "hey, if baseball can keep out Rose for violating the gambling rules, I can use my vote to keep out steroids users." If Rose was back, isn't it possible that some writers would re-think their opposition to the PED guys? That no one should stand in the way of history being recorded the way it should be?
I suppose reasonable people can disagree about that too.
Leave a Comment:
Saving...
Pete Rose did not enhance his body, did not make his head 3 sizes bigger, ahem Barry Bonds, or throw games. The man bet his team could beat others, because he has a problem. He did also run over a catcher in an meaningless All Star game because, as he said, thats the only way he knew how to play baseball. He is absolutely Hall of Fame material. He belongs in. And the steroids will get him in. People know what the steroid users did is far worse, and thus his infractions look mediocre by comparison. As popular as he is, if he gets the ban lifted, first ballot hall of famer for sure. Selig, who does everything wrong anyways, may botch this up too. We shall see.
It's always Bonds 1st right? Like he was the 1st & only user! Get over it. Start saying Mcgwire, Palmero,Sosa, Brady Anderson! I get so tired of people making it like Bonds started the Steriod era! He didn't, let it go, he's just one in a long list of PED users!
I'm going to have to disagree with one point you made.
Steroid users didn't do anything nearly as bad as gambling on baseball. Gambling could totally destroy baseball as we know it. Do we know for sure that he only bet on his team to win? Sure he said that, but he also denied gambling for years before he "came clean". We don't know/never will know if he is being totally honest. At least anyone who used PED's was just trying to make themselves and their teams better. While it gave them whatever advantage steriods give, at least we knew the competion was real.
I guess that was a round about way to say he very well could have thrown games, which is much worse than taking steriods.
dcfan, your post is weak and senseless. Rose LIED for years about betting...YEARS!! And the best you can do is bash Barry?!?!? What about G. Anderson and Mark McGwire, or how about A. Petite?!?!?! Why do people like YOU leave out M. MaGwire?? Barry is one of what.... HUNDREDS of roid users.....try and post to the subject: Pete Rose and his life time ban from Baseball!
Since roid users (except for Barry) get a flippN pass, let's forgive Pete and move on, obviously dcfan doesn't have a problem with CHEATING...unless it's Barry!
If Pete Rose threw a single game, even one, then there is no argument ever for him to be involved in baseball period let alone get into the hall of fame. I 100% agree with that. But i just cant see this fierce competitor ever betting against himself. He was into every single baseball game in a scary and crazy way. I will not rule out the possibility, but I just dont see it. And gambling destroys baseball if it changes the outcome of a game. Considering what the players are paid, i don't know if that can truly happen. But the steroids ensured those large paychecks. I mean cmon guys, the PED players of this generation destroyed this game, and some destroyed themselves. Bonds is just the big fish in a pond full of steroid users. Plus, i really dont like the prick...haha.
How did they destroy the game? We still watch/talk about it. If it was the WWE do you think nearly as many people would watch?
The only way PED's made checks bigger is they gave the teams more revenue to spend on player salaries. Players were going to make a large amount of money anyway.
Wow Strong Arm. So harsh. Clearly i went after the lead figure for the steroid investigation. Their are so many to name it hurts. And Barry is one of hundreds of cheaters, but he is the most hated. And Pettite admitted it. Unlike the others. I must make this clear, I dont like Pete Rose as a person. Terrible guy. But hall of fame material. To slide back a litte on what i said i refer to a lower post. Let the writers decide. They represent the public. Dont you guys agree?
The writers represent the public? Can't say I agree with that. I think Craig's contrasting of Bill Plaschke and the Dodger fans cheering Manny's return demonstrates that not to be the case. I certainly don't want Buster Olney, Jayson Stark or possibly any other HOF voter voting on my behalf.
Someone should point out to whomever wrote this that if it was for a "lifetime", then it wasn't a suspension, it was a ban. And if it ever had the possibility of being lifted, it wasn't for lifetime, it was indefinite.
Man people are sloppy writers today.
Pete Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame.....period. His personality disorders are immaterial. Forget the term "betting".....did he EVER throw a game? Is he emotionally capable of throwing a game? NO. His desire to win was one of the traits that made him the player those of us who watched him were overwhelmed by. He didn't want to win.....he HAD to win. Pete, I'm rooting for you.......again!
Do you know those things? NO.
He broke a rule the consequence for which is a permanent ban from baseball. He's permanently banned from baseball. That should be pretty much the beginning and end of this discussion.
I'm with Bill312.
And as Bill said, it's a permanent ban, not a "lifetime" ban. Some folks seem to think Rose can be voted posthumously. Nope, not unless he's pardoned.
"Pete Rose did not enhance his body."
Gosh, DC, do you really want to lay odds that Pete Rose didn't use amphetamines in his playing career (see what I did there?)? I sure don't.
