CT poll- Rose in/out

[sikeston bulldog2]

The overall Tally is 32-12. About 75 percent.

Panel one voted 14-2 In
Panel two voted 11-5 need 12.
Panel three is at 7-5. Need 12.

[ramfandan]

Is it illegal for the owner of a horse entered in the Kentucky Derby, to bet on his horse to win? That’s what Rose did. He never bet against his own team which is critical.

No one is talking about legality. He broke the rules, he knew he broke the rules, and the rule along with its associated penalty are very clear.

Find it interesting of the varying feelings on gambling by participants of the game. The Black Sox scandal threw baseball for a loop regarding the integrity of baseball.
Obviously baseball felt Rule 21 was VERY important as with all the numerous rules of the game . The RULE 21 prohibiting gambling on baseball by the players , managers , etc. was POSTED in Writing in BOTH the Home and Visitors clubhouses in every MLB city. So this was not some obscure rule buried in rule book . Every player, manager , employee knew they would receive a permanent ban for violating that rule.
Pete Rose , for whatever reason , decided he didn't need to comply with the rule.

[MikoTython]

Not much of a baseball fan, but actually regardless of the sport, or level, if it draws betting action and one participates directly, or thru a third party, or furnishes info., or in any way lets a personal/commercial aspect effect their role/duty/responsibility/position of trust, to do other than promote competition in the best interest esp. of the team, but also the league, sports in general, that should be a zero tolerance situation.

out.

Great players are being kept out for ped's. But gambling is ok ? They're both forms of cheating.

Letting someone in after death is still tolerance of the intolerable. Its just sort of a mealy-mouthed way of giving in to people who don't see the hazard, or have an interest in lowering the standards. Gambling is already way off the charts, the last thing needed is to be yet more permissive.

Its a drag that such an obviously great player was shunned by the league - but then, that's the risk he knowingly ran when he gave into what was probably a gambling addiction. Rose was/is far from alone, uniquely at all subject to gambling interests or blackmail/exploitation, then & currently.

Now, if a person had gotten in a jam, and self-reported, that might be a different case, with some severe penalty short of banishment. jmo.

[ronnie76]

Is it illegal for the owner of a horse entered in the Kentucky Derby, to bet on his horse to win? That’s what Rose did. He never bet against his own team which is critical.

The problem is, he held back players (pitchers especially) from games he didn't bet on so they would be available for ones he did bet on.

[sikeston bulldog2]

Panel three is at 7-6 in. This panel will be a no vote.

[AZ_Cardsfan]

Rose - out. he touched the 3rd rail for personal gain and never showed true remorse.

Bonds, Clemens, etc - In. They used PEDs like everyone else to help their teams win. Yeah,maybe personal gain but they were already supremely talented and rich so I'm going with they wanted to win.

Until they restore reality to the process of entry I have lost respect for the HOF.

[last deadhead]

i always believed he should be in. if his bat is on display, his glove his shoes ect then he should be in as well. the hall and mlb should not be able to profit off his legacy if he and his family cant.
i do understand people who think otherwise though
as for managing differently in games he bet on or did not bet on i have never seen anyone show any evidence of this happening and with all the videos, stats internet you would think there would be some concrete evidence that he manipulated games as a manager one way or the other.
lastly,now that baseball has not only gotten in bed with gambling but has fully prostituted itself to the gamblers in that bed,i cant see any reason to prevent a dead man from being in a museum!
i vote in

[sikeston bulldog2]

Panel three needs one vote to close. Currently 8-7 In.

Couple super interesting phenomena.

First panel was 14-2 in. Second panel was 11-5 out. Third panel will be out. Three sets of eyes , two no gos.

Next- the first panel followed the Roe- no discussion. They voted 14-2. The other two panels had mucho narratives but voted no. That is neat.

Seems the more you talk about it the vote goes no.

Total tally 33-14. 68.75 percent. Needs 75.

[HighHeat23]

How I would vote - Out
What will happen - In

As the Mississippi River told the Missouri River, my sediments exactly.

My thoughts as well.

Funny thing is I want Shoeless Joe in. To me his transgression was not the same because they were trying to survive an owner who may be the true definition of cheap. Does that justify the difference in my opinion between Joe and Pete? Probably not.

[sikeston bulldog2]

How I would vote - Out
What will happen - In

As the Mississippi River told the Missouri River, my sediments exactly.

