Selig on Pete Rose reinstatement: “Still Reviewing Application”

[savafan]

http://www.williamsondailynews.com/p...ts_left_column

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Twelve years later, baseball commissioner Bud Selig still is examining Pete Rose's application for reinstatement.

The career hits leader agreed to a lifetime ban from baseball in 1989 after an investigation concluded he bet on the Cincinnati Reds to win while he was manager of the team.

Rose applied for reinstatement in September 1997 and met with Selig in November 2002. His effort to gain reinstatement appeared to falter after he admitted in his 2004 autobiography, "Pete Rose: My Prison Without Bars," that his previous gambling denials were false.

"It is under review," Selig said Tuesday during a question-and-answer session with the Baseball Writers' Association of America. "He did, as you know, accept voluntarily a lifetime suspension from Bart Giamatti, and there really isn't much more I can say about that. I did agree to review it. It is under review. We do spend some time discussing it. But it's not I think appropriate for me to say any more."

While on the lifetime banned list, Rose is ineligible for the Hall of Fame ballot. The Hall's board of directors decided unanimously in February 2001 that anyone on the permanently ineligible list couldn't appear on the BBWAA ballot.

Rose's final year of eligibility in the writers' vote would have been 2006. Jane Forbes Clark, the Hall's chairman, has left open the possibility that the Hall would allow Rose a spot on the BBWAA should he gain reinstatement.


http://www.williamsondailynews.com/p...ts_left_column


by Jeffrey Reynolds Sports Editor

From 1919 to 1987, Major League Baseball’s biggest scandal had been the 1919 “Black Sox affair” where members of the 1919 Chicago White Sox were found guilty by baseball of throwing the 1919 World Series to help gamblers insure their winnings.

The biggest controversy of that scandal saw legendary “Shoeless” Joe Jackson of the White Sox sent into banishment by baseball along with the other White Sox members who were found guilty and banished from the game for life. The controversy stemmed from the fact that no direct evidence linked Jackson to the affair, yet Jackson was deemed guilty anyway and given baseball’s biggest penalty.

Then, sixty-eight years later, baseball pursued allegations that Pete Rose, manager of the Cincinnati Reds and baseball’s all-time career hits leader, had bet on baseball, including his own Reds team.

While baseball itself indicated that no evidence at the time showed that Rose bet on the Reds, the evidence they had was enough that they asked Rose to accept voluntary lifetime banishment from the game with the understanding that baseball would allow him at some point to apply for re-admission. Rose, wishing to avoid harsher provisions that would not have allowed him a way back in to the game, signed the agreement.

Rose applied for re-admission a decade later in 1997. Being led to believe MLB was tying his truthfulness into the approval of the application, Rose admitted several years later to indeed betting on baseball, but not on the Reds.

Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig “tabled” Rose’s application, taking a hard line on Rose’s sins against the game.

Fast forward to 2003 and former player Jose Canseco opens baseball’s next scandal as he documents steroids abuse by major players of the game. Many of baseball’s biggest record-breaking stars are linked to the use of performance enhancing drugs. Numerous records, including the single season and career home run records have been tainted. But no lifetime banishments have been handed down by Selig, No records have been expunged or marked by asterisks.

Some of baseball’s biggest stars have been suspended for testing positive for using such drugs and some have even lied to Congress. But no lifetime bans as players have been allowed to apologize for their transgressions.

Which was more detrimental to baseball. Jackson and Rose’s never definitively proved betting or taking performance enhancers to lay claim to baseball’s records? And why is Rose’s admission and apology not taken with forgiveness and A-Rod’s and Manny’s are?

If baseball can accept back into it’s fold those who have scarred the games records, it needs to let Rose back in as well.

That’s how I see it from the other side of the desk. We’ll revisit this issue again.

[hebroncougar]

Which was more detrimental to baseball. Jackson and Rose’s never definitively proved betting or taking performance enhancers to lay claim to baseball’s records? And why is Rose’s admission and apology not taken with forgiveness and A-Rod’s and Manny’s are?

If baseball can accept back into it’s fold those who have scarred the games records, it needs to let Rose back in as well.

That’s how I see it from the other side of the desk. We’ll revisit this issue again.

How is Rose's definitely not proven, when he admitted it? It's simple, when you BET on baseball, you KNOW the punishment before you do the crime. Same for steroids..........it's a 50 game suspension, then 100 games, then lifetime. Betting is one strike and you're out, steroids are three strikes and you're out. I liked Rose as much as the next guy, but he made his own bed, now he gets to sleep in it. I'd honestly be shocked if he ever got in.

[Raisor]

Wait, Pete Rose bet on baseball?? When was this discovered?! Will this affect his Hall of Fame chances?

[GAC]

Selig is a coward. Instead of continually saying you're "reviewing" the Rose appeal, and avoiding the question, come out and honestly answer the question. Geez!

Of course knowing Selig, maybe it is taking him this long to review it.

[redsfan4445]

if something i do at work took me 12 years to review it, I think i know I would be fired by now!!

[flyer85]

someone must be a slow reader

[savafan]

We all know Rose bet on baseball and the Reds. I think the sad part is that its widely assumed that Rose would have been reinstated after a year by Giammatti, but the commish's death ended the agreement Rose thought he had made with baseball.

[Raisor]

Originally Posted by savafan

, but the commish's death ended the agreement Rose thought he had made with baseball.

You mean the agreement where he agreed to a LIFETIME ban?

