Quote:
Originally Posted by robw1959
I can see some merit in this, but there is a vast difference between betting on a team and taking bribes to throw games.
|
No not really, because in both instances the player/manager is perceived to be purposely trying to lose games. In Jackson's case he took money from gamblers to throw games he played in. The gamblers would bet on those games for Jackson's team to lose and the money they paid him would come out of their winnings. In Rose's case he was a player/manager in games that he personally bet on himself, the bets weren't placed by separate gamblers. The perception then is that if Rose bet against his own team that he would do something to throw the game so he would win the bet and collect the money himself. In either case, the issue and bottom line with both Jackson and Rose is them making money off gambling by them doing something to purposely lose games. It doesn't matter if Rose said he never bet against his team or not, because the perception is that if he tried to make money gambling then why wouldn't he be doing it by purposely losing some games as well as through winning some.
The issue isn't the gambling, it is the fans thinking that the players aren't always trying to win games and baseball turning into the WWE.