Re: Selig mulling pardon for Rose
Until/unless it's shown that Pete Rose ever bet on the Reds to lose, he probably did not jeopardize the integrity of the game. That's not letting him off the hook for what he did, but unless there's any evidence he 'threw' games, I think he served his punishment and it's time to let him off the hook.
I do think gambling on your own games is worse than steroids, but since there's no one claiming he intended to try and lose, he did not do something that shouldn't be forgiven.
Had he thrown games (or bet against the Reds, giving the appearance he did), I without question would not condone his reinstatement. But since that's not the case, he's done his time.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda