The Return of Pete Rose(Exclusive--He's Back in Baseball in 2004)

baseball prospectus ^ | Aug. 12, 2003 | Derek Zumsteg and Will Carroll

[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.

[over3Owithabrain]

please see my post 62 and substitute Bryant with Clinton.

[Khurkris]

Thank You very much

I will work with this

It will be handy

[xzins]

ROTFLOL!

:>)

[Fury]

You hit the nail right on the head. There is way too much being made by some on the "well, he did not bet on his team to lose" line of thinking. Monkey muffins. He made odd managing decisions on a game to game basis when he was betting on the Reds to win. He had a little more than the Red's best interests in mind.

He does not deserve to be in the HOF.

[Cooter]

When Rose was allowed on the field as part of the All Century Team in 1999, he was given a 5 minute standing ovation - the longest of any player. This was remarkable considering all the HOF players who were also there (in Atlanta - including Hank Aaron).

In game 4 of the 2002 World Series, Rose was part of a ceremony marking the 10 greatest moments in baseball history. He received a 70 second standing ovation, which was cut off prematurely by the organizers on the field.

Perhaps the fans in attendance on these two occasions aren't part of your "true fan base".

[Michael.SF.]

Pete Rose once said:

'A perfect game? That's when I go 4 for 4, the Reds win and no one gets hurt'

Testimony to his 'perfection':

Pete Rose and Ray Fosse - 1970 All-Star Game

Ray Fosse was at the zenith of his career, but never again was able to match the numbers of that season in 1970. To his credit Ray Fosse never held a grudge for the shot that Pete Rose took on him, which resulted in injury and won the game for the National League.

Baseball is played to win, and Rose played to win all the time, even in a meaningless exhibition game*. Pete Rose was a winner at the plate, but he was a loser in his personal life and in trying to live up to the ideals he once spouted.

Ray Fosse does not hold the career numbers to be in the HoF, but he certainly was a better man then Pete Rose.

--------------------

* 'meaningless game' - Inspite of the importance of history to baseball, the All-Star Game is essentually simply a matter of pride and holds no $ignificant meaning to the player$. Many of whom would rather be home then play. Making the All-Star team may hold $ome incentive$, but by 1970, it held none for Pete Rose.

[jimkress]

A sad commentary on our society.

If you break the rules you should be punished. However, in today's society, if you break the rules it doesn't matter. Indeed, it appears that if you break the rules, you are rewarded for it.

There is no question that Rose intentionally undermined the integrity of baseball by betting on games. Rose accepted a life time ban as punishment for his unprincipled and indefensible behavior. But now, due to his incessant whining and that of his unprincipled and amoral supporters, Rose is being allowed to thumb his nose at the rules and the integrity of the game.

So, along with the restoration of Rose, Major League Baseball (MLB) should rescind its ban on players, managers, etc. gambling on games. Since MLB has admitted it has no integrity, by restoring Rose, it should admit the games have no integrity either.

[xzins]

When I grew up that's the way they played baseball.

If they're less aggressive today, then perhaps that explains why fewer people watch.

Maybe they can even quit the All-Star game in late innings before the game is done. That'll be sure to make me watch it.

[visualops]

My first thought upon reading this was what about Shoeless Joe!!

[Paladin2b]

When Rose was allowed on the field as part of the All Century Team in 1999, he was given a 5 minute standing ovation - the longest of any player. This was remarkable considering all the HOF players who were also there (in Atlanta - including Hank Aaron). In game 4 of the 2002 World Series, Rose was part of a ceremony marking the 10 greatest moments in baseball history. He received a 70 second standing ovation, which was cut off prematurely by the organizers on the field. Perhaps the fans in attendance on these two occasions aren't part of your "true fan base".

So what? So friggin' what? By that criteria, Clinton should never have had to be accountable or impeached, because, after all, polls showed he had a majority of Americans approving of his job performace, and loads of cheering crowds when he made appearances.

[PBRSTREETGANG]

But your point is valid.

I guess I see it differently. As much as I despise OJ and think he should fry, I don't see his crime as one that impacted on the integrity of the game.

Pete's betting on baseball, while he was managing, clearly did. I can't believe that they would consider letting him manage again in 2005.

[RGSpincich]

Ray, quick turn off the lights. That prick Ty Cobb is coming and he's bringing Pete Rose.

[OldFriend]

I was equating the statement that this will bring lots of attention to baseball.......as no different than the Cuban comment that Bryant's rape charge will bring people to watch the basketball games.

[OldFriend]

Betting slips proved beyond a doubt that Rose bet on baseball. He denied that he ever bet on games he was managing at the time.

The deal was that he would agree to the ban and the evidence of his betting on games he was managing would not be brought forward.

[Zack Nguyen]

Do you have documentation for that? Did he admit he bet on baseball recently, like in the last year? Because until he has expressed a little remorse, he shouldn't be let back in anywhere.

[Zack Nguyen]

I understand your feelings - I am a long-suffering Ranger fan myself, and am raising my kids around baseball.

(I think the "no betting" on other sports rule was stupid.)

It really isn't if you think about it. Giving a large, organized group of people a direct financial interest in a game, and by definition the possibility exists to break all laws to ensure an outcome. Once that happens, the game is hardly worth watching. Rose contributed to the "action" on a given game, thereby raising the stakes for other more vicious players in the same market.

[xzins]

I don't see how Pete betting on football made a bit of difference to baseball.

[Ray Kinsella]

Perhaps the fans in attendance on these two occasions aren't part of your "true fan base".

You may be right, that is why I said it should be explored. Even with those two events--where all those fans regulars? That might be the only game they go to: like all the corporates at the Super Bowl every year.

[rs79bm]

Even if he did bet on the game, he still had to go out there and perform. He was a great player in his time.

[Zack Nguyen]

He has paid for his sins...

No - he won't confess what he has done.