Don't know if this will make any difference to anyone, but to me personally whether Rose gambled/gambles is irrelevant to his inclusion in the Hall of Fame.  In my opinion, the Hall of Fame is about performance, and their adoption of the integrity clause used by MLB is a cop-out.

That's a different issue from whether he should be banned from participating in MLB-sanctioned baseball exhibitions.  I don't think Rose should be banned-for-life from baseball, because I believe MLB is inconsistent in how the commissioner's office applies bans.  I think betting on your team is a legitimate reason to be banned...I just think MLB doesn't apply bans appropriately, justly or consistently.

The reason this won't be resolved until Rose is dead is because it involves MLB admitted *they* did something wrong as well, and forces the Hall of Fame to deal with an issue that they don't really want to deal with.

For the record, I really don't like the commissioner's position that Rose has to reject gambling and show a particular type of contrition to get un-banned.  I don't like MLB being morality police (he's either banned because he gambled while playing, or he's NOT banned because he gambled while playing.  None of this crap because he's STILL gambling.  Not your job.)

Posted by: Ben at 12:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 215 words, total size 1 kb.