Rose Commentary

I know I hardly post anymore, but I have a couple of interesting links and quotes about the Pete Rose matter:

David Pinto over at Baseball Musings has a lot of good stuff, including the following, a quote from Tom Verducci:

SI.com: What do you think the public reaction will be?

Verducci: I’m really curious to see how fans react to this. Rose has remained far more popular than I could imagine all these years, especially in the way he has been perceived as being victimized by baseball. If you believed he had been wronged, do you now hold it against him that he was lying for all these years? And does he go far enough toward explaining himself? My guess is that in Cincinnati, where he’s still revered, that he be wildly popular no matter what he does. Outside Cincy, it’ll be interesting to see what the reaction is. I think fans want to forgive him, but they need to see at least a pilot light of contrition. I think the commissioner really took note of the ovations Rose received in Atlanta in 1999 and in San Francisco in 2002. He’s going to be watching the fallout from this confession very closely.

John Perricone at Only Baseball Matters has a surprisingly thoughtful piece about Vincent, Dowd, and Selig’s culpability:

So, Fay Vincent and John Dowd got it right, and now they are bitterly demanding apologies. Well, they won’t get one from this writer. They did it wrong, all wrong, when they railroaded Rose, and they are part of the reason this BS went on for all these years. It was obvious from the minute Rose signed that agreement that something smelled funny, and when Giammatti immediately violated the agreement, (as did Vincent and Dowd, every time they opened their mouths over the last fourteen years), they made all their posturing and bluster irrelevant. If they had him, they should have taken him out, clean, with no slippery slope. They didn’t, and then they went and made it seem like if they said they did loud enough, that would be the same as getting it right the first time.

They didn’t get it then, and they don’t get it now; they are the reason he’s on the cover of SI today, after all this time, trying to get back into a game that he betrayed. They gave him the legs to get to today. They could have and should have forced him to make this same admission back then, especially if they felt so strongly that they had him dead to rights; and more so since they were giving him so much. They couldn’t, wouldn’t and and/or just plain didn’t, and now Seligula has, and for finally coming clean, Rose will be allowed back into baseball by a commissioner who has plenty of ‘splainin’ to do of his own most days.

I’m still processing, and I’ll probably formulate an opinion pretty soon, but I thought these takes were both interesting. What does this change, as far as Rose is concerned? Should it change anything?

One thing I do feel with is that it’s idiocy to reinstate Rose based on the admission of guilt. Betting on baseball does, and always should, carry a lifetime ban, no matter the circumstances. I don’t think admitting your guilt is good enough.