“He bet on baseball, but he ALWAYS bet on the Reds to win. So he was not throwing games.”
So when a professional league determines a referee, player or coach is betting on their games, does the responsibility rest with the league to precisely determine the types of bets that were placed and how those bets might have affected the games’ outcomes before handing out punishment? Isn’t this an almost impossible burden? Isn’t it simpler (and fairer) to just establish no betting of any nature should occur?
Yes. When Pete bet on the Reds that was valuable ‘information’ to the bookie taking the bet. What would a bookie do with that information? Huh? You bet, he’d sell that information to his better customers, thereby corrupting the game. If Pete didn’t bet, that’s information too.
Just my opinion, but there is a big difference in betting on yourself and your team, than some one throwing games for profit like Hornning (sp).
Some folks on here acting so sanctimonious that gambling is so evil. Sports in America thrive on gambling. Hell ESPN shows poker games.
He broke the rules, so yes he should have been punished, but come on. Enough is enough. Put the man in the HOF.