Pete Rose to confess

[Fiyah]

Report: Rose willing to admit to betting on baseball
ESPN.com news services

More than a month since news broke that commissioner Bud Selig was considering reinstating Pete Rose, Newsday is reporting that the all-time hits king has indicated to Selig that he's willing for the first time to admit he bet on baseball.

The newspaper cited a friend of Rose, who spoke on condition of anonymity, for the basis of its report. The report said Rose also would be willing to apologize for his betting denials the past 13 years and even serve a probationary period in order to gain reinstatement and Hall of Fame eligibility for 2004.

Rose's friend told Newsday that Rose is encouraged by progress in talks among Selig, Rose's lawyers and current Hall of Famers Mike Schmidt, Johnny Bench and Joe Morgan -- all former teammates of Rose -- and is confident an agreement can be finalized and announced within a couple months. Such an agreement would allow Rose to be reinstated in full, meaning he'd be permitted to work in baseball, as well as be eligible for Cooperstown induction.

One high-ranking baseball source told Newsday that any Rose probationary period of good behavior is expected to last "six to eight months," meaning there would be time for Rose to enter Cooperstown next summer. Rose agreed in 1989 to be banned permanently from the game.

A source told ESPN.com that Rose would be expected to "behave the right way" during the probationary period, in which he will be obligated to demonstrate true contrition.

Selig has been adamant in negotiations that Rose fulfill all three obligations: an admission, an apology and probation. Rose has consistently denied that he bet on baseball in the face of a mountain of evidence against him, including betting slips and phone logs between bookies and his ballpark office in Cincinnati in the 1980s.

Selig, reached by Newsday on Tuesday night at the Baseball Assistance Team dinner in New York where he was being honored, declined to comment on his negotiations with Rose's lawyers, except to say he hadn't talked to them in the past few days.

However, a source close to Selig told the newspaper things were "still on track" regarding Rose's reinstatement despite the commissioner insisting on an admission, an apology and probation.

The source also suggested things were pointing toward reinstatement terms being announced as early as spring training after Selig meets with a contingent of current Hall of Famers, but there's no certainty of that. A date for that meeting is still unscheduled but is expected to convene some time in February.

A source told ESPN.com that the meeting could be construed as "a courtesy" to the Hall of Famers, and that it's expected a surprising number will express serious reservations about Rose's reinstatement.

Rose's lawyer, Roger Makley, could not be reached by the newspaper Tuesday night.

I think if they re-instate Pete Rose they need to re-instate Shoeless Joe Jackson!

 

[EB]

Originally posted by Fiyah


I think if they re-instate Pete Rose they need to re-instate Shoeless Joe Jackson!

I agree.

 

[Beer Man]

Reguardless weather he admits or not he should be in the hall of fame. I never got the connection with him being banned from the game with him not getting into the hall of fame. He was the best hitter of all time. But I am glad he is finally gonna admit to betting on baseball. I hope he just got some help for his gambling addiction.

 

[Fiyah]

Originally posted by Beer Man
Reguardless weather he admits or not he should be in the hall of fame. I never got the connection with him being banned from the game with him not getting into the hall of fame.

Because the rules for getting into the Hall of Fame states that you must be in good standings with Major League Baseball. He was the manager of the Reds at the time and was betting on baseball games at the time and he was even betting on his own team. Don't you think he could have had a factor in how some of those games turned out being manager. If he wasn't involved in the game at the time of his gambling this wouldn't be a problem but thats not the case. I'm sorry I don't have no good will feeling towards someone who made a mockery out of his sport by doing this. Shoeless Joe Jackson never affected the way he played during the Black Sox scandal and it was never proven that he took money. He was one of the best outfielders that the game has even seen and he's not getting any consideration for reinstatement after all these years. Pete has only been out 13 years and he's still making a mockery of the sport. I think even if does confess to this he shouldn't be given the chance to get in because after he get there he's only going to make a mockery of baseball again and start saying he was blackmailed into confessing so he could get in the Hall.

