Release List Reviews Shop Join News DVD Giveaways Video Games Advertise
DVD Reviews | Theatrical Reviews | Price Search Buy Stuff Here
DVD Talk
DVD Reviews DVD Talk Headlines HD Reviews


Add to My Yahoo! - RSS 2.0 - RSS 2.0 - DVD Talk Podcast RSS -


Go Back   DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Sports Talk

Sports Talk Discuss all things Sports Related

View Poll Results: Should Pete Rose Be In The Hall Of Fame?
Yes, His stats are amazing 106 59.89%
Yes, if he admits and/or apologizes 14 7.91%
No, his actions are inexcusable 52 29.38%
only if he takes twikoff with him 5 2.82%
Voters: 177. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-14-02, 03:29 PM   #51
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Franklin, WI
Posts: 6,082
All Pete has to do is change his attitude - admit that he did it, claim that he had a problem and he dealt with it. Say he's sorry, and then the great number people who are against him going in because of his disdain towards the commissioner's office will go away (mostly anyway). He would be in the HOF in a very short time.

Not to go off on a tangent, but I bet there are quite a few guys who had the same love and intensity for the game as Rose (maybe more). Guys like Ripken, Nolan Ryan, Jessie Orosco, Ozzie, Robin Yount, Paul Molitor, Maddux, Carlton Fisk, Dave Winfield, George Brett - heck, he played with hemmorhoids.
__________________
"Any man playing grabass or fightin' in the building spends a night in the box."
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 03:31 PM   #52
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
Quote:
Originally posted by KitchenSink

Not to go off on a tangent, but I bet there are quite a few guys who had the same love and intensity for the game as Rose (maybe more). Guys like Ripken, Nolan Ryan, Jessie Orosco, Ozzie, Robin Yount, Paul Molitor, Maddux, Carlton Fisk, Dave Winfield, George Brett - heck, he played with hemmorhoids.
true.. but look at the company your comparing him too
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 04:05 PM   #53
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Franklin, WI
Posts: 6,082
My point is that I beleive that level of love and intensity is a fairly common trait amongst baseball players, and amongst pro athletes in other sports as well. Not that some majority like 90% have it, but a substantial number (they just don't show it by running to 1st on a walk).

And not necessarily just superstars, either. Guys like Mike Hargrove, Bob Boone, even guys like Mike Fetters or even Al Hrabosky and John Rocker have a passion for the game, though they may not come across the way everyone would like them to. I'm sure there are less talented guys who love the game. Heck - was Tommy Lasorda ever worth a damn as a player? (See my post about Mike Matheny in the Cringe thread)
__________________
"Any man playing grabass or fightin' in the building spends a night in the box."
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 04:07 PM   #54
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Newberg, OR
Posts: 17,092
Quote:
Originally posted by AgtFox
Pure and simple...both Pete Rose and Joe Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame given their stats as a player. Joe will be forever mired in the fact that he gave into peer pressure to take the money, but many do not believe he threw the games that the other 8 did on the field. Joe made a dumb mistake by taking the money and it is sad he will never be in the Hall of Fame.
Joe Jackson absolutely threw the games. There is no doubt about that. Letting him in would be a travesty.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 04:25 PM   #55
Mod Emeritus
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Gone to the islands - 'til we meet again.
Posts: 19,053
IMO, Rose should be in the HOF unless it can be shown that he took actions to intentionally lose games.
__________________
Breathe In,
Breathe Out,
Move On.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 04:32 PM   #56
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 120,464
Quote:
Originally posted by Dead
IMO, Rose should be in the HOF unless it can be shown that he took actions to intentionally lose games.

I'll post this again...Betting to win can have an effect on the integrity of the baseball season as well...

Consider the following scenario. A team is trailing at home by 3 runs going into the 8th. Let's say the manager has bet on his team for that game. In an effort to prevent the deficit from growing in the 8th or 9th innings, he brings in his stud closer even though this would never happen under normal circumstances. Now his stud closer pitches 2 perfect innings, but now because of the heavy work, he is unavailable to pitch in the next game, which the manager does not have a bet on. Alternatively, if the Reds are facing a different team the subsequent day, that team essentially gets to face a bullpen with 1 less player.

