Pete Rose sycophants

[darkcloud4579]

It's a crime that the all-time hit leader isn't even eligible to get voted into the Hall. Don't reinstate him to work in or around baseball, just reinstate him for eligibility as a player for the hall. His transgressions came as a manager.

[chucksabr]

The only way Baseball can reinstate Pete is if they change the rules and start allowing players and managers to bet on baseball. But as long as they intend to keep the rules intact, they have to keep him out.

There is a third alternative: keep the rule intact for everyone except Pete. Baseball would have to explain why they are making an exception for Pete, though, and they definitely don't want any part of that.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

The only way Baseball can reinstate Pete is if they change the rules and start allowing players and managers to bet on baseball. But as long as they intend to keep the rules intact, they have to keep him out.

This is nonsense. I pulled a few examples from Wikipedia.

Dickie Kerr of the Chicago White Sox was banned for life in 1921 for playing exhibition games with former banned Black Sox players. Kerr had been a member of the 1919 Black Sox team, but he won both his starts in the contested 1919 World Series and was acquitted of involvement in the conspiracy. Kerr was reinstated in 1925. That's a much shorter "lifetime ban" than Pete Rose has received.

Ferguson Jenkins of the Texas Rangers was banned in 1980 after a customs search in Toronto, Ontario, found cocaine and marijuana on his person. Jenkins missed the rest of the 1980 season, but was reinstated by an independent arbiter, and retired following the 1983 season. He was elected to the Hall of Fame in 1991.

Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays were banned in 1983 after they were hired by casinos as greeters and autograph signers. Mantle and Mays were reinstated by Peter Ueberroth in 1985.

George Steinbrenner was banned in 1990 for paying a private investigator $40,000 to dig up dirt on Yankees player Dave Winfield in order to discredit him. Steinbrenner was reinstated by Bud Selig in 1993.

Marge Schott was banned in 1996 for bringing Major League Baseball into disrepute by repeatedly making slurs against African-Americans, Jews, Asians and homosexuals, and showing a sympathetic attitude to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. Schott had previously been fined $250,000 and banned from day-to-day operations of the Reds for the 1993 season for similar offenses. Schott was reinstated in 1998. So she was banned twice and was still reinstated.

No rules were changed in these examples. The commissioner merely granted a pardon.

[Le Grande Orange]

And none of those examples involved a violation of the clear, strict, and long-standing rules against players or other officials betting on the sport.

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by Orcin

This is nonsense. I pulled a few examples from Wikipedia.

Dickie Kerr of the Chicago White Sox was banned for life in 1921 for playing exhibition games with former banned Black Sox players. Kerr had been a member of the 1919 Black Sox team, but he won both his starts in the contested 1919 World Series and was acquitted of involvement in the conspiracy. Kerr was reinstated in 1925. That's a much shorter "lifetime ban" than Pete Rose has received.

Ferguson Jenkins of the Texas Rangers was banned in 1980 after a customs search in Toronto, Ontario, found cocaine and marijuana on his person. Jenkins missed the rest of the 1980 season, but was reinstated by an independent arbiter, and retired following the 1983 season. He was elected to the Hall of Fame in 1991.

Mickey Mantle and Willie Mays were banned in 1983 after they were hired by casinos as greeters and autograph signers. Mantle and Mays were reinstated by Peter Ueberroth in 1985.

George Steinbrenner was banned in 1990 for paying a private investigator $40,000 to dig up dirt on Yankees player Dave Winfield in order to discredit him. Steinbrenner was reinstated by Bud Selig in 1993.

Marge Schott was banned in 1996 for bringing Major League Baseball into disrepute by repeatedly making slurs against African-Americans, Jews, Asians and homosexuals, and showing a sympathetic attitude to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party. Schott had previously been fined $250,000 and banned from day-to-day operations of the Reds for the 1993 season for similar offenses. Schott was reinstated in 1998. So she was banned twice and was still reinstated.

No rules were changed in these examples. The commissioner merely granted a pardon.

Not one of these examples involves a player gambling on the game he is playing in, which is the offense that warrants the permanent eligibility. As far as I know, it is the only offense that explicitly warrants that penalty.

If a player gambles on a baseball game that he is not involved in, he is declared ineligible for one year.

I was not taking any position on Pete Rose in my post. I was only laying out the three options that Major League Baseball has, including the special pardon of Pete Rose. I just don't see how Baseball can square the circle of pardoning Pete Rose while permanently banning all other past and future players for doing the same thing, and I also don't see what's in it for them.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

And none of those examples involved a violation of the clear, strict, and long-standing rules against players or other officials betting on the sport.

They do involve people being banned from the sport and subsequently reinstated, which is the topic at hand.

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

And none of those examples involved a violation of the clear, strict, and long-standing rules against players or other officials betting on the sport.

Both sides have a point here actually. Bans have been lifted before, it's only a matter of whether there is an actual Rubicon.

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by Westheim

Both sides have a point here actually. Bans have been lifted before, it's only a matter of whether there is an actual Rubicon.

