And what most tend to ignore is Pete brought 100% of this on his self. Had he just admitted it from the start and worked with baseball to right the wrong then I think he is at least reinstated by now.

 

Without question. I, for the life of me, can't understand how anyone can have anything but disdain and disgust for the loser.

By whose "all accounts"? Pete's? In the end it doesn't matter. How do we know he didn't get in too deep to someone and was asked to throw games to cover debts? The fact is when you have the power to affect the out come of a game you can't gamble on it. If I had to rate the PED versus gambling then it has to be gambling as the worse offense.

The Dowd Report

I think the bolded would be true once you get outside of the Cincy area.

 

Why the city has idolized the baffoon is beyond me. They've made him out to be some sort of innocent victim to a vicious vendetta by MLB.

 

Technically, it was a vendetta by Bart Giamatti. That he died when he did is the single biggest reason Rose hasn't been reinstated, in my opinion. Fay Vincent wouldn't dare overturn that ruling, and Selig has no stones either, so we are where we are.

And what most tend to ignore is Pete brought 100% of this on his self. Had he just admitted it from the start and worked with baseball to right the wrong then I think he is at least reinstated by now.

Who ignores that, this is 100% Pete's fault with no vendetta from baseball or anyone else IMO.

Technically, it was a vendetta by Bart Giamatti. That he died when he did is the single biggest reason Rose hasn't been reinstated, in my opinion. Fay Vincent wouldn't dare overturn that ruling, and Selig has no stones either, so we are where we are.

Mike Schmidt was on some show (Cowherd I think) a few days ago and said that he sat in a meeting with Rose and Selig and that he left that meeting with the impression from Selig that Pete was going to be reinstated. When asked what happened, he said to ask Selig because he didn't know what changed after that meeting.

Technically, it was a vendetta by Bart Giamatti. That he died when he did is the single biggest reason Rose hasn't been reinstated, in my opinion. Fay Vincent wouldn't dare overturn that ruling, and Selig has no stones either, so we are where we are.

 

No one from MLB will ever admit to that. But, I agree.

Without question. I, for the life of me, can't understand how anyone can have anything but disdain and disgust for the loser.

Because the Pete Rose that played on the field is not the caricature that you have grown up hearing about. Pete played every play like it was 2 outs in the bottom of the ninth in game 7 of the series. He even sprinted to first on a walk. Pete and got more out of his talent than maybe any player in history, he had an average arm, less than average power, wasn't real fast but became an All-Star at every position that he played 2B, 1B, 3B, LF and RF.

 

Did Pete screw up when he was the Reds Manager, Absolutely!

Does Pete come off as arrogant and egotistical, Yep!

Is he an All-Time Great, without a doubt.

Casey Stengel is in the HOF...not because of his mediocre days as a player...but for winning 7 WS in 12 years as a manager. Therefore, I think there's a precedent for separating someone's playing career from their managerial accomplishments. The same thing will likely happen for Joe Torre. Sure he had some good years as a player...but HOF worthy? Probably not. However, what he did at the helm for the Yankees in the 90's will likely get him in.

 

Therefore, if Pete is reinstated by MLB, then I don't see how/why anyone could NOT vote for him as a PLAYER. 4,256 hits is just an insane number.

Which one is more detrimental to the integrity of the game? A juiced hitter versus a juiced pitcher or a guy throwing games?

 

If he was throwing games then I'd say that one...but he wasn't throwing them and there is no evidence that he was.

If we assume(yes, I know) that his bets were on non-Reds games and even given that the rule is in every clubhouse do we say that his offense is worse than using greenies? HGH? Is Andy Pettite going to be banned from consideration? Is it worse than ARod? Bonds? McGwire?

By all accounts he never bet against the Reds to win, so he supposedly someway manipulated to win games that he was already trying to win anyway. He also was found to have bet on them daily, so it wasn't like he was blowing the bull pen one day to "Get a win" and not worrying about the next day, because he was betting on them to win the next day.

 

Besides it being a "Baseball Rule" what is wrong with betting on your team to win? Jockeys and trainers are allowed to bet on their horses, do you think they somehow can effect a race more just because they bet on their horse.

 

But for betting I agree he should have been banned...but he bet after his playing days were over.

 

Pete the Player should be in the Hall and be in before any of the PED/HGH guys for what he did on the field.

 

The problem isn't betting on your team to win. The problem is when he didn't bet. When he didn't place a bet to win, that's a clear indicator to the folks he's betting with that there is a good chance his team wouldn't win that day. Pete not betting is a signal, for everyone else to bet against his team. I know it's been said that he bet the Red's daily, but if that's true, he is a terrible gambler. No way he bet the Reds 162 times to win.

No, should never be reinstated, should not be in HOF, should never be allowed in a baseball stadium, should not be allowed to associate with anything baseball, period.

 

I disagree w/ the stadium. As long as he's not an official guest of the team, he should have every right to watch a game. He can't directly impact the team or represent a team. That's should be the deal.

I disagree w/ the stadium. As long as he's not an official guest of the team, he should have every right to watch a game. He can't directly impact the team or represent a team. That's should be the deal.

 

Plus, I love how he still gets a standing ovation when they show him on the jumbotron.

Should have been like with Webber and Michigan. Wait so long before the team can have anything to do with him. After that time period they can do as they please, if they choose.

The problem isn't betting on your team to win. The problem is when he didn't bet. When he didn't place a bet to win, that's a clear indicator to the folks he's betting with that there is a good chance his team wouldn't win that day. Pete not betting is a signal, for everyone else to bet against his team. I know it's been said that he bet the Red's daily, but if that's true, he is a terrible gambler. No way he bet the Reds 162 times to win.

The investigation showed that he bet every day, not just 2 days and then skip. Pete bet on himself as the Reds Manager to win everyday according to the investigation by MLB

 

No one ever said he was a good gambler...but if you think your team is going to win 90+ games in a year then at the end of the year, you would be way ahead of the losses.