Gothamite Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Oops. http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/13114874/notebook-obtained-lines-shows-pete-rose-bet-baseball-player-1986 For 26 years, Pete Rose has kept to one story: He never bet on baseball while he was a player.Yes, he admitted in 2004, after almost 15 years of denials, he had placed bets on baseball, but he insisted it was only as a manager.But new documents obtained by Outside the Lines indicate Rose bet extensively on baseball -- and on the Cincinnati Reds -- as he racked up the last hits of a record-smashing career in 1986. The documents go beyond the evidence presented in the 1989 Dowd report that led to Rose's banishment and provide the first written record that Rose bet while he was still on the field."This does it. This closes the door," said John Dowd, the former federal prosecutor who led MLB's investigation.Scumbag.Hope his last defenders are finally shamed into silence. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadragon76 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 ...And any hope for the Hall of Fame is now toast.I wonder if the Commissioner is going to retract the offer for him to be at the All-Star game in Cincinnati? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 We can only hope so. He was also trying to get reinstated to take a job in baseball; that's gone forever as well.I'd count the Reds amongst those defenders who will hopefully stop lobbying for him to be included in events like that. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 What's publicly revealed at the outset always ends up being the tip of the iceberg. This is why he was banned in the first place, and this is why he will always be banned. You do not bet on the game, period. And to have bet on the Reds, just ask the Black Sox how that works out for you. It's in a different universe of wrong from all the other questionable things we've seen over the years like PEDs. Hell his betting on the game at all was in a class of wrong above PEDs, but to bet on your own team's games... Don't care how great you were, you undermined the very integrity of the game and can rot in sports hell where you belong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Rose is surely a slimeball, but I don't see how this dirties him further. A notebook from a conman associated with Rose had "Pete" written in it, and said conman supposedly told investigators that those bets were for Rose. That wouldn't hold up in court. This doesn't really do much for me.That being said, the question of whether or not he bet as a player is irrelevant since we know he bet as a manger. A star player has a good chance to impact a game, but a manager can make "tanking" decisions which could pretty easily set the team up to lose. For those defending him, the question shouldn't have been whether he bet as a player, but whether he ever bet against his teams. That's far more egregious to me. I don't think it's ever been reported that he bet against his team, because that would be much, much worse for the sport as a whole. That being said, he'll stay banned and we're all better off for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Stop making the Hall of Fame the Hall of Honor and put the great players in or remove Ty Cobb, Fergusson Jenkins and Orlando Cepeda. www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJWalker45 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 As petty as this may sound, Rose betting on baseball is more egregious to the baseball gods than what the others did outside the game. That's why Rose, A-Rod, Bonds and Clemens will most likely never be in the Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Stop making the Hall of Fame the Hall of Honor and put the great players in or remove Ty Cobb, Fergusson Jenkins and Orlando Cepeda.It's not the Hall of Honor, but you also can't have done things that impinge the integrity of the on field game. We've kept the Black Sox players out for a century. What Rose did was in the same exact class of crime against the game that those players did in 1919. He's been treated the same accordingly as he should be. To a lesser extend the precedent has been the same for known PED users so far as what they did impacted the integrity of what we saw on field.Ty Cobb may have been a racist , but I can't recall an instance in which he put the integrity of his play into question even if he was a vile person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Needschat Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I find it suspicious that, after all these years, the Postal Inspectors finally gave the evidence to put Rose away permanently. Why not when Dowd was investigating? Oh what could have been.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 Because it was sealed by the court at the time, as part of an unrelated federal investigation. They finally got around to unsealing it.Rose is surely a slimeball, but I don't see how this dirties him further. A notebook from a conman associated with Rose had "Pete" written in it, and said conman supposedly told investigators that those bets were for Rose. That wouldn't hold up in court. This doesn't really do much for me.It's corroborative evidence supporting verbal testimony. The investigators were told at the time by these bookies that Pete Rose had bet on games as a player. This notebook is physical evidence backing up those claims, which means not only would it "hold up" but I understand is actually quite significant when presented in court. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I find it suspicious that, after all these years, the Postal Inspectors finally gave the evidence to put Rose away permanently. Why not when Dowd was investigating?Technically I don't think the investigators have given the evidence up, just that it was transferred last year to the National Archives. It looks like OTL had this information for some time and has been sitting on it. Seems though that the timing of their expose was designed to coincide with the All Star lead up. That I don't find surprising at all. It generates maximum controversy for ESPN to report on at just the right time.That said, the information is what it is, damning against Rose. He was already likely permanently screwed, but now he's done. He might as well go find a new sport to be connected with, because he's got no future in baseball unless it's with some independent minor league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Needschat Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 When he might be eligible for the Hall of Fame? Coincidence? Oh what could have been.