KC Kingdom Editorial: Should MLB Lift Ban on Pete Rose

Mandatory Credit: Charles LeClaire-USA TODAY Sports

Lift the Ban?

I’ve never really tackled this topic, even though I’ve often thought about it. It wasn’t until Rose’s recent reinstatement request that I devoted any considerable deep thought to it. I have some pretty strong feelings on the matter, and believe there’s a way all sides can win.

What muddies the waters is the fact that we’re talking about Pete Rose, and not some rum-dum middle-of-the-road player. It’s Pete Rose! One of the greatest hitters of all time. The career hits leader.

The facts remain that Rose bet on baseball games. Some were games that he was a direct participant in, and some where he was a manager and actually dictated some of the game action.

So, the thing that’s hardest to do in sports, Pete Rose did it more than anyone in MLB history. Pete Rose, to many, is what George Brett was to me. A baseball idol, and an example of how the game should be played.

Unfortunately, there’s no room for what Pete Rose did, and under no circumstances could I ever support MLB lifting the lifetime ban. The rule is there for a reason. If we’re just going to forgive and forget what he did, what’s the point of having the rule? The one unforgivable sin that MLB has posted in every clubhouse, in every MLB city, Rose thumbed his nose at.

We’re a forgiving country, I get that. When people admit their wrong-doing, our society tends to be more lenient and understanding. This, however, is a case where the punishment fits the crime, and there is no need for re-consideration. The facts remain that Rose bet on baseball games. Some were games that he was a direct participant in, and some where he was a manager and actually dictated some of the game action.

None of that has changed. The rules haven’t changed. Rule 21 remains a staple in every clubhouse. The rule doesn’t state that if it is broken, you’ll immediately receive a lifetime ban, but if you’re good, and a legendary ball player, and admit you’re wrong, we’ll consider lifting the ban after 25 years or so.  If this were any other player, say Buddy Biancalana, would they be “considering” lifting the ban? I sincerely doubt it.

The ban stays, in my opinion, and if there were a part of this process I could change, it would be that there is no application for reinstatement unless evidence is produced that the findings of the initial investigation are potentially inaccurate.

Sorry Pete, case closed. You will never be officially affiliated, or employed by MLB ever again.

Next: The Solution