Should Pete Rose be in the H.O.F.?

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

kurri

Sicc OG
Jul 23, 2002
154
17
0
46
#21
proppa said:

if he didnt bet on his own team then WHO GIVES A FUCK!!!!!!!!!
How do we know he never bet on his own team or against it? cuz he said so???

i dont know man, he has lied for so many years, i wouldnt believe much out of his mouth at this point
 

Dosia

Sicc OG
May 2, 2002
748
2
18
44
#22
lol right now on espn classics they are showing a mock trail at harvard law school with johnnie cochran defending roses position to get in the h.o.f.

lol...i cant believe this...cochran.....hahahahaha
 
Nov 7, 2002
9,634
15
0
47
WWW.MYSPACE.COM
#23
Quote:
Originally posted by proppa

if he didnt bet on his own team then WHO GIVES A FUCK!!!!!!!!!
THA MLB AND THAT IS WHO

PEEP THE INTERVIEW HE TILL THIS DAY STILL THUMBS HIS NOSE AT THA RULE LOOK......

Pete Rose appeared in a national television interview Thursday on ABC's "Primetime," flushing out his story three days after first admitting he bet on baseball while he was still in the game.

Rose told interviewer Charles Gibson that he bet on baseball in 1987 and 1988, that his mistake was "not coming clean a lot earlier" and that he didn't think he'd get caught.

Rose, 62, was banned from Major League Baseball in 1989 after an investigation concluded he bet on baseball. A report given to then-commissioner Bart Giamatti reportedly detailed 412 baseball wagers between April 8-July 5, 1987, including 52 bets on Cincinnati. Rose agreed to the ban, but denied having bet on baseball -- a position he maintained for nearly 15 years until this interview, which surrounded the publishing of his new autobiography, My Prison Without Bars.

As part of a number of upcoming scheduled interviews to promote his book, Rose also will appear Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America," to respond to questions that were sent to ABC's website by viewers during the showing of Thursday night's broadcast.

Asked during Thursday's segment if he had bet on baseball, Rose said, "Yes I did, and that was my mistake. Not coming clean a lot earlier."

Had Rose bet on his own Cincinnati Reds team that he managed at the time?

"Yes," he said. "I believed in my team, I knew my team. But it never altered the way I tried to run the game."





• Rose admits he bet on baseball
• Gambling admission raises questions
• Bauman: Questions remain
• Career stats | All-time hit leaders
• Special coverage from MLB.com >

What do you think? Post your thoughts on the Message Board > Or, submit a column on Pete Rose.





Rose denied that he ever bet against his own team.

"No, that'd be the last thing I'd even consider," he said. "Because I want to win every game."

Gibson asked Rose if he was familiar with Rule 21, Subsection D, in the Major League rules -- the text prohibiting players from gambling on baseball.

"Yeah, I'm familiar with it," Rose said.

After Gibson read the text verbatim, Rose said, "A lot of players don't pay much attention to the fine print. It's not as big as you make it sound like it is."

"That's the most important rule," Gibson continued, citing the rule's prominent posting in every Major League clubhouse.

"Well, I wish I could answer that question but I just can't," Rose said. "I was wrong, just stupid. Worst thing I ever did in my life. I've had to live with that for 14 years."

Rose's on-air contrition was a marked departure from his book, where he wrote: "I'm sure that I'm supposed to act all sorry or sad or guilty now that I've accepted that I've done something wrong. But you see, I'm just not built that way."

The Primetime segment showed Rose in all of his playing glory, when he accumulated 4,256 hits and played in more winning games than any other Major Leaguer -- and also documented the dark side of his past gambling problems, including interviews with people who had seen his problems first-hand. According to the segment, Rose had fallen into gambling debt in other sports and thought he could get himself out by betting on the sport he knew best.

"How does it get out of control?" Rose was asked.

"I can't remember the first time I made a baseball bet," Rose said. "I don't think when I made that bet, I thought, 'Now what's going to happen to me if I get caught?' I don't think I ever considered that."

Despite his recent admission, Rose continued to deny that the betting slips, produced in 1989 by investigator John Dowd, were accurate evidence against him. "I know those betting slips weren't mine, because they didn't have betting slips like that," Rose said. " I'm the only guy that knows what happened, regardless of what the investigators said."

And despite recent reports to the contrary, Rose also denied ever placing bets from the Reds' clubhouse. "I never picked up my phone and called a bookmaker and bet on a baseball game from the clubhouse," he said. "Never."

When asked if gambling is a sickness, Rose said, "It can be."

"There are gambling addicts," Gibson said.

