Should Pete Rose be eligible for the Hall of Fame?

I seriously doubt that Rose would get the 75% required. BY now, Rose has been retired long enough that he would no longer be on the regular ballot - he would go to the Veterans Committee, which is made up of all of the living Hall of Famers. I would doubt that anyone who played the game would ever vote for someone who broke the most sacred rule in baseball. He may get a few votes, but I would bet he couldn't get more then 10 %.

Bob, you're really asking TWO questions:

1) If the voters could vote him in, would they? No, I doubt it., Rule #1 in baseball is no gambling. And keep in mind the writers LOVED Rose before all this. He broke their hearts (I know--sob, sob), lied to them, and lied about the lies. I don't think they as the group who votes people in would ever forgive him.

Veteran's Committee? Pretty much the same, especially since Rose came out with a book which admitted that when he said he didn't bet he had been lying. In some cases, he was lying to the faces of the former players who make up the VC.

Question 2) Should the people who vote on the HoF be the ones to vote on the HoF?

On the one hand, no. Bill James had a really good proposal for more open voting in his book "Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame?" But on the other hand, yes, of course. WHOEVER does the voting for the Hall will be the final judge of if people get in or not.

Good question. Let's first look at the most important rule in baseball. It is posted in every locker room in the Majors. "No Gambling On Baseball Games Will Be Tolerated By Any Player From Any Team At Any Time".

Now if each member of the Baseball Writers Association, followed those guidelines they would have no choice but NOT to vote for Peter Rose. However, there is such a gray area that is being dealt with.

Not to put McGwire into the hall this year but put him in, say in two or three years from now is not the answer either. That's like saying it's not okay that you cheated during your career but in three years it's okay that you cheated. That doesn't make sense.

Betting on games could damage the integrity of the game in that games could have been thrown or run differential could have been controlled. Rose was in a very unique position to do all that.

The problem is we will never know the extent of each players involvement. The fans would vote with their hearts as I would probably do. That's why the worse thing that could happen is to put it in our hands. There has to be an organization that looks at all the evidence objectively. We are about as close to that as we can get with the Baseball Writers Association.

What baseball needs is a "real" commissioner. Until that happens all of what you've talked about will remain unresolved.

No, he should not be eligible.

That would then put the decision if he should be in the hall of fame to the voters, regardless of his crime.

Pete Rose's accomplishments on the field are not dimished by the fact that he is not in the hall of fame.

His personality and personal ethics does however effect the hall of fame.

How has Rose been punished for the ultimate Baseball crime, if you let him in.

He gets his cake (his gambling addiction) and eat it too (HOF)

It always amazes me that people try to say that because Rose only bet as a manager, that it didn't hurt the integrity of the game.

Are you people stupid? Seriously. Betting by ANYONE that has ANY say in the game -- player, manager or umpire -- is the worst thing for the integrity of the game.

Also, if you believe he only bet as a manager, you're very very naive. He admitted to playing the horses, and blackjack while he was playing, so why wouldn't he have bet on the game too? You think he just discovered a love to gamble when he retired?

As for if he'd get in, I'd bet my life that 75% of the Hall of Fame voters (that's 372 voters btw) DON'T support Pete enough to look over the fact that he broke the most important rule in baseball -- don't bet on baseball.

.

I do not believe he should be eligible until/unless he is reinstated by the commissioner.

I think that at least 40% (and certainly at least the 25% needed to block Rose) of the writers are strongly enough against what Rose did that he would not be elected even if he were on the ballot.

If he were contrite about what he'd done, came clean, and didn't try to hog the spotlight at Cooperstown every year by having autograph signing shows, etc., he might have a chance to be reinstated. Basically, he needs to apologize for what he did, admit he was a serious problem gambler, beg for mercy, and then keep his mouth shut for about 3 years, and he might have a chance.

What Rose did was criminal . How do we know that ? We know that because all criminals believe that the rules of their society don't apply to them and so they break them. Rose knew all too well what the rules of his baseball society were and he intentionally and repeatedly chose to break them. That is a criminal act.

If you honestly believe that if Rose's name was on the ballot that the BBWAA would actually vote this cheater in then I think that you have severely misjudged the writers.

The bottom line is that even if Rose's eligibility were restored he still would fail to meet the subjective part of Section 5 of the Rules of Election to the HOF

Voting-Voting shall be based on a players record, playing ability, integrity , sportsmanship ,character , and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played

In gambling on baseball Rose showed a complete lack of character, integrity and sportsmanship-He still doesn't get voted in.

Those that claim that Rose only bet on baseball as a manager and not a player should remove themselves from the discussion because they obviously don't have clue about how a compulsive gambler's brain actually works .

I do because I've seen one up close.

In the event that you knew a high doing baseball group was enjoying an underperforming one, the most obvious bet will be on the most effective doing team. But imagine if your opted for team only sidelined their three best participants through recent accidents might they be this type of powerful contender to get that match today? Zcodes System, from here https://tr.im/kVyeA , will give you all that type of information in order to have better likelihood of earning the bets.

The sports in Zcodes System are selected to ensure that permit you to participate in high volume betting at bookies for their recognition and are picked applying over 80 various variables that govern each game such as for example: participant situations, incidents, group choice, home or out group, goalies, past performance, predicted potential performance, teachers, activities, importance of match, rivalries and much more

This really is in which a bit of understanding may and typically may derail you and where a huge amount of in-depth, as much as the minute information may make you a winner. Time and time again.

Aside from Pete being banned for life which really makes this question moot, do actually think he deserves to be in the hall with great men that honored the game?

As more Mark McRoids no he's not getting in either.

What part of BANNED FOR LIFE do you NOT understand?

EDIT:

Banned for life usually means he is ineligible...that means he is not even considered.

and the gambling issue is THE point why. So that, my friend, makes it very important.

THERE ARE NO HYPOTHETICALS INVOLVED HERE.

pete rose flat out commited thee most cardinal in baseball, and then lied about it for years and years. he only admitted it when he saw a way to make money.

There is NO excuse for him.

He should NEVER be allowed in the hall of fame;

not even as a paying customer

not even after he has been dead for 100 years.

And anyone who thinks otherwise is simply not a real BASEBALL fan. Period. End of story.