Pete Rose Bet While Playing

[MU82]

What a scumbag.

He probably wasn't ever going to get into the Hall of Fame, anyway. But all those who made the argument that at least he never bet when he was a player so he should have gotten in on his playing exploits ... well, that's gone.

If I'm Rob Manfred, I immediately remove Rose from the activities he was going to be allowed to be part of during All-Star Game festivities in Cinci. Pete Rose should not be allowed anywhere near any big-league ballpark ever again.

[MerrittsMustache]

Who cares?

Everyone knows that Rose is a scumbag and a degenerate gambler. He was also an all-time great hitter and deserves to be in the HOF. I'd rather see him be inducted than borderline guys like Craig Biggio and Jim Rice.

[4everwarriors]

Halls are filled with scumbags, womanizers, thugs, idiots, and murderers. Just ax O.J., ai na?

[GGGG]

Betting on games that he managed was bad enough.  It could have impacted how he handled his pitching staff, the line ups he put on the field, who he rested and when.

Betting on games in which he played though is far worse.  It could have impacted how he fundamentally played the game.  It is for that reason that it is the #1 rule that cannot be broken.

His lifetime ban will end.  He can get into the HOF when he is dead.

[CTWarrior]

Betting on games that he managed was bad enough.  It could have impacted how he handled his pitching staff, the line ups he put on the field, who he rested and when.

Betting on games in which he played though is far worse.  It could have impacted how he fundamentally played the game.  It is for that reason that it is the #1 rule that cannot be broken.

His lifetime ban will end.  He can get into the HOF when he is dead.

As far as I've read, he only bet on the Reds to win.  If that is the case, then it wouldn't have impacted how he fundamentally played the game, since he would be playing to win anyway.  As a manager, you could make decisions to win a particular game that are detrimental to your season, so I think that is worse. 

To me, this is the hierarchy of gambling related things you can do as a player/coach/manager

1.  Accepting money to purposely lose a game
2.  Accepting money to allow opponent to cover a spread
3.  Accepting money to insure that you cover a spread (agreeing to run up the score)
4.  Betting against your team in a game in which you have the obligation to participate
5.  Betting on your team as a head coach/manager
6.  Betting on your team as a player
7.  Betting on other games in your sport in which you have no obligation to compete
8.  Betting on other sports

I would imagine everybody has a line they would draw in the above list where the behavior is unacceptable (for me, the line is anything above step 6 would be permanent ban).  Baseball has, since around 1920, clearly articulated that any gambling on baseball would not be tolerated and that those who break the rule are out of baseball.  Rose knowlingly broke that rule and should be out of baseball.

[Eldon]

As far as I've read, he only bet on the Reds to win.  If that is the case, then it wouldn't have impacted how he fundamentally played the game, since he would be playing to win anyway.  As a manager, you could make decisions to win a particular game that are detrimental to your season, so I think that is worse. 

To me, this is the hierarchy of gambling related things you can do as a player/coach/manager

1.  Accepting money to purposely lose a game
2.  Accepting money to allow opponent to cover a spread
3.  Accepting money to insure that you cover a spread (agreeing to run up the score)
4.  Betting against your team in a game in which you have the obligation to participate
5.  Betting on your team as a head coach/manager
6.  Betting on your team as a player
7.  Betting on other games in your sport in which you have no obligation to compete
8.  Betting on other sports

I would imagine everybody has a line they would draw in the above list where the behavior is unacceptable (for me, the line is anything above step 6 would be permanent ban).  Baseball has, since around 1920, clearly articulated that any gambling on baseball would not be tolerated and that those who break the rule are out of baseball.  Rose knowlingly broke that rule and should be out of baseball.

While I completely agree that betting against your team is far worse than betting for your team, I think baseball still has a legitimate gripe against a player betting on his team to win.  If a player bets money on a game, even if it is on his own team to win, this player now has an added incentive to play harder, run faster, etc.  Now this alone may not be that bad, but it would give this player an advantage over the other players who actually followed the rules.

[jesmu84]

Betting on yourself or your team = worst thing of all time. Unforgivable

Using steroids to cheat the game itself, other teams, other players = meh.

Zero logic.

[brandx]

I have no problem with Rose being in the HOF museum. He was part of the history of the game, and after all, isn't that what a museum is for?

But should he have a plaque in the Hall? Was he a worse person than Ty Cobb? We honor men who refused to let black men on the field. Should we remove Ruth & Mantle because they played on the field under the influence? What are we trying to honor in the HOF? A man's character or a man's playing ability?

Rose is absolutely a scumbag. Always was - even as a player. By putting him in the HOF - with his history of misdeeds on the plaque as well - we ensure that the next generations will always know what a lowlife he was despite the records. He cannot be seen as a hero or martyr.

[Lennys Tap]

While I completely agree that betting against your team is far worse than betting for your team, I think baseball still has a legitimate gripe against a player betting on his team to win.  If a player bets money on a game, even if it is on his own team to win, this player now has an added incentive to play harder, run faster, etc.  Now this alone may not be that bad, but it would give this player an advantage over the other players who actually followed the rules.

Ha,ha. good stuff Eldon. I understand that gambling on baseball is verboten for players, coaches and managers and I understand why. But if I'm a big league manager or GM, give me 25 guys who believe and compete at the absolute highest level. Would that be the guy cashing checks no matter the outcome or the guy who put his own dough on himself and his teammates? I feel no differently about a guy who bets on his team to win than I do about an employee who buys stock in his company. This outrage (82's and others) is over the top.

[withoutbias]

Who cares?

Everyone knows that Rose is a scumbag and a degenerate gambler. He was also an all-time great hitter and deserves to be in the HOF. I'd rather see him be inducted than borderline guys like Craig Biggio and Jim Rice.

the rules are as clear as can be.  he doesn't deserve to be in the hof or any part of baseball.  it's quite simple.

[brandx]

the rules are as clear as can be.  he doesn't deserve to be in the hof or any part of baseball.  it's quite simple.

Well, the HOF is divided between the Hall where the plaques are and the majority of the building which is the museum.

I perfectly understand him not having a plaque in the Hall of Fame, but what about the museum. Should he be mentioned there?

[GooooMarquette]

Well, the HOF is divided between the Hall where the plaques are and the majority of the building which is the museum.

I perfectly understand him not having a plaque in the Hall of Fame, but what about the museum. Should he be mentioned there?

Is there a "fallen heroes" wing?

[ZiggysFryBoy]

If I was Pete rose, I'd be sittin in the sports book at Caesars with a couple of bimbos, nonstop booze and pipes of MLB betting slips
  F--- em.

[GooooMarquette]

If I was Pete rose, I'd be sittin in the sports book at Caesars with a couple of bimbos, nonstop booze and pipes of MLB betting slips
  F--- em.

How is that any different from what he already did?

[MerrittsMustache]

the rules are as clear as can be.  he doesn't deserve to be in the hof or any part of baseball.  it's quite simple.

Keep him out of MLB. That's fine. I can understand that. But to keep the all-time hit leader out of the Hall of Fame makes no sense.

[ChicosBailBonds]

We had a debate on this last year and I haven't waivered a bit.  I used to work for a MLB club, and in EVERY clubhouse it is plastered everywhere...NO BETTING.  LIFETIME BANISHMENT.

He knew this.  This new news is nothing new in my opinion and doesn't change a thing.  You can't bet as a player, manager, etc.  It is drilled into everyone's heads...employees, players, etc.

Sorry Pete, you lied and lied and were caught.  No soup for you. Black and white, cut and dried.

[Lennys Tap]

We had a debate on this last year and I haven't waivered a bit.  I used to work for a MLB club, and in EVERY clubhouse it is plastered everywhere...NO BETTING.  LIFETIME BANISHMENT.

He knew this.  This new news is nothing new in my opinion and doesn't change a thing.  You can't bet as a player, manager, etc.  It is drilled into everyone's heads...employees, players, etc.

Sorry Pete, you lied and lied and were caught.  No soup for you. Black and white, cut and dried.

He broke a rule, both as player and manager. Want to hang him for it, fine. But their is NO evidence that he ever gave less than his best as a player or manager. Lots of players in the Hall you can't say that about. And there's NO evidence he ever cheated the game itself with PEDs. Rule breaker? Absolutely. Scumbag? Quite possibly. The fiercest competitor to ever play or manage? Maybe. A Hall of Famer? I'd say yes.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

Pete Rose has been denied employment in basically the only trade for which he is qualified for long enough. He's never going to manage again. I suspect he would have had a very lengthy career in that role. Enough is enough. I don't think many people have ever said he's a "bad" guy. He's a gambler. I know several. Everybody has their faults. The punishment does not fit his crime. Rapists do less time in prison.

I believe he should be able to broadcast and participate in activities with the Reds, etc.

[buckchuckler]

He broke a rule, both as player and manager. Want to hang him for it, fine. But their is NO evidence that he ever gave less than his best as a player or manager. Lots of players in the Hall you can't say that about. And there's NO evidence he ever cheated the game itself with PEDs. Rule breaker? Absolutely. Scumbag? Quite possibly. The fiercest competitor to ever play or manage? Maybe. A Hall of Famer? I'd say yes.

It is just too bad that none of that matters.  Betting on baseball is a lifetime ban.  Rose knew it.  He did it anyway.  He needs to remain expelled.  Not just because of what he did (which is reason enough), but to continue the precedent and show other players what will happen to a player who bets on baseball, regardless of their skill and attitude on the field.  