My thoughts as well.

Funny thing is I want Shoeless Joe in. To me his transgression was not the same because they were trying to survive an owner who may be the true definition of cheap. Does that justify the difference in my opinion between Joe and Pete? Probably not.

Your out vote closes panel three.

Currently three panels complete.

14-2
11-5
8-8

Again the 14-2 group basically voted one word. The last two panels had verbal exchanges. As the vote progresses it gets more dialoge and worse results.

Current tally 33-15 In, but 68.75 percent. Not in.

[ramfandan]

Is it illegal for the owner of a horse entered in the Kentucky Derby, to bet on his horse to win? That’s what Rose did. He never bet against his own team which is critical.

The problem is, he held back players (pitchers especially) from games he didn't bet on so they would be available for ones he did bet on.

Excellent point, Ronnie ! Often heard the rationale, ‘ well he only bet on his team to win’ But what about the games he chose NOT to bet on. Some argue that the pro gamblers ( who were aware of Tose betting) would NOT bet on his non betting games as they would figure Rose realized certain guys were banged up , needed a rest, etc. they thought his non betting games sent a signal to stay clear of those games .

[thetank2]

Just think Rose admitted having an affair with 16 year old whom said she was 14 or 15 at the time during a defamation hearing.

Does he drive over to her house to pick her up?

He lied for years. He was initially going into the Phillirs HOF until this story was reiterated.

[desertrat23]

One of the most fundamental goal in baseball is to get a hit.
The best kind of hit is a home run.

It’s comical that neither the guy who has the most hits nor the guy who has the most “best kind of hits” are not in the Hall of Fame.

Put Pete in, explain the gambling on his plaque.

[Strummer Jones]

I dunno about this panel stuff, but I've gone back and forth.

After MLB gave a big sloppy kiss to all those betting sites and tried to get sports gambling legalized everywhere, I was in the "screw it, let Charlie Hustle in" camp.

But, on the other hand, Pete was NOT a good dude in almost any facet of humanity. He could play baseball, but he gambled on his own games. That shows a lack of character and I think taints the sanctity of the game. Laugh all you want about that, but I think it's important. And, yes, an example needs to be set. And what example is "okay, once you croak, you're back in good graces". Because what did Pete REALLY lose? He didn't get to see himself in the hall of fame. But he still died knowing that he was the all-time hits leader. And he surely knew that he was a hall-of-famer in spirit, if not practice. If Pete gets into the hall of fame, then these other guys that set a bad example for personal gain really have nothing to lose. If they're caught, they'll be immortalized later. Big whoop.

And you can say all you want about certain players who ARE in the hall of fame who were bad people. Two wrongs does not make a right. Standards have changed over time.

And I won't even touch the extra-personal part of Rose's life. That speaks for itself.

So no, I don't think he belongs.

[sikeston bulldog2]

One of the most fundamental goal in baseball is to get a hit.
The best kind of hit is a home run.

It’s comical that neither the guy who has the most hits nor the guy who has the most “best kind of hits” are not in the Hall of Fame.

Put Pete in, explain the gambling on his plaque.

Your vote one on panel 4.

Overall 34-15

[sikeston bulldog2]

I dunno about this panel stuff, but I've gone back and forth.

After MLB gave a big sloppy kiss to all those betting sites and tried to get sports gambling legalized everywhere, I was in the "screw it, let Charlie Hustle in" camp.

But, on the other hand, Pete was NOT a good dude in almost any facet of humanity. He could play baseball, but he gambled on his own games. That shows a lack of character and I think taints the sanctity of the game. Laugh all you want about that, but I think it's important. And, yes, an example needs to be set. And what example is "okay, once you croak, you're back in good graces". Because what did Pete REALLY lose? He didn't get to see himself in the hall of fame. But he still died knowing that he was the all-time hits leader. And he surely knew that he was a hall-of-famer in spirit, if not practice. If Pete gets into the hall of fame, then these other guys that set a bad example for personal gain really have nothing to lose. If they're caught, they'll be immortalized later. Big whoop.

And I won't even touch the extra-personal part of Rose's life. That speaks for itself.

What do you mean panel stuff. Each year, another committee, I forget their title, will prepare the eight player ballot. Each year, a new set of sixteen eyes form a voting panel. This group is made of former players execs etc. they vote. Takes 12 of 16 to get in.