In Defense of Pete Rose

Tru M., Cleveland, Ohio — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 04:34:41 GMT

Welcome back, "Bloggermann"! We missed you! (Hope this isn't the only time you return, either. I still want to see that season preview.) You have made a really good point here: at first, it sounds terrible for Rose to have said he bet on each and every game, but if he was betting at all--and we know he was, that's hardly news despite what some media outlets implied--at least he was betting on them all, rather than placing his bets according to when he expected the Reds to win, which would have been even worse. And there was a time when I was like you were--I said "Forget it, he deserves no chance at the Hall of Fame." But at least he's willing to admit he did something wrong. And in that, he's already got it all over anyone in the Bush Administration. (He didn't even try to weasel out of it by saying "Mistakes were made"!)

In Defense of Pete Rose

Stimp, Girard, Ohio — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 05:26:33 GMT

When I was a child, Pete Rose was one of my heroes. As are Jimmy Carter, Bill CLinton, and, yes, Keith Olbermann. But even the greatest of heroes has flaws. Pete may not be the best at expressing it, but I think today was a further acnowledgement of his flaws, and a chance for redemption. I hate that he bet on the Reds. In spite of everything, I was probably the last person in America to believe he didn't. I didn't want to. Newspeople can spin it anyway they like, but Pete did the right thing today. He owned up to something that could make things worse for him. Takes a lot of guts to say you're wrong. That's what makes a hero.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ron, Columbus, OH — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 05:49:53 GMT

Just when you thought the newshole couldn't get any better. The bloggermann returns!!! Please Please PLEASE keep it coming! And to piggy back my fellow buckeye's comment, my childhood heroes were Han Solo and Captain Crunch. I loves me some cereal.

In Defense of Pete Rose

stephen — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 05:56:10 GMT

Of course heroes have flaws. That's why their heroes! They wouldn't be heroes if they didn't have flaws! Right?

In Defense of Pete Rose

John L. Harrisburg PA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:19:31 GMT

I admire Pete Rose for standing up and making himself fully accountable for his actions and that he realizes that yes he had/has a gambling addicition. As for all these other media outlets talking in a sense sloppy seconds is just plain dumb, especially Katie Couric and her comments (I thought she knew better, evidently I have been proven wrong). It truly will be a shame if Pete Rose is never elected to the Hall of Fame. I think if people who took performance enhancing substances can get in and a man who bet on the Reds to win (especially the team he was the manager of) is like you said having faith in your team and knowing that they had the ability to win. Personally I think Rose should be reinstated back into baseball, however with the stipulation that he not be allowed to manage or be part of any minor or major league team. I think he should be allowed to be invited by any team that wants to have him and not have to worry about the punishment from MLB and I definatly think he should be in the Hall of Fame for the MLB.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jim, Cincinnati, Ohio — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 11:21:32 GMT

Pete Rose bet on games he managed. Nothing new, the Dowd Report said that, and, apparently, Dowd had strong evidence that Rose DID NOT bet on every Reds game, specifically the ones Mario Soto started. Who to believe? If Rose had owned up right away, maybe things would be different. But for how many years did he say that he didn't bet on baseball? How can anyone trust what he says now? With his chances of getting into the Hall of Fame getting longer every year, and him admitting that that is the one thing he most wants, how can anyone trust what he says to be anything but self-serving spin?

In Defense of Pete Rose

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 12:53:24 GMT

Ok, the man bet on America's sport including his own team and damaged his opportunity to be a role model for young kids. Babe Ruth and his buddies played an exhibition game at a boys home where each time they made it to third base they had to stop and guzzle down a cup of beer from a keg placed in the coaches box before proceeding home. They became so drunk and abusive towards one another they had to shorten the game. Great role models huh? Players today claim they own the home run record after having pumped themselves full of steroids. Great role models huh?And there are many other stories of players who have not been angels in and around their chosen sport. We all can name quite a few. But none, none, and I repeat none, ever gave the effort that Charlie Hustle did when he was on that ball field. I don't know if he won his bets or lost them, but I would wager (no pun intended) that his greatest efforts of all were devoted to that game of baseball that he obviously loved more so than most. Pete is not the best of communicators, especially when attempting to apologize for his errors off the field (he had few on the field). It would have been best for him just to say he was sorry and then kept his mouth shut. But he was Charlie Hustle. Let the man into the Hall of Fame that is filled with great players, many of whom could not have played for the Angels as well.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Eric, Houston, TX — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:49:48 GMT

He is clearly trying to get people to believe that his gambling in violation of express baseball rules to the contrary is NOT THAT BAD, because he was betting on his own guys to win. He wants people to say "Oh, it's ok because he was actually trying to support his team." But gambling is gambling. The rules expressly forbid it. And Pete knew that the whole time. He made his bed.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pat, MA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:52:30 GMT

I feel sorry for Rose and I too believe his admission could possibly help him. There's no doubt he was the consummate baseball player. However, when it comes to baseball, I'm old fashioned I guess. I find that I'm still a little troubled by this. Is not betting one of the biggest no-no's in professional sports? It's an intriguing story for sure and as usual Keith, you're way ahead of the rest of the media. Just one more case of you "setting the record straight".

In Defense of Pete Rose

Charity, Princeton, NJ — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:56:38 GMT

Oh, Keith. Looking to the rest of your media colleagues, hoping for context and a grasp of underlying issues. That is just so darn cute. Was Dan happy with your promotion of the show? By my count, you mentioned him by name, you mentioned the Big Show by name, there was a photo of you and Dan, AND there was a clip of his voice from the interview. Apart from actually having him on the show... oh darn, I found the one thing he still has to complain about...

In Defense of Pete Rose

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:37:34 GMT

I believe it was Mark Twain, or maybe Paul Hornung, who said, "Gambling is a Tax on the Ignorant." and I agree with that. The people who win are not Gambling. They are Collecting. Some are very nefarious and will go to great lengths to insure that Collection. Pete broke an old, but very good, rule. He belongs where he is. With the Black Sox.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Lori, Gig Harbor, WA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:32:21 GMT

Keith, Thanks for clearing that up. I grew up in Dayton, OH and watched the Reds all the while I was growing up. My Dad who passed away last year was a huge Cincinnati fan from the day he was born (right across the bridge in Covington, KY.) It was very disappointed when it came out that Pete bet on baseball and may never be considered for the Hall of Fame. Whatever anybody says about him though, he loved the game and loved playing it and gave his all whenever he was on the field or managing. You can't say that with too many players today. It also makes me very angry to see some sportscasters drool over Barry Bonds and the fact that he is still out there playing and making millions. Unfortunately like alcoholism and drugs, gambling is an addiction and as the former has ruined lives over the years, so gambling has done for Pete. We still love Pete, arrogance and all, because he still is a kid at heart when it comes to his love of the game.

In Defense of Pete Rose

JW, Chicago — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:44:16 GMT

Pete belongs in the Hall of Fame. He has an addiction to gambling and I’m sorry for that. He broke the rules and shouldn't be allowed to put on another uniform as a player or coach. But all that doesn’t change the FACT that he was a terrific player who earned his place in the Hall of Fame. He made a mistake and should pay for that with a ban – but you can’t just erase his achievements and years of service because you don’t like something else he did.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dan Luzadder, Evergreen, Colorado — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:47:33 GMT

In the movie 'Field of Dreams' the fictionalized Shoeless Joe says "I'd have played for food money" or something like that. So would Rose. Pete didn't need the money, he had an illness, a secret. But I don't think it changed his love for his team, or his love for the game, or his loyalty. Players buy drugs in the parking lots, trainers keep meetings with bookies. But Rose got caught. We look the other way when politicians lie and steal. The only thing Rose ever stole was a base. He may never make the hall of fame, and so be it. But the world won't forget him and those who understand him know he never meant baseball any dishonor. The hell with the hall; I would rather that they let him coach or manage again, even for a minor league team. Forgive, forget, let him live the game he loves, and to which he gave so much.

In Defense of Pete Rose

frank kelly,avalon,newjersey — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:48:45 GMT

pete rose should be judged for what he did on the field of baseball not off the field,in the workplace people are judged what they do at work not after work. pete should be in the hall of fame,at least he wasn't a druggie like some of the hall of famers. i think drugs is worse than gambling.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Richard, Brighton, TN — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:49:48 GMT

I think the people who vote should decide, not one man. The commmisioner of baseball should NOT be allowed to make this decision on his own. I personally would put him in the Hall where he belongs. I think Pete has suffered enough. He is undeniably one of the ALL TIME GREATS in baseball! At least let the man know for sure that he will be in the Hall after his death and let him know that his LIFE sentence of being banned from baseball will not prevent him from having his place in the Hall of Fame.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Scott, Fort Myers, FL — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:50:43 GMT

So you condemn Barry Bonds on something you can't prove, yet you defend Pete Rose on something you can prove. Does anybody else see a problem here?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Phil, Boston, Mass. — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:50:44 GMT

After all the dissembling and evasion Rose has engaged in for years, you suddenly accept what he says at face value? Wake up, Keith! Even assuming he was telling some truth, the obvious follow-up question you should have pressed him with was how much he bet on his team per night. I wouldn't be surprised if some nights it was a token bet, and other nights he bet a ton. In the end, it's the same as not betting some nights and betting others. Bottom line - Pete Rose bet on baseball, an act which he knew was subject to harsh punishment. He needs to acknowledge to himself what he did. Then he can seek forgiveness, which I expect would rapidly follow. Until then, don't be an enabler for him.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pete Sessions Hudson NH — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:51:22 GMT

Looks like we need a new "Asterisk Hall of Fame" for all the gamblers, steroid users, and other miscreants who happened to have outstanding sports careers. Rose, Bonds, et al knew what they were doing and what the consequences would be if they were found out. Maybe a "Hall of Shame."

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dave, Brooklyn, NY — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:53:49 GMT

If Pete Rose is ever to be elected to the Hall of Fame, and I'm still undecided on that, it should be POSTHUMOUS. He must never have the satisfaction (and $$$) of knowing he got there.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Zuma, Malibu, Ca — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:58:10 GMT

Rose is and was a bum! Just another overpaid athlete that believes his @#$* doesn't stink and is above the law. We have few morals left in America today, and Rose beats us all with having none!

In Defense of Pete Rose

bruce mauhar san carlos, mexico — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:03:36 GMT

Which version of Charley's hustle do we wish to believe? The man was born to be an attorney general. I understand that there may be an opening in that field, soon.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pete Tschantz, Clover, SC. — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:06:20 GMT

I don't care if they reinstate Rose. But the Hall of Fame, without him, is not indicative of the greats of the game. There are plenty of men in the hall who wouldn't be there if their character had been considered in the balloting. I will not visit the Hall as long as Rose is not in it. Not because I think he is a great man, but because he was a great ball player.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Beth, Paris, Ky — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:11:47 GMT

Would someone please tell me the difference in betting on your own team to win vs taking steroids to improve your performance. As far as I'm concerned Pete Rose made mistakes, but he shouldn't be villified for it. Betting on his own team to win has nothing to do with the contributions he made to the Reds or baseball.

In Defense of Pete Rose

David, Huntington Beach, Ca. — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:12:07 GMT

"He who is without sin" Yeow!! when are the hopelessly pure going to stop busting Pete's chops. It is eactly as it looks. Pete was and is a strong athlete who backed his team with energy and money. This guy obviously played to win and I am sure that the main focus of the "No Gambling" rule was to insure that nobody bet "against" their team to throw a game. Violation of any rules must adjudicated on a case by case basis.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Karl Wimbush, Winchester, Ca. — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:14:35 GMT

Pete Rose finally realized that he had no chance in hell in every making it into the HOF unless he confessed up to what he did. Now that he's at a age where time against him now he want to own up to his betting. If Rose think this is going to help him get into the HOF or become a Manager again he had 18 years to right the wrong. It's funny what reality will make you do or say. Tell Rose to keep signing baseballs because that's about as close as he's going to get to the game.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pat,Easton,Md — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:15:37 GMT

Just another fine example of the great American apologia: do something knowingly and unequivocally wrong, get caught, deny it until you can"t any more, then have the emotional press conference admitting the guilt that had long since been proven, write the book, make a few millions, blame your parents, the alignment of the planets, whatever, and wait for people to call you a hero. I don't buy i. The lesson we teach our children is do something wrong, then admit it and all's well. Hey Pete, you lied, cheated and got busted-no more a hero than any other loser who got caught.. Man up and shut up

In Defense of Pete Rose

Tom Y Minnesota — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:18:02 GMT

Rose admits what he did (betting on his team) was wrong, but at the same time said he did it because he believed in his team. This statement seems to me Rose's way of explaining away his behavior. It appears to me that Rose still does not realize (or acknowledge)the full impact his gambling might have had on the integrity of baseball. His statement that he wants to manage again shows to me that he still doesn't fully get it. And no Pete, the integrity of the game doesn't have a price. Having said all of that, I believe that Rose is a sick guy. A gambling addiction, in my view, is an illness. It shows in the statements Rose makes. He has made progress by admitting he was wrong, but still has a way to go. Rose obviously has character flaws too, but no one is perfect. I would like to see Rose reinstated in some way. I tend to agree that he should not be allowed to manage, or be directly involved in the day to day operations of a team. But he could have some role.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Louisville, KY — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:18:07 GMT

I just don't think gambling is a big deal. Steroids is cheating... gambling? No big deal. I may be influenced by growing up around horse racing, but it just doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

In Defense of Pete Rose

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:18:42 GMT

Babe Ruth held the home run record for years. He was a big man, huge shoulders, arms, very strong wrists and a belly that added extra power to his swing. And the ball used when he hit them into and out of the stands was as soft as softball is today. To tell me that guys like Bonds and some others who have greatly surpassed this record with the ball used today, better bats and at higher impact speeds from the pitchers of today, and to say they don't have some help from muscle enhancing drugs that have to the naked eye increased their physcial mass in a few short seasons. Give me a break. Nope, can't say 100% positive that Bonds has used steroids, but testimony indicates that steroids is in wide use among the players today. And that testimony has come from the players themselves.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Richard White, New York, NY — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:19:46 GMT

Frankly I am surprised at how easily Keith takes Pete Rose's latest version of how and when he bet on his team as the actual truth. Given Pete Rose's history of outright denial followed by grudging admission of betting on some games and not others, why would anyone assume that this story is true? Even if it is, did he bet the same amount on every game? If not, the size of the bet could certainly be a significant piece of inside information for the professional gamblers. Pete Rose was a force of nature on the field, but to me, his history of gambling on games and of repeatedly lying about that gambling until he becamed convinced (by some in the media) that confession would free his path and lift his banishment merits banishment. Please keep Pete Rose out of baseball. He has not done anything to convince me that this latest announcement is anything other than an attempt to fudge the truth to pad his bank account. Enough already.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Kolberman-fan — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:20:44 GMT

I find no joy in baseball anymore, and I was at Pete's last game as a manager, am a huge former Reds fan, and just find so much wrong with what the current administration is doing with the 700 million dollars it swindled away into FAKE military companies, stealing from the taxpayers, and it sickens me you will put more interest in Pete than the "Carol Lam" story.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Richard Fannan, Los Angeles — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:22:47 GMT

The Dowd report says that he didn't bet on every Reds game. He initially denied he bet at all; why should we believe him now? Moreover, even if he did bet on every game, the question that should have been asked is whether he bet the same amount on every game. If he bet thousands on most games and only a few hundred when Soto was pitching, then his actions sent a message to people in the betting world that, since he had access to inside information, something was up and he therefore impaired the integrity of the game.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Carl, Decatur, Illinois — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:23:00 GMT

Funny thing with all of this is that in most professional sports, players get chances to redeem themselves and improve on their mistakes or continue to make them with excalating consequences. What is it now it takes 3 or 4 postive tests for drugs, or alcohol abuses, or steroids in professional football before you are banned for life. Maybe the same with baseball and basketball, I am guessing it is much the same. (not fully versed in the rules and punishment)Steriods and drug use affects the outcome of the game more so than Pete betting on the Reds to win. Of the one thing I do believe with Pete, it is that he bet to win, and played to win, and managed to win. So why is it that the govening bodies and unions give so many opportunities to make mistakes before being banned to players now a days. Now granted, Pete denied it, but then how many other players have denied it, made up excuses, and still remained to play the game. I think that Pete should probably never again be employed in baseball in a postion that he could bet and/or affect the game, but I do believe that Pete earned his way into the Hall of Fame, long before he earned his walk down the hall of shame.

In Defense of Pete Rose

David Melbourne Beach Fl — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:24:04 GMT

Two words: "Yeah,right", two more: other shoe, two more: I forgot, two more: beat it. Bum.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Gerald, Denver CO — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:28:29 GMT

I guess Pete thought the Reds would go 162-0!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Kyle Moore, Pasadena, CA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:29:15 GMT

So the defendant shows up in front of the judge, guilty beyond a shadow of doubt. The judge looks at the defendant - who happens to be his own son - and says, "Well, that's alright, we'll let you slide on this one, but nobody else better try it!" Justice has just been thrown out the window, hasn't it? The integrity of the game of baseball rests on the fact that baseball must be willing to punish even its most cherished sons for infractions of the rules. If the "no gambling" rule is "flexible" for certain great hitters, then what next? You don't have to touch all the bases?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Clay Spradlin, Nicholasville, Kentucky — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:31:09 GMT

To hear all of the stories of drunks, womenizers, and in general jerks that have all been put into the Hall of Fame makes Pete's not being in, extremly hypocritical. What he did after getting 4256 hits should have no bearing on the Hall of Fame. As I understand it's a players Hall of Fame, not a Managers. No one has, or likely will ever have that many hits. Some one who is likely going to break the home run record, does not even have 3000.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mylon Stark, Oskaloosa, Iowa — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:32:08 GMT

I abhor the egregious conduct of Pete Rose and the way he dragged baseball through the mud. Lest we think it is ONLY Mr. Rose who is guilty of this, let us look back on the sport. Countless members of the sport have spat upon the purity and beauty of the game. Of greatest note in my memory is the despicable way in which Tommy Lasorda declared to the world that he cared not for players - only winning. How did Mr. Lasorda do this? In the 1988 World Series, Manager Lasorda sent Kirk Gibson to bat in a condition in which he should not have been in uniform, let alone holding and swinging a bat. There is nothing heroic or laudable about telling a player (in actions) "I don't care about you, your physical health, or your ability to ply your craft. I only care about winning." I am fully aware that I am in the minority. The Neanderthals of the sports world - players and fans alike - look upon the Kirk Gibson home run as a tremendous feat of heroism. I look upon it as another in a stream of barbaric behaviors and decision-making throughout the world of sports. No, Mr. Rose has a great many partners in crime - players, coaches and fans, who degrade sports and society with a need for pain and blood. Thank you just the same, but I am quite satisfied with my testosterone level.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Robert Heintze — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:32:47 GMT

Pete Rose is not a hero. He was a MLB player. Why do we set moral/ethical standards for our professional atheletes which are analagous to our government leaders? "Let no baseball commissioner or even the President think they are greater than the game". Because this administration expects the rest of us to conform to a moral code of ethics, which they themselves won't adhere to, who does ANYONE person think they are adminstering a lifetime ban to someone who "puts their pants on the same way I do." I say Pete Rose belongs in the hall of fame based solely on his contribution as a player, because thats all he was.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Joan Kaighn, Moorestown, NJ — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:33:46 GMT

My 94-year-old mother LOVES Pete Rose and has worn out her favorite Pete Rose T-shirt. I believe that he should be forgiven and admitted to the Hall of Fame and given a job in Baseball. Do we punish people with addictions FOREVER? The people in charge of the Baseball Hall of Fame must be very sanctimonious and unforgiving folks!

In Defense of Pete Rose

JoAnn,Independence,Ky. — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:35:15 GMT

I think enough is enough.Pete Rose gave it all he had when he was out on that field playing ball.I think his record shows that.We all make mistakes in life and I think its time we forgive and put Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame where he belongs.We know if anyone has the right to be there for their accomplishments then it's definitely Pete Rose.So get off of Pete Roses back and give him what he truly has worked for,The Hall Of Fame.I'am rooting for you Pete.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Lily — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:36:11 GMT

I grew up in Cincinnati and will always love our Pete Rose. I only wish he would have pulled a full crying, please forgive me "Jimmy Swaggert" type confession when the gambling revelations occurred. We would not be having these discusssion today if he had!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Damon, Charlottesville, Va — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:36:36 GMT

Let's get priorities straight... Betting on your team: Worse Betting against your term: Worser Doing Steroids: Worst

In Defense of Pete Rose

Hanan Kolko, Montclair, NJ — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:37:49 GMT

Cap Anson led the drive to exclude black players from the majors and he's in the hall of fame. Ty Cobb was a flaming racist and he's in the hall of fame. Philanderers, drunks, speed-freaks, spitballers, bat-corkers, and sign-stealers are in the hall of fame. Ultimately, it's the voters who decide. Let the voters decide here. If they think Rose should be excluded because he violated a basic rule deemed fundamental to the integrity of the game, well, we'll live by their vote. If they vote him in because he was Charlie Hustle who hit and played like a demon, well, we'll live with that. This debate is getting stale. Let's start worrying about whether the Mets will win the world series this year.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jim, Santa Fe, NM — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:43:07 GMT

Perhaps Rose really is doing the most good for the sport he loves by continually being held up as a bad example, thereby warning others off from gambling?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jim Karr, Cleveland Ohio — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:43:48 GMT

Rose knew the rules regarding gambling and today he's still crying about the consequences of his choices. Addiction or not, a "real man" would accept the consequences and get on with his life. As far as the HOF is concerned, his numbers as well as his influence on the team are difficult to ignore. I say let him in the HOF posthumously, it's only fair.

In Defense of Pete Rose

scott helmus philly pa — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:45:41 GMT

i dont care what bart giamati or fay vincent say, this man, pete rose was one of the greatest baseball players i have ever seen play the game. he gave a 110% day in and day out. he is/was the true iron man of the game. i would take 9 pete roses over the drek that some of the teams field. and what about them bums who are taking drugs....rose never did that...

In Defense of Pete Rose

Paul DeGrande, New Baltimore, MI — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:46:13 GMT

He was one of the greatest for what he did on the field. He never threw a game or bet against his team. He bet on them to win. Pete should be in the hall of fame, PERIOD

In Defense of Pete Rose

David, Gaithersburg, MD — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:47:34 GMT

Pete Rose would be bored in the Hall of Fame. His Hall of Fame was making precision throws to first base, skillfully putting baseballs in places where fielders couldn't get to them, then charging around the baseball diamond and slamming into catchers - that's the Hall of Fame he loved. It's his (and our) memories of that time that is most satisfying today. I salute Pete Rose for making this Hall of Fame, our memories, that stretches to baseball parks all across America. Cooperstown would be a little confining to Pete Rose.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Denise C., Cleveland, OH — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:51:13 GMT

I am soo grateful there was a little basbeall action on your show KO. Growing up in Cleveland, there was never such drama as there is in Cincy. I admore P. Rose for being the true athlete he is. But the true facts are, he has an addiction and an addiction is an addiction, no matter how you slice it or dice it, ( no pun ) intended. He has done the crime, and obviously the time, ( meaning no great accolades), a little foregiveness goes along way, he is deservant of at least that. People should not forget the joy he brought to the city, the team, and to each individual fan. Let bygones be bygones and get that Man a place in the Hall of FAme, not the Hall of Shame.

In Defense of Pete Rose

KT , TN — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:51:34 GMT

Cheers to Pete Tschantz. He's SO right about the HOF players who wouldn't be there if character had really had anything to do with their selection. I have two words for you in that context: Ty Cobb. The GA Peach was no GA peach, just a drunken cracker bum. Call me some kind of radical, though; when Pete goes in I want to see Shoeless Joe Jackson, Eddie Cicotte et. al. go in too. After all, Charlie Comiskey was not a man of admirable character either.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Patrick, Atlanta — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:54:57 GMT

I loved watching Pete Rose play baseball. I have never seen anyone in any sport give as much as he did to the game for as long of a period. There was never any doubt that he gave 110% every play of every game. Charlie Hustle. He always left everything he had on the field. The issue with gambling is not the betting, but the implication the if gamblers will ultimately fixed games. The empherical evidence is that did not happen. If it did, we would not be asserting that he gave everything to the game. As one of the greatest players ever, Pete Rose earned his place in the hall of fame. If he fixed games, tar and feather him (as we've done for gambling), but he still should be in the HOF for what he did on the field.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Sally Shelton, Yakima, WA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:01:13 GMT

I listen to The Dan Patrick show daily, & I heard Keith say a day or two before the Pete Rose interview that he thought Rose would eventually be allowed back into baseball in some capacity or other; it appears that may be true. It's great that Pete finally sees his gambling addiction as a problem, but the sad fact of addiction is that by its very nature it corrupts the best intentions & judgements that people have. That's why it's BAD. I don't see how Pete Rose could have risen above it so it didn't affect his management of the team. The original ban should stand-forever.

In Defense of Pete Rose

A. Nonymous - Denver CO — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:08:09 GMT

Pete Rose is an addict, and addicts are good at one thing. Rationalizing their destructive behaviors. One thing addicts are not good at is taking responsibility for their destructive behaviors. As long as he is alive, he should never be involved with baseball again. He broke the rules and should have to face the consequences of doing so. Judging by the opinions expressed here by my fellow posters, the point of Mr. Olbermann's article was completely missed. It wasn't about Pete Rose per se. It was about the salacious nature of our 24/7 news coverage culture which fears dead air time more than the icy hand of Death himself. They need to fill 24/7 of air time and jump on every little tid bit and make more of it than is really there.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jeff Nestler — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:14:36 GMT

Is it called the Hall Of Fame because the Commissioner Of Baseball thinks the people inducted are worthy or is it the Hall Of Fame for the people, who pay to watch their heroes play the game? Let the Commissioner build his own hall and put whoever he wants in it and let the people have OUR hall and OUR heroes. IMHO Pete Rose is one of those heroes...one of OUR heroes...who's onfield actions qualify him to be in the hall.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Austin, Madison, WI — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:28:35 GMT

Pete Rose knew the prohibition on gambling, had an addiction such that he bet anyway, made outstanding contributions to the game while harming himself and the game, and now gets to live with the knowledge his addiction, which he knew about, fueled his life and was his downfall in terms of getting into the hall of fame. Rules for entry to the hall of fame are important. They don't otherwise diminish his (and others') knowledge of his accomplishment.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Linda, Chaffee, MO — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:31:44 GMT

While I didn't have the pleasure of seeing Pete play (other than in clips) I feel, as others in this post do also, that he should be considered for how he played as a player not his later life's issues. Would the 'powers that be' act so intolerant if he had gotten a DUI or been accused of rape as other sports players have been? I'm sure the ones I allude to will be inducted into their sport's hall of fame when the time comes without issue.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Don Bown, Middletown, Ohio — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:31:57 GMT

Pete Rose was a great player and belongs in the Hall of Fame. In my opinion, the gambling rule was made for those who might throw games for personal gain (like the Black Sox); Pete gambled because he knew he had a winning team. Many people in our society are more intent on punishment than foregiveness and we are worse off for it.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Don, Charlotte, NC — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:33:08 GMT

Sorry Pete, do not pass go, do not collect your betting chits, do not go to the HOF Pete. You lied, you lied a lot, you lied a lot for a long, long time. Admitting you lied does not make you a HOFer, it makes you, yes, a liar.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ron Webb, Tampa, Florida — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:34:06 GMT

You can say what you want about Pete Rose, personally, I don't like the guy. However, if anyone ever belonged in the Baseball Hall of Fame it is him. For one thing, you look at his record as a player, not as a manager. If Rose hadn't became manager of the Reds he would have been in the Hall of Fame long ago. Nobody ever played harder than Pete Rose & Johnny Bench. If Rose isn't inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame, they might as well close it down. If there were a Moral Hall of Fame, he would be the last person I would want voted in. This is about the person as a baseball player, not as a role model. When Rose took the field, he had only one thing in mind,Winning. Guys with an ego like his can't stand to lose, not even for a bet. This is in fact, the Baseball PLAYERS Hall of Fame, not the Baseball Managers Hall of Fame, or the Moral Majority Hall of Fame. Rose made a lot of enemies' both on and off the field during his career, but so did Babe Ruth. Is he in the Hall of Fame? Think about it.