What do you think is in it for Baseball to lift the ban against players and managers gambling on games they are performing in?

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

What do you think is in it for Baseball to lift the ban against players and managers gambling on games they are performing in?

Tell me. You love to tell people what they should think. And when you're on it:

What was in it for Baseball to reinstate a homophobic Hitlerist, who on top of all was upset with John McSherry for dying on her field, twice?

Lines are getting drawn in the strangest places.

[Le Grande Orange]

One difference is that gambling can have a direct and measurable result on the outcome of games, casting doubt on the integrity of the sport. Examples abound, such as the numerous betting/game-fixing scandals that have plagued the CPBL over the years, not to mention the various game-fixing incidents that have affected some European football leagues.

A team owner making stupid comments, on the other hand, is mostly limited in effect to making the owner look like a complete jackass.

[RchW]

Ferguson Jenkins of the Texas Rangers was banned in 1980 after a customs search in Toronto, Ontario, found cocaine and marijuana on his person. Jenkins missed the rest of the 1980 season, but was reinstated by an independent arbiter, and retired following the 1983 season. He was elected to the Hall of Fame in 1991.

This is wrong. Jenkins was charged in Toronto then pitched two games then was suspended by Kuhn. The suspension was overturned by an arbitrator who ruled that Kuhn had exceeded his power by not presuming innocence and requiring Jenkins to answer questions that could reveal his defense in court. Apparently Kuhn didn't understand that the matter was covered under Canadian law. Jenkins then pitched the rest of the season.

As for the drug charges? He was convicted technically on one charge then given an absolute discharge because the Judge agreed that the drugs were planted in an equipment bag. No record exists because of the discharge. Did he catch a break? Maybe, but the drugs were not found on him as so many stories say.

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by Westheim

Tell me. You love to tell people what they should think. And when you're on it:

What was in it for Baseball to reinstate a homophobic Hitlerist, who on top of all was upset with John McSherry for dying on her field, twice?

Lines are getting drawn in the strangest places.

Why are you getting hostile with me? Is that really necessary?

All I've done here is lay out Baseball's three options, and then said what I think about them. Nothing more. Not only have I not told you what to think, I actually asked you what you think is in it for Baseball to life the ban on players gambling. Now, you don't have to tell me what you think about that—that's totally up to you. But is it really necessary for you to be hostile to me?

[RchW]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

Why are you getting hostile with me? Is that really necessary?

All I've done here is lay out Baseball's three options, and then said what I think about them. Nothing more. Not only have I not told you what to think, I actually asked you what you think is in it for Baseball to life the ban on players gambling. Now, you don't have to tell me what you think about that—that's totally up to you. But is it really necessary for you to be hostile to me?

Not unlike the bash stat heads thread.

I want Rose in the HoF for what may be irrational feelings but I understand and agree with most of your position on this. The hostility is weird.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by chucksabr

Why are you getting hostile with me? Is that really necessary?

I don't see any hostility there. He was merely making a statement of fact. You DO love to tell other people what they should think. Anyone who posts in this sort of thread is guilty of that. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by Orcin

I don't see any hostility there. He was merely making a statement of fact. You DO love to tell other people what they should think. Anyone who posts in this sort of thread is guilty of that. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

If that's the case—that everybody here is basically telling everybody else here what to think—then fine, I'll cop to that. But if I indeed do that, I am certainly far less direct about it than you are.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Orcin

I don't see any hostility there. He was merely making a statement of fact. You DO love to tell other people what they should think. Anyone who posts in this sort of thread is guilty of that. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

He was rendering an opinion. No facts involved.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by RchW

He was rendering an opinion. No facts involved.

Well, my opinion is that he was stating a fact.

[MarkInCincy]

Think of how absolutely great Strawberry or Mantle (just 2 off the top of my head) with their huge raw talent (where Pete had far,far less of than either) if they had Pete's work ethic, hustle and love of playing for the sheer pleasure. Maybe 800+ HR's for Mantle, sure fire first ballot HOF for strawberry.

I sincerely believe Pete overachieved versus his raw talent more than any other player ever.

But thats just my opinion and I am sure others will disagree.

[Orcin]

MLBPA head Tony Clark wants Rose reinstated. Clark said, "He made a decision. He made a decision that was not the right decision. He made a decision that he has paid a price for."

[chucksabr]

Originally Posted by MarkInCincy

Think of how absolutely great Strawberry or Mantle (just 2 off the top of my head) with their huge raw talent (where Pete had far,far less of than either) if they had Pete's work ethic, hustle and love of playing for the sheer pleasure. Maybe 800+ HR's for Mantle, sure fire first ballot HOF for strawberry.

I sincerely believe Pete overachieved versus his raw talent more than any other player ever.

But thats just my opinion and I am sure others will disagree.

I completely agree. Pete was not a supremely gifted player, but he recognized his own strengths and he made the most of them. A man with his resume would normally be a slam-dunk first ballot Hall of Famer.