OT Ok all you baseball purist

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by Hoopguru, Feb 18, 2020.

  1. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    29,913
    Likes Received:
    13,552
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Uhh......no. You're talking about opening huge can of worms.

    And how do we know exactly what Rose did and did not bet on?...among other things, he's a proven liar.
     
  2. tlongII

    tlongII Legendary Poster

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    16,455
    Likes Received:
    10,935
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Systems Analyst
    Location:
    Beaverton, Oregon
    All I know if what has been reported on. Every betting document from Rose that has been reviewed showed he bet on the Reds.
     
  3. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    29,913
    Likes Received:
    13,552
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can believe that all you want and no offense, but I think you're being quite naive and your motivation on this subject is understandably skewed.

    But as far as what did or did not bet on, we don't know what we don't know. Rose broke a long standing rule and he's rightfully paying the price for his transgressions.

    How do you propose to govern/regulate allowing ball players/athletes to bet on sports?...what you're prosing is just not pragmatic at all.
     
  4. GhostOfPGA

    GhostOfPGA The late great Paul Allen

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    3,222
    Likes Received:
    3,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Heaven
    I think all their players should have about 10-20 HBPs this season.

    Can’t strip their title but I think they should asterisk it and vacate wins.
     
    Shaboid likes this.
  5. TorturedBlazerFan

    TorturedBlazerFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2018
    Messages:
    19,824
    Likes Received:
    23,356
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Baby Daddy
    Location:
    Chasing my kids
    So I'm an outside observer not into baseball really but I get to hear about it on sports radio and I know the history sort of... The issue to me with Baseball is they've got some weird honor system with this stuff and come off totally hypocritical. Like hey Rose gambled that's bad, oh but we can make money off gambling so were into it. I've never seen or heard any proof that Rose was trying to lose games.
     
  6. tlongII

    tlongII Legendary Poster

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    16,455
    Likes Received:
    10,935
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Systems Analyst
    Location:
    Beaverton, Oregon
    Dude, the league cannot invest in gaming sites and then prohibit players from gambling. That is just horseshit.
     
  7. Hobbesarable

    Hobbesarable Cartoon Character

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2012
    Messages:
    6,773
    Likes Received:
    5,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
  8. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    29,913
    Likes Received:
    13,552
    Trophy Points:
    113

    You're missing the point.

    Casual observers betting is OK...players betting on their sports is a completely different animal. You'd be inviting bribery/extortion and God knows what else into the game.
     
  9. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    29,913
    Likes Received:
    13,552
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here's someone more articulate than I outlining the evils of betting in sports;

    ===========================================================
    http://www.sportsonearth.com/articl...think-gambling-isnt-baseballs-biggest-problem


    Pete Rose thinks PED users have scarred the game of baseball more than he did with his admitted gambling during his career. (Getty Images)
    Pete Rose -- and by extension, Kostya Kennedy, author of a new biography of Rose, and Sports Illustrated, which put Rose on the cover this week with the cutline "It's time to rethink Pete Rose" -- claims his admitted gambling on baseball is a lesser crime, and less damaging to baseball, than players who used PEDs. Whether or not you believe Pete Rose should be allowed back in baseball, he is wrong. Here are 10 reasons why.


    It's the No. 1 rule. When players walk into any clubhouse in any stadium in baseball, they see this rule: "Any player, umpire, or club 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 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." This has been the case for nearly 100 years, since the game was almost destroyed by a betting scandal. There are now rules posted in clubhouses about banned substances that cannot be taken. But they have only been there for the past decade, and a lifetime ban occurs after three offenses, not one.

