An Iconic Fantasy Baseball Community
Moderator: Baseball Moderators
LCBOY wrote: This is one of my pet peeves. The HoF is very hypocritical in that they banned Rose but still have his stuff on display. If they don't want Pete in, then take dwon all the Pete Rose displays. Why should the HoF "profit" from Rose's name?
LCBOY wrote:This is one of my pet peeves. The HoF is very hypocritical in that they banned Rose but still have his stuff on display. If they don't want Pete in, then take down all the Pete Rose displays. Why should the HoF "profit" from Rose's name?
benjapage wrote: if he did bet on his team, you can be assured he bet *for* his team.
Pogotheostrich wrote:Here is what I think should happen
Once he admits he bet on baseball he can be enshrined in the HOF but never ever work in MLB again. If he doesn't admit to it, he can be enshrined postmortem.
ty cobb was a vicious criminal. completely unlikeable, as stories go. but the hall of fame should not be a popularity contest
The Dude wrote: So, put aside the rule and ask, did Pete do anything that was wrong - i.e. would affect the game outcomes? Its my understanding that Pete bet on his own team winning. It would certainly be problematic if he was betting on his own team losing, but winning, what's he going to do - cheat to win? I realize that there are rules and regulations and standards of appropriate conduct here, but do you think Pete managed differently because he bet on games? I don't...
In a sense, he was buying stock in his own team... I don't see how this affected any baseball outcomes...
And for this reason, I think the rules should be bent, and the crazy old man should be in the Hall so we don't have to hear about this anymore.
But I'm dying to be proven wrong here...
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 7 guests