Letter: New Investigation for Rose

Guest Letter: Rose, With or Without Thorns

by Robert M. Tufts

New York, October 29, 1999 -- The controversy surrounding Pete Rose and his eligibility for induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame has lasted far too long. The recent uproar brought on by Rose's interview with Jim Gray and comments by investigator John Dowd show us that after ten years, it is finally time to reopen the Rose case, examine all of the allegations and resolve this issue to the satisfaction of the greater community of baseball.

Major League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig has repeatedly said that he has seen no evidence to indicate Rose's case should be revisited, and has steadfastly refused to answer Rose's petitions for reinstatement. It is now time for the rest of us to have access to the evidence and make our own informed decision on who is telling the truth.

There is no question that Pete Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame on the basis of his outstanding on-field achievements. However, Rose stands accused by major league baseball of violating Rule 21 of the Professional Baseball Agreement. Rule 21 (D) "Betting on Ball Games." The rule states that "any player, umpire or Club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any Baseball game in connection with which the bettor has no duty to perform, shall be declared ineligible for one (1) year. Any player, umpire or Club or league official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any Baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform shall be declared permanently ineligible." A large poster of this rule appears in every minor league and major league clubhouse.

1989 Investigations

Rose's gambling habits were investigated by Major League Baseball, using rather clumsy and heavy-handed tactics. A lengthy report containing thousands of pages of interviews convinced the late Commissioner Bart Giamatti that Pete Rose had indeed violated Rule 21 (D) and should be punished. After much legal posturing and wrangling by both parties, Pete Rose signed an agreement in which he neither admitted nor denied the allegation that he bet on baseball games. Rose was placed on the ineligible list and would be allowed to apply for reinstatement after serving one year in exile from baseball. [Editor's note: Rose also pleaded no contest to charges of tax evasion.] For more background, click here.

Despite this setback, it still appeared that Rose would be voted into the Hall of Fame five years after his retirement as an active player. However, Rule 3 (E) of the Hall of Fame Rules for Election was added in 1991, the year before Rose became eligible for induction. It states that "any player on Baseball's ineligible list shall not be an eligible candidate." Since Rose is currently on the ineligible list and has not been reinstated, his name has yet to be placed on an official Hall of Fame ballot.

An impartial and open investigation to determine whether and to what extent Rose did or did not violate Rule 21 (D), and an examination of the prosecutorial tactics of Major League Baseball should occur this November. This investigation will require the full cooperation of four parties: Rose, Major League Baseball, the Hall of Fame and the Baseball Writers Association. If the serious charges levied against Rose cannot be corroborated, Rose has served a sufficient sentence for his numerous other unseemly and indiscreet actions. He should then be immediately removed from the ineligible list by Major League Baseball. If the evidence indicates conclusively that, contrary to years of denials and obfuscation, Pete Rose did indeed bet on baseball games (either his own or others), his suspension must be made permanent.

The concerned parties should drop all legal threat and pretense, review the evidence and plainly state their case in a public forum. In light of the historic and educational mission of the Hall of Fame (and its involvement the Rose case), Cooperstown would be an appropriate site to host this discussion. Executives at the Hall of Fame may get queasy at the thought of exhibits featuring bookies, betting slips and phone logs, but this matter is an important part of baseball history that must be studied and discussed by those who study the game.

Rose's Options

Pete Rose will have two options. First, he can decline to appear and face his accusers. If he makes this choice, Rose must immediately and publicly demonstrate sincere contrition and apologize in detail for his actions. His statement should be addressed not just to the Hall of Fame players that he longs to join, but all players who ever wore a major league uniform. Rose can start by saying that he will thrive to represent baseball outside the lines as well as he represented it between the lines from this day forward.

Additionally, Rose should retract his collection of acerbic sound bites stating that if he had used drugs instead of gambling, he would be in the Hall of Fame. The damaging effects of gambling must not be minimized. Drug usage and gambling are correctly viewed by Major League Baseball as potential threats to the integrity of their business.

If Rose follows this course, Commissioner Bud Selig should place a fixed term on the suspension. However, if Rose chooses not to participate or make a detailed and complete apology, his ban from baseball and eligibility for the Hall of Fame should continue for the foreseeable future.

Second, Rose can appear and confront his accusers and the evidence in a public forum at the Hall of Fame. The Pete Rose that I watched play each day with great passion would not shy away from competition or turn down a golden opportunity to realize his lifelong dream of enshrinement in Cooperstown. If he appears, I would certainly advise Rose to suppress his ego, tone down his rhetoric and cease all attacks against baseball for purportedly maligning him and causing all the troubles in his life.

If officials from either the Hall of Fame or Major League Baseball decline to cooperate, and continue to keep Rose on the ineligible list (and thereby off the Hall of Fame ballot), the Baseball Writers' Association should organize a strenuous protest campaign to punish these groups for their hubris, and elect Pete Rose to the Hall of Fame as their only induction candidate through a write-in campaign. Additionally, the writers should encourage their membership to refuse to accept as valid the admission of any candidate selected by the Veteran's Committee or on other group with authority to select Hall of Fame honorees.

Hopefully, by this review of the facts we can finally end the case of Rose versus Major League Baseball and decide Rose's fate just in time for baseball's winter meetings and the 2000 Hall of Fame vote.

Robert M. Tufts

President, New York Chapter

Major League Baseball Players Alumni Association

Pitcher, San Francisco Giants, 1981

Kansas City Royals, 1982-1983

[Editor's note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not represent the views of the organizations cited or of Mark's Sportslaw News.]