Should Pete Rose Be Inducted into the MLB Hall of Fame?

Pete Rose died this week at 83. By any measure, he was one of the greatest baseball players we've been privileged to watch. But he is not in the MLB Hall of Fame. Why, because he gambled on his own team's games and was declared permanently ineligible to participate in professional baseball, and later, to be considered for election to the Hall of Fame. It's a sad case with people arguing passionately he should be kept out and people arguing equally passionately he should be put in the Hall of Fame. It's not just an emotional decision, though, for there are significant moral dilemmas to consider involving the integrity and longterm viability of the game of baseball. 
For more Christian commentary, check my website at https://www.rexmrogers.com, and for more podcasts and videos, see my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers. 
#PeteRose #Baseball #HallofFame #MLB #Gambling 

Transcript

Few people would argue with the statement Pete Rose was one of the best baseball players to ever play the game, but he’s not in the Hall of Fame because of gambling. So, what is right and just in this matter?

Hi, I’m Rex Rogers and this is episode #172 of Discerning What Is Best, a podcast applying unchanging biblical principles in a rapidly changing world, and a Christian worldview to current issues and everyday life.

I grew up in Ohio watching Pete Rose, a la “Charlie Hustle,” probably the first Major League Baseball player with whom I connected. I always appreciated his hard charging, run everything out, never give up, headfirst slide (which he invented) style of play.

As I came of age in the mid-1070s, Pete Rose was a primary engine in what was called the Big Red Machine, the Cincinnati Reds at the top of baseball. In the 1970s, they “won six National League West Division titles, four National League pennants, and two World Series titles.”

Meanwhile, Pete Rose played from 1963 to 1986, as member of the Cincinnati Reds, later the Philadelphia Phillies, where he won his third World Series championship, and briefly with the Montreal Expos. He managed the Reds from 1984 to 1989.

“Rose was a switch hitter, and is MLB's all-time leader in hits (4,256), games played (3,562), at-bats (14,053), singles (3,215) and outs (10,328). He won three World Series championships, three batting titles, one Most Valuable Player Award, two Gold Glove Awards, and the Rookie of the Year Award. He made 17 All-Star appearances in an unequaled five positions (second baseman, left fielder, right fielder, third baseman, and first baseman). 

As I said, few people argue with the idea Pete Rose is one of the best baseball players we’ve ever been privileged to watch. By every measure, if Pete is not a Hall of Famer, no one is. 

So why is he not in the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, NY?

“In August 1989 (his last year as a manager and three years after retiring as a player), Rose was penalized with permanent ineligibility from baseball amidst accusations that he gambled on baseball games while he played for and managed the Reds; the charges of wrongdoing included claims that he bet on his own team. 

In 1991, the Baseball Hall of Fame formally voted to ban those on the "permanently ineligible" list from induction, after previously excluding such players by informal agreement among voters. After years of public denial, he admitted in 2004 that he bet on baseball and on the Reds.” 

I liked watching Rose play. He was truly outstanding and entertaining at the same time, an athletic superstar before the phrase was coined. 

Ironically, while I later wrote a book called Gambling: Don’t Bet On It (1997, revised, 2005), as I just noted, it was foolish betting on his own team that damaged Pete’s legacy and to date has kept the greatest hitter in baseball out of the Hall of Fame.

Pete Rose not in the Hall of Fame is sad. No question. It grieves me as a sports fan.

And given where professional sports have gone—investing in gambling apps and promoting sports gambling on TV game coverage—I could be moved to say, Pete should be “forgiven” and inducted into the Hall of Fame.

But there are still moral dilemmas and questions about what is best for the game. 

Pete didn’t just gamble on sports, he gambled on his own team, i.e., games over which he exercised influence, thus theoretically increasing the opportunity for cheating and reducing the integrity—meaning level playing field—of competition. 

The usual come back is, yes, but Pete always bet on his own team to win, not throw a game to lose so he’d win at gambling. So, his gambling was inconsequential.

Add another major wrinkle. In 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States opened the door for legalized sports wagering in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association (2018). With the Supreme Court’s Murphy decision, resistance to sports wagering rapidly collapsed in the NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL. 

In an earlier podcast called “Opening Floodgates of Sports Betting,” I noted that the leagues began opening their businesses to legalized sports betting at the speed of light, including professional leagues investing in online gambling or fantasy sports websites. 

But have the rules for gambling by professional players changed? Not much.

Common themes regarding across professional leagues regarding gambling include:

   1 - Zero tolerance for betting on own sport: Regardless of the league, players are universally prohibited from betting on their own sport, especially games in which they or their teams are involved.

   2 - Protection of integrity: Leagues want to avoid any potential influence on the outcome of games that could arise from gambling.

   3 - Use of inside information: Sharing inside information, like injury updates or game plans, with gamblers is a violation.

   4 - Location and timing restrictions: In many cases, players can gamble on other sports, but not while on team property or while participating in team activities.

Now, despite the fact nearly all professional sports leagues have investments in sites like FanDuel or DraftKings etc., rules for players still prohibit them gambling on their teams and games. In other words, rules protecting the fairness of competition are still maintained similar to what existed for Pete.

Think about it this way. Pete violated one of the cardinal rules of sport, especially in the MLB that lives with the memory of the Black Sox scandal, a game-fixing effort in which eight Chicago White Sox players were accused of intentionally losing the 1919 World Series against the Cincinnati Reds in exchange for payment from a gambling syndicate.

Despite acquittals in a public trial in 1921 (though most of the players later admitted involvement), the first MLB Commissioner permanently banned all eight players from professional baseball. He did this, he said, to “save baseball.” 

Fast forward a few decades. What about Performance Enhancing Drug users. Didn’t they cheat? Yes, players who are known to have used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) have faced significant challenges getting into the Baseball Hall of Fame. The Hall of Fame voting process, conducted primarily by the Baseball Writers' Association of America, has been influenced by PED controversies, and voters have often withheld their votes from players linked to PED use.

For example, players like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and Sammy Sosa, who had Hall of Fame-caliber careers but were connected to PED use, have been repeatedly passed over despite their significant statistical accomplishments. 

Bonds and Clemens were dominant during their eras, but their association with steroids has left their Hall of Fame candidacy in limbo for years. The voters' stance on PEDs reflects a broader desire to maintain the integrity of the Hall of Fame as a place that honors not just on-field success but also sportsmanship. As of now, known PED users have not been widely inducted into the Hall of Fame. 

One could make a case that many players in the Hall of Fame had a boatload of character problems in their lives. But the thing is, their character problems didn’t involve cheating at the game of baseball. They were outstanding athletes who earned amazing career statistics and thus a shot to be voted into the Hall of Fame. In this sense, their personalities and personal lives are irrelevant.

So, a lot of emotion, which is not necessarily bad, can lead one to argue that Pete should have been inducted into the Hall of Fame. And now with his recent death, a lot more emotion will be brought to bear arguing the same. Some say that Pete’s gambling never affected a game the way PED users’ actions definitely did, so what he did was not really cheating, not as bad, and worthy of mercy. One could also argue that a lifetime ban is punishment that doesn’t fit the crime. Even Rose observed, “There are guys who get life sentences in prison and they’re set free before I am.’’

But to preserve baseball for our posterity, the integrity of the game of baseball must be inviolable.

If Pete is put in the Hall, does it signal rules don’t matter? Does it require the Black Sox be admitted to the Hall? Should PED abusers be admitted to the Hall? Moral dilemmas abound.
 

Well, we’ll see you again soon. This podcast is about Discerning What Is Best. If you find this thought-provoking and helpful, follow us on your favorite podcast platform. Download an episode for your friends. For more Christian commentary, check my website, r-e-x-m as in Martin, that’s rexmrogers.com. Or check my YouTube channel @DrRexRogers for more podcasts and video.

And remember, it is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm.

© Rex M. Rogers – All Rights Reserved, 2024   

*This podcast blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact me or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com/, or connect with me at www.linkedin.com/in/rexmrogers or https://x.com/RexMRogers.