I say this as someone who thinks Rose is an absolute slimeball, who has gone out of his way to embarrass the game and himself (just to make it clear I have an irrational bias here), but I don't want to see the man anywhere near the Hall of Fame.
Craig, I don't think excluding Rose from the Hall is whitewashing history. If anything, because of his exclusion, we talk about his banishment more than ever. It stays a relevant topic for debate and examination, and if Rose is allowed in (asterisk or not), that debate is going to end. Rose's on-field accomplishments speak more loudly for his exclusion, as does the topic of gambling in MLB (I note that no one has been suspended for these activities since Rose was banned; perhaps players took a lesson).
The only thing that changes if Rose goes in is that he gets to charge more for his autograph, and I'm not interested in helping him do that.
I must say that putting a substance on a baseball, using amphetamines, and tipping pitches have become a staple of baseball. Just like a manager screamming every cuss word he knows at an umpire just to have the umpire do the same in return. Thats what makes baseball baseball. But to physically change your body, change your chemical makeup from a metobolic state, i mean cmon. Can you really compare a drug that keeps you awake and active to a drug that makes you stronger, more powerful, more agile, more everything imaginable. It makes you a completely different player. Dont get me wrong guys, Rose is not a player i like, but i do feel he deserves the hall of fame. At the very least, he deserves the chance. The writers may never vote him in ya know.
Since all those things are "a staple of baseball" does it mean we should just let anything that is wrong linger around for a long time, so it becomes what makes baseball, baseball?
If the public cared less about steroids, no rules were put in place, maybe they would be staples of baseball. What becomes common becomes normal and acceptable. Every sport has something that is arguable. Intentional fouls in basketball. The fumble piles in football. Taking a dive in soccer. Screening the goalie in hockey. They all become part of the game, and thats just the way it is.
Just because something is ignored doesn't make it right. The loading up a ball and using amphetamines are both illegal now in baseball. So they aren't what make baseball, baseball, they are cheating.
I view stroids as the same as greenies or spitballs, one player trying to get a competitive advantage over another. When the weren't banned some used them, some didn't. Since they have now been made illegal then people should be punished if they are caught.
Pete Rose was banned from baseball for gambling and should stay that way. If the Hall of Fame wants to award him a plaque it is their right, since it's a museum and isn't really tied to MLB. But gambling is by far the worst thing a player/manager/umpire can do. It brings the competion into question, and that could be the end of baseball as we know it.
This brings up the point as to what is cheating. Mickey Mantle took an unlicensed, unknown substance in the form of a shot that his body had a bad reaction to in 1961 when he and Maris were chasing Ruth. If a further investigation had taken place he may have been found to be using an illegal pain killer to bypass his problems. He may have been prosecuted and fined/suspended. He also was a major amphedamine user. But does anyone really make an argument the great Mickey Mantle cheated? So i say again, these minor cheating things make baseball baseball. And the public do not argue for lifetime bans for those infractions. Steroids and gambling are on a different level. Otherwise this blog wouldn't be having so many responses.
That's the thing, greenies weren't banned when Mantle used them so no, he wasn't cheating. He was well within the rules. When McGuire was using andro, he wasn't cheating. Steroids, greenies, whatever else is now illegal, so they are now cheating.
I'm not sold that steroids make anyone that much better of a player anyway. The only thing they are proven to do is help with the recovery time allowing you to workout more/comeback from injury faster. They don't help with the coordination that is needed to play baseball.
For the record I think if you put up the numbers to be in the Hall of Fame, then you should be put in. But Rose is different, he broke THE rule, and this is his punishment.
I agree steroids dont improve hand eye coordination. But they do change doubles into home runs. And it shows. The users went from 40 home run seasons to 60 and 70. Whats sad is some of the accused or known steroid users may have been hall of fame caliber anyways. Bonds, Mcgwire, Arod, Clemens. Probably hall of famers before, who knows now.
Repeating what Alex said: we don't know that Pete never threw a game. He has lied pretty consistently for over 20 years about this, and has always let self-interest be his guide.
And even if he didn't, why isn't the steroid users' motivation to win treated the same way as Rose's alleged motivation to win? Is there any steroid user out there who took PEDs so he or his team would play worse? And don't tell me it was different because of greed or self-interest, because why the hell else was Rose gambling in the first place if not to get rich and/or satisfy a personal desire?
Let them all in.
Craig, everyone knows Barry Bonds and A-Rod conspired to take steroids to bring down the game. They are evil agents of soccer.
And even if he didn't, why isn't the steroid users' motivation to win treated the same way as Rose's alleged motivation to win?
It's treated differently because there's a gray area with the use of steroids, as pointed out by Bill James last week. It's really tough to condemn the PED users before rules were in place, and that's why they'll eventually get in. (I personally think those who test positive should have it notated on their HOF plaque like a Scarlet Letter, though.)
