The word permanent has a meaning. But apparently that meaning doesn’t actually mean that to Rob Manfred, who today reinstated Pete Rose, Shoeless Joe Jackson, and others from Major League Baseball’s permanently ineligible list, which was first reported by Don Van Natta Jr. of ESPN. Both players landed on the list as a result of betting on baseball games or agreeing to throw games for gamblers that they were involved in.
It appears that Rob Manfred has removed everyone from the permanently ineligible list who has passed away. While many have often said that Rose was serving a lifetime ban, that simply was not true. He was serving a permanent ban, as were others. Manfred, Major League Baseball’s commissioner appears to interpreted that differently this time around and decided that now if you have passed away that you are now allowed to be removed from the ineligible list.
That now makes Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson eligible for the Hall of Fame under their current rules. Rose has never actually been eligible before. Right before he was going to be eligible the Hall of Fame changed their rules to exclude players who were on the ineligible list.
However, Rose and Jackson are not eligible to be voted on by the Baseball Writers Association of America because to be on their ballot a player who last played 15 years ago must be voted on by the Historical Overview Committee. They get their next chance to vote in December of 2027.
But the Rose family attorney told ESPN that he plans to “confer with the Hall and discuss Pete’s induction into the Hall of Fame” and to try and bypass whatever rules they have to get him inducted sooner.
That seems unlikely to happen given that the Hall of Fame very specifically went out of their way to make a rule that was very specific to keeping Rose out of the Hall of Fame in 1991 and has not wavered on that at all.
When Rose agreed to be placed on the permanently ineligible list he publicly stated he expected to be removed from it in a year or two. Whether that was because he just felt he was big enough, popular enough, etc. to get away with what he knowingly did, or was just saying it to keep public support is something we will never really get an answer to.
What we do know is that from day one he knew that he was guilty of gambling on the game. And he lied to anyone and everyone who would listen to him about it for the next 15 years until he decided to sort-of come clean in his book “My Prison Without Bars”. Within the book where he admits it, he notes the following:
I can’t honestly remember the first time I bet on baseball. But I remember the first time I spoke openly about it. I was sitting in my living room, watching the 1986 playoffs between the Mets and the Astros. I had a group of friends over for the game – just like I’d done my whole life. Paul Janszen, a friend of Gio’s from the gym, heard me talking about the score and asked me a question about gambling on baseball. Without even thinking about the consequences, I said, “Betting on the playoffs makes the games more exciting to watch!”
Rose, who never admitted to gambling on games as a player, was the Reds manager at the time of the 1986 playoffs. But just two months before those playoffs began, he was also a player on those 1986 Cincinnati Reds.
ESPN reported in 2015 that a notebook seized from a Pete Rose associate showed that he had wagered on baseball while he was still a player. When asked about it, Rose did not acknowledge the document.
Other off-the-field issues with Rose exist that may come into play if he does become eligible through the Historical Overview Committee and lands on the ballot for the Classic Baseball Era Committee to vote on, could come into play. Character is one thing that is supposed to be considered by voters for the Baseball Hall of Fame. There is the gambling on the game, then the subsequent lying about it. But then there is the fact that he is a felon for which he served five months in federal prison in 1990 for falsifying his taxes. There is also the alleged statutory rape where as a part of a deposition where Rose was suing John Dowd, a woman swore under oath that she had a sexual relationship that began with Rose when she was 14 or 15. He did not deny the relationship, only that he believed she was 16-years-old when it began – which was the legal age of consent in the state of Ohio at the time.
Will the Baseball Hall of Fame change their rules once again after the fact in order to keep Pete Rose ineligible for induction? Or will they leave it up to their multiple committees to decide his fate?
You can read statements from MLB as well as Cincinnati Reds owner Bob Castellini below:
Commissioner Robert D. Manfred Jr. today issued a policy decision regarding the status of individuals who have passed away while on the permanently ineligible list. This issue has never been formally addressed by Major League Baseball, but an application filed by the family of Pete Rose has made it incumbent upon the Office of the Commissioner to reach a policy decision on this unprecedented issue in the modern era as Mr. Rose is the first person banned after the tenure of Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis to die while still on the ineligible list. Commissioner Manfred has concluded that MLB’s policy shall be that permanent ineligibility ends upon the passing of the disciplined individual.
