Posted on 06/06/2019 11:38:11 AM PDT by jazusamo
Baseball legend Pete Rose took a shot at his former teammate and Hall of Fame catcher Johnny Bench on Thursday during an appearance on “The Brian Kilmeade Show.”
Rose fired back after Bench refused to budge from his view that the former Cincinnati Reds star should be excluded from the Baseball Hall of Fame for gambling on the sport in 1989.
“It don't bother me but you know Johnny Bench is one guy who should thank God I was born,” Rose told host Brian Kilmeade. “Because he never would have made the Hall of Fame if I wasn't born.”
Kilmeade asked Rose to elaborate.
“Because I'm the guy he knocked in a thousand times. You got you've got guys in front of you guys right behind you and you got to be responsible for everybody else involved,” Rose said, adding that Bench couldn’t understand why he wasn’t as loved as Rose was in Cincinnati.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I remember the story about Sparky Lyle dragging his member thru the frosting of a locker room birthday cake. That’s kind of flawed, I suppose.
Yes there’s Pete at the 1970 all star game, bowling over Ray Fosse to score the winning run.
Wow!
What a way to repair your image Pete...
The Hall of Fame is a farce. Where’s the all-time hits leader?
Nowhere, he’s banned.
Where’s the all-time home run leader?
Nowhere, he can’t get voted in.
Where’s the guy who broke Maris’ single season record?
Nowhere, he didn’t get enough votes.
How about the best pitcher since WWII who won seven Cy Young Awards?
Nowhere, he can’t get voted in.
But you can see the plaque for Bud Selig...
You can go all out to win a game, only to jeopardize your chances in the next few games, for example, wearing out your closer, making him unavailable for the next game, in order to guarantee winning the game you bet on.
When your good it aint braggin.
“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?
Yeah, they won, and I am sure Pete was proud of his achievement.
You’re an idiot Pete.
Here’s the thing about Pete Rose as an offensive player. He hit. No denying that. Most years he had 200 base hits. Look around at the guys who hit for average today and you’ll notice that very few get more than about 160 bh’s.
And this is where Pete’s weakness was... on base percentage. A good OBP would be right around .400 to be an elite offensive player. Pete’s wasn’t much higher than his BA. Great contact hitter, but if he’d been more patient he’d have walked more and probably hit 20 points higher.
Pee Rose is jealous cause Bench is an honorable fellow and he isn’t
“Only older baseball fans give a damn one way or another about Pete Rose”
And the scores of all ages posting here.
What bizarre analysis. Opposite of what is before everyone’s eyes.
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.
Rose can never be in the HOF. What does letting him in do for baseball? The answer is nothing positive whatsoever. Baseball can’t afford to give up all credibility to satisfy one mans ego. He violated one of the cardinal rules for years and then he LIED about it profusely for years and would still be lying to this day if he was not caught red handed. It’s sad but it’s the truth. Everyone knows what he did on and off the field. Some things cannot be fixed.
Only one catcher has hit more home runs than Bench. it’s not arguable that he belongs in the HOF.
Pete Rose is the most over-rated player in the history of baseball. His career slugging average was .409, one of the lowest of any hall-of-fame position players... and he was a first baseman with below-average defensive skills. And first base in the National League was where you stuck the guy with the bat that was too good not to play him, but not a good enough defensive player to stick anywhere else.
Even his nickname, “Charlie Hustle” is a crock of reds: he was caught stealing 149 times, while he stole only 198 bases.
To me, Slugging percentage is the end-all, be-all stat, if you make a few adjustments: add to the number of bases half the number of steals (because unlike hits, you don’t advance anyone else) and subtract the number of times caught stealing. That adjustment shaves 200 more bases off Rose’s already decidedly mediocre slugging pct. (I also add half a base and half an at-bat for each walk.)
Bench had an unadjusted slugging pecentage — that is to say an official one — of .476; Rose’s was .409. Bench’s was among the best ever for catchers; Rose’s was below average for a first baseman. And again... Rose only played first or outfield only because he wasn’t good enough to remain at second after he was 25.
Sick and tired of a bunch of jock sniffing holier than thou sportswriters, many of which couldn’t compete in sports,are the determinate as to who get in the hall. Just look at some of the inductees who don’t belong. Pete belongs in the hall.
Bench was a 267 hitter. Rose scored a lot of runs and was on base a lot to give Bench opportunities to get those RBIs. So Rose is looking at it from a pure baseball game view. Bench is looking at it from an integrity view. Pete still doesn’t get that, but I understand what he’s saying to some degree.
What good is a HOF with all-time hits leader?
Keeping Roger Clemens out is silly, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.