Pete Rose????????????

Question

Do you think Pete Rose should be allowed in the Baseball's hall of fame? why or why not

Answer 1

No, although I was a fan of his as a child growing up,  he broke the number one rule of baseball and did it knowingly and willingly with no remorse. What a sad person he truly is.

Answer 2

No because he broke the GOLDEN RULE. I know he was a great player but still if you break a rule your out of the race. The same thing happened to Barry Bonds he took steroids and so he isn't allowed in the Hall Of Fame.  

Answer 3

He should be let in because what he did as a player has nothing to do with what he did while he was a manager.  Sure, betting on the sport you play is a bad idea, and he should be scorned for that.  And yeah, I don't really like him.  But he is no doubt one of the best players to ever play the game, and because of that, he should definitely be in the hall of fame.

Answer 4

Nope. He cheated his way to the Hall of Fame.  

Answer 5

Absolutely not.

It never ceases to amaze me why people don't understand the facts in this case.

1. Pete Rose bet on baseball.

2. The punishment for betting on baseball is to be declared permanently ineligible.

3. Players who are permanently ineligible are not allowed to be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

For those of you who for some reason can't understand these simple reasons, I will explain.

Pete Rose has admitted to betting on baseball games involving the reds while he was the manager. This despite the fact that he would have seen the very large sign that is prominently displayed in every single major league clubhouse that clearly states that it is against the rules, and also clearly explains what the punishment is. Rose played in or managed in about 4500 major league games, so I seriously doubt he did not know the rule. he simply chose to break it, thinking that he either wouldn't get caught or that he would be let off simply because he was the one and only Pete Rose, and Pete Rose is certainly more important then any rule could possibly be. This was not, as some people will surely say, a "mistake", but a deliberate breaking of the most sacred rule in sports. But he continually broke the rule. The rule does not state that this rule does not apply to a player with over 4000 hits, it does not state that the punishment is different for managers than for players, and it does not specify that the rule is different if you only bet on your team to win. Plain and simple, the rule is very clear cut.

Whether or not someone like a Bonds or Clemens gets into the Hlall is completely irrelevant to Rose's case. The bottom line is that baseball now has a disciplinary plan in place for players who test positive. While it is not a great rule until HGH can be tested for, it is the rule they have. And players will be punished according to that rule.

The argument that players like Cobb (an unbelievable racist) or Ruth (a drunk and a womanizer) are in the Hall also holds no merit for the simple reason that being a racist, a drunk or a womanizer is not now, nor has it ecer been, against the rules set forth by MLB. If ti were, the Hall would certainly have a lot fewer members, as I would bet that a good number of the Southern gentlemen who played the game even into the 60's were pretty racist, and we all know that more then a few ballplayers have had a weakness for the opposite s*x.

Also you cannot simply separate Rose the manager from Rose the player. There is only one Pete Rose, and he screwed himself.

You also can not argue that he deserves to be in because he is the all time leader inhits. There is a place that that is recognized - it's called the record book. His stats are still there, and will always be there. So to claim that he is not given recognition for his achievements is just plain silly.

There are only 3 things that will ever make Rose worthy of the Hall of Fame. The first is that he somehow magically becomes completely innocent. And since he has admitted to betting on games, that obviously will never happen. Another thing would be for "permanent" to actually expire. Rose's ban was not for a lifetime, it was not for a fixed amount of time, and it was certainly not based on when public opinion would change. it was permanent. as in forever. And finally, the hall of Fame could possibly change it's rules.

Don't hold your breath for any of those events to occur. And I am certainly glad that they won't.

Answer 6

He deserves to be in stat wise, but he was booted from baseball which makes him ineligible. I think he should be allowed in, but if you do so, then you have to let Joe Jackson and maybe Eddie Cicotte in.

I dont think what Rose did was that bad. Apparantly Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker ( 2 of the best ever) were involved in fixing games and the commish at the time found out but sort of swept in under the rug.

I'd like to see him get in, because I want to see Shoeless Joe get in.  

Answer 7

If he ever honestly apologizes and admits that what he did was wrong, then baseball should re-instate him so he can go into the hall, but he should not be allowed to be associated with a big league team as a manager or front office employee.

Answer 8

i think wat barry bonds did was worse so if he gets in then rose should also.

Answer 9

he should because even though he did gamble, and was banned from baseball, he apologized for what he did. even if it took him years to do it, he manned up and did it. he is the all time leader in hits, so yes he should be in the HOF.

Answer 10

If we are going to let the rest of the cheaters, crooks, wife beaters and drug doers in then why not Pete? He has more hits than ANY PLAYER EVER!!!! And he didn't use steroids to do it. Baseball is so hypocritical to say that they will allow players from this current era with roids being so out of control in the hall but not Pete.

Sheesh.

Answer 11

Stat wise, yes but he bet on baseball and that is the worst thing you can do in sports if you're a player.

Answer 12

yes beacuse he did not use enhancers to get those numbers