I haven’t read, obviously, Pete Rose’s discussion of his gambling in his upcoming book. He does say he feels it’s time to admit that he gambled and take responsibility for his actions, and sections of it were quoted in news reports.
I dunno. I’d probably be much more impressed with his responsibility-taking if:
A) He had made the admission in relation to nothing other than feeling the need to clear the air, rather than as the centerpiece of an autobiography which stands to sell more copies as a result.
B) He didn’t make such a point of saying that he hoped his admission would get him back into baseball and a shot at the Hall of Fame.
C) He didn’t seem to blame the organization of baseball so much, stating that he would have received far better treatment if only he’d had a drug or drinking problem or something acceptable like that.
I tend to agree with Kathleen on this: The only way they should lift the ban on Pete Rose is if they lift the ban on Shoeless Joe Jackson and induct him into the Hall of Fame first.
PAD
• 
Good call!
I know that they talk about some players, and how their attitudes on and off the field will likely keep them out of the Hall of Fame (Albert Bell comes to mind), but Rose’s contributions cannot go unnoticed, regardless.
Shoeless Joe is, obviously, a bit before my time, so I’m not even sure his legacy is the product of being The Name out of those that got in trouble, or if he was really that good a player.
I have visited the Field of Dreams in Dyersville, IA though. 🙂
“I tend to agree with Kathleen on this: The only way they should lift the ban on Pete Rose is if they lift the ban on Shoeless Joe Jackson and induct him into the Hall of Fame first.”
Apples and oranges. No comparison. Totally different situations. Shoeless Joe bet against his own team and deliberately threw games in order to cash in on his bets. You could never convince me that a competitor like Pete Rose ever did such a thing.
I’m not saying what Pete Rose did should be condoned, but the punishment in this case far outweighs the crime. TPTB in MLB wanted to make an example of him, and so they did.
Its time to forgive and forget the mans mistakes, and honor him for everything that he brought to the game, which far outweigh his mistakes.
IMO, they should let him into the Hall because thats what most of the fans want. I know that until Rose is inducted, I’ll always refer to the place as “The Hall of Lame”.
Excellent points, Peter. Let’s also add that Rose is hyping this just in time to steal the thunder from the latest crop of inductees into the HoF.
And Steve – “because the fans want it” is not an excuse. Rose broke the cardinal rule of baseball, and he has not shown the slightest bit of remorse about it. As Peter and many others have pointed out, Rose seems to blame Major League Baseball instead of himself, which is just ridiculous.
And what is this “making an example” crap, Steve? The rule and the punishment have been posted in dugouts and well-known way before Rose’s time. Rose could have applied for reinstatement ONE YEAR after accepting his punishment, but didn’t. So don’t give me this crap about him being made an example of.
Once Rose shows actual remorse, takes responsibility for what he has done, and most importantly shows that he has sought help for it, then I’ll support his entry into the Hall.
And Shoeless Joe certainly belongs in before Rose. There has never been any solid proof that he threw games.
It would be so much easier to forgive Rose if he weren’t such a graceless, crass thug, liar, and all-around self-aggrandizing goon.
Other than that, he’s swell!
Shoeless Joe’s numbers in that World Series show that he played to win. There is no proof that he did anything to hurt his team’s chances, regardless of whether he took the money or not. He was unfairly blacklisted before all the evidence was seen.
As far as Rose goes, the man is an ášš. He’s a liar and a self-serving bum. This is all about money for him. I’m not sure if he truly wants to be in the Hall anymore. He can probably charge more money for his autograph if he can write “Hall of Famer Pete Rose” on the cards and bats.
But the man was one helluva player. His numbers deserve to be in the Hall, even if he doesn’t.
And he should never, ever be allowed to have a job in baseball again.
Well, re: Shoeless Joe, it depends a lot on if you consider a signed confession probably made under duress as solid proof. (In one of many bizarre twists, the confessions were stolen from the court during the criminal case, only to reappear later.) Commissioner Landis seemed to think he had enough evidence, but it’s not nearly as clear cut that his guilt was direct rather than by association than, say, Rose’s. (His overall performance in the Series was good, but looking at it situationally makes it less conclusive, with lots of hits in non-critical situations, and poor performance in the clutch. But you can’t solidly conclude anything from that kind of data.)
