...Pete Rose

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
From Forbes magazine, March 18, 2015

On Rose and HOF.....


Former Commissioner Fay Vincent was the Deputy Commissioner when Commissioner Bart Giamatti announced Rose’s banishment on August 24, 1989 and was an integral part of the Rose decision making process. When I interviewed Mr. Vincent in September 2014, I asked him about a possible Rose reinstatement. Mr. Vincent didn’t mince words.


“It is not a question that we should feel sorry for Pete Rose or whether he has served his time – none of that is relevant,” Mr. Vincent said. “What is relevant is the gambling deterrent in baseball is perfectly effective. Nobody bets on baseball and I mean nobody. And the reason is absolutely clear and if you change that deterrent, even if you wrinkle it a little bit, you run the risk of undermining the game of baseball. If you reinstate him, you are fooling around with a major deterrent that has been perfectly successful.”
 
yankeesince59 said:
...sorry mensa, but it's not just the "writers". Do a little reading/research on the subject...hell, I think there's even sites that limit their wording to 2 syllables or less.

...tell me, who's more deserving of the HOF?

...this guy; ... .303 .375 .409 .784

...or this guy; .356 .423 .517 .940
Click to expand...

the "writer" is me you huckleberry, read it again, and see me after class, no play time for you!
 
Pastafazul said:
the "writer" is me you huckleberry, read it again, and see me after class, no play time for you!
Click to expand...

..."huckleberry"?...lol, OK. All I can say is that if you didn't typically type as a 6 year old, maybe people would not see you as one...and maybe they'd also be able to better understand wtf you're actually talking about.

...also noticed you conveniently dodged my simple question...that makes 2 direct questions from me that you've completely avoided. (you know what the other one is too, don't you?)
 
totus44 said:
I have no issue with us disagreeing on this topic....but I'm offended that you cherry picked my sentence and didn't quote it in its entirety.

Nuff said.
Click to expand...

...you're "offended"?...by what?.
...sorry, but I didn't cherry pick anything, not at all...I simply chose ONE part of your post as how shallow your stance is. Now, if you want to expound on the rest of your post and make your stance more compelling, go ahead, and I'll respond in kind. (but just to reassure you, I even went back and edited the quote to include your entire statement, OK?)

...but lets face it, your opinion on the Rose subject is based on myopic emotion instead of common sense and practicality.
 
The kettle callin the pot black...

what the fook does rose betting on any game have to do with the outcome of a game? he's a degenerate gambler , wow .... And I didn't know you had to be a Harvard grad to participate on this board, lol
 
Pastafazul said:
The kettle callin the pot black...

what the fook does rose betting on any game have to do with the outcome of a game? he's a degenerate gambler , wow .... And I didn't know you had to be a Harvard grad to participate on this board, lol
Click to expand...

...if you actually feel compelled to even ask that question, you're obviously too stupid to be able to understand the answer.

...but I really don't mind helping to educate the ignorant...here, try reading and grasping the obvious...and if you still don't "get it", Harvard certainly won't do you any good either.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertai.../why-pete-rose-still-cant-be-absolved/378866/

http://www.sportsonearth.com/articl...think-gambling-isnt-baseballs-biggest-problem


...if this doesn't answer your question, I don't know what else to tell you

...now, are you going to answer my questions or not?
 
Last edited:
My statement called into question the incongruence between gambling and PED offenses. Parsing out the second half of my sentence was a mis characterization of my statement. It's not myopic or emotional. Fact is that baseball has always had a consistency issue.

As I have made abundantly clear over the years to you is that my position has always been to apply more contextual analysis to offenses rather than the all or nothing standards. The rules are out of date, ball players are playing in poker tournaments, casinos and legal gambling in almost every state. Baseball is making a mistake to not look at this situation holistically. MLB is being myopic and emotional here.
 
yankeesince59 said:
...if you actually feel compelled to even ask that question, you're obviously too stupid to be able to understand the answer.

...but I really don't mind helping to educate the ignorant...here, try reading and grasping the obvious...and if you still don't "get it", Harvard certainly won't do you any good either.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertai.../why-pete-rose-still-cant-be-absolved/378866/

http://www.sportsonearth.com/articl...think-gambling-isnt-baseballs-biggest-problem


...if this doesn't answer your question, I don't know what else to tell you

...now, are you going to answer my questions or not?
Click to expand...