As for gambling, it's a black-and-white rule and it was in place and known when Rose managed. Reread Rule 21:
Rose admitted in his 2004 biography that he bet on baseball as a club official, and that he bet on the Reds. And now we want to let him back in because "someone got all those hits" and we feel bad for his current sorry state?
He broke that rule. He knew he was breaking it. And he knew it was wrong. Where's the gray area?
Excellent argument. Hard to argue that. I will just say he is to damn good not to be in. But he flat out broke the rules and may never get that shot. I think he deserves the shot, then let the writers, which may represent the public, make the decision. Whichever decision they would make, if it happens, i would support. In or out, let the hall of fame voters decide.
Well, Beardedgman, thank you for that insight into Pete Rose's deepest, innermost thoughts. When you get over your schoolboy hero worship, the rest of us will be over here talking about the issue rationally.
By the way, do we KNOW he never threw a game? What are we basing that off of?
Two points: He bet on baseball while he was playing - violation, but forgiveness possible. He lied about betting - violation, but unforgiveable. NO HALL OF FAME for Rose, besides he is a jerk with an attitude
Why have rules if there is no resounding penalty for breaking the rules? Baseball is America's unique sport. It needs boundaries that should not be crossed without consequence. Steroids is the next frontier and there should be no forgiveness there either - especially if you lie.
What's the point of having rules if you're just going to overturn them? Baseball CLEARLY, and I do mean CLEARLY, states that if you gamble on the game you are banned FOR LIFE. There's a sign in every locker room.
Quit looking at steroid users, quit looking at spit ball pitchers and look at the fact that Pete Rose knew the rules, saw the signs and spit in the face of baseball by betting on it.
What really, really angers me is that he voluntarily agreed to a lifetime ban in return for Giamatti not releasing the facts of the case against him. Then, after Giamatti died, he tried to get reinstated. That's low and disgraceful.
And, for the record, he admitted to betting for AND against the Reds in his book "My Prison Without Bars." So he is a sleaze.
I don't think he did admit to betting against his own team, did he? He's saving that for the next book. One admission per profit opportunity.
Come on people. I'm not a Pete Rose fan, but "Jeez", he belongs in the Hall. He wasn't jucied where he'd hit 75 homers a game. He was a singles hitter that knew how to play the game. So he has or had a sickness, who doesn't? If you can put a racist (Ty Cobb comes to mind) in the hall, which to me is far worst than gambling, Pete belongs in. Bud, you got some believers, like Frank Robinson and "Bad Henry" that don't just think, they know he belongs. Time to cut the slack and let him have his day.
Pete belongs in thehall. He playedthe game harder than anyone I ever saw thru today. and of course he did not admit at first he bet on the game of baseball. who would have. Pete belongs in the hall for what he accomplished as a player on the field of play. Thanks Mr. Arron for trying to correct a great wrong.
Rose should never be in the hall of fame. Betting on his team to win is just as serious as betting to lose. It effects his decision making in a bad way. Does he use a pitcher that should be rested to close out a game, just because he has money on the game. Just one example, and if he does use that pitcher, said pitcher gets hurt, how does that not effect the sport. Beating by athletes on teh sports they play is the worst offense that can be committed, as it undermines the integrity of the game itself.
Does that mean that Joe Jackson should get in too?
Joe Jackson was aquitted of the charges and still banned. He had staggering statistics for someone allegedly throwing a world series. Will he ever get in, I dont think so. But he is different. He was found guilty (by his peers) to purposely throw baseball games. There is no evidence to say Pete Rose threw the games. Thats why the 2 players are not considered together with such a decision.
Shoeless Joe deserves it more
In 1919, Jackson and the White Sox found themselves back in the running for another World Series ring. Jackson batted .351 during the regular season and .375 with perfect fielding in the World Series. The heavily favored Sox found themselves in a losing battle against the Cincinnati Reds. During the next year while batting .385 and leading the American league in triples Jackson was suspended after allegations that 8 members of the White Sox threw the previous World Series. In 1921 A Chicago jury acquitted Jackson of helping to fix the 1919 World Series, but Kenesaw Mountain Landis, the first commissioner of Baseball went against the ruling and banned all eight players including Joe Jackson from baseball for life.
Like i said, found guilty by his peers despite the numbers. And with that cloud of suspicion, it was enough to convict him in the public mind. Thus, he will never be in the hall of fame. He could have throw that world series, he really could have. We probably will never know. But i am willing to bet his ban is never unlifted and he never gets into the hall of fame.
The rule is in place so that there can be no conjecture. Because Rose didn't follow the rule, one can only assume he threw games.
Rose didn't bet. Oops, no, he did. He has absolutely no credibility. No one ever proved Shoeless Joe had malice and intent.
