Pete Rose Sinned Against Baseball. And That's Enough.

[TopGunn#22]

This is a very complicated topic.  Those who think otherwise are firmly on one side or the other and will never change their minds.  I get that.  I have given thumbs up and thumbs down for various comments but that just means I disagree or agree with the comment.  I try to appreciate good insights given whether I agree with them or not.

I grew up in the 1960's and 1970's.  Pete Rose was a part of that.  Whether it was baseball cards, watching baseball on TV, Strat-O-Matic baseball with friends, there was always a Pete Rose presence because someone always had a "Big Red Machine" team.

Pete Rose is such a contradiction to me.  I admired the way he played the game, so I played baseball and softball much like he did (minus a couple thousand hits).  But my personality and his couldn't be further apart.  That he was an arrogant and self centered man is not debatable.  He was nothing like I aspire to be as a husband, father, grandfather, son, brother or friend. 

I will always admire how Rose played the game.  I will always be disappointed in his shortcomings.  Whether he ever gets into the HOF will not change my life in any way.  The only guy I ever ached for getting into the HOF was Tony Oliva.  It just bugged me he had to wait so long.   

As I've grown older, I've tried to be less judgmental and more forgiving.  It's just easier to go through life without a visceral hatred of something or someone.  That doesn't mean I've forsaken discerning right from wrong.  As a Christian, it just means I pray more, for friends and family as well as for those I feel are sinners and who also need the prayers (that includes myself).

I used to be dead set against any PED users being in the HOF.  While not campaigning for any of them to be inducted, I also won't rush to Cooperstown, dressed in black with a mask covering my face, and burn down the HOF if any of them get in.  

If Rose gets in (and Shoeless Joe for that matter) I will appreciate what he/they accomplished, but would embrace a plaque that highlights the good but also addresses the bad.  If he/they never get in, I can accept that as well.  My life will not be diminished in any way either.  I will still enjoy the game of baseball.  

[CCHOF5yearstoolate]

19 hours ago, bean5302 said:

I don't know Pete Rose, and he certainly never wronged me in any way. His prime was long over before I was born. He's dead. He can take no pleasure in any respite from hate, yet comment after comment drips with hatred and vitriol, eager to demonstrate the virtue of the commentor. Perhaps we should take his rotting corpse and hang it from a tow truck to haul it across the country from state fair to state fair. Sell tickets to commentors for $2 to take a swing and beat it with a baseball bat so as to demonstrate refined moral superiority while proving their virtue?

When it comes to Pete Rose and his relationship to baseball, his contributions are unquestionable. He's the all time leader in hits, RoY, MVP, and has accumulated 80 career WAR while being one of the most popular players of all time, representing the game and drawing in fans an insane 17 times as an All Star.

His behavior also critically damaged baseball. It was a series of massive sucker punches to fans, and he also risked a potentially catastrophic impact if fans believe play was all showmanship and entertainment rather than a competitive sport. As far as the non-baseball related claims against him, they're paper thin, but no type of claim is more powerful so it's not surprising it's been so intently weaponized.

For whatever reason, Americans have both been taught and embraced the concept of persecution or acceptance. If a person isn't willing to actively persecute somebody they don't know, and demonstrate outrage while demanding endless vengeance for behavior which did not personally injure them in any way, it means the person is actively endorsing the harmful behavior, and therefore must also be persecuted. 

Of course, it's all intensely hypocritical, but it makes an American feel good to judge themselves to have superior value in society while seeking an active minority group to persecute. We're not allowed to persecute based on skin color or sex or gender or body shape or hair color or smoking status anymore. Who can we find? Somebody, certainly, and it's our duty to destroy those people to demonstrate moral superiority. 

It saddens me a little to see people so bent out of shape over somebody they don't know who did nothing to them, hasn't been relevant in 40 years, and is now dead (or somebody who hasn't played in 100 years for that matter). Rose paid and paid again for his actions. I can't comment as to whether or not he regretted his actions, but I suspect being widely hated after having been so beloved and honored was probably a truly never ending horrible experience.

I don't have a vote, and I'm not sure how I would vote. I'm quite positive I won't lose any sleep over it.

The dripping condescension throughout this pearl-clutching post is very funny, and quite obviously hypocritical. 

[Fire Dan Gladden]

On 5/16/2025 at 2:12 PM, cmoss84 said:

This is a slippery slope many people like to be very picky/choosey on. You could mention quite a few individuals from a variety of sports, and their HOFs, and come to the same conclusion. Also, have you done research on every player in baseball's HOF? Did anyone else have character concerns or a history of crime? Have some athletes gotten away with worse over the last 150 years? Professional athletes need to be looked at as such when this process occurs every year. I battle the same concept with Michael Jackson. I have to only listen to his music as a musical prodigy. If you are going to judge everyone, then judge EVERYONE. 

We go down this path, anybody here want to discuss Kirby Puckett?

[VivaBomboRivera!]

On 5/17/2025 at 12:20 AM, Minderbinder said:

The question today is the importance of forgiving.

We extend forgiveness to those who admit their transgressions, apologize and make amends. Pete Rose did none of those things.

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, VivaBomboRivera! said:

We extend forgiveness to those who admit their transgressions, apologize and make amends. Pete Rose did none of those things.

You must've missed Rose's letter to Manfred, above, in which he admitted wrongdoing and apologized.  Rose was punished with a lifetime ban.  He's dead, served his punishment.  He has no more amends he can make....  Rose's achievements merit HoF consideration, albeit with an asterisk if one chooses.  But, let those without sin continue to cast stones.... 

[Squirrel]

1 hour ago, Minderbinder said:

You must've missed Rose's letter to Manfred, above, in which he admitted wrongdoing and apologized.  Rose was punished with a lifetime ban.  He's dead, served his punishment.  He has no more amends he can make....  Rose's achievements merit HoF consideration, albeit with an asterisk if one chooses.  But, let those without sin continue to cast stones.... 

This website is not church and MLB is not God. Please refrain from conflating the two. We are talking about rules in MLB that were broken and the consequences of those actions. Rose knew the rules and broke them anyway as both a player and manager. His ‘apologies’ were insincere and self-serving. Good for you for thinking they were otherwise, but I don’t think he truly meant it. Not to mention other moments in his life that were reprehensible and far worse. Forgiveness doesn’t mean the rules no longer apply for someone you feel is contrite. Forgiveness is God’s to give, not MLB’s.

[ashbury]

13 hours ago, Minderbinder said:

Rose was punished with a lifetime ban.

He was not.

MLB publishes its rules of conduct. You can read them here.  Nowhere in the rules is found the word "lifetime" in regard to a ban or anything else.  The phrase you are thinking of, stated in a few places throughout Rule 21 regarding Misconduct, is "shall be declared permanently ineligible."  It is pointless to play semantic games about Rose or Jackson's life being over; that is nowhere stated as a criterion.

[Guest]

On 5/18/2025 at 10:37 PM, ashbury said:

Rule 21 regarding Misconduct, is "shall be declared permanently ineligible."  It is pointless to play semantic games ...

Pointless, indeed.  The mind reels trying to see daylight between "permanently ineligible" and "lifetime ban."

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, Minderbinder said:

The mind reels

Sorry to hear that.   I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.

But I can try a different way: life is impermanent.

[knothole61]

Minder, some, maybe you, seem to believe that Rose was given a lifetime ban meaning, to some, maybe you, that once Rose's life was over the ban was also over. Ash has clearly indicated that "lifetime" bans are not provided in MLB's rules of conduct--rather "permanent ineligibility" is the term of choice. The state of permanence, unlike life itself, remains unchanged indefinitely.   

[Guest]

9 hours ago, knothole61 said:

Minder, some, maybe you, seem to believe that Rose was given a lifetime ban meaning, to some, maybe you, that once Rose's life was over the ban was also over. Ash has clearly indicated that "lifetime" bans are not provided in MLB's rules of conduct--rather "permanent ineligibility" is the term of choice. The state of permanence, unlike life itself, remains unchanged indefinitely.   

Wrong.  Whether one refers to the media's shorthand "lifetime ban" or "permanent ineligibility," the result is exactly the same.  

My point is that Rose paid the ultimate price, but admitted wrong, and asked for forgiveness and reinstatement.  He can do no more at this point.  In my view, it's time to consider Rose for the HoF, albeit with a footnote.  He (and Jackson) paid a heavy price for a serious offense.  

I believe the veterans group governs Rose's HoF status at this point.  It will be interesting to see how they proceed, perhaps taking time to reflect on their own conduct before passing on Rose and Jackson.

[Linus]

I think the whole concept of contrition and apologies is baloney. Who knows if they are even sincere?  In my view you committed the act so now you live with the consequences and all the other stuff is unimportant. You don’t get to hit the undo button because you say something people want to hear. As far as the references to religion in this thread, it means nothing to me and I’m guessing many others. No place for it on this site.