Posted By:
Jeff OTommy, I think you're simplifying the situation too much.
Judge Landis absolutely had the authority to do what he did, whether anyone agrees with his decision or not. Major League Baseball is a business, just like any other, and if he was granted the authority to make that decision by the men who controlled the game, he was within his rights.
I agree that gambling was "a common thing" in those days, but it doesn't mean that it was right. However, this is nothing at all like being tried twice for the same offense - one potential punishment was criminal, the other was civil. There is a big difference in standards applied. As an example, if I had a permit to carry a gun I could bring one to work with me on Monday. That would not be breaking the law, and I couldn't be arrested for it. However, I would certainly be fired from my job and never be able to work for my employer again, because it is against company policy. It's not illegal, but it is contrary to a specific set of rules, and I can be punished according to those rules.
As for your final comment: "That is just like living in an prison without the possibility of being paroled for a baseball game." Sorry to disagree, but being banned from baseball is nothing even remotely like living in prison without parole. Not even close.
With regards to Rose (who I know Tommy didn't comment on) - the rules regarding gambling were posted in every clubhouse during his career, and every year someone from the league talked to the players about gambling. He knew that what he was doing was against the rules, he knew the penalties, and he made his decision.
Jeff