In Defense of Pete Rose

MTV, Phoenix — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:35:50 GMT

KO, My grandfather taught me at a young age that if you ever want to start an argument with someone, bring up either politics or religion. Is it now safe to add Pete Rose going into the HOF to that list? I enjoy listening to you and Dan on the Big Show in the afternoons, and I did get a chance to listen to the Rose interview yesterday. After the interview was over, I thought it was a good conversation but nothing overly revealing (other than the fact that he bet on his team EVERY night). But when I got home last night, I was shocked with the amount of press coverage the interview got. Did I miss something else in the interview? Why did Katie Couric feel it was necessary to mention this on the evening news? This is basically "remastering" a picture that Rose painted for us 2yrs ago, no? Either way, the debate for his HOF election is an interesting one. Does he deserve to be in for his playing career, and accomplishments? Yes. Does he deserve to be punished for the greatest sin you can commit on the field of play: gambling on your sport and your team? Yes. Am I glad it isn't my decision to make? Yes. It is a sad story, but it is also good to see that finally Rose is seeing the error in his ways. Keep up the good work.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Gerald,York,Pa. — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:36:26 GMT

Nobody ever played the game of Baseball with more enthusiasm than Pete Rose.He hustled on every play,ran out every walk,hit,pop-up,or fly-out.He played hard every minute of every game!Charley Hustle deserves to be in the MLB Hall of Fame!He earned it on the field of play,and earned the respect of the players he played with,and against,because of his passion and love of the game.Put Pete in the HOF,because he earned it with his sweat and blood.He deserves to be in as much,or more than,the other players who are already there.They all have skeletons of some kind,in their closets.They all sinned,one way or another,but it didn't keep them out!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Norm Eingurt — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:38:45 GMT

All professional ballplayers, coaches and managers know the rule: NO BETTING! It doesn't matter if he bet on one ballgame or every ballgame. His betting struck at the integrity of the game. Pete Rose knew the rule and disregarded it. Talk of Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa or Mark McGuire is irrelevant. Rose thumbed his nose at one of baseball's modst sacred rules. He does not belong in the Hall of Fame!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bruce Beaton, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:39:36 GMT

It doesn't take courage to admit a mistake, it takes honesty. And Pete Rose has been dishonest with himself and his fans for too long. He should accept his punishment and pay his penalty. THAT takes courage.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Robert, Sacramento, CA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:41:06 GMT

Pete Rose deserves to be in the hall of fame. We gave 110% in every game he played or managed. So he gambled, and bet on his own team to win always. He never threw a game or did anything to harm the game. Is gambling any worse than the current crop of drug users, steroid use, etc.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Barb G, Albany NY — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:42:10 GMT

wow, what a thread! way to go, KO. let pete in the hall. base it on his playing. he was a great player. let the people vote, as that earlier poster wrote. i like that idea. so the great babe ruth was a womanizing drunk. he's in the hall. the difference is on using baseball, i understand that, but the bigger concept, that of role model.... well, pete gave his all when he was on the field, and that's a pretty good model. it is shameful how they select players to go into the hall, anyway. they have no bragging rights here. pete needs to be in the hall [and so does gil hodges, but that's another story]

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mel, Va Beach — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:42:34 GMT

Keith you hit it on the head. Distortion is the key to most media outlets ratings. I agree Pete has made mistakes and broke THE GOLDEN RULE OF BASEBALL. The hall of fame in my humble opinion is for what players do doing their playing days, and based on that Rose should be in the hall of fame (ahead of his biggest slandering team mate Johnny Bench). His record while playing the game is stellar and he deserves to be in the hall of fame.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Andrew Scharnhorst, Phoenix (Cincinnati native) — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:49:19 GMT

Adrian "Cap" Anson: Extreme racist. Ty Cobb: VIOLENT racist. Babe Ruth: Drunken philanderer. Leo Durocher: Suspended one year for consorting with gamblers. Wade Boggs: Cheated on his wife. Ferguson Jenkins: Convicted coke user. Orlando Cepeda: Convicted tax evader. John McGraw: Held opposing runners by the belt to prevent their advancing. Gaylord Perry: WROTE A BOOK describing the illegal pitches he threw. The list of miscreants goes on and on, but the men all have one thing in common: they're in the Hall because of what they did on the field, not off. Peter Edward Rose once said, "I'd walk through hell in a gasoline suit just to play baseball," and proved it every time he took the field. (Ask Ray Fosse.) Despite whatever flaws he had/has, he has earned his place with the immortals of the game -- and to his famous No. 14 retired by his hometown Reds.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Sandi McGee, Akron, Ohio — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:49:28 GMT

For the life of me I will never understand why Pete Rose is barred from the HOF for gambling ON HIS TEAM TO WIN (not lose, mind you), when we KNOW there are men who take steroids, among other outlawed drugs. I don't understand the huge preoccupation with "gambling." Drugs are also against the rules, and a far worse transgression, but there have been dozens of players of many sports (baseball & football, to name two) who have been caught with or taking illegal drugs, and who not only are still playing their sport, but will probably one day be in their respective HOF. Can someone please explain to me what's up with all this????

In Defense of Pete Rose

Terry Weaver — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:50:24 GMT

Rose earned his way into the hall of fame, simple as that. What's the point in keeping him out....to impress upon the little leaguers around the country that in baseball there is no redemtion?

In Defense of Pete Rose

M, Chillicothe, Ohio — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:52:11 GMT

When I was young my parents took me to Riverfront Stadium to see the "Big Red Machine" play and if we weren't there, we listened to the games on the radio. I still have my baseball hat with the names of all the players written in my childish handwriting...right there in the middle of all of them is Pete Rose. I have the special section of our local paper when Pete made his 3000th hit as well as several other pieces of memorabilia from my younger days. I never really cared that he bet on baseball, I didn't care how he did it, where he did it or who he placed bets on and I still don't. I just know that I believe he should be in the baseball hall of fame because of the player he was, he deserves the recognition, he was a great player.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Michael Jones, New Orleans,La. — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:16:18 GMT

I wore number 14 in grade school ball and even learned to bat left handed in the Pete Rose style(crouched over). Great player and baseball needed him as badly as he needed them. Guess what...in the light of steroids they still do.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Davey O Pittsburgh Pa — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:24:54 GMT

Admission of guilt should not diminish the consequences. Accepting the consequences shows redemption. Humility is the result of a redemption. I'm still waiting to see a humble Pete. I'll keep hoping but Im not going to bet on it.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ken Bley — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:26:13 GMT

I am not a baseball fan and know Pete Rose only by reputation. However, if a player or coach bets evenly in favor of his team on every game, there would not to seem to pose any greater conflict of interest than a pitcher agreeing to be paid a bonus for games won. Obviously, Rose's gambling was against the rules, but doesn't this new information obviate the reasons that gambling is prohibited and therefore eliminate or at least mitigate any moral turpitude by Rose? P.S. I don't follow sports. I happened upon this site because I am an Olbermann fan.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Marilyn Ward, Davenport ,Iowa — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:26:26 GMT

Let him in!!!!! I love Pete Rose and in the midst of rampant steroid use, let's forgive him and give him what he is due.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jeff Pratt, Black Betsy, WV — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:26:45 GMT

The home run record might be broken by a person that used steroids to build the mass it would take to launch a baseball over the outfield wall. Others have snorted and sniffed and smoked and whose knows what while in the big leagues. We even have people that murder other people that eventually get out of jail. And then there is Pete Rose. Finally being honest. The Hall of Fame to me will always be the Hall of Shame until Pete Rose can be inducted. One of the greatest baseball players ever, and he always bet on his team to WIN, not lose, but to WIN. Let him in

In Defense of Pete Rose

Adam Stillwell, Bloomington, IN — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:28:47 GMT

The man bet IN FAVOR of Cincy every night (among a plethora of routine bets). It's like the person in the NCAA pool who puts his/her team in the final four despite their slim chances of advancing. It just sweetens the contest a little... expresses hope and loyalty. Reinstate him already. He's one of the greatest to ever step onto the field. (I've got the Hoosiers in the Final Four BTW)

In Defense of Pete Rose

Erv Server, Des Moines, Iowa — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:32:15 GMT

I don't care if Rose was betting on baseball or not, as long as he didn't do anything to sway games, and I've never seen any facts to say he did. Gambling is just another bad habit of society and baseball players are just people. This Rose story is over already.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Suse Dedham MA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:44:17 GMT

Pete Rose lied for years about gambling on baseball games. Now he says he's sorry so he should get into the Hall of Fame and maybe let him manage again. Since the Black Sox scandal one thing has remained unchanged in Team Lockerrooms. "No GAMBLING". He broke the Rule and we're supposed to reward him? No wonder this country is so screwed up. No one is responsible for their actions.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bob Bernstein, NY NY — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:45:47 GMT

No doubt MLB has a paranoid fixation about gambling. But there's one thing about Pete Rose that can never be changed/modified/stricken: 4,256 hits. I would be amazed if anybody in my lifetime approaches that. I am not so hot about Pete - he stinks of arrogance, but my opinion about his getting into the HOF has changed over the years. Imagine a kid visiting the hall and asking "daddy, who has the career record for most hits, I don't see any name here?" Cut Pete some slack and put him in the hall, he belongs just for that record. Oh, and while you're at it reopen discussion about Joe Jackson. After 87 years of being banned, hasn't he paid his dues?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dan Hostetter Queen Creek Arizona — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:46:46 GMT

This man is the greatest and most prolific hitter in the history of the game. Give him his due and put him in the Hall of Fame where he belongs. Add an asterisk if it makes you fell better about yourself to be reminded that even the greatest of us have flaws. Pete-you're the greatest!! I love ya man, and would love to meet you someday!

In Defense of Pete Rose

James Dahl, Wisconsin — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:55:56 GMT

Many are saying that Pete Rose should not be believed because he lied to cover up a past mistake....everyone single one of you has lied at some point in their life, but all expect others to continue to believe you, to value your opinion, go ahead and point fingers, i'm pointing mine right back to you.

In Defense of Pete Rose

sirpaulj7 — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:56:25 GMT

The only problem I have with the latest Pete Rose confession is that I have the feeling there's one more shoe to drop. Something like "I bet on my team every night ... and, oh yeah, sometimes I bet AGAINST my team." I still don't think he's come 100% clean.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dave — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 18:59:58 GMT

Michael Irvin is in the Football Hall of Fame. He was a great football player and deserves to be there. Pete Rose was, in terms of hits and hustle at least, the BEST there ever was. To keep him out is a travesty. And everybody loves to say "what about the children" or it's affects on the young fans. I guess you can do coke with strippers and go to the NFL Hall of Fame. Heck, in baseball you could have been a total racist who shunned Jackie Robinson and thought he should have had a seperate locker room and you are celibrated and imortalized in Canton. To have a guy who obviously gave the game all he had in the pre-steroids era (granted, greenies were everywhere) is a sham.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Don Laine, Phoenix, Arizona — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:02:06 GMT

Well, I say that if they let todays current crop of steroid sluggers into the hall, they better damn well let Mr. Rose and and the "Black Sox" in. What good are rules if they are not enforced?

In Defense of Pete Rose

John Hillman — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:02:51 GMT

Pete Rose, the player, deserves to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. Pete Rose, the manager, does not. Induct him for his record and efforts between the lines. Make it clear that his actions outside the lines were unacceptable. What better way to make it clear than a statement to that fact in the HOF itself?

In Defense of Pete Rose

M.C. Shelly — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:05:14 GMT

Thank you for setting the record straight as far as Rose's remarks to you and Dan Patrick went. What are the odds (please, no money bets!) that the news about the true story won't get as much air time? I have very mixed feelings about Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame, but everyone deserves to have their story reported correctly. Thanks for righting everyone else's wrong.

In Defense of Pete Rose

P. Manley, Philadelphia, PA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:27:43 GMT

It's not The Morality Hall of Fame. His gambling has ZERO to do with his being the all-time hits leader. If you want to add a line to his Hall of Fame plaque censuring him, so be it.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Stephen, Pueblo, CO — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 19:48:38 GMT

I say Pete the "Player" should be admitted to the Hall of Fame and continue the lifetime ban on Pete the "manager." He should not be allowed to manage again but his player credentials are worthy of entry. And that is the tragedy of all this, his post player misdeeds should not be held against him as far as his entry into the HOF as a player.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Perry J. Brewster, NY — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 20:07:41 GMT

This new revelation is even more reason to put Pete in the Hall of Fame. A guy who loved his team so much that he bet his own money on them to win EVERY night. That's beautiful. Reinstate him now!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Thomas Stevens, Eugene OR — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 20:28:13 GMT

Look, I admire Peter Rose; but do I think punishment is in order here. He made us wait 20 years to find out the truth. Let's make him wait another 20 years to induct him into the Hall of Fame. Fair is fair.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Joe Morin — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 20:52:32 GMT

Nobody can take away or deny what Pete Rose did for the game of baseball. While gambling is illegal, than why do we condone someone that has admitted to cocaine abuse and yet gets re-instated only to get busted again. We are all to blame for allowing gambling, drinking, steriods and other substances by saying that it is wrong, that it kills, but yet it is still available. Pete Rose is a hall of famer and deserves to be recognized as such.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ron Denison Iowa — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:14:17 GMT

Andrew has the right idea.There were far worse transgressions being perputrated and they were allowed in.Maybe all HOF players should be voted in posthomously to make sure that baseball is represented by only the purest of humanbeings.Besides it is hard to find a player with as much dedication on the field as Rose showed in his playing days.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Rob, Plano, Texas — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:44:52 GMT

Pete Rose belongs in Baseball's Hall of Fame. In fact, it lessens the significance of the Hall of Fame by excluding him.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ms. E.J. Johnson, Sunrise, fl... (Ft. Lauderdale) — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:45:04 GMT

I have read the above, and I know he admitted what he did, but he does have conversation with anyone that requests it, where as now, the players refuse to admitt that they take steroids, etc. and hide from interviews and nothing seems to be done as far as punishments. The public loves him and appreciates his honesty and his hard work. He has lived with his thoughts for a long time...I say "Give him his due, and let him enjoy the company of all the other heros in baseball, that "WE" love.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Peter — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:53:24 GMT

We only "know" that he bet on his team every game because that what he's told us. Previously he's told us that he didn't gamble at all; that he gambled but didn't bet on baseball; that he bet on baseball but not on his team; that he bet on his team but always to win but not every game; and now that he bet on his team every game. What will he tell us five years from now? Sorry, Charlie Hustle, fool me once, shame on you . . .

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dan Nap — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:53:54 GMT

Thanks Keith. Its great that we have a know it all from Cornell around to clear things up for us. I thank god every day that I have you on radio and television to help to though another day. It's a miracle I can survive your days off.

In Defense of Pete Rose

john doe — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:58:35 GMT

if pete rose cant have the hall of fame then at least he should have his own library,free lifetime bodyguards,free health care. annd a very very fat pension-this will teach him not to bet on baseball again--he can try basketball instead.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Stumps, Virginia — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:02:04 GMT

4,256 STERIOD FREE hits. That says it all. The man deserves a bust in Cooperstown. He earned it with his bat. The day baseball, or any sport, becomes a hallowed sactuary of morality is that day that hell freezes over.