Rose bet on baseball. There’s an established rule that if you bet on baseball, you are banned for life. Rose knew this, there is no doubt – it’s posted in every clubhouse in baseball. He took an action, knowing the consequences. He should pay the consequences. I hope that his confession eases his conscience, but it doesn’t really change things.
Gambling is one of the few things that can directly harm the integrity of the game of baseball. Rose probably didn’t throw any games – but he admits to losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in gambling. Whose to say he couldn’t have, while under intense financial pressure from people who could instantly get him banned from baseball, his true passion, have fixed a few games? I don’t think he did, but the risk of it – if the fans stop believing that the article on the field is genuine competition, it becomes spectacle. And MLB can’t match things like WWE for spectacle. It could devastate fan interest. Given the history of the sport with game fixing, it makes sense that they have an extremely harsh stance.
The only other thing that’s comparable is steroids, and that story is still breaking.
MLB isn’t in the business of dispensing criminal justice – it’s in the business of promoting baseball. Players on cocaine hurts baseball a little, so they get punished a little. Players fixing games hurts baseball a lot. Players gambling on baseball are a high risk to fix games. Hence, the harsh penalties.
I feel a little sorry for Rose, because he has some serious issues with gambling and has paid a high cost, but it’s hard for me to define something as unfair when the consequences were extremely clear and unequivacable before he did the action. If only all of life were this fair!
Apples and oranges. No comparison. Totally different situations. Shoeless Joe bet against his own team and deliberately threw games in order to cash in on his bets. You could never convince me that a competitor like Pete Rose ever did such a thing.
Would you be open to being convinced that Shoeless Joe didn’t do such a thing either? From the Shoeless Joe website:
“Jackson was the star of the Series, he hit the only homerun, fielded flawlessly, batted .375 to lead all players, and his twelve hits set a World Series record that stood until Pepper Martin tied it years later. Joe accounted for 11 of the Sox 20 runs in the Series, he led players on BOTH teams.”
I don’t see it as apples and oranges at all. If you’re going to forgive the sins of someone who aggressively violated the no betting rule and then lied about it for over a decade, then it seems to me you have to forgive a player whose only crime, to my understanding, is knowing about the misdeeds of other players but not exposing them.
PAD
PAD wrote: “Would you be open to being convinced that Shoeless Joe didn’t do such a thing either?”
Of course I would be open to evidence of this.
If it could be shown the Shoeless Joe didn’t accept money or threw games and was just closing ranks with his teammates, I would be very open to the idea of Joe in the Hall.
The ‘apples and oranges’ I mentioned apply to the fact that there is a difference (to me anyway) between simply betting on baseball games and actively throwing or rigging baseball games. Not the same thing at all, but we can agree to disagree.
I’ll say again that I don’t condone what Rose did. He deserved to be punished, and he has been. I just feel that the punishment is too harsh for what he did. I always have.
I’m a forgiving sort, and I forgive him. To err is Human and to forgive divine and all that.
Pete Rose isn’t a sweetheart. Neither was Ty Cobb. So what?
Oh, and Scott Bland? You’re rude, so I wont bother responding to your comments.
What I find interesting is that Rose denied that he bet on baseball games for 14 years, but now suddenly admits that, yes, he did bet on them, but NEVER, EVER against the Reds. Oh no, he wouldn’t do that. Not in a million years.
And we’re supposed to believe this, based on his proven track record for honesty?
Giamatti had his number from the very beginning. Rose doesn’t deserve to be in the Hall.
JSM
I don’t see why MLB isn’t looking at its own syntax.
“Anybody caught betting on baseball shall be banned for life.”
Shoeless Joe Jackson is dead. He’s served his time.
Pete Rose is alive, and he’s still being an excuse-making áššfáçë about his crime. Admission is one thing, but contrition is expected.
I agree with PAD. Let Jackson back in first, and I’ll accept Rose.