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Oops. http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/13114874/notebook-obtained-lines-shows-pete-rose-bet-baseball-player-1986 For 26 years, Pete Rose has kept to one story: He never bet on baseball while he was a player.Yes, he admitted in 2004, after almost 15 years of denials, he had placed bets on baseball, but he insisted it was only as a manager.But new documents obtained by Outside the Lines indicate Rose bet extensively on baseball -- and on the Cincinnati Reds -- as he racked up the last hits of a record-smashing career in 1986. The documents go beyond the evidence presented in the 1989 Dowd report that led to Rose's banishment and provide the first written record that Rose bet while he was still on the field."This does it. This closes the door," said John Dowd, the former federal prosecutor who led MLB's investigation.Scumbag.Hope his last defenders are finally shamed into silence. Cincinnati has a lot of thick-headed numbskulls that will defend him until the day they die and this will do nothing to persuade them. "He never bet against the Reds and that's all that matters!", they'll decry. That is a city eternally stuck in the past with a lot of politically uneducated half-wits. It might be the dumbest major American city and I love it and I may live there again, but it's a city full of morons. I'm too young a Reds fan to remember him as a player or even as a manager. All I know is the post-ban buffoon. You won't hear any defending him from this Reds fan. Rose is surely a slimeball, but I don't see how this dirties him further. A notebook from a conman associated with Rose had "Pete" written in it, and said conman supposedly told investigators that those bets were for Rose. That wouldn't hold up in court. This doesn't really do much for me.That being said, the question of whether or not he bet as a player is irrelevant since we know he bet as a manger. A star player has a good chance to impact a game, but a manager can make "tanking" decisions which could pretty easily set the team up to lose. For those defending him, the question shouldn't have been whether he bet as a player, but whether he ever bet against his teams. That's far more egregious to me. I don't think it's ever been reported that he bet against his team, because that would be much, much worse for the sport as a whole. That being said, he'll stay banned and we're all better off for it.It's still a problem even if he only ever bet for his teams to win. It still affects the integrity of the game because as a manager he didn't bet on every game so he was managing games he had money on differently than he was managing games he didn't have money on. But yes, betting against his team would've been worse. Stop making the Hall of Fame the Hall of Honor and put the great players in or remove Ty Cobb, Fergusson Jenkins and Orlando Cepeda.*Sigh*. Come on, Tank. He broke THE rule and here's more evidence that he broke it while playing. You can't put him in the hall of fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOldRoman Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Because it was sealed by the court at the time, as part of an unrelated federal investigation. They finally got around to unsealing it.It's corroborative evidence supporting verbal testimony. The investigators were told at the time by these bookies that Pete Rose had bet on games as a player. This notebook is physical evidence backing up those claims, which means not only would it "hold up" but I understand is actually quite significant when presented in court.From my understanding, it's not supporting actual testimony of the conman, just hearsay from the investigators (who likely never testified about Rose since he was never roped into this case). So I guess my statement "wouldn't hold up in court" was more of an expression. I have no reason to doubt the authenticity of this notebook or that Pete Rose was the one it referred to. I just don't think it's a smoking gun. Nor do I think one needs to be found here. The people who actually argued that he was okay because he only bet while managing were dumb. Like I said, if they wanted to make a claim that he only bet on his teams to win, they might have some sort of point about the integrity of the game and whatnot. But baseball outlaws all betting on the game, so it still wouldn't save Rose.As for the notebook, the article never said that the feds unsealed it, and says specifically that it was still classified through April of this year. It just says that ESPN "got a hold of it," so I'm guessing someone with access sent them pictures or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterchaoss Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Still would vote him in, I wouldnt give him a job in baseball obviously but I don't see what him getting into the hall of fame or making appearances is gonna hurt. Kershaw is GOD! Kershaw is LIFE! Kershaw is ALL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 When he might be eligible for the Hall of Fame? Coincidence?It might be a coincidence, if he was going to be eligible for the Hall of Fame. But he wasn't going to be, so no. Not a coincidence. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I have no sympathy left for Rose. He broke the cardinal rule of the professional game, made a farce of his punishment and of himself, and has lied about the extent of his transgression every step of the way. He can stay banned forever. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted June 22, 2015 Author Share Posted June 22, 2015 He was lying about this up to last month, if not more recently.Scumbag. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Needschat Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 The HOF has baseball WRITERS vote for who is elected into it. They are a bunch of frustrated, never-were athletes who will hold grudges until they die, or even after the player dies! IF he did bet while a player, then yes, he's ineligible. Oh what could have been.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 The HOF has baseball WRITERS vote for who is elected into it. They are a bunch of frustrated, never-were athletes who will hold grudges until they die, or even after the player dies! ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.