should pete rose be allowed back in baseball and why?

Question

If guys like bonds can take steroids and guys like strawberry can snort cocaine and guys like sosa can use a cork bat and guys all these players who go out and get in trouble with the law. All these guys get away with crap so why does rose have to stay away from the game. He is the greatest player in the history of the game. More hits than any other player. I say let him come back. After all he has done for the game I think he deserves one last chance to come back and redefine is legacy.

Answer 1

Baseball has always taken the stance that betting/gambling is the worst possible sin in the game. I think it is horrible and should result in him being barred from being in any active position on the field or in the office. However, he should be in the HOF as a player. Gambling or not what he did on the field ranks him among the best ever - to not include him in the hall is as much of a travesty as Pete betting on the game...

Answer 2

These are the only facts that matter - 1. Pete Rose bet on baseball games in which he had a duty to perform (as manager of the Reds) 2. The punishment for doing so is to be declared permanently ineligible. (Note - it is not, as so many people call it a "lifetime ban". Rose will not be eligible for the HOF when he dies either) 3. Players who are on the Permanently Ineligible List are nto eligible for induction to the HOF. Steroids have nothing to do with Rose. Ty Cobb has nothing to do with Pete Rose (and if you kicked out every player who slid spikes high in the early 1900's , there'd be nobody left) Albert Belle has nothing to do with Rose. Belle served his punishment for corking a bat, as did anyone else who was caught corking a bat (Sammy Sosa, Craig Nettles, etc.) There are NO exceptions to this rule. Nowhere in the rule does it state that the punishment is different for players with more than 4000 hits. There is no difference between a player who was lazy and a player who "worked hard out on the field everyday". And there certainly is nothing that says that the punishment will be lifted because enough fans somehow feel that what Rose did was not worthy of his punishment. One other thing - although the HOF uses baseball's permanentlt ineligible list as a guideline, it does not exist for that purpose. Baseball has that list to make sure that people who damage the integrity of the game by breaking the most sacred rule they have will NEVER be allowed back into the game. For baseball to remove him from that list would mean that they would be okay with Rose going back to work as a coach, manager, GM, special consultant, etc. They can not declare him eligible again for any other reason. And Rose does not deserve that oppotunity. He knew what he did was wrong, and he knew the punishment for it would be being permanently gone from the game. Perhaps instead your time would be better spent campaigning for players who are more than worthy of the HOF but as yet haven't been inducted. I'll even give you 3 names to start with - Ron Santo, Andre Dawson and Bert Blyleven. One last little thing - the rule does not differentiate between betting on your team to win or lose. Even if he only bet on the Reds to win, the bottom line is he was betting. A small part of the equation would be what would happen if Rose had a bad losing streak and ending up owing a bookie more money than he could afford to pay? The odds that Rose would actually throw a game, while very remote, could exist as a result. And the rule needs to take all possibilities into account. Sorry, but Rose does not deserve to be in the HOF. He didn't in 1989, he doesn't now. and he won't in the future either. Baseball doesn't want any part of him, and neither does the Hall. And that's the way it will stay until "permanent" expires.

Answer 3

Is this a joke? Where is McGwire's or even Canseco's name on this pitiful a@@ list you just conjured up? Both are biggest cheaters of all time and you use Bonds, Strawberry, and Sosa as examples. Could you be a little less racist?

Pete Rose signed a agreement as a manager stating that he would never bet on the game of baseball. He dishonored that agreement and dishonored himself as well.

Why in the hell would you want a man like that in the hall with great men who played an honored this game with respect and integrity? He doesn't deserve the honor.

And just so you know. Baseball no longer considers Pete Rose to be and issue at all. The matter of Peter Rose and baseball and been officially closed! So stop asking and whinning about this moron getting into the hall. It's not going to happen.

Answer 4

This is a very good question and a hot topic in baseball. Actualy baseball letting him back in, just very slow. For the first time since everything happend the allowed the cincinnati reds to induct him into there teams hall of fame and his statue is in there hall of fame. So he is on his way back. How can you define who is the greatest player in the history of the game. I say you have to look at the numbers. The numbers dont lie. Alot of people can have there opinions and mine is that he has more base hits than any other player in the history of the game. So anyone could argue that yes he is the greatest player in the history of the game. My opinion is rose and hank arron are the top guys. Rose the most hits and arron the most homeruns. Rose had better defense so I would give the edge to rose for best player ever.

I met rose a couple years ago and he was a realy nice guy, he was does alot for baseball even though he is now allowed to manage baseball or be in the hall of fame.

One thing for sure is he should be allowed in the hall of fame for what he did on the feild. I think after all he has done he should have a second chance to come back to the game. It would be good to see him come back to the reds. They need a new manager anyways.

Answer 5

Rose should NOT be allowed back into the game of baseball OR into the Hall of Fame. Because Major League baseball does not deal with the other offenses and offenders you mention does not mean that Rose is cleared of gambling when he was a player and manager and then lying about it. Now he wants all forgotten. Cannot do that!!

Chow!!

Answer 6

Pete Rose should not be allowed back in baseball. By betting on the game of baseball he ruined the integrity of the game. By betting on games in which his own team played, he ruined the integrity of his team. Since he was the manager, he could affect the outcome of the games in which he bet, not just ruining his own numbers but those of his players. That is the ultimate form of selfishness the game has ever seen. At least the alleged 1919 White Sox made the decision as a team, Rose made this decision on his own. Then he lied about it for decades, and only came clean to try to gain favor with and sway the fans and the commissioner. I for one used to be a Rose supporter, but not anymore.

All that being said, Rose deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. He is one of the greatest players in the history of the game, nothing he did after his playing career can ever tarnish that fact. The Hall is intended for players' accomplishments, not their faults. If the MLB allowed Rose in the Hall, but kept him out of baseball I would be fine with that. I think Rose would also, I think at this point all he cares about is getting into the Hall of Fame. He doesnt truly want to be involved in baseball: managing, coaching, or being a GM, he just wants the honor of being in the Hall. Grant him his wish and keep him as far away from baseball after that.

Answer 7

Any player engaging in self-destructive behavior is being generally stupid, but that's not necessarily an offense against baseball. And Rule 21, which describes offenses involving gambling within baseball and prescribes specific sanctions, was enacted (ages ago, before the 1919 World Series scandal) not for any moral grounds, but because gambling has the potential to be massively, internally corrosive to the economics (and therefore, overall viability) of the game as a business. The owners were not about to stand for that. Blow a game and they can deal with it; lose them money and you're toast.

Rose broke Rule 21, repeatedly, for a span of years -- and it likely dates back (WAY back) into his playing days, though Dowd didn't investigate that far and didn't need to do so. And, yes, he bet on his own team, the Cincinnati Reds -- that he never bet on them to lose is irrelevant. He bet, he got caught, he agreed to his punishment. (That Rose then serially lied about his offenses, denying them, for 14 years afterward, doesn't make any difference, but it surely doesn't help him win sympathy. Or at least, should not. Rose apologists have incredibly wide bandwidth for believing anything positive regarding Pete, not matter how misconceived.)

And since signing his permanent ineligibility agreement in 1989, what has Rose done differently in his life? Gotten older; that's it. Other than that he is the exact, same, defiant, "I can do no wrong" Pete Rose who took off the jersey 18 years ago. He hasn't restructured his life, he hasn't curbed his gambling addictions, he's done nothing, NOTHING, to indicate in the least that he has even begun to reshape himself into someone worthy of restoration into baseball's good graces.

Rose's road to redemption -- on which, again, he has not yet taken the first step -- does not BEGIN with reinstatement. It ends there. If Rose wants it, he's got a long, long way to go.

Me, I would never -- to emphasize, NEVER -- reinstate him, not based upon what his past 18 years have been like.

-----
As for the Hall, I really don't consider it an interesting topic. Given eligibility, Rose would be in, yes, duh. That's not remotely worth debating. However, he is NOT eligible, and there's an end to it.

I would find some satisfaction in seeing his name get placed on the ballot and letting the writers demolish his candidacy by giving him something poetic yet pathetic, like, oh, 14 votes. At least his apologists would have something different to whine about for the rest of time.

Or, should he get elected, have his plaque clearly note his offenses against baseball, and be made of black cast iron rather than bronze.

Answer 8

First of all I can name 50 players off the top of my head that were better players than Rose. Second, he broke the cardinal rule of baseball. There are specific rules laid out for what he did. Third, he knew about the rule and he still broke it.

Pete Rose is the lowest form of pond scum there is. I had the misfortune of meeting this piece of sh*t many years ago and I can tell you he was bad for the game when he played and he would be bad for the game if he returned.

Don't be so willing to give credit to someone when you don't know the entire story. All those people you mentioned were given a gift and they all abused it including Rose.

Answer 9

This question gets asked so much and is so beaten to death that I am going to start cut/pasting my reply to save on typing.

The short answer is: No. He willingly and repeatedly broke the sport's #1 rule knowing full well what the penalty would be if he got caught. And he got caught. So he pays the penalty. If he was Joe Blow no one would question his banishment. Just because he's Pete Rose doesn't give him a pass.

The long answer I'll hold back for the next time this question is asked...say in about 15 minutes.

Answer 10

No he does not. He does belong in the Hall of Fame though. He is the all time leader in hits. His game was tremendous. He screwed up big time with the betting although he does claim he never bet against his team. There are people in the Hall that did much worse things than bet on a baseball game. Put Pete in!