In a letter to Jeffrey M. Lenkov, the attorney for Mr. Rose, Commissioner Manfred wrote, “In my view, a determination must be made regarding how the phrase ‘permanently ineligible’ should be interpreted in light of the purposes and policies behind Rule 21, which are to: (1) protect the game from individuals who pose a risk to the integrity of the sport by prohibiting the participation of such individuals; and (2) create a deterrent effect that reduces the likelihood of future violations by others. In my view, once an individual has passed away, the purposes of Rule 21 have been served. Obviously, a person no longer with us cannot represent a threat to the integrity of the game. Moreover, it is hard to conceive of a penalty that has more deterrent effect than one that lasts a lifetime with no reprieve. Therefore, I have concluded that permanent ineligibility ends upon the passing of the disciplined individual, and Mr. Rose will be removed from the permanently ineligible list.”
Commissioner Manfred further wrote, “While it is my preference not to disturb decisions made by prior Commissioners, Mr. Rose was not placed on the permanently ineligible list by Commissioner action but rather as the result of a 1989 settlement of potential litigation with the Commissioner’s Office. My decision today is consistent with Commissioner Giamatti’s expectations of that agreement.
“Commissioner Giamatti’s comments were completely reasonable given that, at the time, the Hall of Fame did not have a rule barring people on the permanently ineligible list from Hall of Fame consideration. In fact, Shoeless Joe Jackson was afforded the opportunity to be voted upon in 1936 and again in 1946.”
To establish clarity for the administration of the Major League Rules, the decision in this matter shall apply to individuals in the past or future who are posthumously on the permanently ineligible list. There are 17 deceased individuals disciplined since the founding of the Commissioner’s Office impacted by today’s announcement, including Eddie Cicotte, Happy Felsch, Chick Gandil, Joe Jackson, Fred McMullin, Swede Risberg, Buck Weaver and Lefty Williams; Joe Gedeon; Gene Paulette; Benny Kauff; Lee Magee; Phil Douglas;
Cozy Dolan; Jimmy O’Connell; William Cox; and Pete Rose.
The full text of the letter from Commissioner Manfred to Jeffrey M. Lenkov is available here.
Tuesday’s announcement does not guarantee that any of the newly eligible former players will appear on a future Hall of Fame ballot. Hall of Fame Chairman of the Board Jane Forbes Clark issued the following statement:
“The National Baseball Hall of Fame has always maintained that anyone removed from Baseball’s permanently ineligible list will become eligible for Hall of Fame consideration. Major League Baseball’s decision to remove deceased individuals from the permanently ineligible list will allow for the Hall of Fame candidacy of such individuals to now be considered. The Historical Overview Committee will develop the ballot of eight names for the Classic Baseball Era Committee – which evaluates candidates who made their greatest impact on the game prior to 1980 – to vote on when it meets next in December 2027.”
Reds owner Bob Castellini issued the following statement:
“On behalf of the Reds and our generations of loyal fans, we are thankful for the decision of Commissioner Manfred and Major League Baseball regarding the removal of Pete Rose from the permanently ineligible list.
“Pete is one of the greatest players in baseball history, and Reds Country will continue to celebrate him as we always have.
“We are especially happy for the Rose family to receive this news and what this decision could mean for them and all of Pete’s fans.”
It should be noted that Commissioner Fay Vincent warned the Hall of Fame that Major League Baseball would end their partnership with the Hall of Fane if they did not eliminate Rose from eligibility. In fact the Black Sox were eligible to be voted in a were not. So, Pete was discriminated against when compared to others on the ineligible list at that time. Vincent was pissed that his buddy Bart died and he blamed Pete.
Kind of interesting this happened right before Pete Rose day at GABP?
The whole thing has been a mess from the beginning with Rose being sooo stupid and MLB being sooo hypocritical.
1000%
I will also add the neither party has ever had the fans best interest in mind since the whole thing started.
@Doug, this is a really well-written and balanced article. Thank you for the time you put into this piece.
I go back and forth on Rose and the hall of fame.
Good article Doug and as mentioned well written.
My initial feels are mixed. I’ve always wanted Pete in the HOF but unbanning him after his death feels like a slap in the face.
