SI.com Fantasy Minors College Baseball Baseball

 

Keeping the faith

Rose hopes 'delicate' reinstatement talks can continue

Posted: Thursday December 12, 2002 7:02 PM
Updated: Friday December 13, 2002 1:44 AM
  Pete Rose Pete Rose agreed to a lifetime ban from baseball on Aug. 23, 1989 after an investigation into his gambling habits. Jed Jacobsohn /Getty Images

NEW YORK (AP) -- Pete Rose sounded hopeful his ban from baseball would end, calling his talks with commissioner Bud Selig a "delicate process."

In his first public remarks since meeting with Selig in Milwaukee on Nov. 25, the career hits leader issued a statement Thursday through his agent, Warren Greene.

"I greatly appreciate the tremendous fan support and interest in my quest for reinstatement back into major league baseball. I carry with each of you the passion to enter a new phase of this long drama," Rose said.

"Since I submitted my application for reinstatement back in 1997, I have looked forward to the opportunity to once again become a part of this great game. I can say today that we have been provided the forum to discuss all of the issues with major league baseball. Please respect this delicate process and permit those of us intimate with the details to continue our efforts," he said.

Not everyone is looking forward to Rose's return.

Former commissioner Fay Vincent, in fact, has an idea for a plaque should his old nemesis one day get into the Hall of Fame: Put "Banned for Gambling" right on it.

Rose would become eligible for the Hall ballot if Selig agrees to end the ban. Vincent discussed the issue of Rose's potential plaque this week with commentator George Will, a former director of the Baltimore Orioles and San Diego Padres.

SI writers weigh in on Rose
The possibililty of an end to Pete Rose's lifetime ban from baseball is the buzz of the sports world.

CNNSI.com asked a select group of Sports Illustrated writers for their take on the situation and whether Rose should be in the Hall of Fame.

Click here here for their responses. 
 

"He called me the other day and said it should be on the plaque," Vincent said. "I agree with that. That's what the Hall of Fame should do."

If Rose is ever elected, the Hall of Fame would decide the wording of his plaque and would not reveal it until the day of the induction, Hall spokesman Jeff Idelson said.

The Hall has taken more control in recent years, announcing that it would decide which team a player would be identified with when inducted. In recent years, some inductees had appeared to be negotiating with different club managements over which hat would be portrayed on their plaque.

After negotiations between Rose and Selig became public this week, the Hall staff notified its board of directors that it was not commenting on the issue of Rose's possible reinstatement. Former AL president Lee MacPhail and former commissioner Bowie Kuhn both declined comment Thursday, and MacPhail said he was instructed not to talk.

Selig got a call Thursday from Ohio Sen. Mike DeWine, a Reds season ticketholder and a big Rose fan.

DeWine remarked that Rose should be in the Hall during a speaking appearance during the day before an economic development group in Dayton. The senator's press secretary, Mike Dawson, would not give details about the conversation between DeWine and Selig.

Vincent said John Dowd, who headed baseball's investigation of Rose in 1989, never mentioned any evidence that Rose bet against the Cincinnati Reds.

The New York Post reported Wednesday that Dowd told the paper he had reliable evidence that Rose bet against his team but didn't include it in his 225-page report because of time constraints.

"This is the first I've heard of that claim," Vincent said Thursday. At the time of the investigation, Vincent was deputy commissioner under A. Bartlett Giamatti, and Vincent hired Dowd to head the probe.

In the summary at the start of his report 13 years ago, Dowd wrote "no evidence was discovered that Rose bet against the Cincinnati Reds."

 
Rose Revisited
CNNSI.com's Mike Fish
Former commissioner Fay Vincent says we should all be wary of buying into Pete Rose's act too easily. 
SI's Kostya Kennedy
If it weren't for an inane rule by the Hall of Fame's board of directors, the Pete Rose debate wouldn't be so complex. 
CNNSI.com's John Donovan
The fans, it seems, forgave Pete Rose a long time ago. The question now is this: Can baseball? 
SI Flashback
The Dowd Report concludes that Rose bet on the Cincinnati Reds. One key figure gave SI his account of how he booked some of Rose's action
One Man Out
On the 10-year anniversary of Rose's lifetime suspension from major league baseball, CNNSI.com revisited the evidence used to banish Rose
 

Dowd said Thursday he was asked by the Post whether he came across any evidence that Rose gambled against his team. Dowd said he told the paper there was some, but it was inconclusive.

"I was never able to tie it down," Dowd said. "It was unreliable, and that's why I didn't include it in the report. I probably shouldn't have said it. I was not trying to start something here."

Rose agreed to a lifetime ban from baseball on Aug. 23, 1989, following an investigation of his gambling. While Rose denied gambling on baseball, Giamatti said he concluded the 17-time All-Star bet on games involving the Reds.

Selig wants Rose to admit he bet on baseball as part of any reinstatement agreement. None of the 14 others banned for life for gambling were ever reinstated.

Vincent isn't sure whether Selig should end the ban, but wants an admission of gambling on baseball included in any agreement.

"The real problem is how do you take his word that he stopped," Vincent said. "We know he bets on all things. What has he done in the last 13 years to demonstrate he's worthy of being reinstated?"

Even if the ban ends, Vincent would not put Rose in the Hall of Fame.

"I think the Hall of Fame has a character test, and I don't support his candidacy because he failed a very important test," Vincent said.

Vincent is withholding judgment until he sees what kind of agreement Selig and Rose agree to. He also said Selig should proceed "very carefully."

"He has to be careful not to take Pete's word," Vincent said. "We know that word is no good -- that's something that has to be factored in."

Selig, who at the time was the owner in charge of baseball's labor policy, spoke with Vincent many times during the investigation. Until now, Selig has said he has seen no reason to alter the ban.

"I think it's public pressure," Vincent said when asked why Selig would change his stance. "He may think this may help rejuvenate baseball, which has looked a little gray around the edges of late. He may think this is a good thing to do for baseball. I happen to think it's a bad thing.

"He runs the risk that baseball would have a spate of gambling in the future. He's taking personally some enormous risk that his legacy could be that he made a very bad mistake fooling around with this. Otherwise, commissioners might have let Joe Jackson back in. They wrestled with that, but nobody took the chance because they didn't want to risk hurting baseball."

 
Related information
Stories
SI Covers Archive: Pete Rose
Selig talking with Rose about reinstatement
Donovan: Time to get Rose back into baseball
Fish: Vincent has his doubts on Rose's sincerity
Kennedy: Hall pass has more to do with the board than Bud
Multimedia
Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video

Copyright 2003 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

 


 
CNNSI