"Yes," Rose replied, "but if you're addicted . . . I don't think I ever gambled out of my means. I didn't take the house payment money, the gas and electric money and gamble it. That was a part of my life you can't change and you wish never happened, but you just hope it would never happen again."

Rose said he met with Commissioner Bud Selig in November 2002, and in hopes of being reinstated, admitted he bet on baseball.

"I didn't beat around the bush. I elaborated on what I could remember, how often, stuff like that," Rose said. "Not every day, not every team. . . ."

Rose said Selig made no guarantees he would be reinstated.

"None whatsoever," Rose said. "I could be sitting out on the limb for the next 20 years."

When asked Sunday night about Rose's admission in the new book, Selig told the AP: "We haven't seen the book. Until we read the book, there's nothing to comment on."

Rose, who said he still hoped to get reinstated and manage his hometown Cincinnati Reds, said he was done betting.

"I'm not going to go back to gambling. It's as simple as that. I've got a little bit on the ball."

Asked how the Commissioner could be sure of that, Rose said:

"Well, they can never be sure. All you can do is give your word. And if the Commissioner is going to give me a second chance, there's no way I'm going to let him down. There are just some things you can't do."
 
Nov 7, 2002
9,634
15
0
47
WWW.MYSPACE.COM
#24
I SAY LET HIM IN, WHY? IF DARRYL STRAWBERRY CAN GET SOOOOOOOOO MANY CHANCES, WHY NOT CHARLIE HUSTLE? SHIT, HE BROKE RULES TOO.

I BELIEVE EVERYONE DESERVES A SECOND CHANCE AND PETE DESERVES IT. LET HIM IN, LET HIM IN!

Slowpokes Sidekick, B. Yogi
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
49
#25
cartoon said:
Last I checked Corked bats and Steroid's are against the rules.
does the rulebook say that they are to be banned forever from baseball for corked bats???

or is corked bats an offense punishable by suspension of a reasonable amount of games determined by MLB
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
49
#26
slowpoke said:
I BELIEVE EVERYONE DESERVES A SECOND CHANCE AND PETE DESERVES IT. LET HIM IN, LET HIM IN!
like i said earlier. it is in the hands of the HOF Veterans Committee and the other day i heard Bob Feller (who sits on the committee) say that they would never let him in.

so unless they change their minds he will never get in.
 
May 8, 2002
1,763
0
0
#27
Mcleanhatch said:
does the rulebook say that they are to be banned forever from baseball for corked bats???

or is corked bats an offense punishable by suspension of a reasonable amount of games determined by MLB

Last I checked Pete Rose as a player was one of the best of all time as far as stats hustle etc... without using corked bats steroids etc....Soo as far as a player he is one of the greatest to hit the diamond. First Ballot Hall Of Fame "As a PLAYER"!!!
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
49
#28
cartoon said:
Last I checked Pete Rose as a player was one of the best of all time as far as stats hustle etc... without using corked bats steroids etc....Soo as far as a player he is one of the greatest to hit the diamond.
^^^^^^^TRUE, VERY TRUE!!!!!!!!

cartoon said:
First Ballot Hall Of Fame "As a PLAYER"!!!
100% IF HE DIDNT GET BANNED.

BUT NOW SINCE 20 YEARS HAVE PASSED HE CANT GET IN ON THE BALLOT, AS FAR AS FROM WHAT I HAVE HEARD, HE CAN ONLY GET IN THRU THE VETERANS COMMITTEE.

CORRECT ME IF A AM WRONG BUT ONCE YOU RETIRE YOU GOT 5 YEARS BEFORE YOU ARE ELIBIBLE FOR THE HOF. ONCE THOSE 5 YEARS ARE UP YOU GOT 6 YEARS TO MAKE THE HOF THROUGH THE BALLOT SYSTEM WITH THE WRITERS. AFTER THOSE 6 ARE UP THE ONLY AY YOU CAN GET IN IS THRU THE VETERANS COMMITTEE
 
Apr 17, 2003
180
0
0
50
#29
Hell yeah! Let the man in! He's a fuckin legend no matter what anyone says. That fool was a fuckin savage that's why he was "Charlie Hustle." I don't give a fuck what he did. His betting had NOTHING to do with what he did on the field.
 
Apr 15, 2003
1,005
0
0
40
#36
bay_dezinz said:
i have no problem with him not being allowed to ever manage again or have any job with MLB cause he did break the rules....if you break the rules at your job you get fired... But even though he broke the rules as a manager he did put up the HOF numbers as a player , the HOF is all about the history of great PLAYERS, rose was one of the best so to erase that history is wrong. Put him in the HOF everyone wants him in there anyways.
explains it all right there