I get it if you don’t like Pete, and whatever your criticism is, it’s probably fair. The thing is he loved the game like few people do. If he gets into the hall of fame, it would have been probably one of the best days of his life.
The only reason they are allowing it now is because of MLB’s hypocrisy with gambling. Enjoy watching the game tonight on FanDuel and stop over at BetMGM to place your wager on the game tonight.
If you don’t know what to pick, just listen to the pregame and they will give you some picks. Not the BetMGM at GABP, they moved that offsite but google maps will get you there pretty quick.
Well said on all fronts.
Yep, that’s well said. Agree with your comments throughout.
+50,000
I disagree.
Just because gambling has been legalized in many places, doesn’t give players free reign to go start betting on games. If anything players and teams are benefiting from the revenue generated by the games they play.
Also, because it is now legal, it is so much easier to determine if any shady wagering is taking place on the games….so in essence, the legalization has made it safer from the corruption of players.
you are correct-it give fans ,not players, the opportunity to gamble
Laymen not playing the game have been betting on it since it started. Used to be illegal but not now.
Players and managers doing so ruins the game, obviously. Pete knew, calling in his bets from the dugout no less. He knew what the penalty was.
He was a great player. I had the privilege of watching him play and almost will the Reds to win at times. If he would have admitted his crime without lying about it for 15 years I’d have more sympathy. But this is a disgrace. A total lack of respect for integrity. But it seems we’ve entered a time when morality and fair play doesn’t matter. Sad
I quit caring if Rose got in the HOF when I found out he was lying to Reds fans for years.
THE Hit King!!!!
I’m on the fence as are many who participate here. The accomplishments are that of a legend. The man himself showed not only feet of clay but a complete lack of self-discipline and (for the most part) any level of remorse (at least as I saw it).
I do grow weary of the hypocrisy of a sport that takes so much revenue and partnership with sites dedicated only to gambling. The in-game odds … the whole mess. It goes beyond the annoying Miami Valley Gaming ads (AWESOME!!!!). It’s a huge problem that can’t be mitigated with some disclaimer and a 1-800 hotline.
Well-balanced article, Doug. Thanks for that.
Very good comment, Mark.
I’m of the notion that one thing (legalized sports books) has nothing to do with the other. (players betting on games). MORE SO now than when Pete did it. Pete could bet with private bookies and stay “hidden” until some one decided to rat him out.
Nowadays, every wager is an open book…digitally, electronically that person’s fingerprint is there forever. Thus, even more of a deterrent against doing it.
A player could have a friend place the bet for him.
Well, I knew al70ost from the start that Pete was lying about gambling on baseball.
He lied to his friend and assistant coach, Tommy Helms.
He lied to Joe Nuxhall, who loved Pete like a brother. If you don’t think so, then I would refer you to “Star of the Game” interviews of Pete by Joe, back in the 1970’s. I know you can’t find them to listen to them, but it was like two best friends talking about the game they loved.
Having watched Pete play his whole career, I don’t really know what to think anymore.
Based on playing on the field, it’s a no-brainer that he should be elected into the Hall of Fame. Based on Pete as a flawed human being (as we all are), he had a lot more flaws than some (most), was a lot more tempted by fame and money, and did some really awful things, that have come to light in recent years.
Tony Perez, who was not the famous player that Pete was, was actually an All-Star as a human being. As was Lee May and some more guys that played next to Pete.
And now, the sanctioned betting on baseball takes a real luster off the game.
I honestly think Votto should make the Hall before Rose does. As much as we loved watching Rose play the game “the right way,” he cheated and broke a pretty important rule. He admitted to it, but then just kept doing and saying questionable things until he died. Plus, there’s the whole ugly underage thing (questionable laws) that doesn’t help his chance with current voters. He has to get elected in, which he may not. Heck, if cheaters who used roids aren’t allowed in, neither should he.
Bob Castellini’s statement in the name of the Reds organization just adds fuel to the fire already burning in many of us that the Reds desperately need new ownership.
I see nothing wrong with the statement.
Absolutely.
Good article Doug.
I am decidedly on the side that Pete should have been in the HOF long ago. The hall of fame is about performance on the field. Pete played the game like no one else ever has and got the most out of his talent. I miss players playing with the passion that Pete had.
