December 14, 2015

Good bye, Mr. Rose.

posted by grum@work at 03:10 PM on December 14, 2015

The footnotes tell all:

¹ Mr. Rose attempted to minimize the severity of his conduct by asserting that he only bet on the Reds to win. Mr. Rose further asserted that in order to avoid the impression that he only bet on games in which he believed that the Reds would win, he placed bets on every Reds game. While it makes no difference for the purposes of the prohibition of Rule 21 whether Mr. Rose bet for or against the Reds, or on some or all Reds games, I note that the Bertolini Notebook shows that, contrary to his assertions, Mr. Rose did not wager on every Reds game. Thus, Mr. Rose's wagering pattern may have created the appearance to those who were aware of his activity that he selected only those games that he believed that the Reds would win.

² Even more troubling, in our interview, Rose initially denied betting on Baseball currently and only later in the interview did he "clarify" his response to admit such betting.

posted by grum@work at 03:50 PM on December 14, 2015

Long time Cincinnatian and Reds fan here. This opinion might have the effect of cancelling multiple standing invitations from friends in the old hometown, but...Good call.

Pete is beloved in Cincinnati and he always will be, and good for him. He will always be a VIP and get a prime seat at any of Jeff Ruby's restaurants or the Montgomery Inn. However, what he did tarnished both baseball and the Reds in a pretty severe way. Integrity and baseball might not be synonymous, but that doesn't mean that you can thumb your nose at the game's history.

I met Rose a few times growing up-once at the local Graeter's ice cream and once at Spreen's Pharmacy in Montgomery-and he never struck me as anything more than a low class simpleton who was gifted with great hand-eye coordination and an incredible work ethic. In fact, he was a great player and could have been a world-class role model as to the benefits of working harder than the next guy to achieve success. Then his addiction took over. I'm not one to ignore the severity of a gambling addiction (I used to manage casinos and know the power gambling has on people), and would have readily forgiven Pete if he had taken any ownership of his mistakes whatsoever. But he refuses to do so. Thirty years later, he is still lying about it unless and until somebody presents him with proof that he is lying. He continues to be an unapologetic gambler and all-around weasel.

My wish--he should be inducted posthumously, and with a full discussion of his banishment. He is unarguably a player who should be memorialized in the HOF, but he shouldn't necessarily receive the vindication of seeing it happen.

posted by tahoemoj at 11:44 AM on December 15, 2015

I like to think that Rose bet against his own reinstatement, so he's happy either way.

posted by grum@work at 03:49 PM on December 15, 2015