The W
Views: 99925394
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
22.10.14 1737
The W - Baseball - Pete Rose Bet On Baseball, Dammit!
This thread has 26 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(1409 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (23 total)
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 98 days
Last activity: 1 day
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87
There is no way this guy should ever wear a uniform again. Is he deserving of the Hall of Fame for his career of play? Without a doubt! In a second! Unanimous, first ballot! He is the friggin Hit King!

But dammit, he bet on baseball, including his own team, and there is no good in that, for it is just wrong, and it has been apparent for years that there is sufficient proof of this.



"You know Monsoon, I am impressed, and I don't impress easy"
-Jesse "The Body" Ventura

"Bob Ryder sucks" - Me.
Promote this thread!
tomvejada
Andouille








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 4073 days
Last activity: 4073 days
#2 Posted on
I think he should be reinstated.





"I just got pinned by a friggin twelve-year-old."

Kurt Angle
Simba
Frankfurter








Since: 7.8.02
From: Boston, MA

Since last post: 2504 days
Last activity: 2112 days
#3 Posted on
He's going in, without question. Selig desperately needs a "good faith" gesture to work some damage control on baseball's image.



Professional wrestling isn't a hobby. It's a lifestyle.
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 98 days
Last activity: 1 day
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87

    Originally posted by tomvejada
    I think he should be reinstated.



    Originally posted by Simba
    He's going in, without question. Selig desperately needs a "good faith" gesture to work some damage control on baseball's image.
How can either of you justify letting him back in the game? Are you automatically reinstating Joe Jackson also? Apparently, Pete Rose bet on his own team. For me, that is enough to say "Hey Pete, you can have your one standing ovation a year when you come out onto the field for winning some all-time player fan poll, you can hang out in Cooperstown during Induction Weekend, but hey, that's it." I think this would do more harm than good to baseball's image. Is baseball's image tarnished because of the opinions of Pete Rose fans? If they let him back in anytime soon, it opens the door for someone else to pull the same crap. Selig should show that he has some stones and respect for Giamatti.






"You know Monsoon, I am impressed, and I don't impress easy"
-Jesse "The Body" Ventura

"Bob Ryder sucks" - Me.
Simba
Frankfurter








Since: 7.8.02
From: Boston, MA

Since last post: 2504 days
Last activity: 2112 days
#5 Posted on
I'm not justifying it, but I think there will be too much pressure on Selig to settle this.
It's not like he's the only person that's ever wronged the game. He's just one of the few that's been caught.



Professional wrestling isn't a hobby. It's a lifestyle.
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 98 days
Last activity: 1 day
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87
A - what if he doesn't admit to betting on baseball?
B - should Joe Jackson be enshrined?

Selig has to realize that he loses credibility if he settles it, and it will be seen as a desperate act by a desperate fool.



"You know Monsoon, I am impressed, and I don't impress easy"
-Jesse "The Body" Ventura

"Bob Ryder sucks" - Me.
evilwaldo
Lap cheong








Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 3407 days
Last activity: 3187 days
AIM:  
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
The only way Pete Rose will be reinstated is if he admits to betting on baseball.

Would I like to see him reinstated? As a Reds fan, yes.

Does he deserve to be in the Hall of Fame? Definitely.

There are others in the Hall who have broken laws and their transgressions are overlooked.

Why he would bet on baseball is beyond me. From everything I have heard it is the most difficult of the 4 sports to bet.



From the infamous Wrestleline SS interview:

DTD: If you were to make changes in WCW, if you were in charge and not Ric Flair, what would they be?

SS: I'd get rid of all the old guys, and push the talent that has waited to get the push. The things they are doing, it's back in the 1980s. It's just bad, man. Flair doesn't even deserve to be on the show. You've got to get rid of all the old guys. Like what Vince did, they started pushing guys. Nobody knew who The Rock was 2 years ago. He made The Rock. Now The Rock just did Saturday Night Live. You've got to start with the young talent, talent people can relate to. Who are we trying to relate to if we've got a 50 year old man out there? Are we trying to relate, so a 50 year people and above will go out and buy a f*cking little toy? That ain't gonna happen. It's a f*cking joke.