In Defense of Pete Rose

John Hayes,Charlestown, MA — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:06:08 GMT

Wrong is wrong know matter how you look at it what he did was wrong. If you let in Pete Rose then let in the all of the black sox and everyone else who got caught doing something wrong to the game. How do we know if he is telling the truth now, he has not been known to tell it like it is. Someone who can control the games like the manager can make things happen to his benifit. I think he should not be allowed back into baseball, he just wants to make more money on his appearences, than coming back to baseball to make baseball better.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Lonn DeLashmutt Grants Pass, OR — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:44:09 GMT

Thanks for making sure the real truth is put forth. I heard about this from the regular news and didn't think much about it one way or another. Probably felt is was about time he came totally clean and it is about time baseball allows him into the Hall. It seems every story these days is so blown up to get some kind attention for the news network or some person reporting it. I am glad you take the high road and report the facts

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ron Denison Iowa — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:44:46 GMT

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bill Lentzsch, Gainesville, FL — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:49:58 GMT

I wrote this the second I saw that Pete admitted to betting on the Reds. Doesn't it feel better to FINALLY come clean? I've always been outspoken about Pete Rose. Sure, he gambled. He even bet on baseball. But I can *finally* say that he is willing to admit it. He says he never bet against his own team, and I believe that 1,000%. Nobody ever worked harder to make sure his TEAM won. In today's world of prima donna athletes, Pete played with UTMOST intensity - all the time. Not concerned for individual accolades, he played with heart, desire, and a commitment to team goals. Can we finally get him back in the game, he is clearly among the greatest to ever play the game, and the only one that could even POSSIBLY rival his tenacity, hustle, and endurance in my lifetime at least, is a guy who's already in...one Cal Ripken Jr. Thanks, Pete, it feels better to be a longtime supporter today.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Phillip Volner, Milan , Tennessee — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:55:58 GMT

Pete Rose was one of the all time greatest players. He was a manager when he gambled, and who really cares if he did or didn't. He still should be in the hall of fame. He made baseball fun to watch and was one of my favorite players. Good Luck Pete

In Defense of Pete Rose

Robert Pyper, Las Vegas, NV — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 23:10:32 GMT

What Pete Rose accomplished on the baseball field deserves to be recognized in the Hall of Fame. On the other hand, regardless of any (in my opinion, self-serving) admissions, apologies, contrition or recognition of reality, he also deserves his lifetime banishment from any relationship with professional baseball. My solution is this: put a bust of Pete Rose in the Hall, along with all his records. Do not, however, hold an induction ceremony, or in any other way recognize the event. If Pete wants to visit and see his stuff, let him pay the admission fee like any other customer. Bud Selig should tell him once and for all "Not no way, not no how, now go away and leave us all alone!!!" Pete committed the unpardonable sin (as far as baseball is concerned) and therefore can not be pardoned. His "addiction" notwithstanding, he walked past the sign that told him that what he was doing was wrong and the punishment attached, every day of his baseball life. He accepted the consequences when he took the action. We all make choices, every day, and must accept the ramifications of those choices. Despite his ability to hit a baseball, Pete Rose is no different.

In Defense of Pete Rose

g.e sigman — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 23:11:12 GMT

I love the guy...he help the phillies bring home the championship in 1980..

In Defense of Pete Rose

Steve — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 23:22:50 GMT

Everybody knows that Pete Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame. Just because the institution won't officially recognize him as being one of the all-time greats means nothing. He's already been voted in.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Garrett Miles, Morgantown, WV — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 23:42:41 GMT

So, if we let pete Rose into the HOF, then denny mcLain deserves a shot. Oh, his career was cut short because they caught him before he retired. If pete rose has an addiction, do we know it happened only after he quit playing? Get real. keith, you are a much better journalist than this is making you look, and i'm a Republican baseball fan.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Tom, Ludlow, KY — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 23:55:15 GMT

I grew up across the river from Cincinnati. Pete Rose was a role model for me growing up. My dad went to Pete's high school. Everyone in Cincy knew Pete wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed or the most talented athlete. But he played his heart out. His brothers were more talented but Pete got to where he got on pure persistance. He took an awkward batting stance so he could get on base more. He set an example for all of us athletes that were a little lacking on the talent size. I credit him for being my inspiration to play center on my high school football team at a 145 lb. That said, it hurt me and other tremendously when he admitted he bet on baseball. Not because he gambled but because he lied. I know gambling is a powerful addiction and my heart goes out to the man. I don't know if I would put in in the Hall today except that he means so much to the fans of Cincinnati. For us, he was the guy who could succeed against the odds. While others preened, he hustled. While others bragged, he won. Don't reward Pete for his bad behavior but do reward those that Pete inspired. I know there are a lot more out there than just me.

In Defense of Pete Rose

jen — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 23:55:39 GMT

There is no joy in Mudville.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Frank Lee Dunn — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:10:20 GMT

pete the cheat claims he only bet on the Reds to win. this from the man who said for years he never bet on baseball? so when he does confess finally he does so in a manner that makes him look like loyal charlie hustle. I have $50 says pete the cheat is lying, he did more than just bet on the Reds to win. farnkly I'm sick of hearing about Pete. he may be charlie hustle but he's no Kirk Gibson.

In Defense of Pete Rose

john williams — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:21:16 GMT

I think many posters fail to understand that John Dowd, writer of the Dowd report, has said that Rose did NOT best on his team every game and likely bet against his team. Dowd, and others, have said that gamblers Rose new bet against the Reds when Rose did not bet on the Reds. Evidently, Rose did not bet on the Reds when Soto and Gullickson were pitching. As history has shown, Dowd's opinion on Rose's betting is to be trusted over Rose's. Until recent years Rose called Dowd a liar (and worse) and the Dowd report lies.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Tom Hofstetter — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:25:57 GMT

I heard the best idea from a speach I attended this week by Tommy John. Let Pete in the Hall, but on his plack inscribe "admitted to cheating on baseball while manager of the Reds". This way everyone who visits the hall forever will know what he did and he can still get his due.

In Defense of Pete Rose

James R., SLC UT — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:34:30 GMT

How many years must someone be punished for gambling? Kobe committed adultry (a sin) and is still playing basketball. Numerous Professional athletes have been arrested for drugs and armed violence (both sins). Yet are allowed to return to the game. Ricky Williams for marijuana for instance. Murderers get second chances (definitely a sin). I'll bet there are many pro players today that still place friendly wagers or wagers through a friend. How can one person be persecuted for this long, when its still happening today. Worse offenses have been committed. Based on his record as a player, Rose should have been invited into the Hall years ago; based on his skills in the game. HIS SKILLS IN THE GAME. I'll say it again, for his skills in the game. Everyone has had their scapegoat. Now, let the man in already. Forgive him. Let him back into the game. If he does it again...yank him. If our society is worried about professional athletes who are or are not good role models...there are more bad role models than good. Maybe persecute them all or none. So, either forgive Pete Rose, or start persecuting them all for all sins, not just gambling. All of you that claim you never gamble are kidding yourselves. A gamble doesn't necessarily include money. Life has risks and every risk you take is a gamble. Wouldn't you feel you should deserve another chance?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Esam, Longwood, FL — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:51:44 GMT

Rose did his trangressions as a MANAGER. He earned being inducted in the Hall of Fame because of his efforts as a PLAYER. I don't understand what one has to do with the other. Rose was one of the best and most exciting players in baseball history and as such deserves being inducted in the Hall of Fame as a PLAYER. No mention of his job as a MANAGER needs to be made. He never bet on baseball while he was a PLAYER. Get it?

In Defense of Pete Rose

john, curwensville pa — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:44:26 GMT

lets see, street drugs have been illegal in the usa for years, but mlb looked the other way when players got caught with these drugs. gambling is legal in the usa, especially state run lotteries, but it is a crime in baseball to gamble.. i'd love to have pete teach my son baseball he earned the right to be in the hof....

In Defense of Pete Rose

jake kizziar — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 03:04:59 GMT

ya know i can sympathize with pete but how come he couldn't come clean eighteen yrs ago??? is the end of the line getting near???

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bert, Hilo, Hawaii — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 03:42:20 GMT

Letting Rose back into baseball because "He's been punished enough" is like letting a pedophile babysit after his jail sentence is over because "He's been punished enough". Rose should never be allowed near baseball again.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Keney, Studio City, Ca — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 04:02:34 GMT

This guy is baseball personified. When he was a player and on the road and when all the players were out partying, he was in his room studying his bat to see where he was connecting with the ball! This guy is a living Ty Cobb -- a great and horrible compliment at the same time. Man would he do wonders for the game. Can you say sell out crowds?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ken, Lakeland, Florida — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 04:11:00 GMT

I would venture a guess that virtually every person who has offered up an opinion about Pete Rose's gambling has at one time or another bet in an office pot. The gambling had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Pete's playing the game. The man earned a spot ahead of most anybody else currently in the HOF. His gambling came afterward. Maybe Baseball should take a peek at its own money dealings with the nabobs who are owners and the like. It is time to forgive and forget until we find someone perfect to hold up as a champion!

In Defense of Pete Rose

B.L., Santa Rosa, CA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 05:17:46 GMT

Oh Keith, why?!! Why give Pete another opportunity to promote himself? According to him he's the best representative that the game of baseball has? Are you kidding me? Definitely one of the greatest players of all time. Definitely a huge horse's ass and an ongoing embarrassment to most grown-ups, let alone baseball fans. If you are going to publicly support Pete Rose being inducted into the Hall of Fame, at least lobby just as hard for someone like Shoeless Joe Jackson -- a great player of all time who was much less of a scumbag than Rose remains.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Stephan, Everett, WA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 05:26:49 GMT

Mr.Olbermann: Perhaps you may wish to address Sen. H. Clinton then First Lady to look into the unfairness of child custody battles notwithstanding prevention of spousal abuse. I wrote her on that issue...now Senator she has a bad recollection as what is needed to difuse violence at home. I suppose, politicians love to line their pockets.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Brian, Las Vegas, NV — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 05:40:06 GMT

As some one who heard the entire interview on “The Big Show” including the build up to the interview, I can only laugh at the different reports I have heard since.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Gregg, Seattle,WA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 06:26:28 GMT

I love Pete Rose and he should be in the Hall of Fame for his accomplishments on the field. With all the changes in the Pete Rose confessions who knows what is true. Next we will probably find out from Pete that he actually only bet on selective Reds games. Forget his words and remember his accomplishments. If he's not in the Baseball Hall of Fame I will make sure my kids know about one of the greatest players to play the game!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Paul B. — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 06:54:21 GMT

This is pretty clear to me, maybe this is fair solution for baseball players on steroids, or using cork bats, or like Pete Rose who gambled away his good name. If the mission of the baseball hall of fame is to continue to record the history of baseball properly then why are they not allowed to do that. Pete Rose was a great baseball player even if he screwed up. Great baseball players need to be in the hall but so does a report of their wrong doing. For all of history the player's accomplishments will be posted but also very clearly and right in the face of the public should be a monument to all their screw-ups and how their actions damaged the game. Maybe a section of the museum called "the Hall of the Infamous" should be started.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bryann — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 07:12:59 GMT

I think the whole issue is rather lame. He bet..against the rules..it does never appear to have affected his decisions. He didn't THROW games. Before he did this he was one of the best players around. Hall of fame should be from results. which he definitely had. Look somewhere else for your heroes. Actually I don't think you'll find an hero or heroine without any faults. Milktoast people seldom accomplish much. In any area of occupation. If you really think the Babe Ruth's Ty Cobbs etc were angels...I think you're somewhat delusional. Maybe we should purge MacArthur from the history boos as a great general because he overstepped his bounds with Truman...Maybe we should take away the Medals of Honor from Vietnam vets because today it was a "bad" war. while we're at it let's purge Truman because he was the only world leader to ever use a Nuke. That all is History. His record as a player is also History. Keep him away from baseball NOW... OK. denial of his abilities and history as a player is pretty stupid.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mike, Appleton, Wisconsin — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:41:44 GMT

I say forgive Pete, It needs to be pointed out that Pete was a great player and should be in the HOF for what he did on the field As for his of the field problems, the man needs our prayers not our judgements "Let he who is with out sin cast the first Stone"

In Defense of Pete Rose

Robert Bried — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:31:42 GMT

I was at the 1973 Playoff game where Pete beat on Bud Harrelson! I still think Pete's an ass but have respect for the way he played the game. As for his latest addmission, he'd be in the Hall if he was contrite when we first found out about his problem. Funny how things work out. You have a current baseball owner who hired surly characters to drum up some smut on ballplayers plus steroid users who "cheat" this game more than Pete Rose ever could! You see, this effects the business, not some retired man with a problem.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jeff Blanchard, Brewster, MA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:40:30 GMT

Et tu, Keith? Fiction: Rose bet every day on the Reds. Fact: A careful reading of the Dowd Report shows that Rose usually bet $2000 on the Reds as part of his daily slate of wagers. But not always. On June 25, 1987, for example, Rose and the Reds played the Giants in Fan Francisco and lost, 7-6. Rose made only one bet that day, on the Mets, and won $2,000. Then, on July 4 and 5, he didn't bet at all despite plenty of opportunities, including the Reds twice.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mike, New Orleans, LA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:48:01 GMT

I think that professional sports, as a whole, would be better served if we REQUIRED its participants wager every game for their own team to win. Sports suffer today because of the lackadaisical efforts put forth by these primadonna "stars". I have absolutely refused to spend my hard-earned money on pro sports for the last several years. I am sick of it.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bob Swintosky — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 12:49:53 GMT

What do you call putting up $200+ million in payroll like the Yankees do, in the hope of making tons more if they win the World Series? Sounds like gambling (sorry, GAMING) to me.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dan, cincinnati, OH — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:22:21 GMT

Pete Rose is a pathetic individual who has a serious addiction problem and still needs rehabilitation from it. His arrogance, denials, lying and greed are all symptoms of addiction. He is totally self-centered and self-absorbed, hallmark behavior of addicts. Until he gets professional treatment for his addiction, he will not change. He is his own worst enemy until then. That said, Pete belongs in the Hall of Fame based solely on what he did as a player ...period! He is the all-time hit leader! There are plenty of players in the Hall with character flaws, that if ever exposed, we'd be shocked. What Pete did as a manager and betting on his team was stupid and wrong. For that, he deserves to be banned from baseball forever. But for the Hall of Fame, he deserves grace and a second chance!

In Defense of Pete Rose

John Rose, Cincinnati, H — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:29:16 GMT

I have no problem with Rose being permanently banned from Major League Baseball. That is the rule and he knew it. But, the Baseball Hall of Fame has no legal association with Major League Baseball and should never have instituted the "Pete Rose rule" and made entry into the HOF contingent on not being banned from MLB. What would happen if we learned that a current Hall of Famer still associated with baseball were betting on baseball? MLB would ban him, but would the HOF remove him?

In Defense of Pete Rose

J.Y.M. - Chico, CA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:42:53 GMT

I agree with a lifetime ban for Pete when it comes to say managing or coaching or day to day operations of a team. But to keep him away from ballfields, from promoting the game of baseball,from have passion for something he loves.... from getting into the Hall of Fame, that's ridiculous! Everyone makes mistakes, he has admitted his. MLB is taking away a great ambassador of the game

In Defense of Pete Rose

chengor, camp wood tx — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:47:42 GMT

let Rose's BASEBALL accomplishments determine his eligibility for the HOF..he never was running for 'sainthood'.Ty Cobb was a despicable human being but he was a helluva baseball player.Rose belongs with him in the HOF.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Tim Garrett, Hockley, Texas — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:59:51 GMT

No, no, no. I thionk it is fine that Pete may finally be coming around to the realization that what he did was against the rules in a big way and that was clear to him. I find it interesting that he is already becoming the victim (a gamling addiction). True or not, it is just another way of not taking responsibility. I say put Pete Rose's records and memorabilia in teh HOF and leave him out forever. It takes nothing away from his accomplishments and sows that Baseball can have some integrity.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dan Ward Jr. Cottonwood, Al. — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:07:55 GMT

I use to watch baseball win Mickey Mantle played for Newyork and I thought he was the greatest.Then came Pete Rose who I think was the greatest all around ball player thats ever played the game!I no longer watch Baseball since the commissioner banned Mr.Rose from the game.

