Reader Mail

Keep Rose Out?

And Lott? And women at Augusta? And who else?

12.16.02

Send to Kindle

HALL OF SHAMER
Re: Paul Beston's Charlie's Latest Hustle:

Paul Beston buys into the same tired argument that all the Keep Rose Out posse has been using in recent weeks.

Yes, Paul. Rule 21(d) is clear. Bet on baseball, you're out for a year. Bet on your team, you're out permanently.

Only problem is, Commish Giamatti signed an agreement that there was NO CONCLUSION on whether or not Rose bet on baseball!!!

So unless there is some new evidence to convict him, Rule 21(d) would have no bearing on the Rose case. In fact, I am quite certain that no court in the U.S. would convict Rose of betting on baseball. That is why Giamatti was so eager to sign a deal with Rose back in '89 accepting his suspension.

In fact, that is why they waited until his playing career was over. For many years, his gambling was well known by the authorities. But as a player, Rose would have grieved and easily won any "gambling" suspension.
-- Richard Goldstein
Somerset, NJ

Paul Beston's article is a breath of fresh air amidst the stench of all the whining sports writers calling for Pete Rose's reinstatement.
Rose is a lying, cheating weasel who has never taken responsibility for his own actions. He deserves to be banned.
-- Elliot Ganz

I saw Pete Rose's first wife on a talk show years ago. She summed up Charlie's hustle pretty well, to wit: "Pete Rose as a human being is a great ballplayer."

Exactly so.

I wouldn't want Pete Rose moving into my neighborhood. He'd likely bring in the wrong kind of visitors. If I had a daughter and she brought him home I'd be horrified. But a Baseball Hall of Fame without Pete Rose in it is an absurdity.

Bud Selig could commit his first sensible public act by allowing Rose to be elected to the hall while keeping Rose's ban from baseball otherwise intact. And let's just skip the phony confession and insincere contrition. I'm not interested in listening to some "it depends on what the meaning of 'is,' is" type of admission cooked up by Pete's lawyers.

Keeping Rose out of the hall punishes him, but it also punishes baseball fans who visit baseball's jewel of a shrine. The hall is there to celebrate great play on the field. And few have played baseball better than Pete Rose.

In fact, if hundreds of major leaguers played ball now like Pete did, America's summertime productivity would take serious hit. No one in America would be doing anything except watching baseball games from April through October (current major leaguers playing in empty stadiums, take note).

Gambling on baseball makes Pete a scofflaw, and it seems clear that baseball has the goods on Pete in this regard. So baseball has the right to cast him into outer darkness. But don't throw the fans into outer darkness with him. Don't try to make us forget Pete's 4,000 plus hits. Don't try to make us forget that Pete Rose made baseball about as fun and exciting as anyone who ever put on cleats.
-- Larry Thornberry
Tampa, FL

I do not think for a moment that Pete Rose should be able again to be involved in the game of baseball. Perhaps, that is because I think he is a reprehensible person. So saying, that does not diminish his achievements of the baseball field. In my 70+ years I have watched many great players and count Pete among that group. No matter what anyone says, he belongs in the Hall of Fame.
-- Martha Craig

Like this Article

Print this Article

Print Article