Pete rose should be in the hall of fame?

since the nba going through this gambling thing with its referee. should pete rose be in the hall of fame

Pete rose should be in the hall of fame?
I agree that Pete Rose should never be allowed to manage ever again.



However, he was a great player. He is MLB's all time hits leader. I think he deserves to be in the HOF.
Reply:Every player since 1920 knows there is ONE thing he cannot do and that is bet on baseball. Sure, performance enhancing drugs ought to be added (making a giant list of TWO things, but the Player's Union surely wouldn't allow it -- the $$ gobbling sissies) but that isn't there yet. So just one thing is: don't bet on the game.

Rose was a MANAGER. Who else is in a better position to help force the outcome of a game?

He should NEVER be allowed in the Hall. Never ever.
Reply:Definitely not - #1. He bet on baseball. #2. Betting on baseball is against the rules. #3. Punishment is a permanent ban from the game. #4 Players who are on the permanently ineligible list are ( by Hall of Fame Rules) not eligible for induction. There shouldn't even be a debate on this subject. For now, Pete will just have to be satisfied with his name being in the record books. Are his accomplishments incredible? Yes. Without his gambling would he be in the Hall? Of course he would. But he knew that betting on baseball is forbidden by MLB, he knew what the punishment was, and he knew what that punishment would do to his Hall of Fame eligibility. He chose his own path, and now must live with it. While I loved Pete Rose as a ballplayer, as a human being I think he's dirt.

As for the NBA, the argument that another sport may be tainted doesn't mean that baseball should allow itself to be. That would be like saying, well the WWE allows its' wrestlers to take steroids, so the other sports should allow them too.
Reply:no!
Reply:I guess if we put Rose in, then we need to put Donaghy in the basketball HOF..
Reply:Absolutely not.



He knew the rule before he started gambling. It's pretty simple - if you bet on baseball, you're banned for life.



For those that said, he deserves to be in as a p[layer don't know the exact criteria for induction.



It's not only what you did on the field, it takes character into account also.

.
Reply:He should be. On the field, he played the right way and put up numbers better than most Hall of Fame caliber players. So he placed bets, big deal. He didn't find a way to juice his numbers or anything. He didn't take steroids like some playewrs that will make it in (you know the one(s) I'm talking about). He in know way cheated at the game. Hell, I'm positive that other Hall of Famers have bet on games and that some future ones still do, they just have yet to be caught. Pete just failed to sneak under the radar. My point is, he played the game fairly and has earned a spot in the Hall of Fame.
Reply:Pete rose will eventually be in the hall of fame. Probably not too long after hes dead he'll get the nod.
Reply:Hell no!!!. There is a rule in every clubhouse no betting on the game and he broke it. Its that simple and if he is allowed then those players from the "Black sox's" should be let in like Joe Jackson. Besides he has admit to betting and for the games he managed and played in I think?.
Reply:no he has admitted to betting his own team.. this ruins the integrity of the game,and i dont care how many hits he had......hes still the same man. i have read the dowd report, and i can tell you that it changed my mind completely about pete... hes trash...
Reply:Pete Rose and the NBA scandal have nothing to do with one another. But, yes Pete should be in the Hall of Fame.
Reply:No.



However, I do think asking any question about Rose in regards to his status, possible reinstatement, or anything to do with the Hall Of Fame should be a hanging offense without appeal.



-----

To clarify a point about Rose's enduring punishment: when he willingly signed his "permanently ineligible" agreement in 1989, the Hall had no formal restriction that would keep Rose off the ballot. The Hall codified its own ineligibility policy in 1991. So, yeah, the Hall really did screw Rose on that matter, but (a) I tend to agree with it even though, as a policy, it is pretty weak and (b) I have no sympathy for Rose whatsoever, just to be clear about that. But Rose did NOT know he would not be getting into the Hall.



He does not deserve a Hall plaque. A man in disgrace has no claim to the sport's HIGHEST personal honor.
Reply:Yes most Def. I am from Cincinnti and still live there today and everyone here strongly belives you go into the hall of fame based on what you do on the field it shouldnt matter what he did off the field and Bud Selig has something against him so im counting down days till Selig is dead
Reply:I can't believe we have a 3rd question today on this topic-



Pete Rose violated the rules and deserves some sort of sanction for the things he was involved in while employed as manager of the Reds.



On the other hand, Rose' accomplishments as a player deserve and require recognition by baseball and the HOF.



Jackson and some of the other 7 (maybe not all) accepted money to throw games. While Rose gambled he did not throw games.