OT: Shoeless Joe HOF decision?

Originally Posted by JoeyFarino

Same with pete rose. Who the hell cares if he bet on games. How does that affect anything he did on the field. He played his ass off without PED's and has some insane numbers. How can anyone justify not letting him in. I understand theres a rule but unless he had his team throw any games to benefit him then he deserves to be in. The fact that he bet on games is a seperate issue. Firing him takes care of that. Maybe a fine too but keeping him out of something he clearly belongs in is excessive

Are amphetamines PED's? Rose admitted to using them on David Letterman in 2010, but "only to lose weight". He is not banned from baseball for amphetamines, but your contention that Charlie Hustle played without the aid of PED's is false.

[packs]

I also disagree that the fact that Rose bet on games is a separate issue. He was betting on games while being on the field. That is one and the same. Ban him for life.

[JoeyFarino]

Originally Posted by packs

I also disagree that the fact that Rose bet on games is a separate issue. He was betting on games while being on the field. That is one and the same. Ban him for life.

Ok let me ask you this....did pete rose betting on games have anything to do with what he personally accomplished on the field?

[packs]

He was betting on games while on the field. The actions are one in the same.

[JoeyFarino]

Originally Posted by packs

He was betting on games while on the field. The actions are one in the same.

That didnt answer my question. Did his betting on baseball have anything to do with his stats, records or personal achievements on the field?

[JoeyFarino]

Originally Posted by packs

He was betting on games while on the field. The actions are one in the same.

How are the actions one in the same??? He achieved everything on the field without any help. I didnt know betting makes you hit and run better. Unless youre running away from a angry bookie who wants his money. The betting has NOTHING to do with his playing ability at all. Thats why he deserves to be in. The betting issue should be dealt with by suspension of games or a fine. But to strip someone of a title that they clearly earned is excessive

[Kenny Cole]

The HOF is not exclusively about statistics. There is a morality clause and, now, there is the Pete Rose rule -- that if you are permanently banned, you are permanently ineligible for the HOF. Fair or not, that's the current rule.

I feel much more strongly about betting on baseball than I do PEDs. That is particularly true for Rose, who read the rule against doing that -- one of, if not the only rule taped on the door of every clubhouse -- every time he went out to play. He also had the example of what happened to Jackson. He knew what he was doing would get him banned and he did it anyway.

Screw him. He has no excuses and he is a dick to boot. At least the Joe Jackson and Buck Weaver supporters have some arguments they can make. Rose has none. He was one of the most competitive players I ever saw, but he needs to buy a ticket to Cooperstown. I hope he is never elected.

[Peter_Spaeth]

He's done his time. 25 years or however long it's been.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by pariah1107

Are amphetamines PED's? Rose admitted to using them on David Letterman in 2010, but "only to lose weight". He is not banned from baseball for amphetamines, but your contention that Charlie Hustle played without the aid of PED's is false.

Mays and Aaron used greenies.

[almostdone]

What confuses me in all of this "knowing but not telling equals lifetime banishment" is the case of Rube Benton. He testified to knowing the series was fixed but didn't talk until the hearing. Basically he was thanked by Landis and kept right on playing until retirement.

Btw, there is a young man in my town I know who is a direct decendant of Benton. Kind of a weird family legacy, related to the one guy not banned who admidted for knowing.

Drew