Skip to comments.
Rose won't be on Hall ballot in final year (Odds Against Rose Entering Hall of Fame)
MSNBC.com ^
| 11/22/05
| AP
Posted on 11/22/2005 8:02:01 AM PST by Airborne1986
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
He knew the rules. He broke the rules. But, it doesn't seem right that he is out and Tony Perez is in the Hall. If Bonds and/or Palmiero get in, it will be even worse.
To: timestax
2
posted on
11/22/2005 8:14:57 AM PST
by
Corporate Law
(<>< Xavier Basketball - Perennial Slayer of #1 Ranked Teams)
To: Airborne1986
Rules, for sure. He broke them. OTOH,
private betting on games has been abused
by other pro game players who were NOT
punished despite its being known. Ex:
Michael Jordan, big time gambling.
The discussion on FoxNews this a.m.
mentioned the "rules" abuse of Rose's
faux pas in comparison to the use of
drug enhancing performances so prevalent
in the games today. Specifically, WHAT
is the END goal of a player deciding to
ingest drugs? Answer...fat contract
deal...$$$. It does seem a bit of a
wash.
3
posted on
11/22/2005 8:15:10 AM PST
by
Grendel9
(uick)
Comment #4 Removed by Moderator
Comment #5 Removed by Moderator
To: Airborne1986
Wonder what kind of odds Pete got from his bookie on the upcoming vote.
To: Airborne1986
To: Baynative
"he'd be a shoe in."
14,053 at bats. 4,256 hits. 24 seasons/.303 career BA. Degenerate gambler or not, what is the point of having a Baseball Hall of Fame if you don't have this guy in it?
8
posted on
11/22/2005 8:23:35 AM PST
by
Airborne1986
(Well, you can do what you want to us. But we're not going to sit here while you badmouth the U.S.A.)
To: Airborne1986
But, it doesn't seem right that he is out and Tony Perez is in the Hall. If Bonds and/or Palmiero get in, it will be even worse. Did those other guys bet on the game?
Betting is the one thing you can do that absolutly means you will be banned from baseball for life. It's a simple rule. It's posted in every locker room. There are no exceptions. Every player knows it. End of story.
Rose can just go on selling autographs to suckers and being an all around jerk and Cooperstown will be just fine without him.
9
posted on
11/22/2005 8:24:01 AM PST
by
Ditto
( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
To: Airborne1986
Which only goes to prove that pro athletic leagues could screw up a soup sandwich. I have a distinct feeling that 100 years after his death (assuming MLB lasts that long), they may decide to vote him in "honorarily".
True baseball fans (which I am not) should be outraged. Lesser players who used steroids hold prominent positions in the HofF, but not one of the best of his time, Pete Rose.
Idiocy!
10
posted on
11/22/2005 8:27:14 AM PST
by
DustyMoment
(FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
To: Airborne1986
I am a Braves fan to the max, but I sure loved seeing Pete play in Atlanta.
I was so mad when Gene Garber struck him out to end the 44-game hitting streak.
Pete was (by far) the best player of his time.
He gambled when he knew there were rules against it.
All that talent and hustle... but no common sense.
11
posted on
11/22/2005 8:29:02 AM PST
by
Preachin'
(Enoch's testimony was that he pleased God: Why are we still here?)
To: Baynative
Betting on baseball is the worst thing a player or manager can do, because it directly destroys the integrity of the game itself. Those other offenses are bad, but they concern individual players, not the game itself.
To: DustyMoment
Lesser players who used steroids hold prominent positions in the HofF. . . . Which HOF inductees are you referring to?
To: Airborne1986
I'll bet ya that I eventually get in! - Pete Rose
14
posted on
11/22/2005 8:49:04 AM PST
by
FilthyHands
(Live so that you may live forever. (viva ut vivas))
To: DustyMoment
If Babe Ruth can be in the Hall, if Ty Cobb can be in the Hall, if Barry Bonds can be in the Hall (and you know he will be), Pete Rose should be in the Hall.
15
posted on
11/22/2005 8:50:36 AM PST
by
sinkspur
(Trust, but vilify.)
To: Preachin'
Pete was (by far) the best player of his time. Rose was not even close to being the best. He was just consistently very good for a very long time.
I followed baseball very closely throughout his entire career, from start to finish. I saw him--as well as all the other players--play in person and on television dozens and dozens of times. He was a real good and consistent player, perhaps the most intensely combative and competitive, perhaps the most self-consumed player, but not the best. Mays, Aaron, Schmidt, Bench--that's just for starters.
To: Airborne1986
Every season head coaches gamble their extremely lucrative jobs on whether their team will win. This occurs in every sport. What is the big deal over adding some additional money to the wager?
Please don't cite "integrity" as an answer, as the obvious replies to sports integrity are: Darryl Strawberry, Randy Moss, Bobby Bowden, Tanya Harding, Kobe Bryant etc.
17
posted on
11/22/2005 9:01:30 AM PST
by
Triggerhippie
(Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.)
To: Charles Henrickson
Pete didn't hit for power, but his hustle legged out more doubles than anyone else would've gotten with the same level of talent.
Look at the amount of runs he scored without getting 650-750 via home runs.
He knew how to be patient and get on base with a walk.
He played almost every day.
He made the all-star team at five different fielding positions.
He only played about 8-9 years in MLB with Mays, and was in the same league with Aaron for about 14 years.
He was more fun to watch than any player of his time.
18
posted on
11/22/2005 9:08:16 AM PST
by
Preachin'
(Enoch's testimony was that he pleased God: Why are we still here?)
To: Preachin'
Certainly his playing accomplishments would normally merit the HOF, even first-ballot HOF. But Rose would never make a first--or even second or third-team--all-time team.
But his gambling, along with his long denial, has rightly kept him out.
To: Airborne1986
I don't care if they let him in after his death, but it would be wrong to change the rules to honor him while he's alive. Punishments are supposed to mean something. If you let Rose in, there's no such thing as the threat of a lifetime ban.
All you have to do is whine long enough.
20
posted on
11/22/2005 9:21:59 AM PST
by
Dog Gone
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson