NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-14-2015, 02:01 PM
pitchernut's Avatar
pitchernut pitchernut is offline
Jim
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 775
Default No HOF For Pete

Just heard on the radio that there will be no HOF for Pete Rose. Bummer imo for such a great Baseball player.
__________________
Was collecting Next day newspaper article and earliest rookie ephemera/card of all 20th century no hit hurlers.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-14-2015, 05:43 PM
porkchops's Avatar
porkchops porkchops is offline
member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 95
Default

Good
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-14-2015, 06:00 PM
7nohitter's Avatar
7nohitter 7nohitter is offline
Member
And.rew Mil.ler
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: MA
Posts: 1,523
Default

Ha Ha, Pete!
__________________
Working on the 1957 Topps set.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-14-2015, 06:13 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

I think he's done adequate penance, at this point. Let the punishment fit the crime. I would reinstate him.

Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 12-14-2015 at 06:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-14-2015, 06:18 PM
Snapolit1's Avatar
Snapolit1 Snapolit1 is offline
Ste.ve Na.polit.ano
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 5,760
Default

I agree. He's not OJ Simpson. Or Hernandez from the Patriots. He deserves to be reinstated. People can make their own judgement.

Last edited by Snapolit1; 12-14-2015 at 06:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-14-2015, 07:21 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

I would put him in the Hall of Fame solely on the basis of two things he said. One, "I'd walk through hell in a gasoline suit to play baseball." Two, when asked why he was taking batting practice on a day off following a doubleheader in which he went 6 for 8, he said, "They got me out twice."
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-14-2015, 07:29 PM
Romahawk's Avatar
Romahawk Romahawk is offline
member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 45
Default

He is banned from baseball activity not the HOF according to the commissioner...

Later in that paragraph, Manfred concludes:


The issue of whether Mr. Rose should be eligible for Hall of Fame election under the bylaws of that organization presents an entirely different policy determination that is focused on a range of considerations distinct from the more narrow question before me — i.e., whether I believe that Mr. Rose's reinstatement would be consonant with the policy rationale underlying Rule 21. Thus, any debate over Mr. Rose's eligibility for the Hall of Fame is one that must take place in a different forum.


http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-bi...183831192.html
__________________
:

http://romahawk.com
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-14-2015, 07:40 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Romahawk View Post
He is banned from baseball activity not the HOF according to the commissioner...

Later in that paragraph, Manfred concludes:


The issue of whether Mr. Rose should be eligible for Hall of Fame election under the bylaws of that organization presents an entirely different policy determination that is focused on a range of considerations distinct from the more narrow question before me — i.e., whether I believe that Mr. Rose's reinstatement would be consonant with the policy rationale underlying Rule 21. Thus, any debate over Mr. Rose's eligibility for the Hall of Fame is one that must take place in a different forum.


http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-bi...183831192.html
That's sort of disingenuous because the HOF decades ago adopted a policy that anyone on the lifetime MLB baned list was also ineligible for the Hall, and obviously Manfred knows that and knows it isn't going to change.

Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 12-14-2015 at 07:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-14-2015, 08:29 PM
Topps206's Avatar
Topps206 Topps206 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 687
Default

They could always change it. You never know.

That said, I'd let him in since there's no evidence he bet against the Reds.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-14-2015, 09:15 PM
RTK's Avatar
RTK RTK is offline
Rick
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 335
Default

Good
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-14-2015, 10:01 PM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

Keep the guy out.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.

Last edited by nolemmings; 12-15-2015 at 08:52 AM. Reason: Toning down language for the Holidays :)
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-14-2015, 10:09 PM
HRBAKER's Avatar
HRBAKER HRBAKER is offline
Jeff
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 5,255
Default

He bet, he lied, he accepted his punishment.
He showed no remorse continuing to lie for decades.
He made his bed, he has no one to blame but himself.
Not the Commissioner, not the voters, not anyone but Pete.
Keep him out - forever IMO.
__________________
Check out my aging Sell/Trade Album on my Profile page

HOF Type Collector + Philly A's, E/M/W cards, M101-6, Exhibits, Postcards, 30's Premiums & HOF Photos

"Assembling an unfocused collection for nearly 50 years."
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-15-2015, 12:09 AM
pokerplyr80's Avatar
pokerplyr80 pokerplyr80 is offline
je.sse @rnot
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,914
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HRBAKER View Post
He bet, he lied, he accepted his punishment.
He showed no remorse continuing to lie for decades.
He made his bed, he has no one to blame but himself.
Not the Commissioner, not the voters, not anyone but Pete.
Keep him out - forever IMO.
Agreed. It has also come out recently that even after "admitting" what he had done he continued to lie about betting as a player. Not to mention he's never stopped betting on baseball and still does so today. In my opinion he hasn't done much to help his case and doesn't deserve to be in the HOF.

They haven't let Jackson in, and it's been almost 100 years. I don't believe Rose will get in any sooner than that, and if I were to bet it would be on him never getting in.
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-15-2015, 02:03 AM
cardsfan73's Avatar
cardsfan73 cardsfan73 is offline
Scott Ti3k
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Missouri
Posts: 713
Default

One of my favorite players as a kid. Even had one of those big Sports Illustrated posters of him hanging in my room for years. My first year collecting baseball cards was 1982 and I remember being thrilled by all the Rose cards in the Topps set that year (I believe he had 5 total).

I was all for lifting the suspension until I saw several reports that stated that he is still betting on baseball and initially lied to Manfred about it. If that's the case then I say Kudos to Manfred.

So he said "I'd walk through hell in a gasoline suit to play baseball." but he won't quit betting on the sport to help him get the reinstatement he claims he wants so bad.

It's shame he isn't in the Hall but I really feel he has nobody to blame but himself at this point.

Last edited by cardsfan73; 12-15-2015 at 02:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-15-2015, 07:31 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Who cares if he is betting on baseball today? Does somebody have to be a good guy or have no vices to make the HOF? Millions of people bet on baseball. He has already served a sentence far disproportionate to his relevant offense. Is he a jerk? Sure, but so what? Too much sanctimony for me.

Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 12-15-2015 at 07:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-15-2015, 07:32 AM
packs packs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,319
Default

The point is he lied about it again. If it's not a big deal that he's betting on baseball now, why did he lie?

Last edited by packs; 12-15-2015 at 07:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-15-2015, 07:36 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
The point is he lied about it again. If it's not a big deal that he's betting on baseball now, why did he lie?
Because he is a compulsive liar, probably. And has terrible judgment. But again, so what? He committed an offense, he served a disproportionate sentence, and it's time to recognize him for the great and unbelievably competitive baseball player he was.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-15-2015, 08:24 AM
packs packs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,319
Default

Disproportionate in what sense? There are still people who are banned spanning a 100 years ago. How has Pete Rose's sentence been especially harsh?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-15-2015, 09:10 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
Disproportionate in what sense? There are still people who are banned spanning a 100 years ago. How has Pete Rose's sentence been especially harsh?
He didn't throw any games, or compromise the integrity of a single played game, as far as we know. He didn't cheat in any games. He didn't use banned substances. He didn't commit any violent crimes off the field. For what he did, in my opinion, a lifetime ban is excessive. Way excessive.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-15-2015, 09:24 AM
packs packs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,319
Default

Well I would say the only reason we don't know for sure if he threw any games is because he's constantly lying about what he did or didn't do. So his own actions serve to cast doubt on his story. Everything happening to him is his own doing.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-15-2015, 09:44 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
Well I would say the only reason we don't know for sure if he threw any games is because he's constantly lying about what he did or didn't do. So his own actions serve to cast doubt on his story. Everything happening to him is his own doing.
We can only go by what we know in punishing someone. Given how incredibly competitive he was, I doubt it though.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-15-2015, 10:04 AM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

Quote:
Given how incredibly competitive he was, I doubt it though.
You don't think he ever tweaked his bullpen or kept a starter in longer (or shorter) than normal because he placed greater emphasis on a game he was betting? Gave a guy extra rest or less rest because a particular game was important--not to the standings as much as to his wallet? I mean, as competitive as he was and all.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.

Last edited by nolemmings; 12-15-2015 at 10:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-15-2015, 10:08 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings View Post
You don't think he ever tweaked his bullpen or kept a starter in longer (or shorter) than normal because he placed greater emphasis on a game he was betting? Gave a guy extra rest or less rest because a particular game was important--not to the standings as much as to his wallet?
In other words, he tried too hard to win? That sounds like complete speculation to me. In any event, I am not defending what he did or saying it had no possible consequences. I am saying, enough is enough.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-15-2015, 10:26 AM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

Yeah, I'm sure he never planned anything out. Probably bet a couple large then noticed he had his #4 starter going against the other team's ace. Oh well.
And if he was close to winning but it meant he had to bring his closer in for the second straight game and he was betting tomorrow's game but not today's, I'm sure that had no influence on him. Because you know, it's all speculation and he deserves the benefit of every doubt.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.

Last edited by nolemmings; 12-15-2015 at 10:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-15-2015, 10:53 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings View Post
Yeah, I'm sure he never planned anything out. Probably bet a couple large then noticed he had his #4 starter going against the other team's ace. Oh well.
And if he was close to winning but it meant he had to bring his closer in for the second straight game and he was betting tomorrow's game but not today's, I'm sure that had no influence on him. Because you know, it's all speculation and he deserves the benefit of every doubt.
No, Todd, what he deserves is to be punished or not on the basis of the evidence, not speculation about what he might or might not have done. Not to mention a FAIR punishment based on that evidence. People who have admitted to repeated use of banned substances to enhance their performance remain eligible to play, and for the Hall. We punish them, they serve their time, and move on. Yet Rose deserves a lifetime ban? Absurd.

Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 12-15-2015 at 10:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:05 AM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

I could not disagree more. When there is a clear and unequivocal prohibition against gambling, you are on notice. When others before you have been banned for life for violating that prohibition, you are on notice. When you admit that you bet on baseball, you are guilty of violating that prohibition. That admission has not been recanted, and ample other evidence supports the finding of guilt. Add to that the fact that he agreed to his own punishment, and it's even harder to make a case for him.

And now, he admits he STILL bets on baseball, when the rule STILL exists that you may not do so. So it's any kind of surprise that he is not allowed to hold a MLB position? He has not changed, is not remorseful or contrite (other than about his own plight), and is still not forthright. I see zero points in his favor for reinstatement.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:08 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

How many guys were on notice that PEDs were banned yet took them repeatedly and admitted to it? Do you want to punt them? PED use has effed up the integrity of the game a hell of a lot more than Pete Rose as manager betting on his own team to win, or Pete Rose as civilian with no role at all betting.

Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 12-15-2015 at 11:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:10 AM
packs packs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,319
Default

Didn't he admit to betting on the Reds but with the caveat that he never bet on them to lose? That's BS and even if it's not, it draws a clear line toward manipulating a game's outcome due to your personal bet on a game. That's why gambling isn't allowed. No one faults a guy for winning. But if your motivation is to win more money as opposed to competing, you are breaking cardinal rules.

And that's only IF you believe him that he didn't bet against his own team. Which is something people don't have any reason to believe because he lies about everything.

Last edited by packs; 12-15-2015 at 11:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:14 AM
DHogan's Avatar
DHogan DHogan is offline
Dave
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Boston
Posts: 804
Default

Poor Pete. Not !
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:14 AM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

Quote:
No, Todd, what he deserves is to be punished or not on the basis of the evidence, not speculation about what he might or might not have done
I submit that one of the reasons baseball has such a hard and fast rule--strict liability if you will-- is because it is difficult to prove with exactness a man's motives when participating in a game. Did the guy really go 0-5 and strand 7 baserunners against that tomato can he normally owns because of an off day or because he bet on the game? Did the manager go against all baseball sense to win this one game (e.g. closer goes 3 innings for first time) at the possible expense of the next because this game means more in the overall picture or because he has $ riding on it? The public's perception that the game might be crooked cannot be allowed, so the rule is harsh, but it is clear, and virtually never violated.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:18 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings View Post
I submit that one of the reasons baseball has such a hard and fast rule--strict liability if you will-- is because it is difficult to prove with exactness a man's motives when participating in a game. Did the guy really go 0-5 and strand 7 baserunners against that tomato can he normally owns because of an off day or because he bet on the game? Did the manager go against all baseball sense to win this one game (e.g. closer goes 3 innings for first time) at the possible expense of the next because this game means more in the overall picture or because he has $ riding on it? The public's perception that the game might be crooked cannot be allowed, so the rule is harsh, but it is clear, and virtually never violated.
We aren't debating whether he should have been punished. He should have, and he was -- for 25 years. When ARod admits to multiple PED violations and is back at third base after a year, it seems to me Rose's sentence is grossly disproportionate. Nobody HAS to vote for him if he's eligible, by the way. If people feel like you do, he won't get in.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:24 AM
packs packs is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,319
Default

I think there's a big difference between PED use and betting on games. PED use doesn't necessarily create a pre-determined outcome. If you're the manager of a baseball team and you're betting on your own games, then an argument can be made that the game you're betting on is a sham. If you bet on your team to lose, you're going to try to lose. And like I said, there's no reason to believe Rose when he says he never bet on the Reds to lose. He is a compulsive liar.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:34 AM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

Did you not see that he continues to engage in the very conduct that is prohibited under MLB rules? No contrition, no rehabilitation, repeated lying and disparagement of others all those years while he steadfastly denied his guilt and impugned his accusers --even a dead man. Why in the hell should this guy be allowed back in the game? What on Earth makes you think he would not continue to bet on baseball?

If you're so bothered by his absence from the HOF, make your pitch there. It is not disingenuous to have that body change its stance on who it deems eligible; in fact, I would argue that it is easier and invokes less potential heartburn for the game if that body were to change rather than to expect MLB to loosen its rules or allow this continuing fool to have any kind of official or acknowledged position in the game.

EDITED TO ADD: Peter, I just saw an earlier post where you say who cares if he still bets on baseball? That is a total non-starter, not just with me but I would guess nearly everyone. Dear MLB, change your rules that prohibit your members from betting on baseball? Why? I dunno. Ask Peter Spaeth.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.

Last edited by nolemmings; 12-15-2015 at 11:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:46 AM
Bored5000's Avatar
Bored5000 Bored5000 is offline
Eddie S.
Eddie Smi.th
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Fleetwood, Pa.
Posts: 1,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Topps206 View Post

That said, I'd let him in since there's no evidence he bet against the Reds.
The prohibition on betting doesn't go away as long as a person bets on their team to win. Even if a person bets their team to win, it opens up the obvious risk of blackmail as soon as the first bet is made, whether it is to win or lose on a player or manager's own team.

I am all for Rose being banned forever. The punishment does fit the crime.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:52 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings View Post
Did you not see that he continues to engage in the very conduct that is prohibited under MLB rules? No contrition, no rehabilitation, repeated lying and disparagement of others all those years while he steadfastly denied his guilt and impugned his accusers --even a dead man. Why in the hell should this guy be allowed back in the game? What on Earth makes you think he would not continue to bet on baseball?

If you're so bothered by his absence from the HOF, make your pitch there. It is not disingenuous to have that body change its stance on who it deems eligible; in fact, I would argue that it is easier and invokes less potential heartburn for the game if that body were to change rather than to expect MLB to loosen its rules or allow this continuing fool to have any kind of official or acknowledged position in the game.

EDITED TO ADD: Peter, I just saw an earlier post where you say who cares if he still bets on baseball? That is a total non-starter, not just with me but I would guess nearly everyone. Dear MLB, change your rules that prohibit your members from betting on baseball? Why? I dunno. Ask Peter Spaeth.
There is, I suspect, zero chance the HOF would say someone who is banned for life from MLB is still eligible for induction.

And I don't care if he bets on baseball now. What possible difference can it make if Pete Rose bets on a game? By the way Gaylord Perry probably broke the rules every time he pitched, were you against his induction? And answer me please about ARod.

Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 12-15-2015 at 11:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 12-15-2015, 12:18 PM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

I have no idea what you're asking about Arod, and I don't really care. Arod was accused of engaging in conduct prohibited under a collectively bargained labor agreement. The process and potential punishments were spelled out and agreed to by labor and management. He went through the process, and even challenged it in court. A decision was made that comported with the law and the CBA. Issue over.

If Pete Rose wants to challenge his treatment in court, I say go for it big fella. Similarly, if he wants to have the players bargain next time around for the right to bet on baseball or for certain specified lesser punishments if they are found to have bet, or even for any kind of retroactive relief for Pete himself, he can focus his energies there. Good luck with that.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 12-15-2015, 12:32 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

You're missing the forest for the trees, and framing the issue in a misleading way. Obviously the collective bargaining agreement has nothing to do with Rose's situation from a literal point of view. And nobody is suggesting Rose has any recourse, legal or otherwise. Straw man argument. My point is simply one of what I view as fundamental fairness, and I believe the ARod case for all its differences suggests, at the level of the forest (not the trees), that Rose has been punished enough for what he did.

Now, answer my question, do you believe Gaylord Perry should be in the Hall of Fame, or not, and why?

Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 12-15-2015 at 12:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 12-15-2015, 01:16 PM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

No it is not strawman argument. No I will not keep answering your questions about other players. Call me fundamentally unfair. I could not care less.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-15-2015, 01:20 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 30,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings View Post
No it is not strawman argument. No I will not keep answering your questions about other players. Call me fundamentally unfair. I could not care less.
Indeed.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 12-15-2015, 01:29 PM
nolemmings's Avatar
nolemmings nolemmings is online now
Todd Schultz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 3,720
Default

Yes indeed.
__________________
If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other. - Ulysses S. Grant, military commander, 18th US President.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 12-15-2015, 01:37 PM
Mountaineer1999's Avatar
Mountaineer1999 Mountaineer1999 is offline
D0NN1E B
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 964
Default

Does the HOF not feel incomplete without Pete? It is almost becoming laughable as to who is in and who is not allowed or not getting voted in. How can you have a HOF without the all time HR and Hits leaders?
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-15-2015, 01:50 PM
cubsfan-budman cubsfan-budman is offline
Chris.tian Aug.ustus
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 512
Default

he deserves to be in the hall. shouldn't be such a popularity contest.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-15-2015, 07:52 PM
BearBailey BearBailey is offline
Brandon Bailey
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 370
Default

I have no issue with keeping Pete out of baseball, I do have issue with keeping him out of the Hall of Fame, and as long as Pete is not enshrined, I will never step foot or spend a single dollar in the HOF.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 12-15-2015, 11:18 PM
cardsfan73's Avatar
cardsfan73 cardsfan73 is offline
Scott Ti3k
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Missouri
Posts: 713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth View Post
Who cares if he is betting on baseball today? Does somebody have to be a good guy or have no vices to make the HOF? Millions of people bet on baseball. He has already served a sentence far disproportionate to his relevant offense. Is he a jerk? Sure, but so what? Too much sanctimony for me.
I don't really care if he bets, but from the reports I heard when questioned on it he initially lied/mislead Manfred.

Also from what I understand they let him know that if he stayed away from gambling and other questionable activities that would really help his case on getting the ban lifted.


I just don't think it's really to important to ol Charlie Hustle, I think what's important to him is making a buck.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 12-16-2015, 06:13 AM
HRBAKER's Avatar
HRBAKER HRBAKER is offline
Jeff
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 5,255
Default

That's a good point. Why should people get so lathered up about this when it doesn't even matter to Pete enough to make an effort to modify his behavior. Of course it can be a Hall of Fame w/o him, it is every day and will continue to be. He is much more a pathetic as opposed to sympathetic figure to me.
__________________
Check out my aging Sell/Trade Album on my Profile page

HOF Type Collector + Philly A's, E/M/W cards, M101-6, Exhibits, Postcards, 30's Premiums & HOF Photos

"Assembling an unfocused collection for nearly 50 years."
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 12-16-2015, 09:03 AM
Romahawk's Avatar
Romahawk Romahawk is offline
member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 45
Default

After thinking about it a bit maybe Pete should be thankfull that he is not being handed the keys to the Hall Of Fame or maybe it should be the Hall Of Shame.. Here is a little article about the Booze Guzzling, Pill Popping, Racist, Womenizers who are all Hall Of Famers adored by millions of baseball fans...