Either players situation is very arguable. But as a realest, Pete Rose has a chance to be reinstated, Joe Jackson does not. Wouldn't you agree with that?
Yes. I also think that more than a few people owe Jeremy Schapp an apology for the way he was treated after he asked Rose whether or not he bet on baseball at the All Star Game that was held at Fenway not long before Ted Williams died.
I think twenty years of banishment is enough for a mistake but you have to look at what he did for the game and his achievements. If his peers ask for his forgiveness and to be placed on the HOF contenders list, let it be. Let baseball people run the business.
Pete Rose is a fellon and is the last liar we need in Cooperstown
The consequence of gambling on baseball for a player is a lifetime ban. This shouldn't even be a discussion, but since you can always count on Bud Selig to make the wrong choice, I expect to see Rose in the Hall of Fame next year.
For those who think Rose belongs in the Hall -- fine. Begin petitioning the Hall to re-revise its eligibility requirements, and stop putting the burden on MLB to reinstate him.
Rose as he is should NEVER be reinstated. He has done nothing to reform his life and try to make himself worthy of regaining baseball's good graces. Unless and until he undergoes a rigorous GA lifetime plan and emerges thoroughly reformed, unwilling to lay down even a nickel on a frog jumping contest, and establishes himself (under a type of permanent probation) as someone who might be trustworthy under tightly controlled circumstances, MLB should not even blink in his direction. Rose has proven himself untrustworthy -- and that's what he has to overcome. MLB imposes a permanent (not "lifetime") ban for his actions, and they really do mean it. Rose never made a mistake -- he made a bad decision and did so repeatedly. Bad decisions can have bad and lasting consequences, and no amount of fan acclaim should overturn that. (And should he be reinstated, it should be under a "one strike" warning -- one more infraction, and ka-boom, that's it, with no further recourse.)
Even then, any reinstatement should impose constraints that lets him do nothing beyond promotional appearances and, and I permit this begrudingly, spring training (only!) hitting instruction.
I don't really care what the Hall does regards Rose; if he does ever get a plaque, it should be made of black cast iron. But MLB should never reinstate him unless he comes back as a totally different Pete Rose than the one who left 20 years ago.
Who has the most hits ever. Pete Rose. End of story. Put the best in the HOF.
I think one thing needs to be remembered. When Mark McGwire and others took PEDs, they were not against the rules of baseball. They did something that was within the rules to enhance their performance. We may dislike what they did, but they did not break the rules.
Pete Rose broke the rules.
Now, that being said, I thing Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame. Just my opinion, and I am not going to defend it. I also think that many of the PED users deserve to be there as well. Mark McGwire deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. Punish him by not putting him on the first ballot (already done), maybe even punish him by not putting him on his first 5, or even 10, but don't keep him out forever. Why? Because he didn't break the rules.
And yes, I say the same for a number of others I think deserve to be in, including the two most hated, Bonds and Clemens. Hated? Absolutely. A$$holes? Absolutely. Hall of Fame worthy? Absolutely.
Steroids was banned in most other sports except baseball. Bud Selig and the owners got raped after the 94 strike and ignored the problem, almost celebrating the home run race as if it were legitimate. Sure, they didnt break a rule, but thats because the league was weak. I always have felt that the league deserves just as much backlash as the players. Bud Selig is the worst baseball commissioner ever. I mean the brewers to the NL so the NL has 2 more teams!!! Winner of the All Star game gets world series home field advantage. His idea of a salary cap which of course is NOT a salaray cap. I mean cmon!
1st - I think Pete Rose deserves to be in the Hall Of Fame. He went into every game with all he had physically, mentally and conditionaly and I dont mean ROIDS. It has been along time and 20 yrs is enough for his gambling punishment. He brought more to the game than many current do combined. PUT HIM IN.
2nd - Steroid users should never be allowed in the Hall of Fame. If it takes the roids to have them play the way they do, then the dont belong in baseball at all.
I am not a Pete Rose fan. I am a Dodger fan. However, he should be allowed in the Hall of Fame as a player, which he obviously deserves. He should not be allowed on the field in any capacity since MLB can not take a chance of having the integrity of the game questioned.
Of course, the lifetime hits leader belongs in the Hall of Fame. Let him apologize again. Let him do commercials against gambling. Don't put it on his plaque, but make a video presentation in the Hall that details Integrity-- mentioning Shoeless Joe's gambling too, Steve Howe's drug use, Ty cobb's racism. Let kids learn talent and hard work aren't enough-- it also matters what kind of person you are. Jim Rice showed that beautifully this weekend. Part of being an authentic example is admitting when you are wrong-- and baseball needs to get a whole lot better at it than it is right now.
Pete Rose is the Mr Baseball.He played the game to win every play the way it should be played.Now days it is for the money.He played because he loved to win at the game and play his hardest to do just that.Yes he should be in the HOF.