Posted on 08/12/2003 7:28:41 AM PDT by Ray Kinsella
Pete Rose and Major League Baseball have reached an agreement that would allow him to return to baseball in 2004, and includes no admission of wrongdoing by Rose, Baseball Prospectus has learned. According to several sources, Rose signed the agreement after a series of pre-season meetings between Rose, Hall of Fame member Mike Schmidt, and at different times, high-level representatives of Major League Baseball, including Bob DuPuy, Major League Baseball's Chief Operating Officer, and Allan H. "Bud" Selig, Commissioner of Major League Baseball.
The agreement includes removal of Rose from baseball's permanently ineligible list. This would allow Rose to appear on ballots for baseball's Hall of Fame, which bars such banned players from consideration. The agreement allows Rose to be employed by a team in the 2004 season, as long as that position does not involve the day to day operations. That employment restriction would be removed after a year, allowing Rose to return to managing a team as early as the 2005 season if a position is offered to him.
In December, several publications reported that Rose and Bud Selig met in Milwaukee last winter, and that lawyers for both sides were exchanging proposals to end Rose's lifetime ban from baseball. Jayson Stark of ESPN wrote in a column August 7th that Reds owner Carl Lindner intends to hire Rose as the team's manager and has agitated for Rose's reinstatement for some time.
Pete Rose has been banned from baseball since he reached an agreement with then-Commissioner Bart Giamatti that included a lifetime ban from baseball for conduct detrimental to the sport, but which did not include an admission that Rose gambled on baseball. The August 23, 1989 agreement ended the investigation by baseball, led by John Dowd. Dowd's findings are published at www.dowdreport.com. Dowd concluded that Rose had bet on games he was involved in, citing such evidence as telephone records including calls to a bookie from the Reds clubhouse, bank records of large payments, and betting notes that handwriting experts identified as Rose's, which matched records of bookie Ron Peters. Baseball Prospectus has published several articles on the continuing controversy over Rose, including a lengthy evaluation of baseball historian and Boston Red Sox analyst Bill James's criticisms of the Dowd Report. Rose has always denied that he has bet on baseball.
The agreement would secure a place on the Hall of Fame ballot for Rose as his eligibility window closes. Rose played his last season in 1986, and Hall of Fame eligibility rules require that a player appear within 20 years of the end of their playing career. There would be significant barriers to Rose appearing on the 2004 ballot, which would leave only one year of eligibility for election by voters at large. If Rose failed to be elected by a vote, he would have to be selected by the Veterans' Committee.
Agreed, completely. The thing is their are plenty of good stories right now that MLB could be pushing (have you seen the Marlins and their young crop lately?) to fix their image problems.
In this Abstract piece, James gave a very detailed account, with supporting evidence and documentation, of why Jackson was guilty. The thing about the triples was one of the reasons.
Personally, I think Joe Jackson probably should get a break after all these years ... especially if they let Rose back in. I've always figured that Joe Jackson, who had the intelligence of a retarded amoeba, got taken advantage of in a lot of ways, although bottom line one must take responsibility for his actions.
I just don't think it's accurate to say that he did nothing to throw that series, and if I can find which issue of the Abstract that piece by James is in I'll at least cite the year, there's no way I'm going to type in a three-page article.
For a second there I thought you were listing his qualifications to be an Episcopal Bishop.
Either way, America slips one notch further...
You have a valid point and I hope O.J. is never accepted or embraced. However, he gambled on baseball and has served (about 15 years or so) time for his misdeed. It's about time he gets parolled. O.J. gets life for murdering his wife (I know you stated the obvious difference)... but the two aren't even in the same category (to me).
Stay Safe !
The August 23, 1989 agreement ...
Apparently, "lifetime ban" in the phony (and rapidly declining) world of professional baseball means 15 years.
Baseball, after years of strikes and chicanery, is so desperate for heros that it's trying to resurrect the old ones, even the ones who are already corrupted.
That dog won't hunt! If I've got money riding on my team to win a game, I am going to do everything in my power to win that one game, even if it may cause me other games down the road. For example, I might overwork my closer to the point where come August and September, he's got nothing left when you really need him.
Can I be any more confusing?
I think given the circumstances you may be right. However, Sports should have a certain number of violations that if violated invoke the ban for life penalty.
But the moment you start betting for your team on somedays and not others, you are really betting against it on those others.
That is just dumb. What would be his incentive to lose games where he stood to gain no money for doing so?
SICK SICK SICK, but then we had X42 as pres so why not.
There's a commissioner who doesn't know his head from a hole in the ground, players who don't know if they're going or coming, increasing prices, continued strikes and work-stoppages, and egos a-plenty. Pete will fit right in.
I'm a long-time Rose fan; I want to see Charlie Hustle in the Hall for his accomplishments on the field. But to have him back "in baseball" managing? Nope.
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.