I believe that Pete Rose never bet against his team. I believe that steroid use enhances a players performance, where Pete Rose only expresses the hope for a possible outcome. I believe that steroid users have damaged the game many times more than Pete Rose ever did. Pete Rose played like he was on steroids when he wasn't. I wonder what these steroid users would have played like without them. I believe that not one of the steroid users should get in to the Baseball Hall of Fame before Pete Rose does. Pete Rose is getting the shaft! What do you think?
2007-12-13 06:58:01 · 12 answers · asked by chrysler_link 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
I am seeing that many of you actually believe that Pete Rose bet on or against his team. What proof can you site. I am not aware of any proof to this matter.
I also see that many of you say that gambling has an impact on an individual game, where steriod use does not. How can you say that. Being from a small market team in Pittsburgh, I remember Barry Bonds. Like Ptet Rose, he was a great single, double, and triple hitter. But he was no home run king. Baseball itself is to blame for steroid use, because they practically condoned it when baseball was at an all time low near 1994. I believe the the steroid users of the league through results by playing beyond their natural abilities. They also got paid more money by large market teams which grouped these players together compounding their effect on baseball. I believe that Pete Rose is above this.
2007-12-14 05:36:00 · update #1
They should all go in together the day after the end of time.
Look, betting on baseball is not simply breaking the game's number one rule.
If I bet today and not tomorrow, this tells gamblers something.
If I bet today, I might do stupid things to try to win which will hurt my team in the long run; if you understand how pitchers and bullpens work, you know that.
He bet. He is done.
2007-12-13 08:03:54 · answer #1 · answered by Bucky 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pete Rose should be allowed in. Even if he bet on his team you can not control what a player will do. A player batting .058 could suddenly hit the game winning homer, and the pitcher with the high ERA could throw a shut out. So no matter what he may or may not have done to his lineup there were no guarantees that the outcome would be what he wanted.
The steroids most likely gave and continue to give an advantage to players. Pete Rose could never guarantee what he did give him any advantage.
Lift the ban and let him in.
2007-12-13 15:09:50 · answer #2 · answered by ziggy_brat 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
IN all honesty, they probably already have. Roids have been around for awhile.
Rose actually bet on baseball games when he was a manager. He had total control of the batting lineups, etc.
I personally think pete the player should be in the HoF though.
2007-12-13 15:01:29 · answer #3 · answered by Phil M 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The evidence says he DID bet on his team, even to lose.
But, look. There is only one rule you can't break and he broke it. He broke in a position of greater influence on any particular game than any player could have. So, no HOF for Pete, ever.
Roids? They generate revenue, they aren't on the list of instant ban rules, and no one will ever know from the past or in the future who took them when, Mitchell report or no, and no fan will ever accept that any player with 3 hits in 5 at bats isn't on them anyway, so -- roiders will make the hall. So what?
2007-12-13 16:36:55 · answer #4 · answered by Sarrafzedehkhoee 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Pete rose doesn't belong in the hall of fame, ever.
it's not a sliding scale, they didn't have "do not use these drugs' posted in every locker room for your entire career.
You are fooling yourself if you think that gambling only 'expressed the hope for a possible outcome'. These steroid users couldn't affect the lives and careers of the people around them by using steroids and Rose certainly could have by betting.
Also, Pete Rose didn't play like he was on steriods, he was a hustler and a good player, but the greatness that people associate with him is by longevity.
He wasn't a base stealer, he wasn't a power threat, he was a singles/doubles hitter and for his career, he hit .303.
You have put him on an undeserving pedestal.
2007-12-13 15:06:49 · answer #5 · answered by brettj666 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
betting while still a player has affect on the out come of some games just like steroids do in some way or manner.what if-lets say the pistons had their equipment man behind their goal and every time the pistons got the ball,he would lower the goal to 8 or 9 ft as they attempted a shot.i promise you they would miss some shots and would not win every game.yet it would not be fair to their opponents.even if he got to do it just once during the game its not fair!
rose is the best in my book.
rose knew better!
2007-12-13 15:18:08 · answer #6 · answered by omarparra_gman 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
i do not think pete rose should be punished anymore. he has paid his dues. Plus gambling is suppose to ban the player from the sport for the remainder of their lifetimes. It does not say ban from the hall of fame. Plus Pete never threw any games. He bet on his team to win.
The steroid users should be forgiven also in the end. Remember it was Mcguires and sosa's homerun chase that saved baseball after the baseball strike. For saving baseball I think the players who used steroids should be forgiven. I do not think they belong in before rose though. Rose should have been a first ballot hall of famer.
nuff said.
2007-12-13 15:11:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Rose should never get in -- how he placed his bets is irrelevant, by the way -- so, eventually, yes, some PED user should precede Rose.
"Never" being a very, very long stretch of time.
Rose cheated on his taxes, but I've never heard him accused of cheating on baseball (not by anyone with a grasp of the facts of his situations). What Rose did was BREAK THE RULES, well, one in particular. That's not the same as "cheating". That's "being stupid" because he did it time and time again.
2007-12-13 15:38:27 · answer #8 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
If they get in before Pete Rose, it will be a shame to the sport.
2007-12-13 15:01:40 · answer #9 · answered by buckeye45694 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i'm with you on that. as a lifelong reds fan, it makes me sick to my stomach to have people accuse charley hustle of cheating in any way. yes he deserved to be punished, but i still think he deserves a spot in the baseball hall of fame for his play on the field.
2007-12-13 15:02:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