Pete Rose: Should his lifetime ban be reconsidered?
In a word the answer to the question is ABSOLUTELY. Pete Rose’s lifetime ban from Major League Baseball and consequently his eligibility for the National Baseball Hall of Fame should be reconsidered.
I’ve always wanted to write a piece on Pete Rose. He’s a complicated character. His exploits are even more complicated and people’s opinions of him range from one end of the spectrum to the other and everywhere in between. He’s hated, he’s beloved, he’s looked down upon, he’s respected. It’s one of baseball’s strangest and most debatable stories.
It’s been 25 years. It really is time to take a look at this situation and do something about it before Rose gets older and possibly leaves this world. Reinstating him posthumously would honor his accomplishments, yes, but who doesn’t want to hear Pete Rose give a speech at his possible Hall of Fame induction. Come on, you know you want to hear some crazy speech from “Charlie Hustle.” I know I do.
Personally I am a firm believer that Pete Rose should be reinstated into MLB and become eligible to be voted into the Hall of Fame. There are so many reasons for and against this argument.
I know that Pete Rose did in fact break a cardinal and official rule that is posted in every clubhouse in MLB. It is well documented that he bet on the game in the Dowd Report. Rule 21 was made official in 1927 by baseball’s first commissioner, the one appointed to clean up the game after eight members of the team now known as the Chicago “Black Sox” threw the 1919 World Series, Kenesaw Mountain Landis. Rule 21, specifically sections (a) and (d) state,
"(a) Any player or person connected with a club who shall promise or agree to lose, or to attempt to lose, or to fail to give his best efforts towards the winning of any baseball game with which he is or may be in any way concerned; or who shall intentionally fail to give his best efforts towards the winning of any such baseball game, or who shall solicit or attempt to induce any player or person connected with a club to lose, or attempt to lose, or to fail to give his best efforts towards the winning of any baseball game with which such other player or person is or may be in any way connected; or who, being solicited by any person, shall fail to inform his Major League President and the Commissioner.(d) Any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible.(a) Any player or person connected with a club who shall promise or agree to lose, or to attempt to lose, or to fail to give his best efforts towards the winning of any baseball game with which he is or may be in any way concerned; or who shall intentionally fail to give his best efforts towards the winning of any such baseball game, or who shall solicit or attempt to induce any player or person connected with a club to lose, or attempt to lose, or to fail to give his best efforts towards the winning of any baseball game with which such other player or person is or may be in any way connected; or who, being solicited by any person, shall fail to inform his Major League President and the Commissioner.(d) Any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible."
Alright so I know he broke this rule. How can I possibly believe that he should be allowed reinstatement?
There are a number of reasons and they begin with the rule itself. It doesn’t account for situations or circumstances to what was happening around the person or in their life or the time period that it is happening in. The climate of a certain time period can influence the way people act.
Maybe that fact doesn’t matter to some people who see a broken rule as just that, a rule has been broken and the person must pay. I just don’t believe that anything in life is truly that black and white.
For one thing Rose had an obvious addiction to gambling. Addictions of any kind turn even the best people into liars, sometimes worse. That’s a fact. Yes, Rose gambled on the game and yes he lied about it for a long time. Was that the right thing to do? No.
Were there circumstances possibly beyond his control that pushed him to gamble, to lie? An addiction to gambling is no different than an addiction to alcohol or an addiction for cocaine.
If people with addictions were all kicked out of baseball for life we’d be missing out on some of the sports greatest players. Babe Ruth was, for all intents and purposes, an alcoholic. Should Babe Ruth not be in the Hall of Fame? I think most people would agree that the idea of banning Babe Ruth from baseball is completely insane.
There is also the fact that Pete Rose played his heart out in every game. He genuinely loves baseball. No one can argue that. That takes him out of the category of the eight members of the 1919 Chicago White Sox. Some of them intentionally played poorly in order to lose the ball game and profit from it.
