Pete Rose is a low rent degenerate that happened to be really good at slap hitting a baseball. He broke the one rule the sport has declared sacred as a player and manager and did it hundreds of times while fully knowing the consequences. He's the slimiest of slime balls...

Pete was never my favorite player, but I always liked him as a player as he played on my favorite team. Pete is a very flawed man, a great baseball player, but a flawed human. I love to here Pete talk about baseball, especially when he's not talking about his own career but talking about other players. Pete has made mistakes, owned up to some of them and been reluctant to on others.

 

That said, his actions on the field deserve to be in the Hall of Fame...end of story.

For his actions off of the field he deserves everything he's received and everything he's been denied.

 

I know that betting is the Cardinal Sin of Baseball..but in my opinion it is no worse than cheating the game in other ways. They say betting on baseball almost destroyed the game back in the early 1900's well PED's almost destroyed the game again in the last 20 years. How is one really any worse than the other?

Pete was never my favorite player, but I always liked him as a player as he played on my favorite team. Pete is a very flawed man, a great baseball player, but a flawed human. I love to here Pete talk about baseball, especially when he's not talking about his own career but talking about other players. Pete has made mistakes, owned up to some of them and been reluctant to on others.

 

That said, his actions on the field deserve to be in the Hall of Fame...end of story.

For his actions off of the field he deserves everything he's received and everything he's been denied.

 

I know that betting is the Cardinal Sin of Baseball..but in my opinion it is no worse than cheating the game in other ways. They say betting on baseball almost destroyed the game back in the early 1900's well PED's almost destroyed the game again in the last 20 years. How is one really any worse than the other?

 

If by "reluctant" you mean lied with every fiber of his being, sure...

Call me when their is evidence that he bet against the Reds. Then I'll listen.

 

Until then let's talk about all of the players in the HOF and/or not banned that have used drugs including PED's, and those involved in domestic violence.

Character and integrity of baseball? Give me a break!

 

MLB's record on domestic violence worse than NFL's - SBNation.com

Never understood the fascination with this debate, along with many other things Rose related.

 

He broke a rule posted in every clubhouse in the game, over and over again. The rule states the penalty very clearly (banned for life). My man must have thought that he was bigger than the game. Or that he was smarter than everyone and would never get caught (if you've ever met the guy, that was a major miscalculation on his part).

 

Not seeing the gray area on the rule or the enforcement.

 

And, as iconic sports figures go, I'll never understand Cincinnati fans continued head-over-heels support of Rose.

The guy played for a long time here on some great teams.

He could really make contact with a baseball, and he played hard.

Hometown kid.

He broke baseball's number one rule over and over, while wearing a Reds uniform.

He left Cincinnati for the money when he had the chance.

He only came back to Cincinnati when his career was basically over to chase the hit record.

 

Cincinnati has had plenty of iconic sports personalities (Munoz, Collinsworth, Larkin, Esiason, Junior, and of course many names other than Rose from the Big Red Machine).

 

Kind of disappointing that so many fans still fight so hard to defend this guy.

So you assume lots of players are betting today with no proof, yet we just are supposed to believe Rose never bet against the Reds or let any bet affect his game just because Pete wouldn't do that?

 

First, yes I believe lots of players bet and do other things but have not been caught. I'm not that naive.

 

Second, given Rose's records/HOF stats and his demeanor on the field, I find it difficult to believe he would bet against himself. Although I've been wrong once or twice.

 

And for all the folks who bring up "integrity of the game" argument, I used to believe it 'cause I'm old school. But the more I watch professional sports the only integrity for the game I see is in the form of $$$$$$$$$$$$.

Edited June 23, 201511 yr by OlDog75

Doesn't matter, put him on the ballot and he still isn't getting in.

Call me when their is evidence that he bet against the Reds. Then I'll listen.

 

That sums up how I feel about it.

The naivete of some on here is astounding.

Let's say for argument's sake, someone - in this case, a player/manager, is in deep. To an individual bookie, a syndicate, whatever.

 

Let's say that he bets on his team 62 times in a season. That's wonderful! He's betting on his team to win! He's giving it everything he's got! He would never bet against his team!

 

What is going on the other 100 games, and why?

 

THAT is why this is the sport's cardinal rule.

 

 

 

P.S Call me when there is evidence that he bet on the Reds EVERY SINGLE GAME.

 

Then I'll listen.

It seems like the big argument is "he didn't bet against the Reds". While that may seem ok, you have to understand that still could have caused problems. Days he didn't bet on the Reds were basically telling other gambling associates that he didn't think he would win, which is in effect giving inside information. A non bet is just as bad as a bet in this situation. And it's not so much of a stretch to think that maybe, just maybe he managed or played those games a little differently.

 

There are other issues too. Very few people have said "Pete's a great guy". He's almost universally accepted as being one of the bigger jerks out there. People on this board bash people every day for being bad, nasty people...but Pete gets a free pass. No other celebrity get's that sort of break, or call for separation of his personality and accomplishments. For example....P Diddy attacks his kids football coach and he's just an idiot. Not "he's an idiot" but made some great music (and yes that's a matter of opinion). Pete has lied to his fans and the world for many, many years. Why do so many still give him the benefit of the doubt, and keep excusing what he did??

It seems like the big argument is "he didn't bet against the Reds". While that may seem ok, you have to understand that still could have caused problems. Days he didn't bet on the Reds were basically telling other gambling associates that he didn't think he would win, which is in effect giving inside information. A non bet is just as bad as a bet in this situation. And it's not so much of a stretch to think that maybe, just maybe he managed or played those games a little differently.

 

There are other issues too. Very few people have said "Pete's a great guy". He's almost universally accepted as being one of the bigger jerks out there. People on this board bash people every day for being bad, nasty people...but Pete gets a free pass. No other celebrity get's that sort of break, or call for separation of his personality and accomplishments. For example....P Diddy attacks his kids football coach and he's just an idiot. Not "he's an idiot" but made some great music (and yes that's a matter of opinion). Pete has lied to his fans and the world for many, many years. Why do so many still give him the benefit of the doubt, and keep excusing what he did??

 

 

100% in agreement with the first paragraph. I don't care whether he was a saint or a tool - there are plenty of jerks who are great ball players and probably plenty in the Hall.

 

But when you're feeding inside information to organized crime, that - in a manner of speaking - is a whole 'nuther ballgame.

100% in agreement with the first paragraph. I don't care whether he was a saint or a tool - there are plenty of jerks who are great ball players and probably plenty in the Hall.

 

But when you're feeding inside information to organized crime, that - in a manner of speaking - is a whole 'nuther ballgame.

 

And again, for the record, I'm a big Pete fan...he helped get my Phillies over the hump in 1980. He's in my HOF. And to stretch things further, I'm ok with the PED guys getting in too. But there are enough good reasons that can be presented for keeping them out, that I know I couldn't clearly win the argument. So while I think they should be in, I have no issues with them not being in.

Where do stand on PED users getting in??

 

Not saying you are wrong, or that I disagree with you. Again, I'd probably vote for Pete to get in. But I don't have a real good argument to refute those who don't want him in.

 

Pete should be banned for life. See Rule 21, section D subsection 2. It gives you your outcome for betting on baseball, banned for life.

As for PED users. Is there a rule that says you can not use PED's? I don't know that there is, or if there was a rule when these guys started using them? Gambling almost ruined baseball, I think if a guy wants to use a chemical in his body that improves his game, have at it. Chicks dig the long ball. If they are willing to take a chance to screw up their bodies for a few extra million, go for it.