Cincinnati Reds Legend Pete Rose Has Died

[The Duck]

Rip Pete Rose you were one of the best.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/30/sport/pete-rose-death-mlb-spt/index.html

https://www.mlb.com/reds/news/pete-rose-top-career-moments

Pete Rose Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Rookie Status & More | Baseball-Reference.com

Check out the latest Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Rookie Status & More of Pete Rose. Get info about his position, age, height, weight, draft status, bats, throws, school and more on Baseball-reference.com

www.baseball-reference.com

https://www.mlb.com/player/pete-rose-121454

 

[ron.alan]

I remember watching him get his 4,192 hit that broke the record (on TV).

 

[KGIII]

It's unfortunate that he'll never be in the Hall of Fame.

 

[The Duck]

I remember watching him get his 4,192 hit that broke the record (on TV).

 

[truckerDave]

It's unfortunate that he'll never be in the Hall of Fame.

I agree. The MLB (and practically every pro sports org in the US) makes a killing from sports betting these days. They should, IMO, drop the ban and allow Mr. Hustle his rightful place in the HOF. Especially considering there was never any evidence (that I'm aware of) that suggested he bet on his team to lose.

RIP Pete

 

[KGIII]

Especially considering there was never any evidence (that I'm aware of) that suggested he bet on his team to lose.

That's what makes it so unfortunate, in my view.

Had he tanked a game because he bet on his team to lose then there's a good reason to be outraged. All evidence suggests that he only bet on his team to win. I don't see that as particularly egregious.

Ah well... Maybe this will change in the future. Maybe... (I wouldn't bet on it, but it could change.)

 

[ron.alan]

All evidence suggests that he only bet on his team to win. I don't see that as particularly egregious.

While I agree he should be in the Hall, betting on your own team to win is still wrong. It may make a person take chances with a player's health (i.e., playing a good player when he's hurt) when otherwise they wouldn't.

 

[KGIII]

While I agree he should be in the Hall, betting on your own team to win is still wrong.

Yeah, but I think it's not so bad as to keep him from the HOF. It's wrong, but not so much so that he'll be lost to history. It's 'wrong' but not nearly as wrong as it could be - if that makes more sense. It's not like it's Chicago in, what was it, 1917.

 

[ron.alan]

It's not like it's Chicago in, what was it, 1917

Close, 1919. (No, I didn't know that offhand, had to look it up.)

 

[KGIII]

Close, 1919. (No, I didn't know that offhand, had to look it up.)

That'd be the year. They were called the Chicago Black Sox for a number of years after that - until the stain wore off, I suppose.

 

[truckerDave]

It may make a person take chances with a player's health (i.e., playing a good player when he's hurt) when otherwise they wouldn't.

I don't recall. Was he managing at the time? If he was, I can see your point.

Edit:
I did a little reading on the subject this morning to refresh my memory. So, no need to answer my question above. But that got me to thinking.

Rose and Commissioner Giamatti agreed on a "lifetime" ban. And not a "permanent" ban. Well, Rose's lifetime is over. Correct? So, the ban should be too.