[savafan]

Originally Posted by Raisor

You mean the agreement where he agreed to a LIFETIME ban?

The one where he agreed to a lifetime ban with the possibility of reinstatement after one year. Why put that possibility in the agreement if it wasn't likely to be given?

[cincrazy]

He should be in the Hall. I wouldn't honor him, I wouldn't invite him to the ceremonies and induct him with all of the other members, but I would induct him into the Hall of Fame. On his plaque, lead it off with the betting on games and go from there.

I don't feel sorry for Pete. If he never gets in, I won't shed any tears. But I think it's absurd to keep him out of the Hall, as if the Hall is full of players who had great morals.

[TheNext44]

Originally Posted by savafan

The one where he agreed to a lifetime ban with the possibility of reinstatement after one year. Why put that possibility in the agreement if it wasn't likely to be given?

No way to know what Giammatti would have done, but according many inside accounts, supposedly Rose only agreed to that punishment because he was given an wink an nod that he would be re-instated after one year.

Giammatti might have gone back on his word, but Vincent was even a bigger Rose hater than Giammatti, and was mad that Giammatti even included that option, so there was no way he ever was going to re-instate Rose. Now Selig is just too much of a coward to actually act on anything that might be controversial.

[15fan]

Originally Posted by GAC

Selig is a coward. Instead of continually saying you're "reviewing" the Rose appeal, and avoiding the question, come out and honestly answer the question. Geez!

Of course knowing Selig, maybe it is taking him this long to review it.

Never ever forget that deep down, at his very core, Bud Selig is a car salesman.

[mbgrayson]

Originally Posted by Raisor

You mean the agreement where he agreed to a LIFETIME ban?

From Wikipedia:

On August 24, 1989, Rose voluntarily accepted a permanent place on baseball’s ineligible list. Rose accepted that there was a factual reason for the ban; in return, Major League Baseball agreed to make no formal finding with regard to the gambling allegations. According to baseball's rules, Rose could apply for reinstatement in one year.

The actual agreement is online HERE.

At the press conference announcing the agreement, the Commissioner was asked if he believed that Rose bet on baseball. Giamatti said that in the absence of a hearing, and therefore in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, he had to conclude that Rose did bet on baseball.

Here you have the sitting Commissioner saying that Rose did bet on baseball, right after signing an agreement that says "the Commissioner will not make any formal findings or determinations on any matter including without limitation the allegation that Peter Edward Rose bet on any Major League Baseball game."

What did Rose get out of the Agreement if not the possibility that he could be reinstated? He got the maximum penalty. He had to give up the game he clearly loved. Then, in violation of the Agreement, the Commissioner states at a press conference that Rose bet on baseball. Eight days later Giamatti died, and Rose is stuck with an Agreement placing him at the mercy of the later commissioners.

The reinstatement clause states:
"Nothing in this Agreement shall deprive Peter Edward Rose of the rights under Major League Rule 15(c) to apply for reinstatement. Peter Edward Rose agrees not to challenge, appeal or otherwise contest the decision of, or the procedure employed by, the Commissioner or any future Commissioner in the evaluation of any application for reinstatement."

Rose had solid legal representation throughout the ordeal. Rueban Katz got a civil suit filed a Cincinnati for Rose, and put real pressure on MLB. The only way I can reconcile Rose reaching this agreement is if he thought he might get reinstated.

Or maybe Rose didn't want a hearing on the allegations where he would have to testify, perhaps under oath, about whether he bet on baseball and the Reds.

The other thing that happened was that baseball changed the rules on Hall of Fame eligibilty right AFTER Rose reached this Agreement. Until that time, there had been no rule prohibiting a player on the permanently inelgible list from being voted into the Hall of Fame. This was put in place right after the Agreement was signed.

In any even, it seems like MLB behaved unfairly toward Rose in three ways. One, Giamatti publically announced that Rose had bet on baseball after agreeing to make no determination in that regard. Two, the Hall of Fame Rules were changed after the Agreement. Three, later commissioners have sat on Rose's reinstatement requests for far too long, without any public reply. They do this while using Rose to boost the All Century team in 1999, but deny the Reds the right to use Rose on the 25th anniversary of the Big Red Machine or the closing of Riverfront or the opening of GABP.

Don't get me wrong: Rose is a compulsive gambler, a liar, and has many other moral failings. He is not alone in that camp (read a biography or two about Ty Cobb). Rose knew gambling on baseball was wrong, he knew about the Black Sox scandal from 1919, and the threat gambling represents to the integrity of the game. He deserves what has happened to him.

I just expect a little more honor from the MLB administration than has been given Rose. The ends do not justify the means, and I would have thought MLB would have behaved better.

My solution is this: deny Rose's reinstatement petition, but change back the rule prohibiting players on the permanently ineligible list from HOF consideration. I expect the writers (and now the HOF veterans themselves since Rose's eligibility time has lapsed) will not let Pete in the Hall too easily.

[Matt700wlw]

There must be a lot of fine print....

Or...it's sitting in a desk drawer collecting dust...

Or...Bud is waiting until just before he hangs it up to reinstate him so he goes out as the guy who let Pete get the OPPORTUNITY at the induction he deserves...

Or.....why is this news?

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by Matt700wlw

Or.....why is this news?

Because Cincinnati still cares, can't let go, looks backwards too much, respects their heroes, cares too much, is an easy mark on this subject or the plain fact that every family has skeletons.