> Even if Rose bet on baseball, to me it only really matters if he bet against his own team. If he bet on games he was uninvolved with, or even if he bet on his own team, I don't see that as much more of an issue as illegal bets on horse races or boxing matches. The integrity of the game is only called into question when you bet against your own team. Because the game is about winning, and if you bet against your own team, you're obviously not interested in winning that game.
>

As a huge baseball fan, this is an issue I've wrestled with. I do think he belongs in the Hall of Fame for what he did on the field. There is no doubt about that. But I also agree with those who say what he did is worse than taking drugs or beating his wife or killing someone, etc. ONLY BECAUSE we are dealing with the game itself and what affects the game. Betting on baseball almost destroyed the game with the Black Sox scandal in 1919 and steps were taken to prevent that from happening again. I do think it is harsh but when fans think that a game is fixed, it might as well be professional wrestling. Baseball is different than most sports in a lot of ways and I love that aspect of it. Like you said, if he bet against his own team, the ban makes sense but I don't know to what degree he bet on other games and if he involved anyone else (doubtful) so I don't feel I can make a proper decision on where I stand. I just don't have enough evidence.

Were his stats good enough? Yes, definitely. I remember watching him break Ty Cobb's record and I don't think it will be broken again. That alone should get him in.

Ferrick