It effects game-to-game strategy, unless you bet the same amount of money on every single game. There is no doubt about it.
__________________
"A question for you. Would you rather Bucknell make the NCAA's once every 20 years or so and get ass raped by teams like Kansas in the first round or have them drop down a rung to a confernce where they can compete for a title?"
- Josh Hinkle
1st Round Final Scores: Bucknell 64 Kansas 63 | Bucknell 59 Arkansas 55
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 04:39 PM   #57
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
Quote:
Originally posted by Red Dog



I'll post this again...Betting to win can have an effect on the integrity of the baseball season as well...
but it takes alot of arguing to try and look at strategy

it could just as easily be argued that he is doing what it takes to win the game, even if some people might try to say thats motivated by the bet..
if you let your guys lose today, it doesnt really matter much that you saved a player for tomorrow.

unless he bet against his own team.. there shouldnt even be an arguement.. if baseball really wanted to set an example because he broke a rule, a really solid slap on the wrist would have been fine. but this punishment is just plain silly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 04:42 PM   #58
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 120,464
Quote:
Originally posted by twikoff

it could just as easily be argued that he is doing what it takes to win the game, even if some people might try to say thats motivated by the bet..
if you let your guys lose today, it doesnt really matter much that you saved a player for tomorrow.

Managers always keep the next game in mind unless they are facing elimination from the playoffs in the present game. They would be stupid not to.
__________________
"A question for you. Would you rather Bucknell make the NCAA's once every 20 years or so and get ass raped by teams like Kansas in the first round or have them drop down a rung to a confernce where they can compete for a title?"
- Josh Hinkle
1st Round Final Scores: Bucknell 64 Kansas 63 | Bucknell 59 Arkansas 55
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 04:44 PM   #59
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 4,182
People, get a grip!!!!

In order for the game to mean anything, there have to be some incontrovertable rules that maintain the integrity of the game. Pete, being the consumate baseball player, knew the rules, he knew the gravity of breaking them, and he broke them.

He should not be in the HOF because, ultimately, he failed baseball: Baseball did not fail him.

It may be hard to reconcile his love for the game in all other areas with his disrespect for a cardinal rule meant to preserve the spirit of the contest, but it remains a fact that must be reconciled.

Anyone who gambles on the game should be banned from baseball and from the Hall. To make exceptions lessens the deterrent effect of the rule immeasurably.

Other infractions have different consequences, but gambling is, rightly or wrongly, the ultimate sin in baseball (plus, there's no crying - I think that's 1a).

I can forgive Pete on a personal level for being human, I can question the validity of the rule, I can rail on that it's unfair....but he cheated himself and us by breaking an integral and historic vanguard of the games integrity: he bet on baseball. He dug his own grave.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 05:52 PM   #60
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
I've bet on baseball many times

I guess I cant make the HOF either
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 05:54 PM   #61
Stealth Moderator
 
namja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: High Definition
Posts: 24,942
All this integrity talk ... I didn't know there was ANY integrity in baseball. If Pete Rose doesn't get into the HoF, then ALL of these players shouldn't either:

(1) Any batter who has ever used a corked bat.
(2) Any pitcher who has ever scuffed the ball with any foreign object.
(3) Any pitcher who beans a player.
(4) Basically anyone who violates ANY rules in baseball.

__________________

life in high definition
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:06 PM   #62
Stealth Moderator
 
namja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: High Definition
Posts: 24,942
Quote:
Originally posted by Big Quasimodo
Other infractions have different consequences, but gambling is, rightly or wrongly, the ultimate sin in baseball (plus, there's no crying - I think that's 1a).
Ultimate sin? What Rose did to/for the game is no worse than:

The MLB allowing billboards/ads to be plastered all over the ballparks.
The owners trying to get the cities to build new stadiums with the contraction threats.
The Marlins (as well as the Yankees, the Braves, etc.) buying the World Series.

No, I'm not condoning Pete Rose's behavior, but since the MLB has no integrity anyway, and since all these players with less credentials and worse personal problems are getting into the HoF, Pete Rose should definitely in there.
__________________

life in high definition
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:06 PM   #63
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
exactly!

who can decide what the #1 rule of baseball is?
can I see it in writing?

last year.. everyone said the first rule of baseball was no bunting for a basehit late in a game, when the pitcher is throwing a no hitter

Im confused.. how many first rules are there
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:07 PM   #64
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
Quote:
Originally posted by namja

The Marlins (as well as the Yankees, the Braves, etc.) buying the World Series.
hey now.. the braves only buy world series runner ups
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:14 PM   #65
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Denver freakin' Colorado
Posts: 8,536
Is there any doubt, has there ever been any doubt, that if you bet on baseball and you are in baseball, you are banned from the game? Was Pete Rose aware of this?

This is one of the clearest rules in baseball, the action and the consequences.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:15 PM   #66
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Denver freakin' Colorado
Posts: 8,536
Quote:
Originally posted by namja
All this integrity talk ... I didn't know there was ANY integrity in baseball. If Pete Rose doesn't get into the HoF, then ALL of these players shouldn't either:

(1) Any batter who has ever used a corked bat.
(2) Any pitcher who has ever scuffed the ball with any foreign object.
(3) Any pitcher who beans a player.
(4) Basically anyone who violates ANY rules in baseball.

There is precedence for the punishment of each of these rules violations, as there is for betting on baseball.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:17 PM   #67
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
Quote:
Originally posted by Three Day Delay


There is precedence for the punishment of each of these rules violations, as there is for betting on baseball.
maybe so.. but the general consensus is that the precedence and punishment are incorrect
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:19 PM   #68
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Denver freakin' Colorado
Posts: 8,536
Quote:
Originally posted by twikoff


maybe so.. but the general consensus is that the precedence and punishment are incorrect
So, should the rest of the Black Sox be absolved of throwing the world series for financial gain, or just the good player?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:23 PM   #69
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
Quote:
Originally posted by Three Day Delay


So, should the rest of the Black Sox be absolved of throwing the world series for financial gain, or just the good player?
100% different situation

proven that they threw the game

alleged that he bet for his team to win

its one thing to sway the outcome against you.. but you cant just go out there and make your team win
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:25 PM   #70
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Denver freakin' Colorado
Posts: 8,536
Quote:
Originally posted by twikoff
its one thing to sway the outcome against you.. but you cant just go out there and make your team win
But a manager can greatly change his line-up to sway the odds towards an individual win, as opposed to managing for an entire season, right? Much more than an individual player?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:33 PM   #71
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
Quote:
Originally posted by Three Day Delay

But a manager can greatly change his line-up to sway the odds towards an individual win, as opposed to managing for an entire season, right? Much more than an individual player?
and I still think that arguement is a major stretch
but if thats the best arguement that can be made for why what he did was wrong, then he would be in the hall right now
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:38 PM   #72
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Denver freakin' Colorado
Posts: 8,536
Quote:
Originally posted by twikoff


and I still think that arguement is a major stretch
but if thats the best arguement that can be made for why what he did was wrong, then he would be in the hall right now
No....I think this is the best arguement: If you bet on baseball while you are in the organization, you are banned. Pete Rose bet on baseball, and was aware of his actions and their consequences.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:41 PM   #73
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 16,046
I believe that #14 does indeed deserve his rightful place in Cooperstown.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:49 PM   #74
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Cary, NC
Posts: 4,182
Quote:

There is precedence for the punishment of each of these rules violations, as there is for betting on baseball.
Right, which I had said in my post...

Quote:

maybe so.. but the general consensus is that the precedence and punishment are incorrect
Doesn't matter. Precedent and punishment are established and known. No crying in baseball for Pete's sake!!!

Plus, the moral minority (me) think the punishment fits.

If you do the sin, you can't get in!
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-02, 06:56 PM   #75
DVD Talk God
 
twikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Right Behind You!!!
Posts: 79,496
Quote:
Originally posted by Big Quasimodo

Doesn't matter. Precedent and punishment are established and known. No crying in baseball for Pete's sake!!!

Plus, the moral minority (me) think the punishment fits.

If you do the sin, you can't get in!
we use to burn suspected witches at the stake
i guess its a good thing that everyone doesnt have your views about punishment being set in stone with no room to adapt to what makes more sense
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:09 PM.


Copyright 2011 DVDTalk.com All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0