It’s only natural for anyone with an appreciation of baseball history to reflect on the past 25 years and what Rose has lost — what we’ve all lost, really. No one enjoys talking baseball more than Pete does, and very few have a more genuine connection with the average sports fan. Rose’s deceptions and lapses in judgment have deprived the game of a tailor-made ambassador. – Jerry Crasnik
Rose was just a gambler who, like the average human being, had lapses in judgement. The evidence points to the fact that when he bet on the Cincinnati Reds, the team he had played for and that he currently managed (he was a player-manager from 1984-1986), a team he could have manipulated to try to lose, when he was banned for life, he bet for the Reds to win the game every time.
In making his case of why Rose should remain banned in an article for Baseball Prospectus, Derek Zumsteg cites the Dowd report as showing the fact that Rose always bet for the Reds and not against them, proving that he was not in anyway throwing the game.
Besides that Rose loved to win. He’s played in more winning games than any player in MLB history, his nickname “Charlie Hustle” indicates that it was obvious he played his heart out no matter what even when a game, like the 1970 All-Star game when he bowled over American League catcher Ray Fosse at home plate, didn’t matter.
Back then the outcome of the All-Star game did not give home field advantage to the league that won, it really was supposed to be all for show and fun. Pete Rose played in 17 All-Star games and he always wanted to win.
When he gambled, I am as certain as anyone can be that he wanted his team to win. He wanted his team to win even when he wasn’t gambling on the game. Isn’t that the point of competition at any level?
Pete Rose holds so many National League and MLB records that the list is almost exhausting to read. Most importantly Rose is Major League Baseball’s all-time hits leader with 4,256 hits. He deserves to be in the Hall of Fame or at the very least he deserves a chance to be elected by the members of the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA).
"“As a baseball writer and Hall of Fame voter, I have no direct role in Rose’s ultimate fate. Two years after Rose went on baseball’s ineligible list in 1989, the Hall’s board of directors decreed that players with that distinction could no longer appear on the ballot for induction. So even if the voters are inclined to forgive Rose, they’ve never been given an opportunity.”"
I believe that they should at least be given the opportunity to see Rose’s name on a ballot. The BBWAA writers have the opportunity to vote for people who used performance enhancing drugs (PEDs) like Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire whose level of cheating is, in my opinion, almost up there with throwing a baseball game except they used drugs that gave them an unfair advantage to win.
Still even the usage of PEDs was a product of the environment and the times in which these players were competing, which is why it doesn’t seem entirely fair to lump them into a category with men who intentionally threw a World Series to win.
The World Series is a sacred baseball honor to play in and not playing your best in it, on purpose and for money for that matter, is the biggest insult to the game that there is.
If players that use PEDs are not held to the standard of those that threw the World Series, why should Pete Rose be held to that standard? If there was clear and complete evidence that he threw a game and got others to help him so that he could profit from it, then I would be singing a completely different tune.
Each major “crime” against the game was in a different time period. As time moves forward many things change. I believe things should change for Rose. A new MLB Commissioner will be in office this January. Pete Rose will turn 74 in April. I hope that Rob Manfred, the Commissioner-elect, will as one of his first acts as the leader of Major League Baseball reinstate Pete Rose. As I previously stated I would hate to see it happen posthumously.
It’s been 25 years, Pete Rose has paid for his crimes. He’s been banned from the game he so much loves for nearly a third of his life. He’s been to prison, something the members of the “Black Sox” never had to endure. He’s finally come clean about his actions and he is the all-time hits leader.
Being the all-time hits leader is the one enormous reason that Pete Rose not being eligible for the Hall of Fame simply cannot be ignored. He leads every single player to have ever played the game in hits! He has so many other accomplishments as well that should be honored. He did them as a player, without the use of PEDs and technically before he became addicted to gambling.
Rose is being held to a higher standard than other players and that just doesn’t sit right with me.