What is the Hall of Fame for? Personality contest? or Records/Stats? Let’s look at Pete’s records:
All-time Major League record for most career hits-4,256
All-time Major League record for most games played-3,562
All-time Major League record for most at bats-14,053
All-time Major League record for most singles-3,315
All-time Major League record for most total bases by a switch hitter-5,752
All-time Major League record for most seasons of 200 or more hits-10
All-time Major League record for most consecutive seasons of 100 or more hits-23
All-time Major League record for most seasons with 600 or more at bats-17
All-time Major League record for most seasons with 150 or more games played–17
All-time Major League record for most seasons with 100 or more games played-23
Only player in Major League history to play more than 500 games at five different
Positions-1B (939) 2B (628) 3B (634) LF (671) RF (595)
Major League record for playing in the most winning games-1,972
All-time National League record for most years played-24
All-time National League record for most consecutive years played-24
All-time National League record for most career runs-2,165
All-time National League record for most career doubles-746
All-time National League record for most games with 5 or more hits-10
Modern National League record for longest consecutive game hitting streak-44
Modern National League Record for most consecutive game hitting streaks of 20
or more games–7
When it comes to the game no other player can touch him. Is he a jerk, sure. The Hall of Fame is nothing if the player with his record is not included, period.
I don’t consider anything that Pete Rose was accused of doing, and now admits that he did, as being indicative of him having a “problem” with gambling. Pete Rose liked to gamble…so what. He could afford to do it. He enjoyed it. He offended me by lying about it instead of telling the world to pìšš øff. He only shouldn’t have done it because baseball has a rule against doing it, and they have always been clear about that. He lied because he knew that breaking that rule would jeopardize his Hall chances.
Gambling was not Pete’s problem. Lying was.
Re: Shoeless Joe, the man could not read or right. His “signature,” or mark, on the confession was made without him truly knowing what he was signing. At the time Commissioner Landis wanted to make an example of these players to show the league he was in charge and felt he could not do it unless he had a big name player as one of the guys being punished.
I could be wrong, but I believe I read somewhere that some of the guilty players named Jackson thinking they would get a lighter sentence.
Although the documentary does have some errors in it, Ken Burn’s Baseball does a pretty good job with this event in baseball history.
RE: Pete Rose, Leo Deroucher was once banned from baseball and he is now in the Hall of Fame.
Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame. I do not support what he has done the past years, I do not feel he should ever be put in a place in baseball to affect the game. BUT, as a player and player/manager he deserves to be placed in the Hall of Fame. The proof in the comment above shows Pete as one of the greats and definately one of the greatest of our time. Let the PLAYER be celebrated and honored as he should be.
However, I feel he should never be allowed on the field during a game, ever. I would love to see him in the front office or the press box and that club would benefit from it. He can offer alot to baseball, he certainly loves the game and we can all benefit from it.
The one thing I agree with Pete is this, if he was just a drug addict, or hit his wife with a telephone, liked høøkërš, chased kids with his car, arrested for Drunk and disorderly, use cocaine WHILE Playing, shot up with steriods, carried a concealled handgun, swapped wives with another player, scuffed balls, or just a plain a**, he would have been back in baseball in a blink. And that is the sad part!
Oh Steve, Steve, Steve… if you think someone saying crap twice when having the never to disagree with you is rude, you’re going to have a lot of problems in the real world.
Or is it that you can’t handle people disagreeing with you and using facts, so you will desperately flail about for any excuse not to answer them?
I heard a little sound bite on the radio yesterday of Pete being interviewed about his book, the clip is of him admitting he bet on baseball. I’m going on memory here, so this might not be exactly accurate.
Interviewer : In the book you have made a surprising admission?
Pete : (overly loud, sigh)I bet on baseball.
I ‘bet’ he practised that ‘sigh’ for an hour in the mirror at home.
I grew up a Pete Rose fan. When he was accused of gambling in 1989, I didn’t believe it. When he was banned from baseball, I read as much as I could about the case, so I could argue in Pete’s favor. In the face of substantial coincidental evidence, I believed the man. He was one of my hero’s, he said he didn’t do it, the he didn’t do it.
Then I heard that ‘sigh’, and before I even heard him say it, I knew he had bet on baseball. I knew he had lied to me, and the rest of his supporters for nearly 15 years, and now, I hope he never gets to step on a baseball field the rest of his life. The dirty liar.
I also want to say, concerning the comparison of Pete’s crimes to that of drug-use by MLB players. The standing argument is that drug use by a player is a crime against society, and it’s societies responsibilty to punish the offender, but gambling on baseball is a crime against baseball, one that many feel has the potential to ruin the sport. While, I don’t agree with this take, it’s the “official party line” so to speak.
1. I certainly feel that the Shoeless Joe file should be reopened as best as possible over 80 years later, regardless of Pete Rose. But if he took the money and was part of a conspiracy to throw the World Series, he is still guilty of a serious offense and probably deserves his eternal ban. At best, he would perhaps be worthy of a partial induction, a plaque that spells out both his talent and his crime.
2. I think Rose’s confession, half-sincere as it is, is enough to satisfy most of his critics. I wouldn’t shed a tear if he never got inducted, but his accomplishments as a player are hard to ignore. Again, a special plaque, one with the whole story engraved on it, would be in order to my mind.
3. Hall of Fame aside, Rose has shown little to indicate he could be trusted in any baseball-related job. He still gambles, still gets in over his head, and would probably never have any real authority as a manager anyway. I don’t see the harm in at least letting him go to baseball games on an ex-player’s comp tickets, but otherwise, he should be on the outside looking in.
4. In general, I’m a hardliner about Rose, and think he got what he deserves. However, baseball really does not its time occupied by this story, not with the harder issues of competitive balance and steroids looming as usual. So part of me would be happy to let Rose into the Hall, and be done with it. I wonder if perhaps Selig is not too terribly unhappy to tlak about Rose as a diversion from THG and George Steinbrenner and the Expos and the Brewers.
5. Shame on Rose for stealing the thunder from whoever gets elected to the Hall today. He’ll be a bigger story than Eckersley or Molitor or whoever, and that is not fair. (Of course, this is why the book is coming out this week.)
1. Pete Rose should never be allowed to work in any baseball stadium as anything higher than a peanut vendor. He still has yet to express remorse or admit that what he did was wrong. The only thing that he is apparently sorry for is getting caught.
2. Pete Rose’s stats as a player merit his induction into the Hall of Fame. There is no question about that. However, unlike using cocaine or wifebeating, his crime was also against baseball. He broke the rules of the league and damaged the intergrity of the game, even if he never consciously threw a game. Because of that, he should never be allowed in the Hall of Fame. If he is ever allowed in, they should do what they did to Roger Maris’ home run record: Put an asterix next to his name on the bronze plaque with his crime craved below.
3. As for Shoeless Joe, I think that there’s enough evidence either way in his case to warrant reopening his case. But, if Pete Rose is to be allowed back in the Hall of Fame, then Joe definitely deserves to go in first. It would not be fair to forgive Rose but not Jackson. Eighty years trumps the mere ten or so that Rose has been waiting.
The dirty liar.
If the HoF is about how nice a player is and how moral he is and not about his ability then, yes he should never be allowed in (which I assume it would be empty). If it’s about how he played the game, it’s not a true HoF without him. Call him a liar, call him a jerk, hate the man, but his ability and stats to play the game can not be ignored. I’d be interested to know how they list the records in the HoF without him? Do they just ignore him and list the second best as the top in whatever field, such as hits or is his name all over the place, but not referenced as being a H of Famer?
Rose says that he bet on baseball, but he never bet on or against the Reds. I think most would agree that if he ever bet on the team he was managing, that’s as damaging a sin as there is in the game, and probably no one would forgive it. He also says he never used the clubhouse phone to place a bet.
So, after 14 years of lying, why should we believe him now? Because he makes a partial admission, after a decade and half of flat out lying? He was a dirtball when he was playing, and he’s been a bigger scumbag since. Why does his “admission” deserve any credence NOW?
I think it’s at least 50/50 that he bet on or against his own team, and nothing I’ve heard so far disabuses me of that notion. These infractions occurred “on the field” since he was in uniform when they happened, and quite possibly, in the stadium at the time.
Rose committed the Cardinal sin of the game, and shouldn’t be reinstated.
If baseball should let Pete Rose back in, he should have to go to EVERY young baseball fan that he has lied to over the years and apologize for lying to them while they paid him twenty bucks for an autograph at some card show. Also, I think it’s insane that Pete has to come out in a book to tell us that he bet on baseball and once again swindle us out of $24.95. I will be saving my hard earned cash for Peter’s next New Frontier novel, thank you. At least he plays straight and honest with us….unless he’s betting on events that transpire in the New Frontier universe. Then I will be truly sad and disillusioned!
I have on question. While i’ll grant that gambling hurts the integrity of the game, on a philosophical level, is it hurt worse by this, or by drug abusers, racists, or complete thugs, such as Ty Cobb. Which is the greater evil to the game?
I don’t doubt that Rose has done much wrong. But I still think it’s worth it to the validity of the Hall of Fame to include him.
Big Deal? THEY ALL bet on sports. Even the team owners. Only diff. is Pete Rose got caught.
Pete knew the rules. He looses. No hall of fame for you!
Rob Said: “is it hurt worse by this, or by drug abusers, racists, or complete thugs, such as Ty Cobb”
The game is hurt more by gambling than it is by employing a bunch of bad guys. Because even though the guys on the teams may be thugs, villians and rascals, we still have the belief that they are trying their hardest to win. While the players themselves may not have integrity, the game itself does. Once people think that pro sports have become professional wrestling, then the game ceases to exist.
So if an NBA player rapes a young girl, or an NHL player kills a person while drunk driving, or a MLB pitcher shouts racial epithets in a magazine article, it’s not going to ruin the sport. The guy’s career will come and go, and no one will remember him. But gambling, we all remember. Name me three players on the 1919 White Sox OTHER than Joe Jackson.
Can’t, can you?
I like the suggestion I read a few years back that it be stated that Pete Rose is eligible for the Hall of Fame based on his career stats and the like…but his eligibility period for election is reset to start, instead of five years after his last game, to the year after his death.
In other words, yep, odds would be quite high that his stats would get him into the Hall. But the penalty for his gambling rule breaking would be that he’d never get to enjoy or capitalize it.
I have on question. While i’ll grant that gambling hurts the integrity of the game, on a philosophical level, is it hurt worse by this, or by drug abusers, racists, or complete thugs, such as Ty Cobb. Which is the greater evil to the game?
I’d say yes. As indefensible as those actions are, they do not directly affect the integrity of the game. One could argue that a play who is too stoned to play is a threat to his team, but not the game as a whole.
Gambling puts a player or manager in a position where he might be tempted to throw a game. Even if he never bet a Reds game, he could throw a game in exchange for his bookie forgiving his other gambling debts. Even betting for a team has hazardous. What if he kept his starting pitcher in too long, risking injury because the Reds had to win this game or Big Louie would break his kneecaps?
I’ve gradually come around to the idea that Pete Rose should be sent to the Hall of Fame.
But.
At this point Rose’s baseball “fame” is as much for his off-field exploits (betting on baseball, then denying it, then promoting himself for over a decade to get his ban lifted) as his on-field performance. He is, as such, as infamous in baseball as he is famous.
Therefore I feel that if Rose goes to the Hall, the Hall has an obligation to commemorate Rose’s gambling and legal battles with baseball on equal footing with his playing career. I think it’s important to highlight this aspect of his behavior side-by-side with his playing ability.
Rose was not, to be sure, one of the elite players in baseball. He was a very good player for a very long time, and his on-field accomplishments were very impressive, but he’s clearly not a top-echelon Hall of Famer. (Arguably he’s a borderline Hall of Famer, a little more deserving than Jim Rice, who I think is the best player who clearly isn’t a Hall of Famer – and I’m a Red Sox fan.)
As for Shoeless Joe Jackson – electing him at this point, under any circumstances, seems pointless. It’s now been 83 years since he last played, and there are few people living who saw him play or actively followed his exploits. Electing him is – to paraphrase Bill James’ observations about electing 19th century players – honoring nothing more than a set of statistics. And what’s the point of that?
(By and large I think no players who played before 1950 should be elected to the Hall at this point, for a variety of reasons. We should just close the book on the first 80 years of pro baseball where the Hall is concerned. But anyway.)
I think that at this point, electing Shoeless Joe would be honoring not a set of stats but a cloud of legend. The man and and the player are long unseen, but the character, the guy Ray Liotta played in Field of Dreams, the guy in Eight Men Out, the persona carved out by years of “say it ain’t so, Joe,” he’d be the one elected.
