This is a dreadfully poor take on Pete Rose. Rose repeatedly violated the one sacred rule of baseball, that no one in the game could bet on baseball. In all of his years in MLB, Rose walked past a poster with this rule in the clubhouse, and at some point, decided that the rules didn't apply to him (kind of like another person who is written about here on The Contrarian). Once he was caught gambling on baseball and betting on games involving his team, he never apologized (writing on baseballs that he sold to people that he was "Sorry I bet on baseball" isn't a genuine apology, it is just another way to cash in on his infamy), never asked for forgiveness, never seemed to acknowledge his guilt in this whole affair. There is a reason he was put on the permanently banned list (not a lifetime ban), since he serves as a cautionary tale of how baseball stood up for integrity and its rules at one point. At that time, MLB and the commissioner's office were willing to ban one of the most popular players when he broke baseball's biggest rule. Rose earned his permanent ban from the game and has done nothing to earn any reinstatement to the game.
Also, Mr. Frommer too quickly dismisses the ugly side of Pete Rose. While the Hall of Fame has its share of problematic players, the well-documented allegations of multiple victims of statutory rape against Rose need to be addressed. Rose's dismissive attitude towards these allegations again demonstrates his belief that he is above the law.
In the end, I hope the Hall of Fame rejects giving Rose the highest honor in baseball, a plaque in Cooperstown. If we believe in the rule of law and that people need to be truly remorseful to earn forgiveness for their harmful actions, Rose should not be in the Hall.
But MLB has besmirched itself by selling out to the gambling industry. Pete Rose paid a lifetime price for his gambling misdeeds. Enough. The Hall of Fame is not a choir of saints and he was not one. It is a recognition of performance, of excellence and contribution to the game. He certainly qualifies.
If Rose had been the first to have been penalized so severely under baseball's no gambling rule I might have agreed with your argument. The impact to the game might have seemed lesser and the severity of the punishment might have been considered extreme.
But the Black Sox scandal, where a World Series was thrown by players, at the instigation of a gambling syndicate, and which required the appointment of a baseball commissioner independent of the owners in order to restore the integrity of "America's pass-time", had left such a scar on the game that baseball was forced to come down drastically against any activity that might indicate that games might be fixed or thrown. And Rose knew all of that history and exactly what the consequences might be.
He willfully gambled on the games he was playing or managing and thus threw into doubt the integrity of his sport. And all those players who weren't gamblers, played within the rules, and cared about its integrity could have been tarred by Rose's actions, just like the guys that didn't take steroids during that era might have their accomplishments questioned.
So as far as I'm concerned he should still be banned.
Baloney. The guy knew what he was doing, he did it anyway, and no amount of "Charlie Hustle" worship can redeem him. The Hall should reject Rose without a second thought.
But, at some point, Rose was entitled to some grace, a chance at forgiveness.
Bullstuff, bullstuff, and more bullstuff. Pete Rose was a disgrace to the game, and his ultimate forgiveness will deliver the message to young players that misbehaving isn't so bad-- so Manfred's lame excuse doesn't hold water.
Pete Rose should stay forever banned, along with Shoeless Joe Jackson, who also fits in that category.
I disagree that Rose was entitled to “grace“. The man broke a very fundamental rule for any professional sports player. As far as I’m concerned, pardoning Pete Rose made about as much sense as pardoning the January 6 Capital rioters. Neither pardon strikes me as justifiable, ever. Rose knew the rule and chose to break it. I simply wonder how many other times he broke it without us being aware of it… who knows. What we do clearly know is enough that he should have been left as he was, banned and dishonored.
Many years ago a tv commercial caught my attention. A man essentially lied to his wife so he could drive around in his new car. I said at the time that this was not a good place for our society to be going. Today we live with a president who lies like he breathes, all the time. The micro-messaging has grown steadily that cheating and lying is okay as long as you get what you want. This Pete Rose affair is just another example of how we’ve lost our way.
The article somehow ignores the obvious reason why Pete Rose was reinstated - from NBC Sports, April 28th:
'Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred said he discussed Pete Rose with President Donald Trump at a meeting two weeks ago and he plans to rule on a request to end the sport’s permanent ban of the career hits leader'
Trump liked Pete Rose, and Rose once signed a baseball for Trump, writing “Please Make America Great Again.”
It is as simple as that.
Like so many other US businesses, law firms and media outlets, the MLB is doing Trump's bidding in order to hopefully stay in his favor.
In order to obtain forgiveness, one must first acknowledge one's sins. Rose never did that (as far as I recall).
Manfred's lifting of the ban does NOT automatically guarantee Rose will have one of those bronze plaques in that special room at the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. Two years from now, a committee will decide if Rose will be allowed to be considered for that distinction. If they agree, his name will appear on a special ballot - and at least twelve of sixteen members of another committee (who all have some special knowledge of "The Game") must all agree that Rose is worthy. I suspect that Rose will not survive that process.
Rose gambled on his own team, so far as I know, only to win. So, on the days he didn’t bet on it to win, what do you think the “smart money” did? He was a very good baseball player, but his gambling on baseball and his lying about it should have banned him from the Baseball Hall of Fame forever, as it did until Manfred folded to the principal grifter’s request. Such a pity.
This is a dreadfully poor take on Pete Rose. Rose repeatedly violated the one sacred rule of baseball, that no one in the game could bet on baseball. In all of his years in MLB, Rose walked past a poster with this rule in the clubhouse, and at some point, decided that the rules didn't apply to him (kind of like another person who is written about here on The Contrarian). Once he was caught gambling on baseball and betting on games involving his team, he never apologized (writing on baseballs that he sold to people that he was "Sorry I bet on baseball" isn't a genuine apology, it is just another way to cash in on his infamy), never asked for forgiveness, never seemed to acknowledge his guilt in this whole affair. There is a reason he was put on the permanently banned list (not a lifetime ban), since he serves as a cautionary tale of how baseball stood up for integrity and its rules at one point. At that time, MLB and the commissioner's office were willing to ban one of the most popular players when he broke baseball's biggest rule. Rose earned his permanent ban from the game and has done nothing to earn any reinstatement to the game.
Also, Mr. Frommer too quickly dismisses the ugly side of Pete Rose. While the Hall of Fame has its share of problematic players, the well-documented allegations of multiple victims of statutory rape against Rose need to be addressed. Rose's dismissive attitude towards these allegations again demonstrates his belief that he is above the law.
In the end, I hope the Hall of Fame rejects giving Rose the highest honor in baseball, a plaque in Cooperstown. If we believe in the rule of law and that people need to be truly remorseful to earn forgiveness for their harmful actions, Rose should not be in the Hall.
Amen, brother! His presence will pollute the Hall in Cooperstown.
But MLB has besmirched itself by selling out to the gambling industry. Pete Rose paid a lifetime price for his gambling misdeeds. Enough. The Hall of Fame is not a choir of saints and he was not one. It is a recognition of performance, of excellence and contribution to the game. He certainly qualifies.
If Rose had been the first to have been penalized so severely under baseball's no gambling rule I might have agreed with your argument. The impact to the game might have seemed lesser and the severity of the punishment might have been considered extreme.
But the Black Sox scandal, where a World Series was thrown by players, at the instigation of a gambling syndicate, and which required the appointment of a baseball commissioner independent of the owners in order to restore the integrity of "America's pass-time", had left such a scar on the game that baseball was forced to come down drastically against any activity that might indicate that games might be fixed or thrown. And Rose knew all of that history and exactly what the consequences might be.
He willfully gambled on the games he was playing or managing and thus threw into doubt the integrity of his sport. And all those players who weren't gamblers, played within the rules, and cared about its integrity could have been tarred by Rose's actions, just like the guys that didn't take steroids during that era might have their accomplishments questioned.
So as far as I'm concerned he should still be banned.
Me too!
No to Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame
I am quite tired of seeing rapists rewarded in this country.
AMEN
Baloney. The guy knew what he was doing, he did it anyway, and no amount of "Charlie Hustle" worship can redeem him. The Hall should reject Rose without a second thought.
But, at some point, Rose was entitled to some grace, a chance at forgiveness.
Bullstuff, bullstuff, and more bullstuff. Pete Rose was a disgrace to the game, and his ultimate forgiveness will deliver the message to young players that misbehaving isn't so bad-- so Manfred's lame excuse doesn't hold water.
Pete Rose should stay forever banned, along with Shoeless Joe Jackson, who also fits in that category.
I disagree that Rose was entitled to “grace“. The man broke a very fundamental rule for any professional sports player. As far as I’m concerned, pardoning Pete Rose made about as much sense as pardoning the January 6 Capital rioters. Neither pardon strikes me as justifiable, ever. Rose knew the rule and chose to break it. I simply wonder how many other times he broke it without us being aware of it… who knows. What we do clearly know is enough that he should have been left as he was, banned and dishonored.
No.
Many years ago a tv commercial caught my attention. A man essentially lied to his wife so he could drive around in his new car. I said at the time that this was not a good place for our society to be going. Today we live with a president who lies like he breathes, all the time. The micro-messaging has grown steadily that cheating and lying is okay as long as you get what you want. This Pete Rose affair is just another example of how we’ve lost our way.
The article somehow ignores the obvious reason why Pete Rose was reinstated - from NBC Sports, April 28th:
'Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred said he discussed Pete Rose with President Donald Trump at a meeting two weeks ago and he plans to rule on a request to end the sport’s permanent ban of the career hits leader'
Trump liked Pete Rose, and Rose once signed a baseball for Trump, writing “Please Make America Great Again.”
It is as simple as that.
Like so many other US businesses, law firms and media outlets, the MLB is doing Trump's bidding in order to hopefully stay in his favor.
No. HELL no.
In order to obtain forgiveness, one must first acknowledge one's sins. Rose never did that (as far as I recall).
Manfred's lifting of the ban does NOT automatically guarantee Rose will have one of those bronze plaques in that special room at the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. Two years from now, a committee will decide if Rose will be allowed to be considered for that distinction. If they agree, his name will appear on a special ballot - and at least twelve of sixteen members of another committee (who all have some special knowledge of "The Game") must all agree that Rose is worthy. I suspect that Rose will not survive that process.
Rose gambled on his own team, so far as I know, only to win. So, on the days he didn’t bet on it to win, what do you think the “smart money” did? He was a very good baseball player, but his gambling on baseball and his lying about it should have banned him from the Baseball Hall of Fame forever, as it did until Manfred folded to the principal grifter’s request. Such a pity.
DISAGREE with this take on Pete Rose. He cheated baseball on top of all his other distasteful qualities.
I disagree. He disrespected the players, his owners and the fans.
I disagree. He got enough grace with his salary.