PETE ROSE cant get in to MLB HOF for gambling
2007-03-08 01:50:39 · 14 answers · asked by doghouse 3 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Why? Simpson was one of the all-time greats; he played his entire career and was elected to the NFL HOF long before the murders. You can't take a player OUT of the HOF for what he did post career. That makes no sense whatsoever. Besides, he was found not guilty of the murders in the criminal trial (although he was found liable for the deaths at the civil trial, which is different). Whether you believe he did it or not, the fact is that the court acquitted him and you can't legally hold that against him.
No comparison to Pete Rose; he was gambling on baseball games (and most likely his own team's games) when he was still a player and manager, so there's always going to be the question of whether he compromised the integrity of baseball by fixing those games in any way to cover his bets.
2007-03-08 02:06:12 · answer #1 · answered by gab500 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I think so...Killing is a little more serious than gambling or drugs...and the NFL has policies on that anyway...The Hall Of Fame should have a policy about character...and make it known that if they get involved in any behavior that is not model behavior in society (like OJ beating his wife, or Michael Irvin using drugs), they can be removed from the Hall...The Hall Of Fame is a LIFETIME achievement award, not just a football award...The NFL MVP, the Super Bowl MVP, those are FOOTBALL awards...
2007-03-08 01:54:58 · answer #2 · answered by Terry C. 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Halls of Fame are for SPORTS
their personal lives should not be taken into account when they're being considered for their respected HOF.
The exception of course is when what they do in their personal life effects their job (their sport(s))
that is why Pete Rose is such a borderline call
OJ's "murder" which he was acquitted of in the criminal case by the way...........what people think is the truth doesn't matter
had nothing to do with his career in the NFL
Nor did his general dickheadedness in recent months
so he should not be removed from the HOF
I think that's pretty obvious
2007-03-08 03:04:13 · answer #3 · answered by retired 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely NOT.. Hall of Fame is for what you did on the field, not off... If we start eliminating talent because of personal affairs, then the place would be empty.. Regardless of what anyone thinks, he still was acquitted.. public opinion says differently, but that's public opinion... He was acquitted and everything else is simply opinion.. Do I think he did it?? Good possibility, but again.. opinion.
Now for pete rose?? this is a shame too.. If he is banned so should babe ruth, as babe ruth had an alcohol problem which is a sickness.. Gambling is a sickness too..
Hall of fame is based on merits on the field, not personal life. When i take my kids I want them to see the best, not the second best who happen to have a clean life..
2007-03-08 03:48:09 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No there is a difference Pete Rose bet on baseball. O.J. may have killed his wife but he was found innocent. So kicking him out of the H.O.F, isnt really justified. Besides Simpson didnt do anything to affect his football team or the league. Plus if you wanna kick O.J. out for being charged with murder, not convicted, why would they let a crackhead like Micheal Irvin in. That just goes to show that it doesnt matter what you do in you personal life all that matters in the Hall is what you did on the field and it should be that way.
2007-03-08 02:33:56 · answer #5 · answered by MJMGrand 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
OJ Simpson was already inducted into the Hall of Fame when his wife died (he didn't commit a crime since technically he wasn't found guilty of it).
Pete Rose was not in the HoF when the scandal about his betting broke. If he was, they wouldn't have removed him either. I think they will eventually let him in - but for whatever reason, I don't see it happening until after he dies.
2007-03-08 02:10:19 · answer #6 · answered by RichMac82 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Football HOF doesn't take into account what you do off the field they could care less if the Baseball HOF did the same Rose would be in as a player
2007-03-08 03:17:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pete Rose LIED about Gambling and that is why he was banned for life. Had he ADMITTED it from the start then the Commish at the time would have reinstated him. Pete Rose was also doing it WHILE HE WAS IN BASEBALL. Ok he was a manager not a player BUT still part of the game. Now if O.J. was IN FOOTBALL when he was accused(found not guilty going by LEGAL record) then you could use that arguement.
2007-03-08 02:54:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
You might as well as if Wilt Chamberlain should be removed for sleeping with 20,000 women. O.J. was one of the greatest backs to play football. What happened after was his own doing, and he will get what's coming to him. As for taking him out of the hall, he might as well be removed from the record books, and all NFL films.
2007-03-08 02:21:08 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No he should not. Although his life has been marred with crime, he can still be recognized for his on-field accomplishments. He should not be held in high regard as a person by usc or anyone. Many, many hall of famers have lived disgraceful lives or even cheated (esp old time baseball guys) and are still in. you think jim brown is a respectable, moral individual?
2016-03-16 07:12:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