Report: Rose met with Selig to discuss reinstatement

AP via CNNSI.com ^ | 12/10/2002

[GeneD]

NEW YORK (AP) -- Pete Rose met with commissioner Bud Selig in Milwaukee two weeks ago discuss the career hits leader's possible reinstatement to baseball, according to news reports.

Nothing was agreed to during the meeting, including whether or not Rose would be reinstated, which would make him eligible for induction to the Hall of Fame, ESPN.com quoted unidentified sources as saying.

[Guillermo]

Let hm back in!!

[Chairman Fred]

Shoeless Joe Jackson first. Pete really did bet on his team while manager.

[Keith]

you know...there are some issues here which deserve comment...

1) Rose, while he may have bet on baseball, has never been accused of betting AGAINST his team if he did on a Reds game while he was managing the team.

2) knowing this, MLB has stated that he corrupted the sport by betting on baseball...

3) How many former coke-snorters are now in the Hall of Fame...and is that more acceptable than keeping out a gambling addict whose worst offense, is that he bet FOR his own team to win? MLB says its cuz he keeps lying about his problem...but as we all know, in today's world, it's ok to lie about your "personal behavior"...right? ;)

[Guillermo]

Don't know if Pete really bet on his own team. Did he admit to that?

[hchutch]

But his tenure as a player, though - setting the career record for hits - still warrants inclusion. The Hall of Fame is for the high points of the game. Players get in there for what they do on the field.

[Guillermo]

Betting FOR your own team is bad too.

For instance, if you bet one day and not another, what is it that you know about your own team that makes you lose confidence? It's not ethical.

It would be better if he bet every game, than just a few here and there.

[1Old Pro]

Betting on your own team to win.....what's wrong with that?

[Guillermo]

Consistency.

It's like insider trading if you're not betting all the time on them. One game you know something about your team that no one else does, another game you know you have an edge for whatever reason...

[pepsionice]

One of the accusations thrown around is that he did bet on Reds games...which is what the commissioner avoided making public. There are bits and pieces of the meeting between Rose and the commissioner years ago...that simply aren't talked about by either party. We have only what Pete will admit to or what MLB will discuss...and both seem to lacking in total honesty.

There are a lot of players, including Johnny Bench, who have said for Pete to simply come out and admit all...and Pete simply won't do it. I will admit that Bench is a bit naive on this whole business...but he has a point. Rose has never been totally honest with the fans...and perhaps thats just the way it will always be. I will admit that drug-users are in the hall of fame...as well as idiots. The hall of fame was intended to be a group of church-going saviors...simply the cream of the crop. I think we all miss that particuliar point. Perhaps its finally time that the fans take the hall of fame away from MLB and run it ourselves. WE couldn't do any worse than these idiots.

[Huck]

There should be no negotiations. What sort of admission comes with a quid pro quo? Tell him to jump in a lake. He should come clean with no promises or deals, otherwise, it is just Pete serving Pete, as usual.

[Cable225]

Let hm back in!!

Let me preface my comment by saying that I'm not replying to you directly.

On this forum the "majority" of posters will spare no passion railing against a variety of groups and individuals -

* Police officers or LEOs - for over-stepping their authority and ignoring laws
* The Clintons - for side-stepping, evading and generally flaunting their lawlessness
* Illegal immigrants - and the ranting usually includes the lack of law enforcement to deal with them
* The War on Drugs - for the compromises it makes on civil liberties and laws

And the list goes on; homosexuals, abortionists, criminals in general, yada yada yada. Without fail the central theme in these discussions are about laws of nature or man and the flaunting thereof.

But yet, the same people that can go on and on about real or imagined injustices in every other aspect of life will fall all over themselves defending Pete Rose and his quest to be re-instated into baseball. Pete Rose, who violated MLB rules by gambling on his own team and others, who was one of the first to charge fans for his autograph and memorabilia, who has never voiced an ounce of remorse for his actions. A singularly unrepentant, less likable, and less admirable sports figure does not exist today. If he was a liberal politician, I suspect the majority here would call for his lynching. Since he was a baseball player, those same people want him in the Hall of Fame.

It never fails to amaze me.

[jiggyboy]

IIRC, the explanation as to why a manager betting on your own team to win, even on every single game, is bad is that a clever manager could manipulate the way a series of game are played; for example, if the odds-makers expect the Reds to lose on Thursday, maybe the manager jiggles the line-up on Tue/Wed so that the best pitcher now has an extra day of rest, etc.

Possible, I suppose, but we're talking about trying to overcome the randomness of human competition, not a new way to stamp out a million widgets of the same size.

I say let him in the Hall anyway.

[Charles Henrickson]

Betting on baseball is the absolute worst thing a player or manager could do, much worse than using drugs--and I am totally opposed to using drugs! Betting on baseball would absolutely destroy the integrity of the game itself. (Whether for or against your team--it would directly affect how you play that game and indirectly affect the games that follow.)

That said, if Rose would come clean, and after these many years of exile, I would not necessarily be opposed to letting him in the HoF. Based on what he achieved on the field, he certainly deserves it.

[Alberta's Child]

There was an interesting thread on this topic about six months ago. A lot of the details of Rose's agreement with Bart Giamatti have never been made public, and based on what I've seen I don't think Rose should ever be re-instated. He should be eligible for the Hall of Fame after he dies, though.

Part of the agreement he signed was that major league baseball would not make public any of the evidence it had gathered against him. Rose was not concerned about his public image -- he just didn't want to face tax evasion charges for all of his unreported gambling proceeds. He began clamoring for reinstatement as soon as the statute of limitations on these crimes expired.

[stilts]

Betting on your own team to win.....what's wrong with that?

The problem is that gambing for many is an addiction. (It certainly sounded as if it had become that for Pete.) In the end gamblers lose. It is designed that way mathimatically.

As losses mount the influence of organized crime becomes a real issue. A manager/player facing huge losses could easily be blackmailed into effecting the outcome of games.

This is the reason Baseball takes a much dimmer view of gambling then drugs. One reflects on the integrity of the player mostly, while the other reflects on the integrity of the game at large. The commissioners office is more concerned with the health of the company (MLB) then the health of any given player.