I used to be "on the fence" about Pete Rose getting into the Hall of Fame... "Should he or should he not?" BUT now there is no way in hell he will get in. After the news that he bet on his Red's every single night they played while he managed them.....does anyone still think he should get a chance at the Hall???
2007-03-14 12:02:25 · 8 answers · asked by d-town 3 in Sports ➔ Baseball
I saw a baseball that Pete Rose signed that said "I am sorry that I bet on baseball." Pete's not sorry that he bet on baseball, he's sorry that he got caught. He knew MLB's gambling policy and its ramifications, and he still chose to bet on baseball. He knew what he was up against prior to making any bets.
2007-03-14 13:23:07 · answer #1 · answered by mojojonji 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think, and I've said this before, if he's not a HOFer, take his memorabillia out of the Hall, take his name from the record books, and give Ty Cobb the hit record back. It makes no sense. That's like saying O.J. should be removed from the football HOF. Or how about Michael Jordan? He was a gambler too. This was while he was playing, and it's not been said if he bet on basketball or not. This has mainly to do with Rose not being well liked. If Johnny Bench had bet on the Reds, would it be an issue?
2007-03-14 19:56:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
First of all, the Dowd report did not find that he bet on the Reds every single night. The fact that he says that now is simply and exaggeration. Second, what is the harm of betting on yourself to win. The Black Sox lost on purpose and received payoffs from gamblers who had money on the other team. Pete only was confindent in his team's ability to win. And aren't incentive laded contracts essentially a player betting his salary on himself. "If I hit 40 HRs, I make 5 million. If I hit less than 40, I only make 3.5 million." How is this any different. Having your personal results directly affect your monetary gain is nothing new. Bart Giamatti didn't like Pete and the ban was personal. I'm glad his son didn't win an Oscar for "Sideways".
2007-03-14 19:13:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
This is not new news. Pete Rose should be in the hall of fame.
2007-03-14 20:21:59 · answer #4 · answered by gman 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No I do not think Pete should be in the hall of frame. Never have and never will. Any one that bets on baseball will you are involed in it is a loser.
2007-03-14 19:07:56 · answer #5 · answered by skins48fan 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He should be in the HOF for his accomplishments as a player. He had heart and was such a gamer. That's where it should end. Rose should never be allowed anywhere near baseball otherwise. He couldn't be trusted w/a job in mgmt or anywhere else on the field or behind the scenes.
2007-03-15 20:21:06 · answer #6 · answered by mooseny35 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He his pretty defiant and does not seem to care if he gets in or not, so that is up to him whether he comes clean or not. Many fans really want to know if he threw games now since he keeps adding to his betting malfeasance bit by bit.
2007-03-14 19:38:01 · answer #7 · answered by Frank R 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He should be there. But apparantly it no longer matters to him.
2007-03-14 20:06:57 · answer #8 · answered by Jayjay 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