|Pete Rose Reinstatement||| Print |||Send|
Written by Jonathan Leshanski (Contact & Archive) on August 12, 2003
MLB Chief operating officer Bob DuPuy called the report “totally unfounded, totally unsubstantiated” and “journalistically irresponsible.” He also indicated that no agreement was in place to reinstate Rose any time in the near future.
Certainly Selig and Rose have met several times now, especially after a call for an apology and admission several months ago. Selig has also used Rose and his name for publicity a number of times and it seems apparent to most baseball fans and reporters that both Selig and Rose would like to see some form of reinstatement.
Should this actually occur it opens a whole new can of worms. Rose would be eligible for the Hall of Fame on the 2004 ballot and unless the moral indignation of the nation came down on baseball, the writers, and Pete Rose - there is no doubt he would be swept into the Hall on the first ballot.
But what about after that? The statement that appears in the Baseball Prospectus report is that Rose would be barred from any position involving the day to day operations of any club for one year - then he’d be free to return to any position in the game.
That means that Pete could once again manage. That is perhaps the biggest problem of all. There is no doubt he was a good enough manager and several cities most noticeably Cincinnati would welcome him with open arms. However the fact remains that he bet on baseball and even if it was always on his own team and always to win - it could have influenced games and his decisions during those games.
Gambling, game fixing and even association with gamblers has been baseball’s cardinal sin (a term which certainly predates the St. Louis franchise). It is a transgression that has warranted suspension, bans, and expulsions from the game. Past commissioners have refused to overturn bans put into place by their predecessors, until now.
If Selig reinstates Rose - who is a proven gambler that gambled on baseball - then I feel it should be in a more limited sense. Otherwise, it’s time for all of us to jump on the bandwagon of Shoeless Joe Jackson and demand his return as well - for by all accounts he was far more innocent than a bed of Roses.