Rose finally cops to betting on baseball

WTF? How are those examples trying to win to the best of their ability? You may want to reword that one. Ok, so I hit a HR with a major hangover, but if didn't go out and party, I may actually hit 2 or 3 homeruns. I am all stoked up on coke and put up these numbers, but not in the right frame of mind and could have actually done better or helped my team players do better. I honestly don't see how you can say those 2 examples you gave don't affect the integrity of the game. But yes I am caught doing drugs and finally do get suspended for a year after getting caught the 4th time, well guess what you now comprimised the integrity of your team again. This team signed you to a contract to perform, but now you can't play because of being stupid, thus making your team weaker, they don't have your services for however many games.

Your arguments to make gambling any worse of an affect on the game than these other things don't wash. Think about this, I deal drugs to a player and am a bookie as well, which we know these can go hand in hand a sometimes. Well guess what this player won't lay down the game for me, but I want to make a major bet or affect the bets made with me, so just decided to make an anonymous tip to somebody so this player misses the game. Well guess what that player doing the drugs just affected the outcome of the game and his teams chances of winning.

Let me say I am not defending Pete Rose, but to hold him more accountable for what he did in comparison to what all this other crap does to the game, you have to be kidding.

Yeah, I am thinking how do I want my kids to be, gamble or doing drugs, not that I would want them to do either, but just say I had to pick one.

 

See that is your problem. You don't KNOW whether doing drugs or being hung over would adversely affect a player's performance. McClain is the perfect example. It is no different - performance wise ONLY - from being sick - you never know whether it will affect the game in a positive or negative way.

I GUARANTEE you that Pete betting on certain games changed his behavior in those games.

And as to your example of the player missing the game - the line would either be adjusted or the game pulled.

 

So we are talking about a betting line only and throwing out the integrity part for the sake of part of the argument?

I just don't agree with you about the drinking and drugs part, it does affect everything you do, whether its bad no matter how you look at it, or if some super drug that helped you for one day, but over time actually destroys you. There are just too many examples of how this had destroyed players and how it hurt their performance on the field. Sure there is a small % that it may help short term, but what about the large % is doesn't and just makes it worse?

So here I am today and I make a bet for Carolina the day before the game, with a certain betting line in mind. Then say 3 players (Steve Smith, Rucker and Stephen Davis) are all out doing something illegal and get locked up or suspended tonight after I made the bet. Sure that may affect the line from that day forward but not before hand. But now I just screwed the entire integrity of myself, the team, and the sport. The decisions they made to get in trouble affected the bet and yes the line can be adjusted but just from that point moving forward. It just screwed me and the bet I made.

 

The scenario you described pretty much just happened with the QB Roberson for Kansas State. And you and VP are right about what happens. The line was taken down, then adjusted. One of the reasons I usually don't bet games early is because you never know who might get arrested or show up sick for a game.

BUT the difference is that these things (your 3 player hypothetical, Roberson) are public knowledge. Point shaving scandals aren't. The integrity issue also is about NOT knowing who is fucking with elements of the game.

 

If the player is not engaged in a conspiracy with the dealer, I don't see how what you describe (minus missing the game part) is different than my placing a bet against the Redskins on Sunday because I was in the same club and pissing in the stall next to the one where Lavar Arrington or Patrick Ramsey was puking drunk on Saturday night.

The dealer is still speculating like everyone else on what he THINKS will happen. There's no quid pro quo between the player and the dealer.

 

Not sure I follow the second point here, so are there two different types of integrities? or all of these just different scenarios. With my point we are talking about things that screw the game over and it seems to me we are making a bigger deal about gambling vs. drugs and everything else.

So what's the big stink about this? Is it because of the crime or is there more to the story of maybe a personal vendetta of some conflicts between Rose and a few others?

 

The big stink IS gambling. As I said to T Schroll, the only way for an individual to GAIN from any of this is through placing a bet based on previously known information. That's it. It's the ONLY possible way. A bet HAS to be made. That's why the gambling is THE problem. (BTW, this is also the rationale behind moving to ban steroids or other performance enhancing drugs.) It's the individual gain part.

I agree there are several things which technically may compromise the integrity of the game. A lot of things do. So does bad weather even if you want to really press the issue. And I honestly don't know if a drunk is better or worse at what he does although I have a pretty good idea. It's still a variable as VP said before. So until you can show me that the drunk gained something individually because of it, I'm never going to place it on the same level as gambling when it comes to the "integrity of the game" issue. Ever. It's not the same intent. And the drunk can't have that intent unless he - you guessed it - gambles for profit.

As for the vendetta? Sure. There's a big one when it comes to Vincent, Giamatti, and Rose. Who's fault is that though? If you caught me doing something wrong and I then bad mouthed you while lying about it for the next 14 years I'm guessing you just might think I'm a shithead too.

 

Drugs do not always screw the game. McClain is an example of that. He was wired as hell on coke and played great. Howe prolly pitched wired too and did a good job. It's a crapshoot as to how it affects it, just like any other variable. You just can't get past that.

I am not saying that drugs are OK, I am just saying that they do not affect the integrity of the game as much as a person having money on its outcome. I know people who ran multi million, and sometimes billion, dollar companies that were addcited to alcohol or drugs.

 

Well I guess its just what order we all place the value of certain things or how bad one thing is compared to the other. My entire point behind all of this is that to me there is a lot of crap that happens in sports that gets a lot less attention than all of this with Rose and for the length of time as well. I just don't see what Rose did as that big of a bad mark on integrity as compared to a lot of the things we all mentioned apart from gambling with certain inside information or control.

Now to the McClain example, if him doing drugs helped him to perform better in a game that what he was actually capable of then everytime he stepped out on the field drugged up he cheated players in the game, the sport, fans, owners and whoever else you want to name.

Back to Rose again, so whoever his bookie or bet was made with, I can't imagine them letting Rose bet against a team he had control over to lose, with him being the manager to have so much control over that. Now as far as increasing his odds to win a game and them taking that bet, sure it could happen, but you wouldn't have the control over it like you would losing.

I don't know, what are the top ten problems we can come up with in sports?

Gambling
Drugs
Sex offenders
Murder or involvement
Theft
whatever else??

Again I ask the question, why is the bandwagon of branding the "A" on Rose such a big deal in comparison to a lot of other things that imo seem to be a lot worse? Sure Rose should be punished, but damn letting that 4 time drug user back into the league so he can get paid and have that much influence over kids that watch sports and want to grow up to "Be like Mike" or whoever else you can think of.

 

You are joking, right? If you manage a team and you ask me to take a bet that they will lose - I am in for whatever amount you want. Then I'll place the same bet with any bookie I can find without raising suspicion. If I know you are going to throw a game, that is the best position in the world to be in.