Comments on: Pete Rose takes shot at the steroid bunch …

By: Mike V

Mike V — Sat, 22 Dec 2007 22:48:05 +0000

Isn’t his son Pete Rose Jr suspended for distributing steroids?

This is ridiculous.

By: Billy

Billy — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:31:57 +0000

Sorry Pete, You are a cheater too!!!!

Plus, you deserve what u get for going after Bud Harrelson!!!!

By: itsmetsforme

itsmetsforme — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:07:51 +0000

two words: that’s rich!

By: Casey Stengal

Casey Stengal — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:52:12 +0000

Ha ha, ream em good Petey

By: Casey Stengal

Casey Stengal — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:50:54 +0000

Atta boy Petey ream em good.

By: Taylor

Taylor — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:28:38 +0000

Pete Rose Dooshbagg.

By: Dan Gurney

Dan Gurney — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:21:15 +0000

Rose’s buddies were heavily involved in steroids in the late 1980s..back when Arnold Schwarzenegger was the biggest movie star and Pete Rozelle was saying they were placebos.Crooks like Rose should learn something from Spiro Agnew: Once you get caught keep out of the public’s sight. Don’t go around whining on how you are innocent and everyone else is as vile as you. Just play golf with your rich buddies.

By: Lonestar Mets

Lonestar Mets — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:59:17 +0000

I predicted he would do this on my site as soon as the Mitchell report came out. I still say he can be inducted 5 years after his death. Oh, and nobody tells him about it.

By: adl

adl — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:58:42 +0000

Hate to agree with Pete Rose but his “they’re bigger scumbags than me” argument does hold merit.

By: Sloppy

Sloppy — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:17:03 +0000

Let me ask you Ravi, if Rose bet on his own team does that mean he rested his closer, or his best player on days he couldn’t place a bet so that the guy would be better for him the day he betted?

By: scoopcoop

scoopcoop — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:08:08 +0000

Can’t take a guy seriously discussing this issue who has no morales and ethics either.

By: Stillsane

Stillsane — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:37:44 +0000

Rose probably has a bet with someone that he can now get in to the HOF due to the Mitchell report. Once a gambler, pretty much, always a gambler!

By: Annie Savoy

Annie Savoy — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:30:18 +0000

For those that are unfamiliar, there is a No Betting On Baseball Sign in every major league clubhouse. And they mean it.

By: Ravi

Ravi — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:17:28 +0000

I do believe that Pete should be in the Hall, especially if Bonds, Clemens et.al. manage their way in. Yes, he did bet on baseball, but he did bet on his own team. The players on the juice affected the way the game is played, and is far more detrimental to the sport. Rose never did any such thing while he was on the playing field, while the others did. If he had deliberately thrown games like the Black Sox, thats one thing, but he did not. Rose belongs in.

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:00:14 +0000

I say just ban them all or place them all in an area called the Hall of Shame. The Hall of Fame already has too many members.

By: Stillsane

Stillsane — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:44:19 +0000

Pete did not get the nickname “Chalie Hustle” for nothing. We just used to think that it just meant that he tried hard!

By: dave

dave — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:27:15 +0000

I have to hand it to Pete. He is nothing if not single minded.

By: dave

dave — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:25:51 +0000

Betting and Roids are both wrong. Both groups deserve to be on the outside.

By: Stillsane

Stillsane — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:25:45 +0000

Rose sees this as an opportunity to be viewed in a more favorable ligt and possibly to receive redemption. The Black Sox players never received redemption. Neither should Pete Rose or the the those like Clemens and Bonds who used aritificial means to enhance their performances and give them an unfair edge. I agree with the report that these individuals should be dealt with on a case to case basis. I do not believe, however, that there actions in any way releases Mr. Rose of the actions he took and the agreement he had with Giamatti.

By: AstoriaMetsFan

AstoriaMetsFan — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:15:32 +0000

Comparing Rose to the roid guys is like comparing apples to oranges.

Betting on the game had been banned for oh, say…50 years. Rose knew it was illegal to bet on the game. Period. Unlike steroids there is no grey area in betting. Who you bet for is irrelevant. It’s completely prohibited. But Rose bet anyway knowing full well the potential punishment. He let his arrogance cloud his judgment.

I see the gambling issue far more dangerous with the potential to completely destroy the credibility of the game, even more than steriods. Gambling undermines the fundamental outcome of games. You can have roster full of roiders, but if one of those guys bets on the outcome of a game and then throws the game to his benefit, does it matter who is juiced or not? The very intregrity of the game, who wins and who does not, has been destroyed by the betting. Betting can and has decided the outcome of the game before it’s even played.

I think what Rose did is far more dangerous for the well being of the game than the roids are. He should be banned for life and not let into the HOF.