I don't understand why this is so complicated.  There is a rule with a defined punishment.  Why should Rose not be subject to the stated punishment?  Because he slid headfirst?  Cmon. 

[GGGG]

Part of the problem is that he just won't stop lying.  If he would have come clean...completely clean...way back in 1989, he probably would have been suspended for a few years, but reinstated...in the HOF...and could have very likely found he way to the bench as a manager again.

[brandx]

Pete Rose has been denied employment in basically the only trade for which he is qualified for long enough. He's never going to manage again. I suspect he would have had a very lengthy career in that role. Enough is enough. I don't think many people have ever said he's a "bad" guy. He's a gambler. I know several. Everybody has their faults. The punishment does not fit his crime. Rapists do less time in prison.

I believe he should be able to broadcast and participate in activities with the Reds, etc.

Rose has never been in prison. So he hasn't "suffered" a severe punishment like a rapist. To suggest so is plain silly.

While I don't care if he is in the Hall of not, he should never be allowed to be a part of MLB. He gave up that right.

Betting as a manager is much worse than as a player. If he bet on his own team as a manager - and there is no reason to think he didn't - that is much more harmful than if betting as a player. Because even if he bet on his team to win, it brings up the probability that he "threw" games. He would be managing a game he bet on like it was the 7th game of the WS, meaning it could put his team and the bullpen in a bad situation for the next game increasing the probability of a loss.

[brandx]

It is just too bad that none of that matters.  Betting on baseball is a lifetime ban.  Rose knew it.  He did it anyway.  He needs to remain expelled.  Not just because of what he did (which is reason enough), but to continue the precedent and show other players what will happen to a player who bets on baseball, regardless of their skill and attitude on the field.  

I don't understand why this is so complicated.  There is a rule with a defined punishment.  Why should Rose not be subject to the stated punishment?  Because he slid headfirst?  Cmon. 

I agree totally. He should be banned from any MLB event for the rest of his life.


But the Hall of Fame is a private interest.  It is the central point for the study of the history of baseball, and honors those who have excelled in playing, managing, and serving the sport. The Hall's motto is "Preserving History, Honoring Excellence, Connecting Generations."

Pete Rose is part of the history of baseball. Like Obama said about the rebel flag - it belongs in a museum (recognizing its existence & history) - not as a part of everyday life. I feel the same way about Pete. His play IS a part of MLB history and should thus be recognized.

But his actions should preclude him ever being allowed to participate in any MLB activity.

[CTWarrior]

Keep him out of MLB. That's fine. I can understand that. But to keep the all-time hit leader out of the Hall of Fame makes no sense.

Important to note that it is not really MLB that is keeping him out of the Hall of Fame.  The Hall of Fame added a clause to its eligibility rules in 1990, stating that players who were on the ineligible list could not be considered as candidates.  This was done specifically to address Pete Rose.  It would have been interesting to see if he would have gotten voted in anyway had that ban not been added.  Given the sanctimonious nature of a large percentage of baseball writers, I doubt he would have gotten the necessary 75%.

While I agree that Pete Rose should be banned from MLB, I would not have a problem with his election to the Hall of Fame.  

[brandx]

What a scumbag.

He probably wasn't ever going to get into the Hall of Fame, anyway. But all those who made the argument that at least he never bet when he was a player so he should have gotten in on his playing exploits ... well, that's gone.

If I'm Rob Manfred, I immediately remove Rose from the activities he was going to be allowed to be part of during All-Star Game festivities in Cinci. Pete Rose should not be allowed anywhere near any big-league ballpark ever again.

Mike, looks like you started a good discussion.

I know we agree on Rose ever being involved in any MLB activity (even though I think he should be in the Hall for his on-field career), but what about McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, etc. Again, these guys are douches, but should they be allowed in?

I consider you the Scoop expert on these matters.

[Pakuni]

Important to note that it is not really MLB that is keeping him out of the Hall of Fame.  The Hall of Fame added a clause to its eligibility rules in 1990, stating that players who were on the ineligible list could not be considered as candidates.  This was done specifically to address Pete Rose.  It would have been interesting to see if he would have gotten voted in anyway had that ban not been added.  Given the sanctimonious nature of a large percentage of baseball writers, I doubt he would have gotten the necessary 75%.

While I agree that Pete Rose should be banned from MLB, I would not have a problem with his election to the Hall of Fame.  

Correct.
Ultimately, it's not MLB who decides who gets in and who doesn't get in the hall. It's the BBWAA. If the writers decided to make Rose eligible for the hall, they could do so at any time.
And, yeah, it's unlikely Rose gets in regardless.