I was a Pete Rose HOF advocate, until...

[fan_since79]

The Phillies have canceled their Wall of Fame ceremony honoring Rose.

http://www.theintell.com/sports/phillies/phillies-cancel-pete-rose-ceremony-after-allegations/article_91af57e2-399a-51f9-8a5d-2b792ecb0ab2.html

[Dtwncbad]

22 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

They recognize his being the all times hits leader.  They haven't stricken his name from the record books, they have his Reds and Phillies unis as well as his bats in the HOF.   So, if someone is looking for him, the memory of Pete Rose IS in the HOF...  

He's just not a HOFer.

  

The Hall of Fame has room after room of interesting stuff and memorabilia and displays.  Then you go into the rooms that is focused singularly, without any distractions, on "this is the group of players who were the greatest of all time."

Not including Rose in that room, like it or not, despite Rose personally feeling rewarded or deprived, makes tjat room historically inaccurate.

It's a subject people will disagree over forever, but here is the point I attempt to make.

When push comes to shove, being historically accurate should take priority over trying to emotionally punish Rose.  I don't care how he feels either way.

Imagine it this way.  If baseball had some other lousy player that they really wanted to punish, and they truly believed putting them IN the Hall of Fame would do the trick. . .should they do It?

Of course this is a silly what if.  I'm just using it to underscore my opinion that exclusion or inclusion is a pretty stupid thing to be used as a punishment when it really is a sidenote that players personally feel rewarded for being elected.  I think being historically accurate should drive it.

The argument that Rose is "there" in the other rooms of novelty and memorabilia means very little.  So is Mark Whiten for hitting 4 homers in a game.

That one room is the most important room and just be accurate.  Tell the truth on the plaque.  Pick words that make Pete's head explode in anger if you want, as long as they are accurate.

 

[Tank]

19 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

Rose has been a real lout about it ..   The dude basically called everyone else liars.  He's about as shitty a human being as you can find in a non murdering POS.

Yep, he's been his own worst enemy.

part of me would advocate for his reinstatement to baseball the day after he dies, and then the hall can do whatever it wants. But the fact that MLB STILL hasn't reinstated Shoeless Joe, with pretty good evidence that he wasn't involved in the WS scandal, doesn't bode well for Rose. 

MLB needs to reinstate Shoeless Joe. He belongs in the Hall.

[ten ocho recon scout]

3 hours ago, Stradling said:

Yep, that's all he did.  He placed one bet on one baseball game.

For his sake, i hope it was on the rangers in the 2011 series.

[Lou]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

The Hall of Fame has room after room of interesting stuff and memorabilia and displays.  Then you go into the rooms that is focused singularly, without any distractions, on "this is the group of players who were the greatest of all time."

Not including Rose in that room, like it or not, despite Rose personally feeling rewarded or deprived, makes tjat room historically inaccurate.

It's a subject people will disagree over forever, but here is the point I attempt to make.

When push comes to shove, being historically accurate should take priority over trying to emotionally punish Rose.  I don't care how he feels either way.

Imagine it this way.  If baseball had some other lousy player that they really wanted to punish, and they truly believed putting them IN the Hall of Fame would do the trick. . .should they do It?

Of course this is a silly what if.  I'm just using it to underscore my opinion that exclusion or inclusion is a pretty stupid thing to be used as a punishment when it really is a sidenote that players personally feel rewarded for being elected.  I think being historically accurate should drive it.

The argument that Rose is "there" in the other rooms of novelty and memorabilia means very little.  So is Mark Whiten for hitting 4 homers in a game.

That one room is the most important room and just be accurate.  Tell the truth on the plaque.  Pick words that make Pete's head explode in anger if you want, as long as they are accurate.

 

It's not merely the HOF deciding to "emotionally punish" Rose.

There is a set rule. A rule that every player, manager and coach know, without exception. There is also a set penalty if you break the rule. Again, a penalty that every player, manager and coach knows, without exception.

He decided to break the rule (over and over and over...) knowing full well that his punishment would be a lifetime banishment. He was caught and MLB dolled out his punishment - a punishment Rose agreed to. 

It would be worse if they bent the rules for Rose because he was a great player. After all, if he hadn't been HOF worthy, a reinstatement wouldn't even be mentioned. What happens when the next guy is caught? Does he get a pass, too, or is that benefit reserved solely for HOF caliber players? 

 

[Dtwncbad]

2 hours ago, Lou said:

It's not merely the HOF deciding to "emotionally punish" Rose.

There is a set rule. A rule that every player, manager and coach know, without exception. There is also a set penalty if you break the rule. Again, a penalty that every player, manager and coach knows, without exception.

He decided to break the rule (over and over and over...) knowing full well that his punishment would be a lifetime banishment. He was caught and MLB dolled out his punishment - a punishment Rose agreed to. 

It would be worse if they bent the rules for Rose because he was a great player. After all, if he hadn't been HOF worthy, a reinstatement wouldn't even be mentioned. What happens when the next guy is caught? Does he get a pass, too, or is that benefit reserved solely for HOF caliber players? 

 

I understand your position.

If you understood mine you would know why what you wrote above has literally nothing to do with my position.

I have no issue, at all, with Rose never being allowed to work in baseball or ever be allowed to even attend a game.  Starve him of a ceremony and never let him set foot there. . .whatever.

I just stop short of sacrificing historical accuracy.

I smell an element of deliberately punishing Rose personally in all of it and my opinion is that is worthless if it is at the expense of accuracy.

Rose is a jerk and if he were in the HOF he would probably get off on it.

But I don't care what Rose feels in this context and it feels pretty undisciplined to even consider it.

Does Rose "win" or "get away with it" if there is a bust of him there?  What in his brain?

I can't make myself assign any weight to that at all.

 

[ten ocho recon scout]

3 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

 

Rose is a jerk and if he were in the HOF he would probably get off on it.

 

 

I dont know about that. The hall of fame is a bunch of old men, not chicks with braces.

[Lou]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

I understand your position.

If you understood mine you would know why what you wrote above has literally nothing to do with my position.

I have no issue, at all, with Rose never being allowed to work in baseball or ever be allowed to even attend a game.  Starve him of a ceremony and never let him set foot there. . .whatever.

I just stop short of sacrificing historical accuracy.

I smell an element of deliberately punishing Rose personally in all of it and my opinion is that is worthless if it is at the expense of accuracy.

Rose is a jerk and if he were in the HOF he would probably get off on it.

But I don't care what Rose feels in this context and it feels pretty undisciplined to even consider it.

Does Rose "win" or "get away with it" if there is a bust of him there?  What in his brain?

I can't make myself assign any weight to that at all.

 

i understand your positon and i disagree. He is banned from baseball and that includes the HOF. He's lucky there is any mention of him at all. 

Question: are all of these "greatest players" members of the HOF? 

The only things that were deliberately orchestrated were Rose's gambling on baseball, including betting on his own team's games, and his lying about it for 15 years. 

[IEAngelsfan]

11 hours ago, California Cajun said:

How many of you date back to the 50s and 60s with Dick Lane hosting wrestling and Freddie Blassie, Mr. Moto, Bo Bo Brazil, and others!  Whoa Nellie!

It's kind of like Pete Rose moving from the baseball class to the seemy underworld of wrestling class with his transgressions.  Requiem for a gambler.

I was a big wrestling fan as a kid.  I remember going to the Olympic Auditorium in downtown L.A. to watch a wrestling show.  Mr. Moto, who was always a bad dirty mean wrestler, was on the card that day. As he made his entrance and was walking down the aisle, people started to boo him, but he did something totally unexpected.  As he walked toward the ring, he was cheerfully and happily greeting fans, signing autographs and shaking hands.  Initially I didn't understand what he was doing, but then I realized it was all fake.  Well, I was shattered.  It was comparable to finding out Santa Claus was not real.

That was the day I was no longer a wrestling fan.

[Dtwncbad]

5 minutes ago, Lou said:

i understand your positon and i disagree. He is banned from baseball and that includes the HOF. He's lucky there is any mention of him at all. 

Question: are all of these "greatest players" members of the HOF? 

The only things that were deliberately orchestrated were Rose's gambling on baseball, including betting on his own team's games, and his lying about it for 15 years. 

It was also quite deliberately orchestrated to add the HOF to what was covered in a lifetime ban after he agreed to a lifetime ban.

Pete is a piece of garbage, but that was wasn't on the up and up.

 

[Lou]

14 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

It was also quite deliberately orchestrated to add the HOF to what was covered in a lifetime ban after he agreed to a lifetime ban.

Is that what occured? Or does the HOF always take what mlb decides into consider once that decision is made? It's not like they were going to ban him before mlb gave him the lifetime ban 

[Lou]

As to your question: " Does Rose "win" or "get away with it" if there is a bust of him there?", I would say yes. It is, and always has been, the single most important thing in his life for some 20 years. He sure as hell wouldn't see it as a loss.

 

[Junkballer]

On 8/2/2017 at 5:13 PM, Dtwncbad said:

 

I just stop short of sacrificing historical accuracy.

I smell an element of deliberately punishing Rose personally in all of it and my opinion is that is worthless if it is at the expense of accuracy.

 

I'm not with you on the accuracy thing.  The hall is not like the periodic table.  It is a club.  Being that he was never admitted, nothing about his career changes, so nothing becomes inaccurate.  He still had the career he had which is well documented.  He is just denied an honor. 

[Angels#1Fan]

Pete Rose broke the golden rule and gambled on baseball then lied about it for something like 15 years all while thumbing his nose at the game. 

This alone is more than enough for a lifetime ban.

There are probably many a-holes in the HOF but this isn't about Roses personal problems, it's about breaking the rules that every kid in America has been aware of since the Black Sox scandal.

Rose bet on baseball and lied about it..that's more than enough to ban him from the HOF and to kick him out of baseball forever.

He has no one to blame but himself.