Rose finally cops to betting on baseball

Rose shows lack of respect

By Peter Gammons
Special to ESPN.com

I have always maintained that if Bud Selig decreed Pete Rose eligible for the Hall of Fame pending the vote of the Baseball Writers Association, I would vote for him as a player. Now I hear Bud is going to issue a two-year probation and make Rose eligible only by the vote of the veterans' committee. Fine. Because these last two days have made me rethink my initial decision to vote for him.

First, in betting on baseball as manager -- a position that demands standards higher than those for players -- Rose demonstrated a complete lack of respect or caring for the game.

Then came this week. Turning around on Bart Giamatti? Despicable.

Also, the fact that he has orchestrated the release of his book and his admission of guilt at a time when Dennis Eckersley and Paul Molitor -- two great people who overcame a lot, which Rose hasn't yet -- are being elected is a bold statement that he has no respect for Cooperstown, and that he wants to be in the Hall for one reason -- to make money to feed his addictions.

This is a man who admitted something in a forum in which he can make money. He has no remorse, no respect for anything but his next bet. Rose is perhaps the lowest figure in baseball in my 32 years of covering the sport.

Fay Vincent, a very good man who deserves all of baseball's apologies for the way he was treated, refuted that "the fans want Pete in Cooperstown" argument by pointing out that, in 1947, 15 of 16 owners voted not to allow Jackie Robinson into the majors -- and 85 percent of Americans were against such integration, too. Well, what Branch Rickey did against public opinion, seven years before Brown v. Board of Education, is the single most important moment in baseball and sports history, proof that it's not about what the majority wants at one moment. It's about what's right.

And until Pete Rose proves to me that he cares about something other than Pete Rose, he does not have my vote.

Eckersley had addiction problems, admitted them, confronted them and became a Hall of Famer. Same with Molitor.

What they did never impaired the integrity of baseball.

As far as I'm concerned, Rose can go to Cooperstown and sign tawdry items for those who, like him, have no respect for integrity, baseball or the Hall of Fame.

 

Didn't really think about that part, but of course I am not that well versed in betting 101. So Rose gets a piece of the pie and the bookie gets some as well.

Errrr, so not much response to anything else other than the down with Rose only theme?

 

I got plenty - that just jumped out at me and wanted ot answer it first. BTW, I had forgotten about it but the Gammons' piece reminded me - Eckersley was a drunk.

 

There are a bunch of good op-ed pieces out there right now. Gammons, Boswell in the Wash Post, Verducci over at cnnsi.com....

 

Well of course it would be that one first, it's been the only leg to really stand on.

But we could actually go back and forth forever and I think both make valid points, but it's going to come down which we each see as worse for the integrity of the game, so that's why one will be on one side of the fence and one on the other.

I still think there is more to the story, there is some reason they went after Rose and let all this other crap go on. It could be that Rose slept with the wrong person's wife, he had something on somebody and they wanted to beat him to the punch, or somebody had a crush on Rose and he turned them down.

 

None will last as long as this Rose deal has. I guess that's the price of being the greatest hitter of all time in some peoples eyes and screwing up.

 

He's not even in the top 10 hitters of all time. he got the most hits, yes, but ain't no way, no how he's the best hitter. That is not even arguable.

 

Gambling is THE royal screw up though.

 

I did say in some peoples eyes. Also are you talking from a average only? Well of course not.

 

So this is the worst thing that a player/coach or whatever can do?