    Gambling truly damages fan interest. The game of baseball was devastated in the wake of the 1919 Black Sox scandal, with trust in the game eroded to the point of near annihilation. Baseball can weather a scandal of whether players are using artificial means to boost their game; it cannot weather a scandal of those players purposely trying to lose. Imagine what would happen if a player like Eddie Cicotte told a grand jury what he did back then: "I don't know why I did it. I must have been crazy. Risberg, Gandil and McMullin were at me for a week before the Series began. They wanted me to go crooked. I don't know. I needed the money. I had the wife and the kids. The wife and the kids don't know about this. I don't know what they'll think. I've lived a thousand years in the last 12 months. I would have not done that thing for a million dollars. Now I've lost everything, job, reputation, everything. My friends all bet on the Sox. I knew, but I couldn't tell them." Also, note that statement: My friends all bet on the Sox. This is an impossible thing to abide today. Baseball knew gambling was such a mortal threat it had to be kept away from players entirely.

    PEDs do the opposite: They increase fan interest. It is easy to argue years later that PEDs were a great stain on the game, once you have the supposed moral high ground. But no one minded PEDs when there was a home run chase. And fans continue to cheer for players who have been attached to PEDs as long as they are helping their team win. (Ask David Ortiz, or Andy Pettitte. Our anger with PED users tends to be directly proportionate to how much we like the player already.) Fans like to mock supposed PED users when they're on the other team. But when they're on theirs, they cheer. Fans would rather players not use PEDs. But more than that, they'd rather just not know, and enjoy the fruits.

    There is moral downside to betting on your team to win. There is no moral downside to juicing.
    A common defense of Rose is "he never bet on his team to lose." This is easily swatted down: Any person helping to facilitate Rose's gambling could simply look at games he didn't bet on and adjust accordingly. (If you told me nine times out of 10 that your team was going to win, I wouldn't have much faith in you in that 10th game.) That gambling creates the moral hazard of being potentially so in hock to bookies that they require you to throw a game -- something that apparently didn't happen to Rose but quite easily could have -- must be noted as well. No one takes PEDs to lose or only takes them before important games.

    Results are more important than statistics. This would seem self-evident, but it's a claim Rose makes explicit. "I know I didn't do anything to alter the statistics of baseball," Rose told Michael Kay last month. "As you know, baseball statistics are sacred. That's why baseball cards are worth more than football cards, why that Honus Wagner card is going for a couple million bucks, why baseball memorabilia is much more valuable than football or basketball memorabilia. I had nothing to do with altering statistics of baseball." Think about what Rose is saying here. Changing the documentation of the game -- statistics -- is more sacred than changing the results of games -- which is what betting on the sport when you are involved with them inherently is. It is also noteworthy that Rose is unable to discuss the value of baseball without connecting it to the buying and selling of memorabilia.

    There's still not a ton of proof that PEDs work the way many claim. We know throwing games works. Many intelligent observers have long argued that the supposed "steroid era" of baseball might in fact have been a juiced ball era; the only proof we have so far of the benefits of PEDs have been in helping players recover from injury and workouts. (There has been no connection proven between taking PEDs and being able to hit a baseball, farther or otherwise.) There may be benefits from PEDs, but they have never been definitively proven; instead, we are given platitudes about "integrity" and "class" and "honor." Also, it has not been proven that PEDs have changed the result of a single game, particularly when you consider that it's not just hitters who have taken them. Pete Rose placed money with people outside of the game based on the results of games he was directly in charge of. This is proven, admitted and undeniable. No one else has been proven to do this since Rose.

    7. Amphetamines are widely thought to have more performance-enhancing benefits than PEDs. Rose used those. He told David Letterman that very thing.

    8. Those who have been punished for PED use, even Alex Rodriguez, have admitted what they did and accepted the punishment. Rose has changed his story for years, depending on what rhetorical point he's trying to make, and continues to argue that what he did -- breaking the fundamental baseball rule -- wasn't that bad. The players have been punished according to the collectively bargained rules (with the possible exception of A-Rod) and accepted their punishment. Rose can argue the rule is too harsh, but he cannot argue it was never the stated penalty -- or the one he formally accepted.

