The
Pete Rose subject and whether to reinstate him or keep him banned from baseball
for life is a touchy subject and one that is prone to incite rioting and
arguments among baseball fans regardless of their team affiliations. Some,
including myself, see a different society today where sports betting is not
frowned upon and see little wrong with what Rose did in the grand scheme of
things. He wasn’t throwing games, he was trying to win games, and did not alter
the game in any shape or form on days he bet then on days when he didn’t. Some
still think he disgraced the game and shouldn’t be allowed back into the game
ever including one investigator who
We
all know the rule, Major League Baseball Constitution, Rule 21, Section (d)
subsection (2). You don’t bet on the game of baseball while you’re employed by
Major League Baseball. Rose screwed up and no one can or will deny that.
Especially John Dowd, the former special counsel to the Commissioner of
Baseball, the man hired to probe the gambling allegations and the man who led
the investigation who interviewed him for two days straight recently. The fact
that Rose could have wiped his slate clean had he admitted to the betting back
in 1989. If the league was willing to let Rose get by with just therapy then,
why is this such an issue and such a legal hurdle now?
Dowd
uses terms like “traitor” and “disgraced the game of baseball” like Rose was
Shoeless Joe Jackson and it’s an absolute shame. Pete Rose in no way should be
the poster child for Major League Baseball but he shouldn’t be the black sheep
either.
I
have a feeling this story isn’t going to be going away any time soon Yankees
family. Whether you’re on the side of reinstatement or upholding the lifetime
ban I think we are all going to be sick and tired of hearing about it before it
is all said and done.
Keep in mind that Pete didn't break a little-known rule in MLB. He broke a rule that was plastered in every clubhouse for every team (literally). He absolutely KNEW that what he was doing was wrong. Think of it like how a lot of people don't believe players that used steroids should ever get into the HOF.
ReplyDeleteHowever, with that said, I'm beginning to lean towards letting him back. No, he did not "disgrace' the game. Baseball is a great game, and no one person could ever scar it. Not even the entire 1919 Chicago White Sox could bring down the greatest game in the World.
On that note, regardless of the movie Field of Dreams, I don't believe "Shoeless" Joe Jackson was in on things. He did hit .375 /.394/.563 during the World Series, while hitting the team's only HR and knocking in the team's most RBI (6). If that's sandbagging it, can you imagine would he could have done if he tried. Yikes!
Back to Pete...
He made the mistake, he paid the price for a long time, and he's admitted what he did was wrong. Perhaps forgiving Pete would allow him and the game to move on, and concentrate on what he did on the field... the thing that matters most.
Like I said in the article, MLB gave him an out back in the 80's and all he had to do was admit it. He obviously declined that like a moron but come on. If he could get away with it with a stern look and a warning then then how is it a disgrace and how does it make him a traitor to the game now? You know?
ReplyDelete