English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I'm not a fan of either player, though I don't hate them either. But it occurred to me recently... why do so many hate Barry Bonds and don't want to see him in the Hall of Fame for alleged cheating (it hasn't been proven yet) but many, maybe even some of the same people, say Pete Rose (who finally admitted he bet on baseball and his own team) should be reinstated to baseball and elected to the HOF?

2007-05-29 06:33:45 · 18 answers · asked by Bryan C 3 in Sports Baseball

18 answers

I agree with you, It's a double standard. Many people like to take that quantum leap and come to the conclusion that Bonds took drugs and therefore none of his accomplishments mean anything. They believe since all Rose did was bet on baseball he should get into the Hall because of his accomplishments. The fact is that Rose admitted what he did and accepted a lifetime ban from baseball and the hall-of-fame while Bonds has never tested positive for steroid use as far as we know. You really can't have it both ways.

2007-05-29 07:37:59 · answer #1 · answered by Frizzer 7 · 0 2

First, Bonds was a lock to Cooperstown about 6 years ago, before he ever shot up once. He is an incredible player, with or without steriods. Second, there is a BIG difference between what Rose did and what Bonds allegedly did. Like it or not, cheating to win is an integral part of baseball's history. The Hall of Fame is filled with players who were caught breaking the rules to their advantage. Gaylord Perry and Phil Niekro were both caught doctoring baseballs. Ty Cobb wore illegally long and sharp spikes. Many great hitters are known to have corked their bats. In reality, what Bonds did is no different. He is being villified because he continues to deny what everyone knows he did and because he isn't a nice guy -- not because of the steroids themselves (after all, nobody is making a fuss about Roger Clemens and the massive change in his head and body over the last 15 years). What Rose did is very different. He bet on baseball. Therefore, it is very likely that he cheated to lose, not to win. Even though it has never been proven that he bet against the Reds, it is very likely that he altered his mangerial style to his teams detriment because of the betting. For example, if he had money on a particular game he might overwork his pitcher in that game to get the win thus hurting his next start. The second piece to the puzzle is the background of the action. Everyone who is associated with baseball knows that there is one unforgivable sin -- betting on the game. Rose chose to blatantly violate this known taboo. He therefore is paying the ultimate price. What Bonds did is murkier. There wasn't even a steroid testing policy in baseball when he started! It is likely that 30% or more of MLB hitters used steroids at the height of the craze. Barry's actions must be looked at in that light. If Bud Selig had come out and said many years ago "anyone caught taking steroids would be banned from the game," one could argue Barry may end up there. That never happened, though.

2016-03-13 01:26:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well... lets just rule the racism card out. The reason why is that the current owner of the record is Hank Aaron, a black man.

The truth is that the Home run record is a record people are partial to. Roger Marris, was often booed, and abused by Yankee fans when he was making a run at Babe Ruth's record. Marris also had a star next to his name, distinguishing that the season had more games in it than when Ruth played.

In Rose's case, he had an issue with gambling while managing the Philidelphia Phillies. Often the arguement comes back about Rose going into the hall of fame because of the type of player he was, not manager. Rose gave it his all every day, and boasted numbers to prove it. Mainly, people want to honor Rose for what he did well before his mishap ever took place.

In Barry's case, he's not as respectable a player as Aaron was, and the reason people would rather see the record stay with Henry Aaron, is because Aaron was a respectable player. Bonds is a shady player. We know Aaron earned his record fairly, but many are skeptic to Bonds earning it fairly. When you have other players such as home run heroes like Jose Canseco and Jason Giambi admitting to steroid use, people start to associate you with the cheaters of your era.

Mainly the reason why is that Rose played fair. Henry Aaron played fair, but can we all say Bonds has played fair?

2007-05-29 06:52:34 · answer #3 · answered by Ryan 4 · 2 0

The scales of justice are seriously warped on this one.....

I want Pete Rose to get reinstated in Baseball. Bud Selig is a moron for not seeing that simple gambling is not a crime and is all for fun/recreation.

I'd like to see Barry Bonds inducted into the Baseball HOF all because there is no solid evidence showing he had positive test results for steroids.

It's not a matter of "the race card", but just the people's views after being brainwashed by the media into hating Barry Bonds. So what if he declines interviews at every chance..... That does not make anyone test positive for steroids, does it?

2007-05-29 11:54:14 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

well because Bonds used preformance enhancers to enhance his playing, which is cheating. Pete Rose did bet on his own team which is aganist the rules, and i guess is cheating, but Pete isnt in the hall of fame, and probably never will be. the point is though is that pete did the amazing things he did on talent. Bonds did "so called amazing things" with the help of steroids. Pete made a bad choice, that will keep him from getting one of the most honorable mentions in baseball, but people still recognize him for his talent, but bonds shouldn't be in the hall, becasue he has no natural talent that is Hall of fame deserving

2007-05-29 09:43:32 · answer #5 · answered by feenafee 4 · 1 0

Pete Rose did nothing wrong as a player. He would not make it as a manager even if he didn't bet on his "own" team to win. If he bet against his team, it may be a different story. But Barry Bonds, has no class, he never admits to anything. If your not building his ego, then he doesn't want to talk to you. Pete Rose was a player, probably top 50, in my opinion. Barry Bonds, would not be in the top 500 if he was clean.

2007-05-29 07:07:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Barry + Pete still = 0 character....
It was proved that Pete did bet.... The ban must stand, even if Pete was made to be an example.. I feel for him because he was a huge hero to me growing up... But baseball needs to stick to it's rules to keep betting and gambling out of baseball.
Barry on the other hand has never been proved guilty..... There is tons of evidence linking him to the use of steroids but no convictions...

I'm sure O.J. is hated but he doesn't have a criminal conviction for his problems either...

But on the other hand whats the big deal??? There's all ready plenty of racist, violent felons already in the HOF... As far as I know Barry and Pete have never been that bad....

2007-05-29 07:02:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Pete played the game "the way it should be." Plus he he came across as loving the game and the fans. Bonds seems to play for himself and for the glory. He lost a lot of people when he made a racial issue when he mentioned that passing The Babe was all that matter. Granted Pete committed the Cardinal sin by betting. He created an image of "I played hard, yea I lived hard, but come on, I did it for the Fans!"

Bottom line: Pete played in the Glory years of baseball, he was one of the best players in a mediocre talent Pool. Bonds was a superstar whom the media was not fond of,who passed Big Mac, whom everyone loved, too quickly. Mac, was credited with "saving the game." When Bonds passed Him, it was in the beginning days of steriord accusations. .

2007-05-29 07:11:13 · answer #8 · answered by Christopher W 1 · 0 0

When Pete Rose admitted he did it, he always bet on his team! It's not like he bet against the Reds. People see this as a less evil! Where as Barry Bonds, who I hate, is breaking the most sacred of sacred records. And if you compare a type of guy Bonds is to Rose, Rose is more likeable and was even Charlie Hustle. People want him in the HOF because of his play not his managing. Trying to break the record of a skinny twerp in Aaron and a Fat blob in Ruth is going to be looked down upon if you take juice! I watched "Rookie of the Year" and Bonds looked so skinny and his head looked normal! He took juice and that's that!

2007-05-29 06:45:11 · answer #9 · answered by FuBu_1217 2 · 2 0

Because Pete Rose agreed to be banned, and did something that was actually expressly forbidden and bannable within the Rules of Baseball.

Baseball should lie in the bed they've made with Barry Bonds and other suspected juicers.

2007-05-29 07:29:41 · answer #10 · answered by Orlando Rays 4 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers