Pete Rose in the HOF? Yes or no?

I didn't know that. That's very cool.

By all accounts, O'Connell is a helluva guy.

 

Agreed. One of my closest friends.

 

dude, I don't claim. I vote. You don't. That ends any and all controversy. Get a life and leave me alone. Please.

 

How about a new poll with three options:
1. In.
2. Out.
3. In with his ban noted on his plaque but he can still never work in baseball again.

Is No. 3 the compromise that a majority could come to grips with?

 

Should be in, but I'll take option 3.

 

Thaks, so MLB isn't responsible for Rose's exclusion from the HOF, if the BBWAA and the Board of the HOF decide to change the rule put into effect in 1991, MLB is powerless to keep Rose out.

 

Gambled. On. Baseball.

Seriously, end of thread. Everything else is just B.S.

 

So did Ty Cobb. So did Tris Speaker.

 

I would say out.

It was my understanding that the thing with Cobb and Speaker (and somebody correct me if they know for certain the facts because I'm doing this on my memory of reading baseball history) was a situation like this - Detroit won one prearranged game so they could finish second and Speaker's team - I think it was still Cleveland at that point - won another game so they could finish third. At the time, players on second-place and third-place teams would receive money for finishing second and third. I know this practice continued at least until the 1960s, because I can recall reading in the Sporting News about players who were voted post-season shares and they would publish the lists. In the 1960s, I think players got something like $1,800 when their team finished second - obviously much less than a losing World Series share but $1,800 was a pretty decent monthly salary back then so it was like getting an extra month's pay.

What Speaker and Cobb did isn't ethical by today's standards, but things were a little different in the 1920s - for one thing, gambling on sports events was legal in a lot of places, including New York. A politican once made a distinction between honest graft and dishonest graft. The principal of not bettting on baseball was not as well established during the 1920s - there were a couple of other questionable incidents. I have always felt that the baseball establishment would have liked us to believe that the 1919 World Series was a one-time thing, and that isn't the case. There were frequent questions about thrown games during the period from 1890 to 1920, and one reason Carl Mays is not in the Hall of Fame is because of a belief he threw games. Hal Chase is the all-time corruption leader.

Which brings us back to Pete Rose. The way he presented himself, Pete Rose was someone who had an interest in the history of the game. He was also somebody who was a serious gambler. So he knew about edges and rumors. As a serious gambler, he also should have known that even betting to win creates a problem because the manager bets to win on three nights and doesn't place a bet on the fourth night.

Pete Rose is the all-time hit leader. He is not one of the 25 best hitters in baseball history. There is a distinction. I'm not saying it would be different if he were Ted Williams or Babe Ruth, but let's keep Pete Rose's ability in perspective.

That is why I say out.

 

Close.

One important omission: Cobb and Speaker (and Smokey Joe Wood) also tried to place bets on Detroit to win that prearranged game.

That was the allegation of Tigers pitcher Dutch Leonard, who had an axe to grind (Cobb, as manager, had later released him) but who also had the smoking gun -- letters from Cobb and Wood, apologizing for not getting their money to him in time for him to place their bets on the game. Cobb was immediately remorseful, claiming that he would never get involved with a situation like that again.

But there is little doubt that he, and Speaker and Wood, initiated the plot to fix a game.

When Leonard threatened to go public with the letters in 1926, Judge Landis convinced him to keep quiet and dismissed the situation like he had with almost all the pre-1920 game-fixing (or "prearranging") situations, which, as you said, were quite common in those days.

Meanwhile, Ban Johnson took matters into his own hands. He coerced Cobb and Speaker to retire after a secret meeting of the American League owners.

Judge Landis, who was looking for a way to oust Johnson from power once and for all, undermined Johnson instead. He questioned Cobb and Speaker's sudden and unexplained retirements, and held additional hearings in Chicago.

(These were the same hearings where Swede Risberg and Chick Gandil came back and charged that the White Sox had paid off Tigers pitchers to ease up in a four-game series in September 1917. While even Eddie Collins admitted writing a $45 check to add to the pot, Landis swept it all under the rug again. He said nothing could be done about anything that happened before his watch -- never mind, of course, that six years earlier he had banned the Black Sox despite the 1919 World Series happening "before his watch." :)

Dutch Leonard, who was in Johnson's corner, refused to testify at those hearings, providing Landis a convenient excuse to dismiss the whole matter and absolve Cobb and Wood of any wrongdoing. They admitted writing the letters but claimed the "bet" mentioned had nothing to do with a baseball game.

 

Junkie: Pete Rose's biggest crime is not that he is an idiot. He is an idiot, but that's not his biggest crime.

Pete Rose's biggest crime is his arrogance. His arrogance in thinking he is above the rules of baseball, the law, and general ethics.

 

Starman, please pick up the white courtesy phone.