Interesting ESPN poll regarding Pete Rose's lifetime ban

[brewing]

Dowd claimed he bet on baseball in 1985 & 1986, while a player/manager.

I can't find it, but there were sources that stated Rose could have had a limited ban if he would have admitted betting on baseball in 1989.

I'm fine with the ban from MLB, it's the exclusion from the Hall that I have an exception to. Of course I think the Hall is a farce and would discount it completely if there was a legitimate alternative.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by brewing

Dowd claimed he bet on baseball in 1985 & 1986, while a player/manager.

I can't find it, but there were sources that stated Rose could have had a limited ban if he would have admitted betting on baseball in 1989.

I'm fine with the ban from MLB, it's the exclusion from the Hall that I have an exception to. Of course I think the Hall is a farce and would discount it completely if there was a legitimate alternative.

If a credible source is stating that Rose bet on the game while he was still playing it, then that would change my position.

It's just too bad, because he was an exceptional ballplayer.

[packs]

Rose was a compulsive gambler, which in most instances also turns you into a compulsive liar.

He claims to have never bet against the Reds. Yeah right.

He says he never did anything to attempt to manipulate the outcome of a game. Yeah right.

He says he never bet on a game as a player. Yeah right.

Even if he didn't bet on a game until he was a manager, do people not see how problematic that is? He is the manager in charge of a game. He has full ability to sub in a pitcher, take a pitcher out, sub in a pinch hitter, not play a particular player on a given day, etc. Anyone who believes him when he says he didn't bet against the Reds is fooling themselves. Since when do compulsive gamblers chasing money have ethics about what they gamble on?

There will never be any way to know what he did or didn't do to manipulate the outcome of games or whether or not he ever lost a game on purpose.

Stay out of baseball. Stay out of the HOF.

[Duluth Eskimo]

One more thing to add about his authority as a manager. If he subs in players or pitchers in one game to ensure his victory in that specific game, only to jeopardize his players or team in a future game that to me would be the much like betting on your team to lose. Not exactly the same, but it makes you think. Jason

PS: I loved Rose as a player, but it's a fact that every locker room specifically has those signs for this exact reason. Rose is a liar and he has always believed that he is above the game and everyone in it.

[packs]

There is just no way that a guy decides to begin gambling when he becomes a manager. And as pointed out, for at least 3 seasons he was a player/manager. Bad behavior starts early. I'm not seeing how anyone can honestly think he wasn't out there gambling and potentially fixing outcomes to his benefit (or at least attempting to) as a player.

[nolemmings]

If I remember right, Dowd had solid evidence that Rose was gambling on baseball in ‘85 and ‘86. Still, Rose may have been too self-absorbed in chasing Cobb to wager much in 1985. After all, he had to pencil himself in at 1b for 500 AB to get the hit record– first base for a guy who had no pop (2 HR), no speed (8 SB), no glove, and a .264 BA. Team first, right Pete? Bet on it.

[brewing]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

After all, he had to pencil himself in at 1b for 500 AB to get the hit record– first base for a guy who had no pop (2 HR), no speed (8 SB), no glove, and a .264 BA. Team first, right Pete? Bet on it.

I agree, but let's be realistic to what the team wanted. Rose was a draw and the Reds benefitted.

[RTK]

Originally Posted by packs

Rose was a compulsive gambler, which in most instances also turns you into a compulsive liar.

He claims to have never bet against the Reds. Yeah right.

He says he never did anything to attempt to manipulate the outcome of a game. Yeah right.

He says he never bet on a game as a player. Yeah right.

Even if he didn't bet on a game until he was a manager, do people not see how problematic that is? He is the manager in charge of a game. He has full ability to sub in a pitcher, take a pitcher out, sub in a pinch hitter, not play a particular player on a given day, etc. Anyone who believes him when he says he didn't bet against the Reds is fooling themselves. Since when do compulsive gamblers chasing money have ethics about what they gamble on?

There will never be any way to know what he did or didn't do to manipulate the outcome of games or whether or not he ever lost a game on purpose.

Stay out of baseball. Stay out of the HOF.

Agreed, the clubhouse sign say's NO Gambling! How do we know he didn't, in his own way as manager, try to throw games because he was in debt. It's a sharp distinct line, he crossed it.

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

If a credible source is stating that Rose bet on the game while he was still playing it, then that would change my position.

It's just too bad, because he was an exceptional ballplayer.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2798498

On Thursday, John Dowd, who authored the report chronicling Rose's gambling as a member of the Reds, told "Cold Pizza" on ESPN2 that Rose was mostly right when he said he bet on every Reds game.

Dowd told the program that Rose did not bet at all in the 1987 season when Mario Soto or Bill Gullickson pitched. He also said that Rose bet while he was playing.

[CMIZ5290]

Interesting feedback. Here on Net54, the majority of those who gave input are against Rose's reinstatement. According to ESPN's Poll (last I saw was 275,000 plus), 83% were for his reinstatement...Wow, go figure....

[71buc]

I loved him as a player but don't think it would be the best move for the incoming commissioner to reinstate Pete now or ever. He thought he was bigger than the game and disregarded its most important rule. I really don't think we will ever know all there is to know about Rose. What was a player of his stature doing running around with Tommy Gioiosa? Nonetheless, I think Pete is going to be just fine.

[the 'stache]

Argh, another double post. Time to reboot, something is acting weird.