So I think that Mr. Rawdon is right. Which doesn’t mean that Shoeless Joe’s career can’t be honored in some way, but I bet that among the memorabilia the HoF owns is stuff that belonged to him, and I would bet it’s been on display many times, ban or not.
but I bet that among the memorabilia the HoF owns is stuff that belonged to him, and I would bet it’s been on display many times, ban or not.
I’ll take that bet! You’re on!
to quickly address the Shoeless Joe issue, his WS numbers do back up the notion that he did not throw any games, and there is evidence that he did not know what he was signing, but I’d have to do more research before I’d be totally comfortable saying that a player who was convicted of THROWING the World Series is allowed in the Hall.
I would like to see his case re-opened though.
As for Pete, I can’t justify in any way letting him back into the game today. The rule is banned for life for gambling. He’s finally admitted to the crime for which he was banned, so why doe that mean he should be let back in?
Also, Pete’s not sorry for what he did. He’s making excuses. He just wants to get re-instated before his final year of Hall eligibility. I’m not sure how I feel about him being in the Hall. His career numbers certainly demand that he be inducted, but he really effed up and tarnished the image of the game itself.
I think, ideally, I hope that he does not get on the next ballot. I would, however, be willing to leave his induction up to the Veteran’s Committee. It is their Hall. I could abide by their decision.
I gave another two seconds of thought to the Joe Jackson case, and here’s my thinking.
Joe’s performance in the Series is pretty much irrelevent. It doesn’t matter how well he played if he KNEW that his performance wouldn’t be enough to win.
If he took money, his ban is fitting and deserved.
Even if he knew about the plot to throw the Series, I have to support his ban. Better to be scorned by your teammate than to disgrace the game.
The only slight loophole for Rose is that he supposedly did not bet against his team.
And like I said above, I wouldn’t want the responsibility of making that decision. Leave his Hall eligibity to the Veteran’s Committee.
I think Tom Seaver, quoted in the Daily News, pretty much nailed it. He said (I’m quoting from memory) that “this isn’t a Pete Rose question. It’s a baseball rule question. Rule 21 against gambling appears in every baseball stadium locker room in the country in both English and Spanish. And it says if you bet on games in which your team has an outcome, you’re banned for life. Period.”
If Pete Rose slid into second and the ball clearly arrived ten feet ahead of him, no one would support the notion that, hey, it’s Pete Rose, so let’s say he’s safe because he really hustles. For that matter, if it were a second string utility player convicted of gambling, there’d be no discussion.
So the debate shouldn’t really be, Should Pete Rose be allowed back into baseball (and into the hall of fame) because the answer is indisputably “no.” The debate should be, should Bud Selig throw out Rule 21? If the answer is “no,” then that’s that. If the answer is “yes,” then Shoeless Joe should be first in line.
PAD
Regarding Shoeless Joe Jackson, his stats were significantly worse in the games that the Black Sox lost. Whether that was a function of his not trying as hard in those games, or whether it was just bad luck is impossible to determine.
Jackson accepted money in exchange for a promise to throw the series. Throughout his life he maintained that he took the money but did his best in the series. I don’t see that as particularly more noble than his teammates.
Buck Weaver was the player who simply knew of the fix, and whose failure to report it resulted in his lifetime ban. I think he, more than anybody else from that team, deserves to be reinstated.
-DVR
Heh. If Rose’s election to the Hall depends on the Veteran’s Committee, he’s up the creek and he knows it. They’d vote to lynch him before they’d enshrine him.
I think Rose is doing a great service to baseball right now. He’s living testament to the fact that it doesn’t matter how many records you’ve broken, how many World Series you played in, how great a player you were in your day–violate Rule 21 and you’re out for good. Period.
And I hope it remains that way. Selig actually shows hints of a spine on this matter.
JSM
“Oh Steve, Steve, Steve… if you think someone saying crap twice when having the never to disagree with you is rude, you’re going to have a lot of problems in the real world.”
Oh,Scott Scott, Scott. It doesn’t matter to me whether or not you use the word crap, šhìŧ, poo poo, doo doo or George W. Bush. They all mean the same thing. Rude is rude.
BTW, the rule stating that a lifetime ban from the Baseball would make you ineligible for the Hall of Fame wasn’t instituted until 1990. The year AFTER Rose accepted his ban.
Shoeless Joe COULD HAVE been voted in back in the day, but the people who did the voting simply DID NOT VOTE FOR HIM. Thats why Joe isn’t in, not because of his real or imagined mistakes.
I’m a baseball fan. I watch every game I can from the first pitch of preseason to the last out of the World Series. I’ll admit that I cannot quote you stats to the nth degree, but there’s just something special about baseball that just keeps me coming back, despite all the salary disputes and strikes.
Shoeless Joe Jackson and the rest of the infamous Black Sox scandal is definitely before my time. In all fairness, if in doubt, look at the evidence again before making a final decision. After all folks, only hindsight is 20/20.
As for Pete Rose…
You cannot dispute the achievements of the athlete, but you have to question the moral ethics of the man.
If it were up to me, I’d reinvestigate the Jackson situation and let Rose stew until either he shows some genuine remorse or wait and induct him post-humously.
Just one man’s humble opinion.
So the debate shouldn’t really be, Should Pete Rose be allowed back into baseball (and into the hall of fame) because the answer is indisputably “no.”
I don’t think he should be allowed back into an active roll in baseball, but if the HoF is to honor a player for his ability and acomplishments on the field you have to change the rule to allow for that (Shoeless included). Rule 21 is needed, but to state that because of breaking that rule, your records can’t be in the HoF, that’s just dumb.
If Pete Rose slid into second and the ball clearly arrived ten feet ahead of him, no one would support the notion that, hey, it’s Pete Rose, so let’s say he’s safe because he really hustles.
You also can’t support the notion that since he gambled he really doesn’t have the record for most at bats. Did the fact that Pete bet on baseball change that he has the most hits in the game? No.
If Pete broke a rule such as using steroids while playing, which would have affected his ability then yes his records should be invalid. No amount of gambling is gonna change his stats.
The one thing I’m tired of hearing is how gambling is against MLB rules.
And yet, here’s a story today where an Anaheim Angels reliever failed his doping test for the Olympics this past October.
Olympic punishment? Two year ban.
MLB? Not a dámņ thing.
Gambling on baseball? Sure beats the kinds of things players are doing to themselves to try and hope they compare to those such as Rose, those that actually played the game.
Londo asked, “Name me three players on the 1919 White Sox OTHER than Joe Jackson. Can’t, can you?”
Well, I can. 🙂
Eddie Ciccotte, pitcher.
Claude Williams, pitcher.
Dickie Kerr, pitcher.
Chick Gandil, first baseman.
Eddie Collins, second baseman.
Swede Risberg, shortstop.
Buck Weaver, third baseman.
Hap Felsch, outfielder.
And that’s just who I remember off the top of my head.
Kid Gleason was their manager.
Even if I hadn’t read Eliot Asinof’s Eight Men Out or seen John Sayle’s film adaptation, I’d have known these names; these players all appear in Ring Lardner’s stories of Jack Keefe, pitcher for the White Sox from 1914-1919. The last stories, written in 1919 as the Sox were beginning down the path that lead to the World Series, are eerily prescient of the events that would unfold that fall.
If there’s a blameless victim in the story of the Black Sox Scandal, it’s Buck Weaver. His sole connection to the betting was that he knew and was offered money; Gandil, who orchestrated the plot, didn’t trust Weaver and didn’t need him, not if he had the two aces on the staff–Cicotte and Williams–on his side.
<>
Then so be it.
gah. this board always gives me trouble posting when I’m using Netscape (which I always am.)
the above post was supposed to say-
<>
Then so be it.
guess it wasn’t netscape after all.
I was responding to Jeff Morris’s comments about Rose’s chances of being elected by the Veteran’s Committee.
(now why do my posts work at work, but not at home?)
If rule 21 says you’re banned for life, then you’re banned for life. I’m taking PAD at his word here.
However, I would read this as being banned from participating in the game. Player, manager, coach, batboy. If Pete Rose want’s to buy a ticket and sit in the stands to watch a game, more power to him. But he shouldn’t be allowed to participate in any game, in any part.
But to not allow previous accomplishments to be honored is just plain stupid.
Ðámņìŧ Peter, you nailed it right on the head.