Yup Pete maybe it's a blessing you are not being recognized as one of the greatest to play the game..


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/sp...famy.html?_r=0
__________________
:

http://romahawk.com
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 12-16-2015, 10:50 AM
Bored5000's Avatar
Bored5000 Bored5000 is offline
Eddie S.
Eddie Smi.th
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Fleetwood, Pa.
Posts: 1,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Romahawk View Post
After thinking about it a bit maybe Pete should be thankfull that he is not being handed the keys to the Hall Of Fame or maybe it should be the Hall Of Shame.. Here is a little article about the Booze Guzzling, Pill Popping, Racist, Womenizers who are all Hall Of Famers adored by millions of baseball fans...

Yup Pete maybe it's a blessing you are not being recognized as one of the greatest to play the game..


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/sp...famy.html?_r=0
It is a blessing for Rose not to be in the Hall of Fame? Like Rose wouldn't instantly revel in the joy of being in the Hall of Fame.

The problem with those types of articles is that they try to justify or rationalize Rose breaking the Cardinal rule of baseball by setting up a strawman and claiming that other people in the Hall of Fame are even worse. Where is the prohibition in major league clubhouses against the various acts committed by other players? The prohibition against betting on games is crystal clear and explicit.

Last edited by Bored5000; 12-16-2015 at 10:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 12-16-2015, 06:14 PM
CMIZ5290 CMIZ5290 is offline
KEVIN MIZE
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: VALDOSTA, GA.
Posts: 6,301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth View Post
I think he's done adequate penance, at this point. Let the punishment fit the crime. I would reinstate him.
+1 big time, Hell, 26 years is enough punishment. Look at others in the Hall, some have very shaky backgrounds....
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 12-16-2015, 06:37 PM
JustinD's Avatar
JustinD JustinD is online now
Ju$tin D@v3n.por+
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Birmingham, Mi
Posts: 2,612
Default

I fall on the side of it being the "baseball" hall of fame not the "personality and upstanding moral character" hall of fame.

To leave out the all time hits leader, home run record holders, arguably the best pitcher in history, and others in a misguided attempt to legislate character takes the credibility of this being a shrine to the "greatest to play the game" and rumples it like a ball of discarded paper into a trash bin.

Do I like them all?

Hell no.

Should the best to play the game be in the hall of fame no matter what?

Hell yes.
__________________
- Justin D.


Player collecting - Lance Parrish, Jim Davenport, John Norlander.

Successful B/S/T with - Highstep74, Northviewcats, pencil1974, T2069bk, tjenkins, wilkiebaby11, baez578, Bocabirdman, maddux31, Leon, Just-Collect, bigfish, quinnsryche...and a whole bunch more, I stopped keeping track, lol.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 12-16-2015, 07:00 PM
Mountaineer1999's Avatar
Mountaineer1999 Mountaineer1999 is offline
D0NN1E B
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 964
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinD View Post
I fall on the side of it being the "baseball" hall of fame not the "personality and upstanding moral character" hall of fame.

To leave out the all time hits leader, home run record holders, arguably the best pitcher in history, and others in a misguided attempt to legislate character takes the credibility of this being a shrine to the "greatest to play the game" and rumples it like a ball of discarded paper into a trash bin.

Do I like them all?

Hell no.

Should the best to play the game be in the hall of fame no matter what?

Hell yes.
+1 , We should all start a Boycott of the HOF and maybe then they change their holier-than-thou ways.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pete Rose RC SGC 98 afklin Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 26 02-03-2011 09:56 AM
Pete Hill Hal Kaplan Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 1 10-14-2010 10:05 PM
Pete Calderon are you there? Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 7 06-04-2003 11:05 PM
PETE Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 2 03-08-2003 12:39 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:00 AM.


ebay GSB