Does it remind you of any show in particular?
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 71 days
Last activity: 71 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, but he shouldn't be reinstated into baseball.

There are admitted spitballers in the hall, and that is as blatant a rules violation as what Rose did, and it had more impact on the games themselves than his gambling did too.

And yes, Joe Jackson should be in the hall of fame if he is deemed worthy (which he would be).
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 98 days
Last activity: 1 day
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87

    Originally posted by evilwaldo
    The only way Pete Rose will be reinstated is if he admits to betting on baseball
I agree that it will only happen if he admits it, but just because he might admit it, his admission should not be the end-all be-all pass back into the game. It doesn't right the wrong.
    Originally posted by evilwaldo
    There are others in the Hall who have broken laws and their transgressions are overlooked.
True, but that doesn't make it right and is silly reasoning.

Let me provide you all a very good column I read in our local Star Ledger by Lawrence Rocca: Click Here There are some great points made here, the best ones being:

1. "Rose signed a document agreeing to the ban."
2. "The time for Rose to admit his guilt was long ago, when a mea culpa would have had at least the whisper of a trace of sincerity."
3. "One of the arguments for reinstatement is that there are other bad guys in the Hall of Fame, a silly argument. You should get away with murder because someone else did 40 years before?"
4. "Rose's defenders argue that he never bet against his team, but that's not entirely true since he apparently didn't bet on them to win every single day. The days Rose didn't place a bet on his team were tantamount to betting against it. And if you don't think Rose managed those games differently than the contests on which he had money riding, you have to admit the possibility, which is damaging enough."
5. "Banning Rose for life has undoubtedly served as a deterrent against gambling by other players and managers."

Let's just say Rose was a little behind with his bookies. Itis never been said that he had bet against his Reds, but do you think the possibility exists that he might have called his bookies and said, "Hey, I know I am behind, so let me tell you that I am resting my regular 1B, most of my bullpen, and two of my regular outfielders." How many bookies would not put some money on that?



"You know Monsoon, I am impressed, and I don't impress easy"
-Jesse "The Body" Ventura

"Bob Ryder sucks" - Me.
El Nastio
Andouille








Since: 14.1.02
From: Ottawa Ontario, by way of Walkerton

Since last post: 4 hours
Last activity: 3 hours
ICQ:  
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.33
I got three words for Pete Rose, and all those who support his efforts;


Shoeless. Joe. Jackson.


When he enters the Hall of Fame, then y'all can start talking about Pete Rose going in. End of discussion.




Next VG Review: Metriod Prime
Next OSVG Review: Blaster Master

~EL NASTIO!
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 71 days
Last activity: 71 days
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
Jackson and Rose's situations are different. What the Black Sox did was detrimental to baseball. It tarnished it, almost beyond repair. They intentionally lost a game to make money. Rose never lost on purpose, and what he did had little long term effect on the game itself.

Also, while I think Rose should be banned for life, I don't think that ban should include barring from entry to the baseball hall of fame. Active participation should have to stop, but excluding him from Cooperstown is like saying because he did some stupid things, none of his amazing on the field feats took place.
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 98 days
Last activity: 1 day
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87

    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    Jackson and Rose's situations are different. What the Black Sox did was detrimental to baseball. It tarnished it, almost beyond repair. They intentionally lost a game to make money. Rose never lost on purpose, and what he did had little long term effect on the game itself.
According to the guy who investigated the case for Giamatti, it is possible that he DID bet on his Reds to lose (I read the story on espn.com). Now, even if he just bet on his team to win - are you telling me that he cannot influence the outcome of the game? Certainly he could, and no one is allowed to have an advantage like that (Enron? WorldComm? It's called insider information). He couldn't ride John Franco for an extra inning of relief, or leave his starter in when normally, in the dog days of late June he would take him out and put in a fresh pitcher, mindful of his pitch count? Think about this well - it would be different if the proof showed he bet on the Reds to WIN EVERY NIGHT. Not that it makes it right, since betting on baseball by someone wearing the uniform is forbidden, but it would certainly be different.
    Also posted by TheBucsFan
    excluding him from Cooperstown is like saying because he did some stupid things, none of his amazing on the field feats took place.
I think the idea is not "none of his amazing on the field feats took place", but instead "Pete Rose fucked up so bad that as great as his stats are, they are cast in a dark shadow by his actions."



"You know Monsoon, I am impressed, and I don't impress easy"
-Jesse "The Body" Ventura

"Bob Ryder sucks" - Me.
drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 31 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#13 Posted on

    Originally posted by jfkfc

      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      Jackson and Rose's situations are different. What the Black Sox did was detrimental to baseball. It tarnished it, almost beyond repair. They intentionally lost a game to make money. Rose never lost on purpose, and what he did had little long term effect on the game itself.
    According to the guy who investigated the case for Giamatti, it is possible that he DID bet on his Reds to lose (I read the story on espn.com). Now, even if he just bet on his team to win - are you telling me that he cannot influence the outcome of the game? Certainly he could, and no one is allowed to have an advantage like that (Enron? WorldComm? It's called insider information). He couldn't ride John Franco for an extra inning of relief, or leave his starter in when normally, in the dog days of late June he would take him out and put in a fresh pitcher, mindful of his pitch count? Think about this well - it would be different if the proof showed he bet on the Reds to WIN EVERY NIGHT. Not that it makes it right, since betting on baseball by someone wearing the uniform is forbidden, but it would certainly be different.


Well, the thing is, for all we know, he could have bet on games where he knew his team was hopelessly overmatched. That doesn't necessarily mean that he was trying to throw games to win money... he could have bet against his team, knowing they'd probably lose, and then go out and manage as best as he could.



Today's Out-Of-Context Quote, Courtesy of Punkinhead:

"I'm gonna go dig up a date!"
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge








Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 560 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
The timing of Jonh Dowd bugs me. He had 13 years to bring this up to the public. Now he does. It just smells like a guy who hates Rose and wants to make sure that he will never be allowed back into baseball.
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 43 days
Last activity: 20 hours
#15 Posted on
Maybe the timing has to do with baseball apparently seriously considering lifting the ban, something they weren't going to do in the past, so coming out with the story would be just piling on.

I can't believe some of you can't see the conflict of interest with betting on his own team, and even worse, betting on them to lose. Yeah, I'm sure he betted against his team and then tried as hard as he could to lose the bet. That's real logical. At any rate, you can't have that. It brings into question the legitimacy of any game Rose participaed in, and that DOES hurt baseball, and its integrity. (Why do you think they HAVE kept him out all these years? Just because they don't like Rose or something?)

See, this is not a moral issue, it's simply a baseball rules issue. If a HOF caliber player beats up his wife, he gets into the HOF, because baseball doesn't care. But if he beats up an umpire, his getting into the HOF becomes problematic. It's just a difference in what effects the game and what doesn't. (I also think had those spitballer's came to light BEFORE they were inducted, they wouldn't be. By the same token, if Rose was inducted before his gambling came to light, they wouldn't have removed him from the HOF).
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge








Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 560 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
There is no evidnece that he bet on this team to lose. Dowd thinks that he did but he does not have any betting slips of phone calls about it. I dont think Rose should be in hall. But what I do have a problem with is this guy Dowd coming out at this time and saying things he knows he can not prove.
Stefonics
Bockwurst








Since: 17.3.02
From: Queidersbach

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 12 min.
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.00

    Just Friends with Kentucky Fried Chicken said:
    According to the guy who investigated the case for Giamatti, it is possible that he DID bet on his Reds to lose

Hey man, you underlined it right there. Possible. Not definite. The Joe Jackson argument is irrelevant for reasons Bucsfan pointed out. Joe Jackson threw the world series. Pete Rose bet on a few baseball games. While both are wrong, they are miles apart in terms of severity. Rose deserves to be reinstated and apologized to by Jim Grey.



Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery.
-Malcom X
James F'n X
Bockwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 3085 days
Last activity: 3052 days
AIM:  
#18 Posted on
Pete Rose has gotten exactly what he deserves. He has no altruistic motive concerning getting into the Hall Of Fame, that's not even what he's looking for. He wants to be a manager again. He wants his autograph to be worth a lot more. It's another display of this man's greed and self-serving attitude that led him to make the decisions he made in the first place. Bud Selig should do the right thing and keep Pete Rose out of baseball.



"Steinerís Chain Mail must be +2 v. Cruiserweights, Chris! Make a saving throw!" - Excalibur05

"Come to the place where tropical breezes blow! Come to the coolest place I know! The people are so great! But really there's only me! And that means I'm so great, and also there's the Cheat, oh there's the Cheat!"
jfkfc
Liverwurst








Since: 9.2.02

Since last post: 98 days
Last activity: 1 day
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.87

    Originally posted by Kidqueens
    Hey man, you underlined it right there. Possible. Not definite. The Joe Jackson argument is irrelevant for reasons Bucsfan pointed out. Joe Jackson threw the world series. Pete Rose bet on a few baseball games. While both are wrong, they are miles apart in terms of severity. Rose deserves to be reinstated and apologized to by Jim Grey.
No, not definite, and I know that I put the word in there. Even if he didn't bet against his team, you still can't justify his betting for his own team. Flat out. It's in the rules. You can't do it if you wear a MLB baseball uniform. Pete Rose had a direct effect on the results of any Cincinatti game he might have bet on. Don't you understand how much of an advantage that is? He can manage a game differently, knowing he has to win it to win his bet, and also knowing that he didn't bet on tomorrow's game, so if he has to blow out his bullpen to win at all costs, fuck it, his money is on the line! Take the arguement of Rose betting against his team (the possibility) out of the mix, and this is enough. The integrity of the game is now questionable, and if Baseball needs to make an example out of Rose, so be it. If he actually comes out and admits he did bet on baseball, and Reds games in particular....THAT MAKES IT RIGHT??? How the fuck is THAT possible? If Charles Manson comes out and says "Hey, I did kill all of those people, I have a problem and I need help," should we say "Hey, look at how long this guy has been locked up! He is a human being, he might be a nice, funny, interesting guy, and certainly he has paid his price. After all, he admitted doing it, so that makes it OK!" What kind of stupid logic is that? Do we all looooooooooove this guy so much, and do people want to hump those statistics so bad that an apology makes everything right?

I just don't get it. Let him hawk his signatures two blocks away from the shrine annually and look like a jackass.

Jim Grey can eat balls. He is almost as much of a piece of shit as Rose. Let them apologize to each other and move to Greenland. The questions he asked Rose on TV were right up there with all of those reporters who ask a brand new widow "How does you feel about being a brand new widow? Your husband was brutally killed two hours ago - have you started dating yet and moved on?" What do you expect to hear?



"You know Monsoon, I am impressed, and I don't impress easy"
-Jesse "The Body" Ventura

"Bob Ryder sucks" - Me.
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54

    It's just a difference in what effects the game and what doesn't. (I also think had those spitballer's came to light BEFORE they were inducted, they wouldn't be.


Gaylord Perry's spitter was a well-known fact in MLB circles.

And here's something you must remember about Shoeless Joe; the man hit .360 in the World Series that he was allegedly trying to throw (hey, that rhymes!)



"If you go out with a girl and they say she has a great personality, she's ugly. If they tell you a guy works hard, he can't play a lick. Same thing." -- Charles Barkley
Pages: 1 2 Next
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: Aren't you dooming a guy if...
Next thread: Whats up with the Bravos?
Previous thread: Nevin blocks trade for Griffey
(1409 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Back to the future of the ballpark By Tim Keown Page 2 Petco Park in San Diego is the latest retro ballpark to incorporate funky angles and cheeky quirks in an attempt to appeal to the bohemian sensibilities of the well-heeled baseball fan.
- StaggerLee, ESPN.com doesnt like Petco (2004)
The W - Baseball - Pete Rose Bet On Baseball, Dammit!Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.123 seconds.