If you were commissioner, would you reinstate Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson?

Comparing gambling and throwing games to using steroids is totally ignorant.

I don't agree with Rock too often but he is completely correct here.

The current commissioner will never reinstate Pete Rose or Shoeless Joe Jackson. Both of which should be in the Hall of Fame. Pete Rose on bet on baseball betting that his team was going to win not lose those games. Shoeless Joe Jackson definitely should be in the Hall. There is NO evidence that he did anything wrong look at his stats for the World Series. Pete Rose should be put in the Hall of Fame for what he did as a player not as a manager. He did all of his betting as a manager.

Very informative question. I didnt get to see Shoeless Jackson play as that was well before my time. But, I was blessed to watch Pete Rose in the 70's and 80's. Nobody did it better and harder than him. This guy played hard every day. Just like George Brett. These two guys to me played hard and didnt bi@ch. After all the steroid crap, it will be intersting to see which of these freaks accused of roiding will be allowed in the HOF. If some of these guys make it in, I would be pissed if Rose isnt reinstated. I believe that once Selig is out, a new Commissioner will reinstate him. Giambi helped his cause of being voted in because he was man enough to admit that he had roided up. You have to admire a person for honesty.

Good grief, can't we have some standards? Just a few?! Pete Rose was betting on games he was coaching, for heaven's sake. How is it hard to understand that he should be banned for life? If he had any class, he would agree and be a man about it. Shoeless Joe and George Buck Weaver should have more of a chance, but for the integrity of the game, let's just leave it the way it is. If we let them in, we will have to listen to Pete Rose more than we already do ..............and any amount is too much. I do agree with you in principle................they got a rough deal.

1. What Jackson did, and what Rose did, were quite different things. There is no reason to conflate them together. So let's not, and make this the permanent state of affairs going forward. One can hope.

2. Jackson and seven teammates conspired to throw selected games of the 1919 World Series. They took the money, they knew what was going on. What they actually did or did not do on the field is not really relevant. There was more than enough complicity. The involved White Sox players, in those four games, played suspiciously not to win.

3. Rose simply proved himself utterly untrustworthy, unable to be relied upon to engage his best managerial efforts to win each and every winnable game.

4. By contrast, any player using PEDs was doing so hoping to -- pay attention, this IS important -- play BETTER and win MORE. Not win less, not try to lose, not play not to win today so there's a better chance of winning tomorrow. PLAY BETTER, WIN MORE -- which is completely in keeping with the overall daily and seasonal (and personal financial) interests of the entire enterprise.

Are these distinctions clear?

1919 Black Sox -- play to let the other team win.

Rose -- maybe not play so hard today, so a win tomorrow pays off. (Maybe.)

Roiders -- play better, win more.

So, No, I would not even consider reinstating Jackson, his seven co-conspirators, or Rose, unless new and compelling and exonerating evidence comes to light. The Black Sox incident happened 90 years ago, so there's probably nothing still undiscovered there, and Rose is still around and still unable to refute the events to which he has since admitted.

Permanent expulsions are harsh, but necessary, and have not yet expired. Not "lifetime", note -- PERMANENT. Many people get this wrong.

And, please, stop filling in the blanks for Giambi. He has admitted to NOTHING in public (if you think otherwise, please cite some direct quotes by him), only that he was sorry for something he refused to specify. Yet this passes for "manliness". Feh.

Even in these days, two wrongs do not make a right. The crimes and violations of others, even Seligula, do not exonerate anyone else.

Forget about the rest, Jackson took money to throw a World Series. He admitted it and it's on record (and tried to recant). He wasn't banned because they're not sure. Do a little research. Anyone who takes money to throw a World Series deserves to banned for eternity. At no point should he EVER be allowed in the Hall of Fame. What other people have done since has no bearing on what Joe Jackson did. He is totally deserving of his ban and should NEVER be allowed in. Once that happens, the Hall of Fame will officially be a sham.

PS - and it always cracks me up when someone asks this question and some uniformed idiot always says "Jackson was innocent" despite not actually knowing anything about the case - but they saw Field of Dreams so they think he must be innocent. Amazing.

PPS. You are incorrect. It's well documented Jackson threw games. When he didn't get all his money he started playing well but he definitely threw games. It's completely baffling to me how people can sit there and say "he didn't throw games, look at his batting average!" without taking the time to actually research it, like they just banned him because they thought it was neat.

Read: Shoeless: The Life and Times of Joe Jackson by David L. Fleitz

Supposedly Jackson took money to throw games during the '20 season as well. He's scum deserving of his ban. I wish you people would actually learn about what you think you know about before making these comments.

I'd reinstate Shoeless Joe Jackson, but not Pete Rose. People aren't really sure if he agreed or not, and the movies don't help. Pete Rose, everyone knew he gambled. If he didn't make that fatal mistake, he'd be in Cooperstown as a first-ballot Hall of Famer.

commissioner reinstate pete rose shoeless joe jackson

As the all-time hits leader there is no question that Pete Rose should be in.

As for Shoeless Joe Jackson, he's one of the old time players I would have loved to see play. Reading about him and his raw ability makes you wonder what he could have done with an entire career. I don't believe that being caught up in a scandel such as the Black Sox scandel without having a fair shake from the Commisioner's office. Kennesaw Mountain Landis was a powerful man who wanted to rule baseball with an iron fist. The Black Sox ruling set the tone for his next 24 years.

So yes, I believe both players should be in the HOF.

No, I wouldn't reinstate either of them. Baseballs rules on gambling are very clear. Bet on baseball - banned for life. No ifs, buts, maybes, or untils. You can complain about cheaters, steroid users, drug addicts, wife beaters... if baseball had a rule that said that doing any of those things would result in a ban for life, I'd support those guys being tossed out as well.

As for Jackson, he had great overall stats in the series, but he sucked in the games his team lost. .If you buy the idea that the Black Sox were told to lose certain games, then it would make sense that he would play great in the games they were supposed to win, and not so great in the games they were supposed to lose. The evidence isn't conclusive either way, but sworn testimony in front of a grand jury by the player involved is hard to ignore.

Great question. IF I were commissioner, no one found to have "cheated" should be inducted into the HOF. Gambling and throwing games are worthy of the lifetime ban. Steroid use is an on-going thing and they should be banned if found guilty of it. ( Palmeiro is out, but Sosa, Bonds and McGuire haven't been found guilty of it). A spitball (Perry) or a corked bat ( gee, Sosa again) here and there shouldn't be judged as harshly.

The HOF considers personal conduct, not just stats.