pedrospecialk Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 In. You don't keep the all-time hits leader out of the Hall. No chance. It's the National Baseball Hall of Fame, and it's not run by Dr. Phil. I completely understand where people who say no are coming from, and they have some great points, but my personal opinion is that it should be based on stats and achievments on the field. I also believe that Shoeless Joe Jackson should be in - 158-519 K-BB rate? That's just rediculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooseknucks Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 It can't be stressed enough IMO that this is the Baseball Hall of Fame, not the Baseball and Personal Lives Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endeavor Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 In. You don't keep the all-time hits leader out of the Hall. No chance. It's the National Baseball Hall of Fame, and it's not run by Dr. Phil. I completely understand where people who say no are coming from, and they have some great points, but my personal opinion is that it should be based on stats and achievments on the field. I also believe that Shoeless Joe Jackson should be in - 158-519 K-BB rate? That's just rediculous. I agree. It is inexcusable what he did off the field, but the HALL is for numbers and stats and he's got them plenty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDaddyCool Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I know that a lot of people say that Pete has been banished for life and that it should stand. Here's a question I would like to have answered though... When you say banished for life, whose life are you talking about? Are you talking about the life of the player or the life of the game? If you are talking about the life of the player, then upon that players death he should be given consideration for reinstatement or induction into the Hall if his career numbers warrent it. If you are talking about the lifetime of the game itself, then isn't that being somewhat vindictive? Isn't that attempting to punish a corpse for the sake of your own personal moral standards that someone else might not measure up to? Isn't it unfair on that players' family members who might want to see their ancestor forgiven in some way? And can someone who bet on the game earn forgiveness? If not, why not? Are they to be treated as criminals for the rest of their life and for all of their death? And what about Pete Rose Jr.? Since he was Pete's son, shouldn't he have been banned from the game as well and declared guilty by association? Why was he allowed to play the game when Pete was banned? Shouldn't the sins of the father have been visited upon the son? Now I don't ask these questions to start a fight or anything, these are just some things that have crossed my mind from time to time when I have thought about the Pete/HOF question. Now, if Pete can never gain forgiveness for what he has done, even if he comes clean, says he is sorry and admits he has a problem, then how does that make any one of us better than him? If we hold a grudge against Pete, then what's to keep someone else from holding a grudge against any one of us and judging us and the ones we love just as harshly? But, I digress... I say that Pete should be inducted for the way he played the game on the field. I also think that part of his plaque should read that he was banned from baseball for betting on the game. I also think that Joe Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame. I mean come on, ESPN said it best in their 5 reasons you can't blame the White Sox for throwing the 1919 WS: 5. Rampant Corruption - There was already gambling involved in baseball. It's just that baseball didn't want to know about it because they were afraid of what might (and did) happen. 4. Charlie Comisky - If he had just treated his players fairly, if he had not abused them the way he did, if he had payed his players what they were worth, the whole thing might never have happened. 3. Lack of a whistleblower - no one was willing to come forward. Buck Weaver wanted no part of the fix in the first place and told no one which was why he was banned. 2. The game stats were inconclusive - Jackson hit .375 in the series, made no errors in the field and hit the series only home run. 1. THEY WERE AQUITTED!!! - they were found not guilty in the trial. End of story. Now, if you still think that Pete should be banned for (his) life, then I leave you with the words of the late Ted Williams when he was campaigning to get Joe Jackson in the HOF: "When Joe Jackson was banned, he and the other Black Sox were banned from the game for life. JOE JACKSON IS DEAD, HE'S SERVED HIS SENTANCE, LETT HIM IN THE HALL OF FAME!!! When Pete Rose is dead, THEN we can start talking about letting him in!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevattac Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I say in. As far as I know, from reading his book and such, he never bet against his team as a player or manager. So he would not throw the game. Infact if I remember his book correctly, he said that betting for his team gave him a more competitive edge, making random games in June seem like the World Series. I see nothing wrong with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
probaseball203 Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Whos pete rose? :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
probaseball203 Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 hahah im kidding...i would say in..because..the facts are that the man is leading all of baseballs history with 4,256 hits, and the only one with less is ty cobb, and ty has 67 hits less.i mean cmon..this man started the head first slide onto first base! this guy had the determination, to get onto the base by ALL MEANS..and his stats reflect that...he bet on a couple of games..a couple of very important games..but u cant take away his honor for that.. i vote in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goose Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 IN IN IN FOR THE LOVE OF GOD IN!!! He is baseball's ALL TIME hits leader.He is the greatest hitter than ever lived. So what if he was a douchebag.Babe Ruth was a douchebag, he was an alcoholic, he beat his wife and cheated on her with prostitutes.Ty Cobb was probably the biggest asshole in the history of the game. Yeah he bet on baseball.Should he be banned from the game?Yes.From the Hall? NO!!! And its not like he threw games in order to win bets. He bet for the Red to win. There isn't a dang thing wrong with that. A manager is PAID to help his team win. It's his JOB. Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame. And someone else said it on here but his plaque should read: Pete "Charlie Hustle" Rose All-Time Hit King Played the game harder than anybody ever. Banned from baseball for betting on his team to win. And like was said before, let Joe Jackson in as well.He served his life sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBaggio10 Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 I would say in because even tough he bet against his own team, but there is no fighting the 4000+ hits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HFLR Posted July 31, 2005 Share Posted July 31, 2005 IN. The Hit King needs to be in the hall of fame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdewals Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I voted out but some do have good arguments to put him in. maybe put an asterix behind his name? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duckdodger215 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I would say in because even tough he bet against his own team, but there is no fighting the 4000+ hits huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duckdodger215 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 In. were the leading home run leaders in? is the leading strike-out king in? why in the hell is the best hitter not in, then? And, by the way, you may think that betting on baseball is the ultimate sin, but I believe steriods is much worse than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdewals Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 if you bet on your own game and affect it results accordingly its at least on the same level as steroids.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadcap Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 In. if baseball's all-time hits leader doesn't belong in the Hall then who does? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adonis2109 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 In. if baseball's all-time hits leader doesn't belong in the Hall then who does? Agreed. But yet, I think Canseco got screwed when he didn't get to have his last at bats to get to 500 HR, but that's another story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angryrat Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 this has got to be the most worn out debate in baseball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kblavie Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 He should be in. I mean it's not about what type of a person you are, but what type of a player you are. Rose was just a great baseball player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.