So instead, I’ll comment on this remark by another poster:
Electing him is – to paraphrase Bill James’ observations about electing 19th century players – honoring nothing more than a set of statistics.
But that’s really all you have in any era (modern or bygone) to *completely* measure a player’s worth. Even in this age of digital cable 35-40 out-of-market games per week subscription plans, one can only observe a player so closely before they have to turn to the stats.
Or as writer Allen Barra said in his excellent book Clearing the Bases: “What are statistics but a record of what a player does when you’re not watching him?”
-Dave O’Connell
An article about Shoeless Joe Jackson and his possible induction into the Hall appeared today from the Associated Press.
http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/shared/sports/ap/ap_story.html/Baseball/AP.V6250.AP-BBO-Rose-Shoele.html
It’s a baseball rule question. Rule 21 against gambling appears in every baseball stadium locker room in the country in both English and Spanish. And it says if you bet on games in which your team has an outcome, you’re banned for life. Period.”
That being quoted Peter, does that mean if Pete bet on baseball games, but not Reds games, he should be reinstated????
And as for Shoeless Joe, enough already, he played 13 seasons and did OK for that era. He took money, period! He did not report it, period! I would love to see him in the Hall of Fame, but for th elove of God people, every time someone mentions Rose you scream Shoeless Joe, Shoeless Joe.
To repeat:
Pete Rose:
All-time Major League record for most career hits-4,256
All-time Major League record for most games played-3,562
All-time Major League record for most at bats-14,053
All-time Major League record for most singles-3,315
All-time Major League record for most total bases by a switch hitter-5,752
All-time Major League record for most seasons of 200 or more hits-10
All-time Major League record for most consecutive seasons of 100 or more hits-23
All-time Major League record for most seasons with 600 or more at bats-17
All-time Major League record for most seasons with 150 or more games played–17
All-time Major League record for most seasons with 100 or more games played-23
Only player in Major League history to play more than 500 games at five different
Positions-1B (939) 2B (628) 3B (634) LF (671) RF (595)
Major League record for playing in the most winning games-1,972
All-time National League record for most years played-24
All-time National League record for most consecutive years played-24
All-time National League record for most career runs-2,165
All-time National League record for most career doubles-746
All-time National League record for most games with 5 or more hits-10
Modern National League record for longest consecutive game hitting streak-44
Modern National League Record for most consecutive game hitting streaks of 20
or more games–7
Joe Jackson:
YR G AB R H HR RBI AVG OBP SLG
Total 1,332 4,981 873 1,772 54 785 .356 .423 .517
(Sorry if it doesn’t line up but you get the picture)
Who is the Hall of Famer!!!!
Do the asterisk thing, detail his crime in the HoF. Honor the player he was, not the man he is.
You say Joe, I say Ty.
Bryans
I once read someone who said something like – ban Pete Rose the manager, but don’t ban Pete Rose the player. He should never be allowed to manage again. If they want to use him in a PR way, fine, but he should never be allowed to have any control of any team ever. He broke the rules…a lot. And lied about it. For a while.
Even if he bet for his team, he certainly used his pitching rotation in such a way to help on the days he had bets riding on a game, hurting other games.
But the player was amazing and deserves to be in the Hall. Sure he is a jerk, but he could play the game as good as most in the Hall. So give him that honor.
Of course I am of the mind anyone should be considered to be in the hall, and if they have some black mark against them it should be mentioned in their plaque.
Still waiting for Shoeless Joe to get put in seems silly. Putting Pete Rose in now would be a much bigger media draw for baseball – since Pete Rose could attend the ceremony. If they decide later to add Shoeless Joe, fine – save it for another year and more media.
Joe Jackson aceepted money from gamblers for the purpose of throwing the World Series. I don’t care if he was a lobotomized gnat and couldn’t read or sign his name, that’s the single most egregious sin you can do in baseball.
Also, as others have pointed out, it’s not true that his stats have shown he was doing his best. In fact, the particular game by game observations show that he made a number of questionable decisions and mistakes in the games they lost. (Things like allowing runners to go first to third on singles to left, not taking second on what should have been extra base hits, etc.)
Not that I’m saying those here have done it, but I get tired of people whose sole knowledge of Joe Jackson comes from seeing Field of Dreams.