Nail-Tinted Glasses

By any other name

And sure enough, the Pete Rose story breaks before the HOF tally is announced. [via OffTheKuff ].

David Pinto points out that there has been an admission of wrongdoing. So far, I haven't noticed any reports that Rose has admitted betting on the Reds (which is the transgression that would call for the "lifetime" ban). I'm looking forward to the BP take.

Does Rose deserve a second chance? Perhaps - but I'm inclined to say that he already had one. He had the opportunity to not break the rule (chance one). Having broken the rule, he had the opportunity to beg the mercy of the court (chance two). Rather made a mess of that one. What has he done to earn another?

Copping to a lesser charge doesn't meet my standard.

Now, perhaps the rule he broke really is an obsolete artifact of an earlier age - and that his actions are not worse than those of Gaylord Perry or Kirby Puckett. So if you want to lift the rule first, then remove Rose from the ineligible list, then allow him onto the HOF ballot, perhaps I'll listen to the argument.

An interesting question: if Rose is reinstated, and added to the HOF ballot (I don't see any argument to keeping a reinstated player off the ballot - I don't believe the Hall has any basis for making baseball judgments, though I think they could be allowed their discretion on criminal matters), can voters legitimately omit him from their ballots? That is, would leaving Rose off the ballot be a violation of the Rules for Election to the Hall of Fame

Rose hasn't yet received the minimum 5%, so in order to be added to the ballot, so he has to first be nominated by the Screening Committee. This, I presume, is a no brainer - you would need five of the six screeners to withhold nomination during his first year of reinstatement.

So then it will come to the voters: "Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played."

Record, ability, contribution to the teams are gimmies. Sportsmanship is an interesting one - injuring players in an exhibition game isn't all that sporting, but that should probably slide.

Which leaves character and integrity. Has Pete really showed much of the latter?

But his induction looks inevitable. I need to get to Cooperstown before that happens.

January 5, 2004 11:06 AM | TrackBack