Once it was determined that Rose did indeed bet on baseball, then by all means, he should have been banned from MLB, and deservedly so. MLB, as an organized entity taking in billions of dollars from millions of fans, has a responsibility to protect the integrity of the game for those fans.

However, Rose should not have been prevented from getting a chance to be voted into the Hall of Fame. I happen to think his accomplishments on the field as a player warrant his election into the Hall of Fame. The litany of sins listed in the Dowd report do not erase the fact that he is the all-time hits leader and performed at an all-star level for many years.

For those that say gambling is the ultimate sin in baseball, I ask why didn’t MLB completely expunge all of Rose’s accomplishments from the record books? Take it a step further – make Cincinnati, Philly, and Montreal forfeit all the games that Rose played in, revoke any World Series titles won with him in the lineup? Now that would have sent a helluva message.

It also would have been completely unrealistic. You can’t change the past and accomplishments achieved. MLB had a responsibility to protect the game moving forward, and they did. Contrition and honesty might have warranted an “unbanning”, but as we’ve seen, Rose was/is severely lacking in both. But he should have been able to have his day in court, so to speak, with respect to the Hall of Fame, just like any other player. Let the Hall of Fame voters, those self-proclaimed guardians of the game, do their job like they’ve been doing for many years. Go ahead and apply all the other standards of eligibility if you want, i.e. the character stuff, but let the voters pass final judgement and give him the thumbs up or down.

Look, I don’t expect to change anyone’s mind here. In fact, I don’t know anyone nor have I heard of a single person who has changed their mind on this one. But regardless of which side of the fence you are on for this issue, I would hope that most of us would agree that the Hall of Fame changing their eligibility rules just for Rose was extremely unfair. It’s been several years, but my recollection at the time was the Hall of Fame basically kowtowed to MLB on this one. I wish they hadn’t.

… that this rule is posted on the walls of every major league clubhouse, along with the penalty for doing it.

Rose, of all people, should have known better.

craig biggio

…you, as a HoF voter, have been around forever and voted in every election. You could then justify not voting anyone else in the first time because you’ve seen them all and could apply a fair sense of objectivity. But if you take the current body of voters and somehow magically transport them back in time to when Ruth, Cobb or whomever was up for election, they very well could have given a perfect score.

In other words, today’s voter shouldn’t be constrained by past votes not of their doing.