[The Detroit Collector]

Originally Posted by rand1com

Good analogy. However, if a policeman is hidden in the dark of night and sees you make the turn, he will give you a ticket. You can bet on it. Rose got caught breaking a clear MLB rule. Whether you like the rule or not is irrelevant. If it said you cannot bet against your team, he would not have broken it. However, it did not say that. It said you could not gamble and that he did. The banishment is warranted. He was one of the best to ever play the game. He gave his heart and soul to the game. But, he could not control his gambling addiction and deserves the punishment he received.

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

As an attorney, there are lots of rules and laws on the books that I don't agree with. But, I don't get to decide whether a given law/rule is stupid or not, nor do I get to decide when its okay to violate it. If I violate a law/rule that I think is stupid and get caught, the penalty is the same as if I had violated a "good" law. That's just the way it is.

This seems pretty simple to me. Rose knew what the rule was. He chose to violate it. He got caught and got the prescribed penalty for that violation. He viewed himself as above the rules and, as a result, he screwed himself. That's the way it works, regardless of what his apologists might wish. End of story.

+1