 

[LaMont]

HE HAD A PROBLEM. I'm told that he was betting on baseball all the way back from when he was a player and that everyone knew about it. It's obvious that everyone turned a blind eye to it and then all of a sudden they decided to crack down on him. Instead, someone should have helped him get help for his addiction. To me, he doesn't have to admit something we already know. Let the man get into the Hall of Fame.

 

[dacontinent]

Originally posted by LaMont
HE HAD A PROBLEM. I'm told that he was betting on baseball all the way back from when he was a player and that everyone knew about it. It's obvious that everyone turned a blind eye to it and then all of a sudden they decided to crack down on him. Instead, someone should have helped him get help for his addiction. To me, he doesn't have to admit something we already know. Let the man get into the Hall of Fame.

Ask any counselor, pschiatrist, minister or therapist and they will tell to you that the first step to restoration is public confession. It frees the offender to walk out of the guilt and shame.

Peter Edward Rose, Sr needs to admit this for his own benefit.

 

[Beer Man]

Fiyah, when Pete first signed the ban there wasn't a rule in place that prevented someone with a lifetime ban from being in the Hall of Fame. I do agree with you if he admits to gambling that is making a mockery of baseball. I think he just should be in the hall of fame for what he did on the field as player. He shouldnt ever, be able to be a coach or any baseball office again.

 

[Fiyah]

Originally posted by Beer Man
Fiyah, when Pete first signed the ban there wasn't a rule in place that prevented someone with a lifetime ban from being in the Hall of Fame.

Wrong, there has always been this rule.

Rules for Election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame by Members of the Baseball Writers' Association of America (BBWAA)


Eligible Candidates ? Candidates to be eligible must meet the following requirements:

A baseball player must have been active as a player in the Major Leagues at some time during a period beginning twenty (20) years before and ending five (5) years prior to election.

Player must have played in each of ten (10) Major League championship seasons, some part of which must have been within the period described in 3 (A).

Player shall have ceased to be an active player in the Major Leagues at least five (5) calendar years preceding the election but may be otherwise connected with baseball.

In case of the death of an active player or a player who has been retired for less than five (5) full years, a candidate who is otherwise eligible shall be eligible in the next regular election held at least six (6) months after the date of death or after the end of the five (5) year period, whichever occurs first.

Any player on Baseball's ineligible list shall not be an eligible candidate

 

[Beer Man]

No Fiyah that rule came about after Rose had signed the ban. Check and see when the rules was last modified. I listen to sports radio 610 an awful lot.

 

[Fiyah]

No that rule has always been in place, thats why Shoeless Joe Jackson and Buck Weaver can't get in, they were banned along with other members of the Chicago White Sox back in 1919 by Kennesaw Landis who was then commissioner. Although all were acquitted of the charges in 1920, they were never re-instated back by baseball.

Baseball I do know, that is my sport.

 

[EB]

A simple apology by Rose for gambling and lying about it for the last 13+ years would not be enough for me. That would be too easy. Let's not forget what his visits to Cooperstown during the Hall of Fame weekend. He has a lot to answer for here.

 

[sophandros]

Originally posted by EB
A simple apology by Rose for gambling and lying about it for the last 13+ years would not be enough for me. That would be too easy. Let's not forget what his visits to Cooperstown during the Hall of Fame weekend. He has a lot to answer for here.

Then take all Pete Rose related memorabilia out of the Hall as well.

One's standing in a HOF should be base PURELY on what they do ON THE FIELD.

Nothing else.

 

[dacontinent]

Originally posted by sophandros


Then take all Pete Rose related memorabilia out of the Hall as well.

One's standing in a HOF should be base PURELY on what they do ON THE FIELD.

Nothing else.

The memorabilia is a part of BASEBALL history. As such, it has its place in the hall. Pete forfeited his place in the hall when he chose to bet even though he know what it would cost him if he was caught.

Taking your position would rule out owners, executives, media personalities, etc who are not ON THE FIELD. I contend that one's standing shoulbe be based on what they do FOR THE GAME. And, yes, that includes on the field, in the dougout, in the media. And, yes, I think that you ought to be able to REMOVE an inductee from the hall if he does something to hurt the game that overrides his contributions.