How in the world can new Major League Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred even consider lifting the lifetime ban on Pete Rose? I’m familiar with the arguments for letting him in, most of which compare his ban to a sentence for having committed a crime. In essence, the feeling is 25 years is long enough. I disagree. Strongly. Charlie Hustle’s offensive statistics are worthy of the Hall Of Fame. There can be no question about that at all. I admit, I was an admirer of his when I was a kid. My entire athletic career was inspired by his style of play, and yet if it weren’t for yearbooks I’m not sure anyone would remember what I did. The point is, Rose taught me there is a place in the world for those who hustle. Nor will I build my case based on character. For me, this was never about character, although Rose demonstrated his world revolves around him with his attitude regarding the 1970 All-Star Game hit on Ray Fosse. For me, the case for reinstatement ended when I read the Dowd report. It can be found easily on the internet through any search engine. John Dowd had the goods on Rose. If the report had been less conclusive, the case would have gone to a civil court for reinstatement. The rule, specifically rule 21(d) says “any player, umpire, or club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible.” That rule has been posted in every Major League clubhouse since before Rose was born. Rose knew the rule, and he broke it anyway. He thumbed his nose at the game he loves and provided him with many rewards. For years he denied having bet on baseball, but agreed to the penalty. Then when he could make a few bucks on a book deal, he admitted the whole sordid affair. I’m not without compromise here. It’s hard to imagine this summer’s All-Star Game in Cincinnati without Rose. He’s as much a part of that town’s baseball heritage as Barry Larkin. Like a bratty little kid, he thumbed his nose at the game, thinking he was above reproach. His actions demonstrate he thought he was above the rules. To be clear, I’m not saying Pete Rose can never be in the Hall. The ban is for a lifetime, and when his is over, he can be enshrined if those making that decision so choose, as far as I’m concerned. But to let him in before then isn’t a matter of grace and forgiveness. It’s more like giving up, giving in and letting Rose have his way because we don’t want to deal with it anymore. Sorry, Charlie, but there aren’t 50 shades of gray here.