Wow! Such class
 
totus44 said:
My statement called into question the incongruence between gambling and PED offenses. Parsing out the second half of my sentence was a mis characterization of my statement. It's not myopic or emotional. Fact is that baseball has always had a consistency issue.

As I have made abundantly clear over the years to you is that my position has always been to apply more contextual analysis to offenses rather than the all or nothing standards. The rules are out of date, ball players are playing in poker tournaments, casinos and legal gambling in almost every state. Baseball is making a mistake to not look at this situation holistically. MLB is being myopic and emotional here.
Click to expand...

...tote, you're trying to draw a parallel between 2 completely different offenses (betting on baseball games and PEDs) even though BOTH offenses are currently keeping a handful of players out of the HOF...and THAT is what we are talking about here. Not about morals or anything like it...Baseball governs itself and always has and you have a set of rules for Baseball which are cut and dry and another set of rules for the HOF which is based on VOTERS.

...I'm still waiting to hear how keeping Rose out of the HOF "hurts Baseball"... and I'd also like to know how Baseball itself is being "myopic and emotional" ...and you've already said that you "don't give a shit about the gambling rules" and so if you are suggesting that Rose should be exempt from this rule just because he was a one dimensional slap hitter who acquired a lot of singles based purely on longevity, well you are in fact basing your stance on "emotion".

...and no matter how you want to spin it, Baseball has NEVER been inconsistent where betting on games is concerned...that rule has been in place for 100 years and the rule has been placed in every MLB clubhouse since then and the rule is very very clear...if you bet on Baseball, you're out...but you want to make an exception for Rose for some unexplained reason.

...and again, bringing a strawman into this by citing "ball players are playing in poker tournaments, casinos and legal gambling in almost every state" is not only silly but it's also irrelevant...are ANY of these players betting on Baseball ? The rule says nothing about prohibiting Baseball players betting on other sports, only Baseball, and if you don't see the difference, well, I'm sorry.

...are you seriously suggesting that Baseball players should be allowed to bet on Baseball games?
 
Last edited:
Pastafazul said:
Wow! Such class
Click to expand...

...thank you, thank you very much.

...now, have you "educated" yourself enough to be able to offer any cognizant thoughts on this topic whatsoever?


...and are you going to answer the 2 questions?
 
Landis didn't create those gambling rules until 1927. So then how are we supposed to believe the game had any integrity prior to that? Try applying the anti-PED logic here.....be consistent. That isn't a straw man.

Those rules are prohibition era antiques, and over time culture has changed its position on the legality of gambling. It's time to either (a) water those rules down, or (b) ramp up the PED penalties. If we are to exclude Rose, Bonds, etc from the HOF....then maybe we also need to analyze pre-1927 players and stats. Based on baseball historians, there are a lot of questions from the early days of the game.

This is the extent of my comments on this subject. As I said, my position is that baseball has a consistency issue and that stems from an inability to normalize the temporal aspects of the game related to both changes in culture and the evolution of man and science.

I applaud your position for the integrity of the game...on that we agree 100%. Where we differ is in the interpretation of how best to achieve it.
 
Mattingly23NY said:
From Forbes magazine, March 18, 2015

On Rose and HOF.....


Former Commissioner Fay Vincent was the Deputy Commissioner when Commissioner Bart Giamatti announced Rose’s banishment on August 24, 1989 and was an integral part of the Rose decision making process. When I interviewed Mr. Vincent in September 2014, I asked him about a possible Rose reinstatement. Mr. Vincent didn’t mince words.


“It is not a question that we should feel sorry for Pete Rose or whether he has served his time – none of that is relevant,” Mr. Vincent said. “What is relevant is the gambling deterrent in baseball is perfectly effective. Nobody bets on baseball and I mean nobody. And the reason is absolutely clear and if you change that deterrent, even if you wrinkle it a little bit, you run the risk of undermining the game of baseball. If you reinstate him, you are fooling around with a major deterrent that has been perfectly successful.”
Click to expand...

Again.....1989 logic that doesn't conform to 2015. And to Mr. Vincent Man&Woman only marry, Bruce was Bruce, and White men are presidents. Not to mention outside of Vegas and AC, Indian casinos hadn't started popping up all over. Avenues of gambling are far more pervasive today and as such one could imagine that Pete would have had sufficient opportunity to exercise his illness outside of illegal sports books.

If you think ball players today aren't gambling.....please.
 
Just when you have one hemorrhoid subside, a new one rears it's ugly head...
 
totus44 said:
Landis didn't create those gambling rules until 1927. So then how are we supposed to believe the game had any integrity prior to that? Try applying the anti-PED logic here.....be consistent. That isn't a straw man.

...sorry, but it is in fact a straw man when you incorrectly apply one set of separate rules to a completely different one. And what happened prior to 1927 is also a straw argument and completely irrelevant because it has no bearing on what has happened since. What we DO know is that a very simple and very logical rule about betting on Baseball games was put into effect...And Rose knew the consequences, but bet anyway, and got caught...end of story.

Those rules are prohibition era antiques, and over time culture has changed its position on the legality of gambling. It's time to either (a) water those rules down, or (b) ramp up the PED penalties. If we are to exclude Rose, Bonds, etc from the HOF....then maybe we also need to analyze pre-1927 players and stats. Based on baseball historians, there are a lot of questions from the early days of the game.

...why can't you get it through your head that we're not talking about culture in general, we're talking about BASEBALL!...like I've said about 3 freaking times, Baseball is a separate entity unto itself and is governed by itself...and so is the HOF. And you drawing parallels to general laws and morays and attempting to apply them to Baseball is way off base...they DO NOT APPLY...our government made that ruling many many years ago.
...and sorry, but unless you can produce a time machine you cannot answer "questions from the earlier days of the game"...you're just bring more irrelevant things into this convo...it really is a very simple discussion but you're making it complicated with stuff that does not even apply to the crux of the discussion.

This is the extent of my comments on this subject. As I said, my position is that baseball has a consistency issue and that stems from an inability to normalize the temporal aspects of the game related to both changes in culture and the evolution of man and science.

...again, you cannot use general laws and morays in conjunction with Baseball, period...squawk all you want about it but it does not change the facts.

I applaud your position for the integrity of the game...on that we agree 100%. Where we differ is in the interpretation of how best to achieve it.

I'll ask again, "how is excluding Rose from the HOF "hurting Baseball?"...and I'll also ask again, "Are you seriously suggesting that Baseball players should be allowed to bet on Baseball games?



...if you're truly done with this topic, that's fine too.
Click to expand...
 
totus44 said:
Don't worry 59, you're always a pain in the ass, its factored into the baseline. :mooning:
Click to expand...

...am I a horse's ass?... certainly...am I a pain in the ass?...perhaps...but am I ever in doubt?...never.

...fwiw, what hammer was referring to was not about either of us.
 
yankeesince59 said:
...am I a horse's ass?... certainly...am I a pain in the ass?...perhaps...but am I ever in doubt?...never.

...fwiw, what hammer was referring to was not about either of us.
Click to expand...

Where did I say "horse"? lol! Now if you were reading my thoughts Mr. Mind control, you would have seen this....but that ain't a horse.

baboon-ass.jpg
 
totus44 said:
Where did I say "horse"? lol! Now if you were reading my thoughts Mr. Mind control, you would have seen this....but that ain't a horse.

baboon-ass.jpg
Click to expand...

Bwaaahaaaaahaaaa

Now that's one chapped ass, quick give him a case of Prep-H.....

ah fk it, just break out the Cortisone Gallon IV Jugs.......
 
totus44 said:
Where did I say "horse"? lol! Now if you were reading my thoughts Mr. Mind control, you would have seen this....but that ain't a horse.

baboon-ass.jpg
Click to expand...

:biglaugh::mook:
Hey, did this Baboon come from the same Pig Barn, that Darwin (the pig fkr) was busted in........(Hammer's Post yesterday, on the Pig Fkr), being busted, with a six pack of Hamm's)........

Don't tell me Darwin got ahold of a Baboon too, what's next (sheep already taken care of), perhaps he should pay a visit, to the Rosamond - Endangered-Feline Breeding Compound.....

"Officer the Hamm's made me do it,"!!!!!! .......

Hamm's is Seattle's recycled waste water....!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top