In Defense of Pete Rose

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:08:06 GMT

Mike-New Orleans: Good thought. How about basing their pay on how many games they win during a season. The only sports figures I think are worth their weight in gold are those little fly-weight, light-weight and bantam-weight Mexicans, Mexican-Americans who literally beat the h--- out of each other for 12 rounds. But Rose still needs to be allowed into the HOF and I see most here agree.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Norbert marcinek,chino valley,az. — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:15:00 GMT

pete rose had an addiction.Itwas betting on basell.What about them players that used drugs,and are still playing.I'd say that was a lot worse than laying a bet on the game.How about Barry Bonds with hias steroid use.He is still playing.

In Defense of Pete Rose

J Santaite — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:18:05 GMT

Pete Rose, aside from the 4256 hits, was an unremarkable player. Statistically, he was average in most of his offensive and defensive categories. Without the gambling, he would have gotten in the hall of fame on the strength of the hits record alone. "Charlie Hustle", as I remember him, was a self centered, egotistical jerk,....who happened to be a better than average ball player. He certainly was not a player I endeared, nor did many of my friends think too highly of him. His "HITS" record is the ONLY thing that would have gotten him in the HOF. The bigger issue here is that he AGREED to a lifetime ban, and whether you or I agree with this, the rules are clear. As long as you are banned from the sport, the HOF cannot vote on you to consider you for the HOF. We cannot and SHOULD NOT bend the rules just because it is Pete Rose. I'll concede that gambling is some sort of "disease" to the extent that it manifests compulsive behaviors. But it DOES NOT make you stupid, nor does it render you incapable of discerning right from wrong. Petey boy knew what he was doing was CLEARLY WRONG. He gambled on this and lost. He didn't get away with it, and now he has to face the music. The fact that he has come clean( if we can believe everything he says) does not change the fact that he bet on baseball, nor does the fact that he bet on his team change anything. Betting, gambling, wagering......whatever you want to call it, is NOT ALLOWED.....whether you bet for or against your team or ANY OTHER team. That having been said, I believe everyone deserves redemption, and I forgive Pete for this, but that does not mean that I am willing to overturn the penalty for this. He must live with these consequences. Not because what he did was so awfully wrong, but because there is a principle here that goes beyond Pete Rose, and that must be upheld because the game is greater than any ONE person.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Rosalie Bazemore, Riverside, Calif. — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:16:17 GMT

Pete Rose just betted on the game. It's not like he actually fixed games. MLB will keep Pete Rose out of the Hall of Fame, but, they will allow a homerun record to stand from a player who has been hyped on steriods for years, and who plays the race card everytime it promotes his agenda. If Pete Rose is not allowed into the Hall of Fame, then the records of these steriod induced players should not be allowed to stand, nor should they be allowed into the Hall of Fame. Hank Aaron is a gentleman, a great baseball player, a real role model, and more than deserving of his homerun record and induction into the Hall of Fame. This is what every baseball player should aspire to and conform to, otherwise baseball is just another cheap and sorry act, fully undeserving of any public attention.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pam, Pennsylvania — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:31:17 GMT

I have been a Pete Roses fan for a long time - when my sons were young - I used to encourage them to be the type of player he was. I admired him for his hustle, his playing style, his love of the game, and no matter what, I always felt that when the going got tough, and the game was on the line, I wanted to see him in the game, and felt that he would make the play or get the hit or do whatever it took to turn things around. I have always felt that he got a raw deal. I would feel differently if he had bet against his team and then done something to ensure that they lost, but no one has ever proven that that ever happened. I think he has been punished enough, and if this country can give child molestors, and murderers, and thieves, and politicians a second chances, then the game of baseball should Pete Rose a second chance.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mike, Whitehorse — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:31:18 GMT

Keith, you seem to almost understand the "game fixing" concept, except you forgot to ask Pete if he bet the same amount every night. 100 one night and 10,000 the next is the same as betting or not betting to a millionare. The fact that he bet "something" every night is not the revelation you seem to think it is.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ed Wright, Columbia, South Carolina — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:43:38 GMT

Pete Rose broke the rules and can not go into the Hall of Shame or Fame. But doing illegal enhancememnt performance drugs is okay. People can believe whatever they want, Pete Rose played baseball at a high level while a player. Pete Rose will not go into the Hall of Shame as a coach. What if a Hall of Famer commits a crime after the induction. Should that person be taken out of the Hall of Shame?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jerry Pupa — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:49:46 GMT

See folks some things never change... its only in America that characters DOESNT count...just ask Pete, Making good bucks while playing a wonderful game and bringing joy to millions isnt enough for some EGO MANIACS.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Tom Sear, Moses Lake, WA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:55:50 GMT

However "politically correct" it may be that no one is responsible for their actions anymore, the fact remains that he broke the rules. Screw him.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Michael McGuire, Philly, Pa. — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:57:10 GMT

Let it go! We have criminals that get away with more! Consider it "Time Served" and let the man in HOF!

In Defense of Pete Rose

steve, concord, ca — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:59:37 GMT

scrap the entire league....and make cricket our national pastime...hmm...or rugby..hmmmm..or first, let "shoeless"....in...

In Defense of Pete Rose

skc, Burke, VA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:51:16 GMT

If betting on his team while managing them was really a manifestation of loyalty, then he would have bet on them regardless of who was pitching. He bet on baseball while playing, it is a clear violation of the rules, he knew the rules, end of story. First allow Joe Jackson and Buck Weaver to be considered, then come back to this congential liar who only admits his transgressions when he seeks sympathy or a new media deal.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jim MacKay, Gilbert, AZ — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:57:29 GMT

The Hall of Fame should be just that - a Hall of Fame. Granted, there are womanizers, boozers and Heaven-Only-Knows what other degraded souls in there. None of them, as far as we know, broke any of the "rules" - the MLB covenants that are set up to keep the game what it needs to be. Players who are steroid users, drug abusers and betters on baseball games should never be admitted to the Hall under any circumstances. Keep it a Hall of Fame - not a Hall of Shame.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bruce R, Elon NC (formerly of Cincinnati OH) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:24:24 GMT

'Way back when Pete got his 4000th hit, Cincinnati renamed Second Street(which ran alongside Riverfront Stadium) "Pete Rose Way". Later it was said that they considered renaming it "The Cooperstown ByPass". In all seriousness, HOF membership SHOULD be based on the player's performance on the field during his playing career. If you're going to erect further eligibility restrictions based on off-field and/or post-playing-career actions, then it should be done retroactively and across the board. How many spots in the hall would THAT free up?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Gene Bartolon, Scottsdale,AZ — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:53:19 GMT

Why does this have to go on and on. The man violated the rules and regulations of the sport. I think the public has had enough of his crying, and the sports writers should find a new way to prove their abilty to make a living. The man deserves nothing.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Adam — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:57:18 GMT

For the past few years, it seems like an almost annual occurance: Pete Rose amends his story. First, he never bet on baseball. Then, he bet on baseball, but not on games he was involved in. Then, yes, he did bet on his team... but always to win. Finally, he not only bet on them to win, but bet on them to win EVERY game of EVERY 162 game season. Even assuming Pete always kept his bet the same amount (that's a big assumption) and assuming he always bet "to win" (and not any other type of bet), then there's still the fact he won that bet 412 times and lost that bet 373 times. A .525 win percentage certainly didn't help erase his mounting gambling debts-- debts so huge he even gave bookies one of his World Series rings. As player and manager of the Reds, Rose was in a unique position to influence the outcome of his baseball bets... while he only had a 52% chance of winning if he bet for his team... he could improve his chances of winning his bet if he bet on his team to lose and deliberately lost the game-- something far easier to do. While there's no concrete evidence he did this, baseball expressly outlawed gambling to prevent this situation from occurring. Pete broke that rule with utter disregard, who's to say he didn't go one step further? Pete Rose has not admitted anything. He's been confronted with overwhelming evidence, and only then, did he cave. He's shown very little understanding of why baseball has banned him. You can believe Pete Rose if you want, but he wasn't honest before, how can we be so sure he's honest now??

In Defense of Pete Rose

Carlo Manahawkin, New Jersey — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:07:18 GMT

This is why they make asterisks. Didn't Roger Maris have one? Put Pete Rose in the Hall and give him the asterisk (was banned from baseball for gambling after his playing days were over) but while managing a team. This should make everyone happy.

In Defense of Pete Rose

diane - kamloops British Columbia , Canada — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:32:17 GMT

good lord what goes on in sports today , and what they get away with. Pete Rose was an Angel, give the guy a break, Only Gambling people thats all.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Damon, Charlottesville, Va. — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:35:51 GMT

Why would anyone want to be in the hall of fame, anyway? As far as I know, Pete Rose is already more famous than the Hall of Fame. Where is the Hall of Fame anyway? The only ones who should have a desire to get into the hall of fame are those who may be forgotten. Rose is way too well-known to be forgotten, well-beyond a need for "Hall of Famedom".

In Defense of Pete Rose

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:47:02 GMT

There are some of you folks posting in here that are truly cold, man. Thank goodness I was not raised by you because I would still be standing in the corner with my nose against the wall 50 years after breaking the damn window with a baseball when I was 12. And if I had thrown the ball through the window intentionally, knowing it was wrong, well, most likely my corpse would still be rotting in your attic where you locked me up and threw away the key. I know Pete gambled and lied, and still may act like a little arrogant s--- about what he did, but my God, at some point you have to forgive people. If you're listeining Pete you better high-tail-it to another planet or something or these folks will have the gates of hell all primed and ready to open for you when you leave this life. If you want to hold people to rules that's fine. But many of you here act like you have personal vandetta's against Rose for having killed your dog and then laying it on your front doorstep before ringing the doorbell and taking off down the street. Ghheezzzzz!! And most of you probably don't even know how to play baseball. Get a life.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Gengar, Jacksonville, NC — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:49:57 GMT

Stimp's comments represent how out of touch people are with the definition of the word "hero", and how incredibly overused the word is. Using her definition, Charles Manson and Jeffrey Dahmer are "heros" if they admit their crime, as would be any criminal admitting a transgression. Pete Rose is no hero. He's the opposite.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ron Larson, Crown Point, IN — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:59:40 GMT

It's funny how the punishment never fits the crime. Yeah, I grew up watch Pete Rose play and he made the game exciting. No one reading this is an angel. That being said, not one is a devil either. I do believe the entire Hall of Fame thing is a farse and regardless of the sport I'd never visit one. No one here is saying Pete was on steriods. Gambling didn't affect how he played the game. If the Hall of Fame is supposed to be about statistics, then keep it that way. If one physically earned every statistic, credit him. If one person makes it to the Hall of Fame with less statistics that another THAT should also be mentioned informing visitors of the THRUTH. There are a handful of people who have been denied "honors" because of stupid or political or prejudices reasons where the "statistical facts" speak for themselves. It still irks me to recall the Jim Thorpe story... which I believe was the 1st time in my youth I wondered about what fairness there was... or to put it another way, what one "really" needs to do to find themselves in the Hall of Fame.... It's a Hall alright... but not really of the type of Fame it was intended. My kids also know they should believe everything they hear or read. Pete did wrong... but as far as baseball is concerned it helped it more than he harmed it... he played it. Hell I quit watching the boring game years ago now.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pam Bignardi, San Pedro, California — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:04:05 GMT

Barry Bonds and the allegations against him have absolutely nothing to do with Pete Rose, and I am somewhat perplexed as to why past comments regarding not using the strengths/weaknesses of one politician as an excuse to justify the behavior of another, does not apply here. In addition, Barry Bonds is still on the "active roster", and is not being considered for a vote into the Hall of Fame. Frankly, I am bothered that this argument is being used by those who feel Pete Rose has been treated unfairly. There is absolutely NO doubt whatsoever that Pete Rose was one of the best players to ever play baseball, and his talents would have earned him an immediate spot in the Hall of Fame on the FIRST BALLOT. Additionally, I believe his ban on baseball should have been lifted long ago, in addition to his induction into the Hall of Fame. However, I also believe if he had been completely truthful years ago, in addition to not questioning and sometimes border line "insulting" Bud Selig, we would not be having this discussion. Yes, Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame; and hopefully, now that he has finally been able to deal with his past in an honest manner, which I commend him for; baseball will finally give this man the credit he earned as one of the greatest to ever play!!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Terri King, Manteo NC — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:15:28 GMT

Bottom line is: Pete Rose earned his nickname of "Charlie Hustle". He was one of the greatest ball players who ever put on a uniform. OK, so he made bets on sports....he bet on baseball. I agree with those who think that is despicable. But tell me this....you want to teach your kid how to play like Charlie Hustle or like these pumped up, bloated, steroid enhanced, spoiled brat, looking for the best deal millionaires who are dominating the game now? At least Pete didn't need any illegal enhancements or drugs to kick tail on the baseball field in his day. And he wasn't a millionaire. He played for love of the game. And he played very well....

In Defense of Pete Rose

Lavonda, Canton, NC — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:22:03 GMT

There are good arguments on both sides, but in the end Pete Rose should be eligible to be voted into the Hall of Fame for his accomplishments as a player. If not, then no one who is not of the highest moral fiber and flawless character should be in. What an empty Hall that would be!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jim Davidson — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:35:20 GMT

Keith: I'm not an expert but it seems like Pete Rose many years ago admitted that he bet on baseball and broke the rules. So what does Major League Baseball have control over, just Major League Baseball, Right? Is the Hall of Fame limited to only those who played, managed, owned, etc... Major League Baseball? Pete Rose went to jail probably because he didn't pay his taxes maybe on gambling income? Well isn't that enough punishment. Maybe the fans need to start a Hall of Fame for baseball that isn't under the control of Major League Baseball! What Pete Rose did as a player should be all that counts! Put an asterisk by his name if you like but he belongs. Life is not fair, Martha Stewart goes to jail for lying to a federal official and Bill Clinton got nothing for lying to a federal grandjury!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Roy Henson — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:46:13 GMT

Pete Rose was a great player. He bet on baseball when he was a manager of a pro team. One thing everyone seems to forget. He agreed to the lifetime ban from baseball. But like most professional athletes, they seem to think their word means only for that day. Stick to your word Pete, you agreed to lifetime ban, so your out for your lifetime.