Pete’s records and accomplishments at in the HOF-I would argue that is enough. Pete’s actions do not merit his personal inclusion
You can’t have one without the other. If your going to allow some of his accomplishments and memorabilia in the Hall then put Pete in with an asterisk/clause on his plaque or don’t mention him anywhere in the Hall for what his gambling created.
JR – Pete has had stuff in the Hall of Fame for 50 years now. He still does. What he doesn’t have is a plaque in one room. He is all of the Hall and has been for a very long time.
Where is it written or enshrined that the HOF is solely about ‘performance on the field”?
Well, if it is just “performance on the field”, then where is Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens?
Just sayin’.
Maybe they will get in after they are dead also.
Sell the team, Bob. Also, Pete can be in the hall, just not on a plaque. He bet on baseball as a player and as a manager. If they wanna vote, then MLB should release whatever evidence they had in ’89. Make it plain as day, then see if people still wanna vote for that asshatted clown.
He disrepected the game, he was a felon, there’s the teenager thing…and from personal experience, he was a an actual ass hole.
With a bit of empathy (not sympathy, but trying our best to put ourselves in someone else’s flesh) it has always, to me, seemed logical to see Pete’s situation this way:
Anyone who has ever played a sport or a board game will cover any temperamental behavior by saying, “I’m just competitive.” Pete took competitive to a different level, even by professional standards. We cannot begin to understand his internal drive to win, no matter how competitive we might think we are. But as Reds fans, we loved him for having it on every single game day, during every single pitch, just like Philly fans did. The same incomprehensible level of competitiveness that drove Pete to play so hard, set records into his mid-40s, and above all else, win, also drove him to deny the investigation — to the point of believing he could win that battle, too. I’m no addiction expert, but it sure seems logical that his unparalleled competitive drive constantly fed his gambling addiction. So, by using a little more empathy than instinctual judgement, it isn’t hard to forgive Pete and simply appreciate what he brought to the game he loved so much. If we’re honest, it’s what we long to see in every ballplayer.
Thoughtful take, JohnnySofa.
I’ve come to view players, as just that players. I judge him how he did on the games I’ve watched, or the stats he amassed, or was he a winner.
I choose to completely ignore things that happen off the field. There are a metric ton of things that these players do off the field that would make most of us think poorly of them as a man. Does he cheat on his wife? Did he drink and drive and hurt some one? Did they get involved with drugs? That doesn’t even include the things we don’t know about. It’s too much to stuff to uncoil for me, that I’m not wasting my time digging through.
Separation of player vs. non-player. It’s easy…at least for me it is.
Well written article as others have said. I don’t like standing in judgement of others. He represented all the hallmarks of a gambling addiction and addiction is a disease which ruins lives and causes suffering for all involved.
I just can’t get past a grown man and professional athlete taking advantage of a teenage girl. If he thought she was 16 that makes it no better. I have a daughter. If a similar situation happened to her, I would ask for him to be prosecuted to the furthest the law would allow. That is a bridge too far for me.
I enjoyed him as a player but can’t bring myself to cheer for his HOF candidacy for that reason.
No question that should be in the HOF. Everyone knows that he was a huge creep off the field and he did nothing to dissuade his reputation. Doug this will end the Reds curse and tonight the Reds start a 10 game win streak.
Turns out it didn’t end the curse. It probably made it worse.
Someday, we all will be judged and every single one of us, without exception, will require mercy.
MLB removing Pete Rose from the permanent ineligibility list seems right in line with the direction this country and world is headed.
Pray for the USA. You sound like some church billboard.
Yeah, I am opposed to a grown man becoming involved with a 15 year old kid. Guess I am a religious fanatic.
I agree with Mr. Gray’s reasoning, but never enjoyed watching a player play the game more than Pete Rose.
This whole situation is just odd and doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me. I don’t understand what MLB’s motives are. I was ok with Pete Rose never being given the lifetime ban. But now it almost seems a slap in the face to allow him in the hall of fame after he’s passed. The only good I really see out of it is maybe for his family to be able to go to the Hall of Fame and see their Dad, Granddad’s display, learn about how good of a player he was, etc.
I was ok with Pete Rose being given a lifetime ban I meant to say.
I’ve always thought it should be a lifetime ban. You don’t get to be there when or if you’re inducted into the HOF. That’s the real punishment.
Of course any ceremony or plaque should not lie about why the induction took so long. You screwed up.
Very mixed feelings here.
My grandpa was a coach of Pete and his brothers on the west side. My dad went to the same HS as Pete. I’ve met Pete a few times and his stories were hilarious, informative, and wildly inappropriate. I know I played football as a kid with hustle the way I did because of Pete’s example—as so many kids played sports in greater Cincinnati the same way. He left an imprint on our city like no one else.
But as good of a baseball player as Pete was, his demons overshadow so much of what he accomplished. Be broke the rule you don’t break and in a way that you definitely don’t break it. He bet on his own team.
There’s no doubt he was addicted to gambling the way a lot of athletes are. Michael Jordan has the same addiction but avoided an outright basketball ban. Talking to a friend who works for a major team in another city, he said nearly everyone in the NFL has family members placing bets for them on the corporate gambling sites. And I know many of us suspect gambling interferes with calls on the field across major sports.
But Pete got caught and he got caught redhanded. Part of the problem with Pete is that Bart Giamatti tried to give Pete a path back but Bart died (some say from the stress of banning Pete) and Pete remained his hardheaded self. It made a path back complicated.
Pete should have been banned from working in baseball in ways that affected the outcomes of games. I 100% support that decision. That’s what his gambling earned him and it the right thing to do to protect the game. He should have never been kept off the eligibility list for the HoF. And he should have never been banned from earning money from his likeness (like Jersey sales) or appearing at the ballpark (events where he’d be compensated). MLB tried to break Pete into submission but his west side skull thickness made that impossible.
There are also some legitimate questions about Pete’s personal life. I don’t know if those allegations are true or not. I know some people close to Pete distanced themselves for a while and then stopped distancing themselves – but I’m not sure if that’s because the allegations are likely false or if it’s because they overlooked the allegations.
Knowing people who knew Pete’s mom and dad and even listening to Pete’s stories, there’s a very good chance Pete was severely abused growing up and his obsessiveness was driven out of abuse. (We’ve seen this with other top athletes as well and it’s not shocking.). Pete also took a lot of hits to the head. There’s no telling how many concussions he got from the way he played sports. Head injuries are directly linked to loss of impulse control (research what happens with damage to suborbital prefrontal cortex). People who lose impulse control from brain damage don’t know anything is wrong even though everyone around them knows sometime is severely wrong. We should consider the impact of trauma on Pete and learn from it.
Any way you slice it, Pete was a great ball player, and pretty darn good manager, and at times, a pretty rotten human being.
For years, the MLB used Pete when it was convenient and profitable. He was included in the all-century team and other on-field events. And then he would be shoved to the side. He’s all over the Hall of Fame yet in the most spiteful move ever, was banned from consideration.
MLB and the HoF used and abandoned Pete in life. What’s disgusting to me is how the MLB and HoF now want to profit from him in death. Pete’s wishes were known – he didn’t want to be in the HoF if it came after his death.
Pete inspired a lot of us to play sports like a demon possessed but like a Greek tragedy, the more we learn about Pete the person, the more complicated things become — that his demons possessed him.
I hope he’s at peace. He’s already in one of the HoF’s that matter – The Cincinnati Reds – and I hope he’s eligible for ultimate HoF, The Almighty’s. I hope he found healing and forgiveness. And I hope Cincinnati remembers the good of Pete Rose and learns from the bad.
Good thoughts Tom, and interesting insight.
“There are also some legitimate questions about Pete’s personal life. I don’t know if those allegations are true or not.”
I am not sure what this is referring to but, if it’s the allegation that Pete Rose slept with a child there are no questions about it.
Pete admitted to sleeping with a 15 year old child. His excuse was he thought she was 16. He should have went to prison and had to register as a sex offender. I don’t care how many hits he had.
By definition Pete Rose was a scoundrel who lied as a way of life, cheated on his wives and his taxes, proudly and repeatedly committed statutory rape, and was an addict. He obviously loved baseball but he obviously loved his vices much, much more. Please keep that in mind when say he loved the game.