Power Pros Forum https://www.mlbppworld.com/ |
|
Pete Rose https://www.mlbppworld.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3436 |
Page 1 of 3 |
Author: | Chief [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:45 am ] |
Post subject: | Pete Rose |
Should the All Time Hits Leader be in the Baseball HoF? Personally I think yes, but mostly because he was the symbol of Cincinnati baseball for so many years. Discuss, and no trolling. ![]() |
Author: | Me_and_Lucy [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:57 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
Yes, but only if he is cleared. He was caught betting on games and thus all this happened. If he is elected, I think there would be a "*" next to his name. |
Author: | Chief [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:59 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
Me_and_Lucy wrote: Yes, but only if he is cleared. He was caught betting on games and thus all this happened. If he is elected, I think there would be a "*" next to his name. I would hope not, because betting on baseball doesn't improve his performance on the field. Steroids do. Betting on Baseball and Steroids are not the same thing, thus should not be grouped together. |
Author: | theyankeesfan011 [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:08 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
I dont think he should be able to manage, be a gm, or own a team etc. but he should be able to be in the HOF. |
Author: | Me_and_Lucy [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:28 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
Chief wrote: Me_and_Lucy wrote: Yes, but only if he is cleared. He was caught betting on games and thus all this happened. If he is elected, I think there would be a "*" next to his name. I would hope not, because betting on baseball doesn't improve his performance on the field. Steroids do. Betting on Baseball and Steroids are not the same thing, thus should not be grouped together. But Bed Selig says he would never allow him back as long as he is in charge. So we have to wait till 2012. |
Author: | [bb] [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:23 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
A Great and Glorious Game: Baseball Writings of A. Bartlett Giamatti concludes with the public statement the commissioner released explaining his decision to permanently ban Pete Rose. In order to begin to have an informed opinion on the matter, you have to first read it. Rose claimed to have bet on his Reds every night, but John Dowd, the investigator, contended that Rose didn't bet on his Reds on the days that some of his pitchers started. This means that Rose did not have an incentive to try to win those games, which amounts to trying to lose them on purpose. Then consider that Rose denied the allegations for fifteen years. In 2004, he finally admitted his guilt in order to boost sales of his autobiography. The timing was questionable. Had he been re-instated at that time, he would've been eligible to appear on the writers' ballot for the next three years. Apart from the actual transgression, Rose's actions regarding it have been deceitful and selfish. To lift his ban and elect him to the Hall of Fame would be a mockery of the ideals and integrity of baseball that Giamatti was trying to uphold. That Rose is the career hits leader and a Cincinnati icon is completely irrelevant. As the commissioner wrote, "no individual is superior to the game". |
Author: | theyankeesfan011 [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:33 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
no it wouldnt the man is the ALL TIME hits leader all he did was bet on baseball people do that every day so because he actually played the sport he gets band from baseball Selig has no idea wat hes doin |
Author: | dishnet34 [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:36 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
NO! For people that are part of MLB, that is considered cheating. It is against the rules and he knew that. |
Author: | theyankeesfan011 [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:39 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
i think people who have taken steroids should be band from the game not someone who bet that is only minor compared to steroids and HGH |
Author: | [bb] [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 11:55 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
I don't understand lax attitudes regarding breaking rules. Rose knowingly broke a major rule. He voluntarily accepted assignment to the permanent ineligible list in order to avoid further investigation. And I say it again, you must read Giamatti's statement. He clearly and eloquently stated his reasons for banning Rose. If you don't know what those were, you're missing a major part of what's necessary to understand the lifetime ban. |
Author: | gocubs09 [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:00 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
Chief wrote: Should the All Time Hits Leader be in the Baseball HoF? Personally I think yes, but mostly because he was the symbol of Cincinnati baseball for so many years. I agree. Now Barry Bonds shouldn't be in the hall, and Hank Aaron should still be HR King ![]() |
Author: | Osfan81 [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 5:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
They should have a " Hall of Shame" in the Hall of Fame for him and some of the other cheaters. |
Author: | gocubs09 [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:23 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
Osfan81 wrote: They should have a " Hall of Shame" in the Hall of Fame for him and some of the other cheaters. Barry Bonds, Sammy Soso, and A-Roid would be the first of our generation ![]() |
Author: | Chief [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
gocubs09 wrote: Osfan81 wrote: They should have a " Hall of Shame" in the Hall of Fame for him and some of the other cheaters. Barry Bonds, Sammy Soso, and A-Roid would be the first of our generation ![]() First Ballot: Bonds, MacGuire, Canseco |
Author: | Osfan81 [ Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Pete Rose |
Now this is the real Home Run King. http://sports.jrank.org/pages/3487/Oh-S ... stics.html |
Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |