Career hits leader, most MLB games played, most singles, only player to play 500 games or more at five different positions -- these are just some of the many records that Pete Rose currently has. Many of them will never be broken. Rose's 4,256 hits will stand the test of time; the next highest on the all-time hit list that is still currently playing is Alex Rodriguez, and he is 1,233 behind Rose as of July 22, 2015. In a perfect world, Rose would almost be a unanimous Hall of Famer, but, yet, he is not.
Everyone knows the story: Pete Rose participated in serious gambling while he was the manager of the Cincinnati Reds. Some reports, not verified, stated that Rose would bet up to $10,000 a night on the Reds to win. Being that betting on sports is clearly against the rules for players and managers, there is no surprise that Rose is currently not in the Hall of Fame. However, the question is, "Is that fair?"
Let us start in the beginning -- with one of the biggest scandals in sports history: The 1919 Chicago White (Black) Sox. The 1919 White Sox players were accused of intentionally losing the World Series that year in exchange for money from people who bet on the game. This scandal is what created the Commissioner's Office to deal with discipline for this issue and clean up the sport. There were eight White Sox players that were found to be behind this, including Shoeless Joe Jackson, one of the best players at the time and an otherwise certain Hall of Famer. All eight players involved received lifetime bans, setting the precedent that sports betting of any kind by players will not be tolerated.
In fact, looking at a list of MLB players who have been banned for life, most have been banned for gambling or fixing games. There was a string of bans given in the early 1920's after the Black Sox scandal with nearly all of them for fixing games. Why did these players fix games? They did it for money.
Baseball players were treated like a lot of workers back in the 1920's, like nothing. They underwent a load of work, little pay, no union to collectively bargain, and players had to stay with one team for their entire careers. They could make 10 times as much money fixing games than actually playing them.
Moving forward to Rose, did he fix any games? It could be argued that the possibility of that happening is the reason Rose got banned for life. We might never know if he fixed any games, but we can certainly make an educated guess. As a manager, he did have some control of the outcome of the game, but how much could he have manipulated before people caught on? Here is a hypothetical situation.
With a one-run lead in the bottom of the ninth, instead of bringing in the closer, Rose brings in a guy who has an ERA of 6.78? That is unlikely. In fact, the growing argument that MLB managers do not have that much of an impact on the game would be in Rose's favor.
What could he have done as a player? That would be the perfect place to change the outcome of a game. Players strike out all the time, right? Instead of bringing the tying run in, just strike out. In fact, reports have come up that Rose did bet on games as a player. Rose denies this, and, honestly, we may never know the 100% truth.
Yet, the big question in all of this comes down to, "Did Pete Rose bet that the Reds would lose?" If he did, case closed, court adjourned, he cheated, should be banned for life, and no one would argue it. As a player/manager, he defiantly had his fair share of opportunities to fix games, possibly making himself a lot of money. However, let us look at some possible indicators that Rose did not bet against his own team.
For one, Pete Rose was a very competitive player. One does not become the all-time hits leader by just spitting sunflower seeds in the dugout. Rose's accomplishments include the following: 17 time All-Star, 3 World Series rings, 1975 World Series MVP, 1973 N.L. MVP, three-time batting champion; the list goes on and on. Rose obviously took great pride in his performance and in winning; he actually also holds the record for most winning games played in, at 1,972.
Would a person this competitive, who hates to lose, really throw a game to make some quick money? Would it not be more likely that he was so competitive that he bet on himself to win every night? If so, is this really a bad thing? Could we not easily imagine old players such as Babe Ruth and Ty Cobb making these kinds of bets with their poker buddies before games?
In addition, one huge difference between Rose and the 1920's players who gambled is money. Rose was one of the highest-paid players of his time. His contract in Philadelphia alone got him $3.2 million over four years (over $11 million in today's money adjusting for inflation). He essentially would sell out The Cincinnati Reds' Riverfront Stadium for pretty much every game.
That brings us to the final theory behind the motives for Rose's gambling: addiction. He did not do it for money, he was not trying to make a statement, he was not trying to "cheat" the system. He might have just simply had a serious gambling addiction. If a surely-bound Hall of Famer knows it is severely against the rules to bet on games, why would he still do it? When people face addictions, they cannot just stop. Consequences are forgotten in their quests to satisfy the urges they face.
If the gambling was a personal matter, and he did not change the outcome of a game, should Rose really be banned? We all have our demons. Yet, the fact is that we will never know the 100% truth if Rose did or did not try to throw games because of gambling. He already denied he gambled and then admitted it. What if he is let into the HOF and 15 years later he admits to betting against the Reds? That uncertainty is why Pete Rose, fair or not, will probably never be admitted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.