In Defense of Pete Rose

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:51:33 GMT

Pam: Baseball is very important and still America's game. But deciding who has some histroical legacy in baseball and who does not is not on the same level as who will take over the white house and run this country. We are not talking about voting for Rose to become President but rather are trying to determine whether the man should have his place in history as a great ball player. Comparing a past President in order to defend the failings of another I agree is not the way to determine those qualities we want the next President to posses. But defending Rose's right to some historical legacy based on the qualifications of others who have entered the HOF "and who will most likely one day enter the HOF, is approriate based on the need for consistent application of the rules. Rose is not in the HOF. Others who violated qualifying rules are. Others who have violated qualifying rules most likely will be. Therefore the one has every right in this instance to make comparisons, whether with those from the past or those of potential HOF status in the furture.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pam Bignardi, San FPedro, California — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:21:45 GMT

C A - This sincerely pains me, but I must disagree. As I stated, Pete Rose the ban against Pete Rose should be lifted and be inducted into the Hall of Fame. My argument regarding Barry Bonds is that his name is thrown around like he is already in the Hall of Fame and was voted in on the first ballot. I believe we should not make comparisons with Bonds and Rose. For if we do, then we must admit that a.) Pete Rose admitted what he did AND accepted his fate years ago by agreeing to a lifetime ban and b.) We have the authority to convict Barry Bonds of something he has NEVER admitted to (unlike Pete Rose), simply because we believe it to be true. This is not a just cause to attack Barry Bonds. Pete Rose was one of the best, as I stated; however, people HAVE ON THIS BLOG, used Barry Bonds as a means to somehow say that's why Pete Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame. NO, HE BELONGS THERE BASED ON HIS OWN MERITS AND TALENTS AND BARRY BONDS HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ROSE'S TALENT!! We can not pick and choose when to use an argument, or when it is appropriate. I see absolutely no difference in justifying Newt's affair by using Clinton's - both were immoral. If one day it is proven that Barry Bonds used performance enhancing drugs, then he alone should suffer the consequences, and Pete Rose should not have anything to do with that. It will be about Barry Bonds and Barry Bonds only, as it should be. This is about Pete Rose and Pete Rose alone, and his long overdue induction into the Hall of Fame.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dave Peterson, Green Valley, AZ — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:26:14 GMT

Ewwwww! That's my response. Pete Rose has been engaged in a decades-long PR strategy wherein he continues to edge closer and closer to acknowledging the error of his ways. Not because he is truly contrite. He isn't. But the outright denials didn't work for him, the qualified denials didn't work, the halfway-there-but-still-not-a-confession didn't work, etc. This latest admission is still not what it should have been from Day 1, an acknowledgement that yes, he utterly screwed up. This latest campaign is, well yes, I bet on baseball but I only bet on my own team to win. We're supposed to respond "Well, he did bet on baseball, okay, but ain't Pete loyal to a fault? What a swell guy." My response for one, remains "Ewwwwwwwwwww!"

In Defense of Pete Rose

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:48:25 GMT

Pam: I see you took some time to pen your response and even though I must disgree with you I do respect your opinion. Perhaps you are correct that Mr. Bonds should not have been mentioned by name. But I still believe that if the HOF is to have rules determining who gets in and who does not, that those rules should apply consistently to all who are nominated. We do have proof of violations by prior players allowed into the HOF. I won't use names here out of respect for your position. But we do know who these people from the past are and that they violated serious rules against society and against the game of baseball as has Rose. And although you may be correct about future hall of famers it is highly likely that some, won't mention names, who have admitted to using strength enhancing drugs will be voted into the HOF. There are a few who have admiited to the same, and have been tested positive for the same, that are being allowed to maintain their historical records of home runs, etc. These comparisons cannot be avoided Pam. For if true, and it is true that HOF eligibilty rules have been applied inconsitently, then we have to compare, it is our duty to compare Rose with these people in order to rectify a wrong being done to him. Don't be pained. Some of the greatest friendships have occurred and been maintained between people with different opinions and view points.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Marce — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 20:54:37 GMT

Pete, lied before and is likely lying now. Pete should not be in th HOF and either should Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa or Mark Maguire(should put a star beside record and say they were on steroids). Or anyone else found betting on the game that is in the game or anyone doing steroids.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pam Bignardi, San Pedro, California — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:12:47 GMT

I agree C A, and I will mention a "name" with regards to future HOF member. Just recently, Mark McGuire did not make the ballot to be voted into the HOF. I believe this gives not only us, but "suspected violators" GREAT insight into what their fates will be. I so appreciate your writings, as they are always insightful!!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jim Bob Finkelstein (SoonerM), Houston, Texas — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:23:46 GMT

I'm still not totally sure what I think about the Pete Rose situation. I will say that he did pretty much everything he ever attempted at about 120% effort. In watching the way he played ball it comes as no suprise to me that when he decided to gamble he went off the deep end. That's Pete and that's the way he approached everything. The only thing I'm 100% sure of is that Myron Stark is a wuss.

In Defense of Pete Rose

C.C. Opelika, Al. — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:24:34 GMT

It is not right what Rose did,but I would rather a player did something that didn't HURT someone, than someone that took, "DRUGS" or enhancer,to help them break rocords and win games. I think if Rose can't be in HOF, then take away ALL the games that was won with players on any kind of drugs.I don't think Any Player should have any RECORDS that might have been won while on any kind of enhancers or drugs. The bottom line is Rose was one of the BEST!!! Put him in Baseball HOF.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Michael — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:41:53 GMT

This issue between MLB and Pete Rose is silly. Let's move on - tell the story as it is in the Hall of Fame - both the good and the bad. Keeping Pete Rose away from baseball, both today and in the future, prevents MLB from being everything that it can be. Moreover, it distorts the history of the sport. MLB should accept what has happened. Remove restrictions on Pete Rose and let the fans and the Teams decide any future role Pete Rose should have with baseball.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Rob Bodenbender — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:46:16 GMT

the saddest thing about all of this is simple. look at all the drug abusers in baseball. here are the names of a few........Otis Nixson, Dwight (Doc) Gooden, Ken Caminiti are a few. did any of these palyers get a lifetime ban for drug using? what kind of message does this send out? it tells me its ok to do drugs, you wont get in trouble. but gambling? lifetime ban. pere needs to be reinstated so he can enjoy whats left of his baseball life.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Matt, San Diego, CA — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 21:58:48 GMT

We can't believe Rose because he keeps changing his story. 15 years ago, it was, "I didn't bet on baseball." 3 years ago, it was, "Yeah, I bet on baseball and on the Reds." This week, it's, "I bet on the Reds EVERY night." What's the story going to be next year? Maybe Pete and Shoeless Joe should have plaques in the Hall that honor their accomplishments as players and then say at the bottom, "Not eligible to be a member of the Hall of Fame because he bet on baseball games while he was an active player (or manager)."

In Defense of Pete Rose

Pam Bignardi, San Pedro, California — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:05:30 GMT

Rob Bodenbender - He not only bet on baseball - he bet on his OWN TEAM - WHILE WAS THE MANAGER!! Don't misunderstand me, I think he should in the HOF, but he did "accept his fate" when he accepted the "deal" of the lifetime ban. HE CHOSE THIS FATE ON HIS OWN. I'm willing to give him another chance, as he made that best decision based on the options given to him........Let's stay focused on Pete Rose and his gambling, then we can move on and get him his due. I don't think using others' illegal drug use will help him get into the HOF any sooner. All the best and the best to Pete!!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Carolyn, Cary, NC — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:05:40 GMT

I grew up in Cincinnati in the 60s and 70s. Pete Rose WAS Cincinnati, Pete Rose WAS the Cincinnati Reds. He was a marvel to watch on the field! No one has ever matched his hustle and his love of the sport. His big ego off the field was a part of who he was and no one seemed to mind. I recall being in his presence a few times and you truly believed that he was the BEST. I have been disappointed in his choice to bet on baseball (although his betting on horses at River Downs was no secret) yet I CAN NOT UNDERSTAND THOSE WHO INSIST ON DENYING HIM A SPOT IN THE HALL OF FAME. There simply will never be another Pete Rose, and his passion and contributions to the sport of baseball are unique and not likely to ever be repeated. I SAY: LET HIM IN! The years of denying him have not lessened his contribution to a sport that is no longer the game it once was.

In Defense of Pete Rose

darryl s., rockford, IL — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:09:03 GMT

Until Pete is in the hall of fame as a player I will not be a baseball fan. There was no proof that he bet as a player, so he should be in the hall as a player. He was caught betting as a coach not a player and to my knowledge him has not admitted to betting while a player. He needs to be in the hall, period!

In Defense of Pete Rose

TaraToo, Cooperstown, NY — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:13:12 GMT

Good Baseball player/coach, maybe. Voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, NY, NEVER.

In Defense of Pete Rose

m.hart — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:38:04 GMT

I was reading these articles about pete if J.Santaite thinks 4,256 hits is not worthy of the hall I quote an average player then he need to go back to school and quit picking his nose in math class.If you average 200 hit a year for 20 years you still arent there. and buy a baseball encyclopedia and check the records of one PETER EDWARD ROSE let him in time served.when i played baseball when you went to the plate they said get a hit pete has more hits than any person on this PLANET EVER !!!!

In Defense of Pete Rose

C A, Tuscaloosa, Al — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 22:57:35 GMT

If we are going to judge players only on each of their own indivdual natural skills (merits) and allow others into the Hall of Fame for skills that were not natural but enhanced by anything other than hard work and practice, then Rose has been wronged. The question then becomes have there been players in the past who made the HOF but whose skills were enhanced by drugs, alcohol, or any other un-natural ability enhancers. I may be wrong but I do beleive there were players in the past who excelled as a result of being so totally inebriated that they played better wasted then if they had been sober. There are those who also enhanced their skills by way of painkillers and without such help would not have excelled. Therefore, we have compared and have shown we are not determining Roses eligibility based on his own skills (merits).

In Defense of Pete Rose

Alberto G, DC — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 23:50:01 GMT

I still don't believe Pete Rose is being entirely truthful. He's admitting something additional in drips and drabs everytime someone sticks a microphone in his face. Would you approve of his abduction into one of our secret prisons where we could strangle him with a microphone cord and waterboard him until he confesses the whole shebang in one shot? I'm all for it. LMK.

In Defense of Pete Rose

J. Zimmerman — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 00:10:50 GMT

Rose accepted his fate long ago when he desecrated (by his actions)the game that he so fervently claimed to love. Please allow Rose to go as gently into that good night as he deserves. We need no contrition for the betterment of the game; we need only accountability for the betterment of our society.

In Defense of Pete Rose

D.C. Twin Cities MN — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 00:37:58 GMT

The way I heard it on air as I am a big fan of the big show with Keith and Dan is that he came on not trying to sway opionions nor was he asking anyone to say by his comments he will get a chance at re-enstatement into baseball. What I heard were corrections in a confused aray of members of the press reading what they wished and reporting that on his admission of betting on his team. Keith came out and asked THE question before Pete came on and he had heard it and said I want to clear that up I did not bet on some games I bet on every game because I believed my team could win every game we played thus saying I did not bet only on games when certain players were in as apposed to ones we had no chance of winning. Pete did a bad thing yes in fact, he committed what MLB will tell you is the biggest sin in the sport but while I agree that it left a bad role model for the game, I also would say to me anyways that any player who uses enhancers to win batting titles or break records is even more of a sin and even a worse example for kids watching the game. ask a kid do you think your team can win? they won't say no ask them if they wanna bet they will say yes it is just faith in your team. Pete Rose was a homer yes and it was wrong to bet on his team , not because he had pure faith in his team but because as Keith said himself it left questions all over on when and why who knows if they are resting certain players on any given night to cover the bet and even if he did bet on his team again who is to say if he pulled a pitcher even when winning to cover the spread?. I will say this betting as a manager was wrong on many levels but, I have always said and not sure what Keith or Dan will say to this but ban him from being part of the game as a coach or manager? YES! but ban him from the hall of fame for what he did as a player? NO! here is a guy who ran over a catcher in an all star game because losing a game was not an option to him. Pete Rose the playe gave eveything inside to win and help his team win and guess what? he did it cleanly no steroids needed to get it done just desire and love of the game I beg anyone to find a player from the 80's to today aside from perhaps Cal Ripkin Jr. that gave that much for so long for love of the game. Pete Rose the player has earned his spot in the hall of fame for what he did as a player period you could exclude all stats and not even mention his manager carrer on his plaque much like the imfomous astrik nest to Roger Marris' name in single season home run records. Pete Rose the manager was a bad team player for betting on his team but don't erase what he did for the sport as a player for his actions as a manager if we do that we may as well start to pull out 3/4 of the hof members for an array of things personally that embarresed the team or family name. I applaud Pete Rose as a player I boo Pete Rose the manager and I thank Keith and Dan for having him on to explain the situation and clear the matter for them Keith has every right to still condem him for betting but does he ever condem him for his efforts as a player? I don't think so. I am not a reds fan I am a cardinals fan and yes I will say Big Mac needs to come clean too and if he did use steroids and admits it he should not enter the HOF and his 70 home runs should be erased from the books and Barry Bonds should not be in the game until he comes clean one way or another there is a black eye on baseball that should earn the same as Rose the manager and conseco the player earned..life time bans and no hof chances differance is Rose the player still has the stats and did it clean he earned the HOF as a player period.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mr. Hondo, Anaheim, Ca. — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 00:51:33 GMT

Pete Rose is not and should not be in the Baseball Hall of Fame! Why, he agreed to the lifetime ban of eligibility in 1989 .... how soon we forget the facts! All baseball managers know that betting on/for your own team is strictly prohibited! His integrity/moral standards would have been saved if he would have admitted this when it occurred! Period! He should have Loved GOD like his team and then he couldn't have bet on them!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ohio Mike — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 01:15:53 GMT

Why did Major League baseball ever allow Pete to accept a lifetime ban and not come forward with the truth about the betting. Had they stepped up and confronted Pete, allowed him a chance to be honest and come clean, this would have been put to rest 18 years ago. He simply was hung-out by MLB. Pete Rose should have been given the opportunity to explain himself. Had he taken that opportunity, confessed to the betting, the public would be feeling sorry for him. Katie Couric should stick to recipes and AM concert coverage.

In Defense of Pete Rose

David Herrington, Bradenton, FL — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 02:07:06 GMT

I am not much of a follower of all the details of Pete Rose's gambling. I have always liked him for his baseball hustle. In my mind, that merits inclusion in the hall of fame. A paraphrase of the Bible "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" seems to ring in my awareness. With very few exceptions every one is guilty of sin or inappropriate behavior at sometime. How did Michael Irwin get into the Football Hall of Fame with all his outrageous behavior with prostitutes and drugs? Yepper, Pete had a gambling problem. THAT in and of itself did not diminish his playing performance. I could go on and on about use of steroids (admitted) by Hall of Famers (doesn't seem to mean anything to the voters) and that clearly influences outcomes.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mike Juran, Loyalsock Township, PA — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 02:17:43 GMT

Let's see, Daryl Strawaberry and Dwight Gooden do drugs and get chance after chance after chance, than after their careers, are put on ballots for induction to the Hall of Fame. Pete Rose bets on baseball and is banned for life. I've seen lifetime bans in other sports last about a couple of years. And if anyone doubts the Rose bet on the Reds to win, just ask former All-Star catcher Ray Fosse, who was bowled over by Rose in the 1970 MLB All-Star Game, which back then was merely an "exhibition" game. I'm sure "Charley Hustle" likes the new All-Star Game format. Put Rose in the Hall of Fame, or announce no more inductions after this year.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Erv Server, Des Moines, Iowa — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 02:31:52 GMT

How does this issue keep getting stirred up I asked myself....seems Mr Rose himself keeps bringing this issue into the limelight. I don't think this helps his cause any, may sell some books though.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ron Campbell, Mountain View, Mo — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 02:36:23 GMT

Having read all the previous posts, One thing is very obvious about those who want a total ban from any part of baseball for Pete Rose and the Hall of Fame. While there are a few that won't agree with me on this, forgivenes is a strange thing. If you did a good job of driving your car but got a severa years getting speeding tickets, how would you like to be banned from getting any auto insurance for life. Forgivenes is forgiveing and forgetting, best for all. I happen to like and loved to watch Pete Rose even though his team was not my favorite.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Will H. — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 03:26:30 GMT

It makes me wonder about the mental capacities and gullibility of people who assume Rose is telling the truth now. Below is the 18 year time line of the Rose's statements concerning his betting and baseball: 1)Rose said he never bet as a manager. 2)Rose said he bet as a manager, but not on baseball. 3)Rose said he bet on baseball as as a manager, but never on the Reds. 4)Rose said he bet on the Reds every game as a manager (apparently he assumed the Reds would go 162-0!). Likely the people who believe him on #4 today, also believed he was telling the truth on 1, 2 and 3. With time there likely will be stories 5, 6 and 7 for these people to also believe. Duly note that John Dowd has said that Rose did not bet on every Reds game, and believes Rose did bet against the Reds. Using Rose's betting receipts and records, Dowd also says Rose bet on other MLB games when he did not bet on the Reds.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Rob, Miles City, Montana — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 03:53:14 GMT

Pete Rose was my hero when I was a kid. I remember being glued to the set when Pete was up to bat, and I could always count on him to get a base hit or an RBI. Yes, compulsive gambling is a disease and Pete made mistakes, but he is still one of the best ball players ever. He was very dependable and consistent, unlike the spoiled, over paid babies that are playing the game today. I say the man belongs in the hall of fame.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ronnie — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 03:54:48 GMT

Rose, with his lawyer as council, agreed to a lifetime ban from baseball. Why is there an argument? Baseball has banned betting on baseball games for all employees (with clearly stated punishment of lifetime ban) since 1920s. Why should there be debate about Rose being banned for betting on baseball? The Rose apologists had no complaint about the anti-betting stance until their hero was caught breaking it.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Sly Stallone — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 04:08:13 GMT

Anyone want to bet on whether Pete Rose is voted into The Hall of Fame?

In Defense of Pete Rose

steve bain, norris city, illinois — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 06:18:41 GMT

The issue of Pete betting on the game is settled. He did. And, he admitted to it. Let it rest. Pete Rose, like it or not, as a major league baseball player was one of the greatest of all times, and, like it or not, is already in Cooperstown. Yes, Pete Rose is in the Hall of Fame, in Cooperstown, N.Y. His name is all over the place in there......... all of his records and accomplishments are right up there with many of the other deserving men of the game....... Gentlemen, do not judge the man of his character, but of his deeds.......the fans of Pete Rose and of baseball of that time, didnt care what the players did while they were at leisure.....they only watched of their performance on the field......Pete Rose gave 100% of his abilities, 100% of the time when playing the game, that's much more than at least 95% of all of the other players of his time. There have been just a handful of players in baseball history that can boast such love for the game, and i dare say that they adorn the walls of the Hall of Fame. Tear down the grievances that bind up your hearts and souls, and allow a deserving player his rightful place in immortality. Put Pete in the Hall.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bob WestPalm Beach — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 10:32:10 GMT

The leaque spoke 18 years ago when Pete was banned from baseball. They did it with the understanding that they didn't want this rogue player based on previous experience upending their apple cart. However with that said... Pete has "served his time" and baseball needs to see the errors of it's ways. The steriod scandal of the past several years has implicitly implicated the baseball office in certainly worse deeds than anything that Pete could have done in that they were aware of the propensity of steriod use but chose to do nothing in order to sell tickets. The fact should also be noted that politicians do much worse and whose behavior more egregious yet go unpunished ( Clinton and genocide in Rwanda, Bush in Iraq). It's quite laughable to believe that we hold baseball players to a much higher standard.

In Defense of Pete Rose

john hutcheson — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 13:31:22 GMT

Why is Mr. Cynical (I love Mr. Cynical, btw) suddenly dropping the cynical guard now? Pete Rose lied for years when he thought it was in his self-interest, lied a bit more when he admitted to some gambling on baseball, and now is probably lying because it is obviously better to bet on EVERY game than to bet on some. The Dowd report had it right all along. I'm surprised that you (and Patrick??) bought into this. For what it's worth, I stole your 'Worst Person in the World' bit, ironically to use against Pete Rose.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Richard, Fort Worth, Texas — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:25:01 GMT

A major league sport has come a long way. If you want to start with Pete Rose betting on a game to what goes on in sports today. Drugs, drinking, rape, killings, and if you wanted to look into it, I would say even “Betting: The only difference today is that they still make the Hall of Frame, the RING OF FAME, in Dallas and even get their own shows on ESPN. And the only one that gets his name dragged in the news daily is Pete Rose. How about you the news media get some BALLS and write about the players today. Pete Rose should have been another color or played for the Dallas Cowboys, that way he would still go into the Hall of Fame.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Josh Logan — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:45:15 GMT

Pete Rose is a serial liar. In 3 or 5 more years he'll tell us more of the story.And More later again. He could have come clean at first,waited a decent interval, and then had his chance. But no, he's still lying, he's still telling half truths Keep him out The Hall of fame isn't just for playing hard... it also has an aspect of trying to honor the game. Pete Rose dishonors baseball.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ryerson Binning — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:55:38 GMT

Keith, I really enjoy your show on MSNBC, but I'm afraid you've been duped by a professional liar. And even IF Rose were telling the partial truth, the whole truth is that he bet on lots and lots of game...and like most addicted gamblers, spent untold countless hours scoreboard watching instead of concentrating on what he was being well paid to do, namely to manage a baseball team that in all likelihood would have finished first if only they had a manager who didn't have his head up his a--. Get focused, Keith, read the Dowd Report thoroughly, and don't get duped by the lies of a man with no moral values.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mark, Gainesville — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 16:11:08 GMT

I hosestly cannot believe how unknowledgeable (and that is being kind) so many fans are about Pete Rose and the problems with gambling. So let me put this in simple terms for everyone to understand. Imagine working real hard all week, paying your bills, and then spending the remainder of your money to go to the stadium to cheer for your favorite team. Ah, they should of won that night, and could have won, too...but the highly paid manager was too busy checking out the scores of all the other games he bet on, rather than paying attention and doing his job with 100% dedication and concentration. And that's IF you believe Rose. If you instead believe the Dowd Report, your team lost that night because the manager didn't want to use his closer because he DIDN'T have a bet that night, or because he gave a couple star players THAT night off to rest up for a game the next day which he WAS going to bet on. Quite honestly, Pete owes all of us a boatload of money that he cheated us out of...yes, he is nothing but a good-for-nothing liar, cheater, and a bum, and I really wish he'd just go away forever.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dennis, Derby, Vt. — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 18:09:06 GMT

IMO,Rose deserves LESS consideration for the HOF. Saying you bet on your team every night is pure b.s. He knew if injuries were going to play a part in the upcoming game and what he was going to be able to put out on the field that night. The guy has no honor and should never be allowed to walk on the HOF grounds much less be part of.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jill C., Canyon Lake, CA — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 18:44:41 GMT

I'm not a sports fan so maybe I may not understand this issue....However, while I can thoroughly understand why it would be wrong for a manager to bet AGAINST his team, I don't understand why it's wrong for a manager to bet ON his team, especially if the manager is paid a bonus when the team does well. Isn't that the same thing as betting your income EVERY NIGHT on how well the team performs? Doesn't EVERY team manager place a "bet" on his/her team EVERY night if their pay includes a bonus at the end of the season, based on team performance?

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dave Varano, Mount Carmel, PA. — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 18:59:01 GMT

Pete belongs in the Hall of fame, BUT NOT until he passes on to the real field of dreams. I think this is punishment enough for him while he is alive, yet he will be safe in knowing he will join the Hall after his death.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Glenn — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:31:10 GMT

Pete Rose's crime was expiated a long time ago. I know it, the readers of this column know it, baseball knows it, unfortunately won't acknowledge it. Pete Rose was the greatest player of his age..Every kid I knew followed Pete, wanted to be Pete...His aggressive style, arrogant attitude and the chutzpah he had scratching himself with his bat on national television was unrivaled. Whether Pete gets into the Hall of fame while he's still around or after he's gone is moot. His fans will always know that he was the greatest. On a personal note. I had the opportunity to take my 3 young daughters to Pete Rose's restaurant in Boynton Beach. Pete couldn't have been nicer. He sat down at our table made a big deal of the kids...he was a real mensch...

In Defense of Pete Rose

KT, TN — Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:17:19 GMT

Hell, guys, if character had anything to do w/the HOF nobody would be in there except Lou Gehrig!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Mark, Dunkirk, NY — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 00:33:46 GMT

He has been coming clean in pieces over the past 18 years, if he would have done it in 1989, maybe he would be at the stage of redemption now. Sure a lot of players have faults, but Pete thought he was beyond it. And now he is in his 60's, his managerial days have long passed, but he wants one more shot at it, a couple year deal at a couple million per year, would solve anyones problems..........He is Hall worthy on his stats alone, who would vote for him escapes me.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Bruce R, Elon NC — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 00:47:39 GMT

C'mon gang. Yes, there's evidence and a range of differing partial admissions about his betting while managing. So yes, he should be banned from the HOF - as a manager. There's NO evidence that he bet on baseball as a player. And as a player he most definitely deserves to be elected into the HOF.

In Defense of Pete Rose

RAndy — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 01:26:38 GMT

Ok. Rose bet on the Reds every night. Did he say if the bet was to win or lose? It makes a big difference.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Chuckles T. Clown — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 09:33:28 GMT

The Hall of Fame is a place where the Baseball writers can enshrine their opinions. on who they think should ger our adulation. When baseball players vote on wins the Pulitzer prize for jounnalism, then the HOF will have some relavence. I wonder if the Vatican endorses sports "journalism" as an alternitive vocation to serving God! Pete Rose IS one of the greats of the Game. The failure to commercialize that opinion, by "enshrinement", does not detract from his accomplishments on the field.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Artie, Baxter, MN — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 09:39:07 GMT

You know, on the one hand, I have to hand it to us Americans - we sure do have a heart. We love giving second chances, and then some. On the other hand, when we have laws, rules, and regulations that go unpunished or when transgressions get reduced sentences, this explains, in large part, the problem with justice in America and why so many commit crimes and recommit them. We simply can't seem to mete out a sentence and hold to it, or we don't punish severly enough in the first place. Pete Rose wants to talk about all the multiple chances others get in baseball, like drug abusers. Bottom line is Pete committed the cardinal sin, the mortal sin, if you will. If baseball determines that gambling on the game is so detrimental to its integrity, which it is, and if they institute a life-time ban for offenses, then they should absolutely hold to it. If Pete were truly remorseful, and if truly cared about the integrity of the game at this point of his life (clearly, he's still passionate about baseball), then he would accept his fate and move on. Because he refuses to accept his Just punishment, and especially after taking years to even be forthright about his actions, it demonstrates his selfishness, self-centeredness, and his lack of respect for the integrity of the game. Finally, I am incredulous that someone as intelligent as Keith Obermann would so easily accept the words spoken by Pete Rose the liar. Could he be telling the truth about betting on all the Reds games? Yes, but it could just as easily be a very well-calculated admission cloaked in more lies. As Keith says, this version of events actually makes his betting appear less vile. Funny it didn't occur to Pete to mention this "fact" in his book a few years ago. Perhaps he hadn't thought of it yet.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Ron Smith, Lascassas TN — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 14:05:25 GMT

Hell, even Richard Nixon got his mug on a postage stamp. Even in death, we kiss their asses...

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dan — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 17:45:22 GMT

Pete Rose knew betting on games was illegal. He did it anyway for years. He repeatedly LIED about it for years. Finally, after overwhelming evidence of his lies, he gets around to admitting it. He very well knew the consequences of doing it, he did it, and he lied about it. Now, because he admits to it, the years of lies should suddenly be forgiven?? What utter nonsense. Comparing him to other crooks that were never punished does not excuse anything. He was banned for life because of choices he made. If he was any kind of man, and wants to be a good role model, he should accept the consequences of his actions and go away!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Alex Hoffman — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 22:04:42 GMT

If you believe that Pete Rose bet on his Reds to win every night in a sport where even the greatest teams lose 40% of their games, then I have some fabulous real estate in Florida we should discuss.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Joe Kohler — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 23:32:13 GMT

I really don't care if Rose bet on the Reds as a manager, all I know I couldn't stand him as a player... He was my all time most hated player.. I actually despised him, odd coming from a 8 year old kid in 1973.. but let me tell you this, he beat you in every way that he could.. I've seen it done with his bat, glove, legs and just his all-out attitude.. The man deserves to be in the HOF as much as anyone else, say what you want but I've seen him do it all on a consistant basis..

In Defense of Pete Rose

Robert Lowenthal, Jemison, Alabama — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 23:54:18 GMT

I can't believe that anyone in their right mind can support putting Rose into the hall. Think of it from our childrens point of view. If the kids are baseball fans, they will look up to someone in the hall. What kind of message are we sending the kids if we tell them it is OK to break the rules and then spend years lying about it. Are we telling the kids that if you are good at something, then you do not have to live by the same rules as everybody else. Are we telling the kids that lying for years on end is OK, as long as we come clean, some day, when we think it is to our advantage. Getting into the hall should not only be for men who play the game well, but for men who play by the rules. Pete Rose does not belong in the hall now or ever.

In Defense of Pete Rose

John G., Athens, GA. — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 01:02:39 GMT

Pete Rose was and still is one of the greatest men to play the game of baseball. Yes, he made a mistake and is currently paying for it. Yes, he admitted to his additions or problem, just like allot of folks in other sports and politics have done. Have we band/fired them? Bottom line, the rules should be the same for everyone in sports or politics. NO EXCEPTIONS!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Jax, Small Town, SC — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 12:34:12 GMT

With all that is going on in baseball now such as players denying steriod use, tantrums, arrests, etc., maybe baseball needs to review Pete Rose as the flawed former ballplayer he is, human. A baseball great that we may not see the likes of for a while. So let his records stand for themselves and give him a break. Looking at what is going on it baseball today, the HOF roster will be slimmer and slimmer each year.

In Defense of Pete Rose

kp, nj — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:05:59 GMT

oh the sacred game of baseball, I lost interest after watching Ricky Henderson wiping away a tear during an interview about 14 years ago. (and I hope Bonds breaks the record so we can all be enthralled with the Jihad that will cause with the "purists")That being said, I believe he should be in the hall of fame just so he can finally fade into oblivion, and we can get to really important issues (I believe CNN is going to show a cat scan of Anna Nicoles lower intestine tonight). in closing I must disagree with the whole "he always gave 110% thing" I think the most he ever gave was 100%...plus the vig.

In Defense of Pete Rose

T; somewhere in St. Louis — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:08:19 GMT

Maybe some of us should stop and think about how much fun and enjoyment we all received from watching this man play baseball. Before any of us knew that he had a 'gambling problem' he was great and he set the all-time major league hit record of 4,192, breaking Hall of Famer Ty Cobb's of 4,191. He also totaled 4,256 hits by the time he retired. I understand all the uproar about this man and his addiction, but I still remember sitting in my living room on a sunday afternoon and watching a great baseball player play great baseball. You do not get the moniker of Charlie Hustle by sitting on your bum and lazily playing the game, you get this nickname by having the passion to play baseball. We can all judge this man all we want... (aren't we all perfect? that's sarcasm by the way) but again we need to actually stop and think about his record AND how much we enjoyed watching him play.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Phil Hall — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:09:01 GMT

I look at it like this: Pete bet on his team, big deal. He never bet AGAINST his team, therefore never "threw" any games. What he did was more of a minor league boo-boo than something that should ban him for life from the HOF. Look at the man's accomplishments! If ever anyone belonged in the HOF, it's Pete Rose. Sure, he's got flaws; everyone does. Making an example out of someone is fine if the penalty fits the crime. In his case, the penalty is so far out as to be nowhere near the ballpark. Pete screwed up, was sorry, and now we need to get over it. When betting for your team is worse than steroids, something's wrong.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Eric Hynes, Fairfield Ohio — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 12:34:48 GMT

I went to the Opening of the Pete Rose Memorial inside the Reds Hall of Fame last week and Pete was there at the Ball Park. Pete has a problem and he knows it admits it and is doing the right thing. He is a huge Hero of mine. My 7 year old daughter asks me why he can't be in the Big Hall of Fame in NY. I tell her he broke the rules and can't go. She says, "Why don't they just give him a time out." They've given him one now it's time to let the guy at least go to THE Ballpark and watch a game. The restrictions against Gamblers getting into the HOF will keep him out. For a man that ran to first on Popups and walks who was a monster of a competitor he should be allowed to see a game.

In Defense of Pete Rose

The Detroit Viper, Detroit, MI — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 13:22:05 GMT

It was only just a couple of years ago that Pete Rose, after adamantly denying it for the previous fifteen, finally admitted that he did bet on baseball. For those first fifteen years he denied and lied, lied and denied, and denied and lied some more. He questioned the integrity of Bart Giammatti, the integrity of John Dowd, and the integrity of everybody and anybody else who said what turned out to be true all along. Jim Gray was effectively blackballed from network sports for daring to ask Rose if he will finally admit to gambling. Pete Rose was a GREAT ballplayer - arguably one of the greatest hitters of all-time, but he should not be reinstated ever. He committed baseball's unpardonable sin - he bet on baseball. He knew the penalty. This rule was not invoked solely for Pete Rose. He further compounded his mistake by lying, defaming, and insulting all those whose only agenda was to get him to own up to the truth.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Patrick, Toronto Ontario — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:29:03 GMT

Lest anyone become confused in some emotional bond to someone, gambling on baseball by any player, coach, or manager is strictly forbidden. Not "but if you're famous and/or you're betting on your own team it's okay". In every locker room there's a big sign stating this. Which means that Mr. Rose ignored this sign umpteen times. Gambling is gambling. Saying 'I'm sorry' nearly 20 years after the fact doesn't make it right. Great player, yes, but one cannot willingly break a rule about gambling on baseball. It calls into question the integrity of the game, and one cannot do this.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Steve, Culver City, CA — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:04:03 GMT

I understand the point you are trying to make about Pete "setting the record straight" about when he gambled on the Reds, but how do you know he's not lying now? Telling the truth does not seem to be his strong suit. And, really, the only thing on earth that could ruin the game of baseball is gambling. How could you root for a team if you thought that the results were somehow fixed? That is why it is so serious a transgression in baseball; the game was almost ruined 90 years ago. There is no doubt that Pete Rose was a great player who put up some of the most amazing career numbers in major league history. However, no one man is bigger than the game. He engaged in the one behavior that could ruin the game of baseball. He was caught and then lied about it for years, playing on the emotions of fans who believed in him. It is one thing to forgive him, maybe relax his association with baseball a bit as long as he is not in a coaching or management position. But it is another thing altogether to grant him baseball's highest honor, induction to the Hall of Fame. Given all that we know about Pete Rose, good and bad, he simply does not deserve that honor.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Joyce Waterman, Deerfield Beach, FL — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 18:01:30 GMT

I don't know how you get around the fact that if you bet on baseball, you're out of the HOF, but in this case, there has to be a way. Pete Rose played with a passion and a heart that is rare on the field. His aggressive enthusiasm was exciting to watch as it was backed up with his ability to play the game. Personal choices are important, but an institution that celebrates baseball is empty without Mr. Baseball.

In Defense of Pete Rose

S.L. Kotar, St. Louis, MO — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 17:20:19 GMT

Keith, if we leave it to the "oldtimers" to vote on whether Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame, we've already reached the end of our discussion. They have not elected one single player/manager/owner since the rules were changed. Clearly, they all believe THEY belong in the Hall but no one else deserves a "second chance" (see comments by Joe Morgan). So really, Rose's opportunity is academic. Whitey Herzog belongs in the Hall; Ron Santa belongs in the Hall. They're not getting in. Get in line, Pete.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Brent Prouty, Chicago IL — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 17:42:12 GMT

I'm confused, Keith. You and Pat seemed to accept that what he said was the truth. Pat said something to the effect of this closing the issue. What? He said for years that he had not bet on baseball. He has changed his story how many times? Five? And now you think he's telling the truth? How is he a credible source on this topic (even if he is the only one who really knows)? After hearing you, Keith, question the honesty of the administration every night on Countdown, how can you not severely question the honesty of Pete Rose? Further, you two amazed me afterwards even entertaining the idea of him being back in baseball as a manager. He is a chronice liar. He's not likeable in the least. His time of, as I believe he said, putting an extra 1M fans in the stands is 2 decades old. Can you honestly say that there is a team in baseball that would touch him for anything other than a minor league role (where he can teach... which is a scary thought, in some ways)? Maybe I'm wrong, but if I was an owner I wouldn't touch Pete Rose if you paid me, paid for the insurance policy, and had 24 hours survelance.

In Defense of Pete Rose

John H, Chicago IL — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 20:01:08 GMT

As much as I love baseball and other sports, at the end of the day we're still just talking about a game - a bunch of overgrown, overpaid kids running around chasing a ball. Should Pete Rose be in the Hall of Fame? Sure, why not. But so do many other players who, for one reason or another, have been passed over.

In Defense of Pete Rose

murphzero — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:24:20 GMT

Sorry, Keith - but I just don't have much sympathy for the man. Yeah, we're all more than the worst thing we've ever done - but this guy can stay on the outside looking in until the likes of Buck O'Neil have been admitted. Buck did the right thing, more than the right thing - and was gentlemanly about getting passed over. Pete did the wrong thing, denied it, and then slowly worked his way up to admitting it (so far as we know). To let him in before Mr. O'Neil would just be an even bigger disgrace than the Hall has already heaped upon themselves.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dale Yelich, LaFarge, Wisconsin — Fri, 30 Mar 2007 22:11:04 GMT

Well, you and Pat have stirred up the 'ol 'Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame' debate again. Truth be told, the older this gets, the more interesting it becomes. Why you might ask? Well, I had always been against Pete Roses' induction into the HOF. Gambling is the ultimate sin when you have so much control over a team. Or at least, it sure looks bad on paper, doesn't it? Paul Hornung and Alex Karras were two super stars of their era in the arly 60's. They always denied that any bet they placed was against their teams, and since their performance statistics during those gambling years never wavered, we can safely assume that to be true. Rose was in the same position, and although not a statistician by any stretch, I believe that his decisions regarding the game were consistent with all of his other decisions. Which means, he really WAS betting every night, and not against his own team. Hornung and Karras were each suspended for a year, and allowed to come back and play. Each of them is in the Football HOF. Why should it be any different for Pete Rose? After all, what's worse? Steroid induced muscles setting home run records which lead to an automatic HOF admittance, or some guy just playing the baseball ponies? Pete Rose, for everything he did on the field, is still and should always be a model for kids to look at and emulate. Bonds, McGuire, Palmeiro and the rest of those artificially made hitters, should be cast off into the valley that now claims Pete Rose.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Paul Bressler, NY, NY — Sun, 01 Apr 2007 23:28:55 GMT

I always thought Shoeless Joe was banned from baseball for life. Evidently, that's wrong. He's been dead since 1951, and he's apparently still banned. Pete Rose should be banned from baseball, and the Hall of Fame, for the rest of his life. When he's dead, and no longer around to reap praise or punishment, he should get in.

In Defense of Pete Rose

quivering — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 17:22:35 GMT

i think that there should be a wall seperating the countrys

In Defense of Pete Rose

Marie Lorenzo — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 07:11:16 GMT

Pete Rose should be inducted into "THE HALL of FAME" He was an excellent athlete & deserves the HONOR !!! Many an athlete have taken drugs & were honored & shouldn't have been.Many people who critisized are no saints,I'm sure they have plenty of skeletons in their closets, so lets put Pete in the Hall of Fame !!!!!

In Defense of Pete Rose

Longshot Hustle , DEEETROIT BASKETBALL — Sun, 08 Apr 2007 02:35:37 GMT

Pete Rose was a hero of mine, but I believe that his admissions are too late. He had his chance to come clean and put it behind him. He may not have used O's show to promote anything, but he is continuing to keep himself in the news and by doing so, he is promoting himself. Sorry Pete, but as much as I would like to say that your betting is not even in the top 10 horrible things that have been done by current and future hall of famers, it was wrong, you knew it was wrong, you failed to timely admit it and you appear desparate to make the Hall. My prediction is that when this "help a guy out" pitch doesn't work, Pete will begin petitioning the rules committee to allow gambling. Give Pete a golden ticket so he can go to any game played by a MLB team, but make it clear that he will never be in the Hall of Fame and call it a day.

In Defense of Pete Rose

Dan B, Blakeslee, Pa — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 07:54:02 GMT

Pete Rose is in the Hall of Fame already. They can't erase his numbers which will probably be #1 for all time. But he should be allowed in the Hall of fame, which is supposedly separate from MLB. It's the pious sports writers who have to vote him in in spite of the lifetime ban. Those supposed purists of the game who get paid for sound bites, and like most haven't played the game since little league. The same writers who have recently overlooked Barry Bonds' implied transgressions until he does break Hammerin Hanks number. Then they will pull out the self righteous articles and I told you so's that they have been saving up for the last 2 or 3 years. There will be a cry of indignation the likes of which you never forget. Put Pete in the Hall of Fame for his accomplishments on the field.

In Defense of Pete Rose

R Roger Beck, Scottsdale, AZ — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:00:26 GMT

Thanks, Keith, for getting the rest of the story out. It seems that the consensus is that 'Charlie Hustle' should be in the HOF because of his accomplishments on the field. And that's really the bottom line. The rest is blah, blah and blah

In Defense of Pete Rose

Robert Seeds — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 20:25:05 GMT

I have to admit that this whole saga provides secret satisfaction to this fan. As a Dodgers fan growing up in the 1970s, the team that I -- and most of my fellow Dodgers fans -- hated the most was the Reds. And of all of the Reds players, the one I hated the most was Rose, no doubt because it was clear he would give his right arm to beat my team. As for whether he bet on every game or not, who knows if he is telling the truth. Did he bet the same amount every night? Did he ever make a decision that was could have advanced his short term betting interest at the long-term expense of his team or its players? If he is ever reinstated, MLB should impose one condition: every time he walks onto a field, he should be interviewed live on camera by Jim Grey (Gray?).

In Defense of Pete Rose

Tim Finney, Kamo, Niigata, Japan — Tue, 01 May 2007 13:39:02 GMT

One person made a comment that all heroes have flaws. That's true to one extent or another. But the writer added, "That's why their (sic) heroes! They wouldn't be heroes if they didn't have flaws! Right?" Well, no, not exactly, but I think I understand what the writer meant. Heroes, real ones, are defined as "noble" warriors or, more often, people who act (not always with success) with bravery in extraordinary circumstances. "Sports heroes" are athletes who perform at a level above the ordinary and usually (but not always) in championship settings and are idolized by the public. Unless we are talking about Christ or Buddha, perfection of character has little to do with it. However, imperfections do make them more human and interesting. Stories of the Mick or Bobby Layne drinking all night and then, hung over, hitting a game winning homer or leading the Lions to victory pepper their anecdotes. Wilt Chamberlain, who owns several dubious reputations, is more interesting than Bill Russell, who owns well more championship hardware. In that respect, Rose joins the pantheon of those whose imperfections subtract from their character but add to their legend. Whether Rose is worthy enough to enter the Hall, I can't say. Rules and by-laws may in fact keep him out legitimately. However, his prowess and deeds on the field are still the stuff of legend and the anecdote that, if true, as a manager he bet on his team to win every game is, if nothing else, "pepper."

In Defense of Pete Rose

John Doe, Seattle, Wash. — Tue, 08 May 2007 14:49:48 GMT

Pete Rose should be in the HOF for two simple words: "Ferguson Jenkins." At its core, the HOF serves as PR for the business of MLB. Ferguson Jenkins was busted for cocaine possession, and he's in the HOF. (yes, I know...the charges were dismissed, but still...) So, let's ask which of the two is a greater threat to society....cocaine or betting. Yes, I know, it's a close one...but I think cocaine wins this one. And if you're willing to admit a guy busted for drug possession into the Holiest of Holies, then you've wiped out any sanctimonious rationale you may have for keeping Rose out. There were no heroes in the Pete Rose debacle. Still aren't. But the voters who can place him in should do the right thing: hold your nose, close your eyes, and cast your ballot accordingly.

In Defense of Pete Rose

AMEL JORDAN PHILA PA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:02:21 GMT

you cant keep people out that have done good or badthings we all have sometimes or other the man is a history piece to baseball you can stop because of one person in the position in a high seat its not american stop the nonsence please thank you & GOD BLESS EVERYBODY

In Defense of Pete Rose

AMEL JORDAN PHILA PA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:02:42 GMT

In Defense of Pete Rose

AMEL JORDAN PHILA PA — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:04:43 GMT

In Defense of Pete Rose

Anonymous — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 03:42:03 GMT

The normal person would be under the impression that taking the time to obtain data on this subject is a waste of resources.