    9. We are still in the early stages of understanding PEDs. We are not in the early stages of understanding gambling. Science is changing rapidly, and always will, and what we think of as a PED today may mean something very different in 20 years. (Even the PEDs Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds are accused of taking are archaic, almost barbaric, compared to the PEDs being used today.) We still do not understand the effects PEDs have on sports or will continue to. The effects gambling has on sports have been proven for a century now. It is one thing not to trust that all players are on an even field; it is another to not trust that all players are trying to win, perhaps for their own private financial purposes.

    10. There's still a ton we probably don't know about Rose's gambling. This has always seemed the shutdown argument. When Rose voluntarily agreed to his ban, part of the deal was MLB would halt its investigation of him. That's to say: There may have been far more gambling involvement with Rose than we know now. Do we know that? No. But we do know that when Rose agreed to his ban, he did so in large part so the investigation would stop. As Matt Snyder from CBS Sportsline put it: "We'll never know what more the investigation would have found and revealed, but we do know Rose wanted badly enough for it to stop that he cut the deal and volunteered to be banned from baseball for life."

    This is not something ever afforded Alex Rodriguez and other suspected PED users: The one thing MLB never offered to do was halt any investigations. (To say the least.) Pete Rose claims he's had a raw deal, and that PED users are getting off easy. He's wrong. He has it exactly backwards. He tends to do that.
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2020
  10. tlongII

    tlongII Legendary Poster

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    16,455
    Likes Received:
    10,935
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Systems Analyst
    Location:
    Beaverton, Oregon
    So PED's are okay, but gambling's not? Oh, okay.
     
  11. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    29,913
    Likes Received:
    13,552
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nice assumption...but you're wrong again. And again, you completely miss the point.

    The article was actually about Rose's contention that PEDs ruined the game..try reading it again.
     
  12. Lanny

    Lanny Original Season Ticket Holder "Mr. Big Shot"

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26,638
    Likes Received:
    16,945
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Elec. & Computer Engineer OSU Computer Science PSU
    Location:
    Lake Oswego, OR
    Wasn't that cheating? Do we reward cheaters with the title?
     
  13. Lanny

    Lanny Original Season Ticket Holder "Mr. Big Shot"

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    26,638
    Likes Received:
    16,945
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Elec. & Computer Engineer OSU Computer Science PSU
    Location:
    Lake Oswego, OR
    Nonsense, gambling on any games is dirty.
     
    yankeesince59 likes this.
  14. RipCityDSCPL

    RipCityDSCPL Could be worse, at least it's not Lonzo.

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    3,423
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No way to prove the games would or wouldn't turn out differently?

    Really?

    How about the fact the very first year they moved to the American League they just started whipping everyone's ass when for years they were at the very bottom of the National League.

    If that isn't proof they had a clear advantage I don't know what is.
     
  15. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    29,913
    Likes Received:
    13,552
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think you misread or misinterpreted what I was referring to.

    We're talking about only the games in a short best of 5 or best of 7 during the year they won the title.

    And who said that it didn't "give them an advantage"?...certainly not me.

    And you're wrong about the Astros first year in the AL which was 2013...their record that year was 51-111.
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2020
    Lanny likes this.
  16. MARIS61

    MARIS61 Real American

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    28,007
    Likes Received:
    5,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Yankee
    Location:
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Games are defined by rules.

    All persons involved in cheating should be banned from the league for life, their stats erased.

    Championship for that year voided and left vacant.
     
    Lanny likes this.
  17. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    29,913
    Likes Received:
    13,552
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course it was...so was PED usage but I don't see how we can start retroactively deny/vacate titles, because not everyone is/was guilty.

    ARod was a cheating POS on the Yanx when they won their last title in 2009 but should the Yanx and other champions be penalized because of a handful of cheats?
     
  18. tlongII

    tlongII Legendary Poster

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    16,455
    Likes Received:
    10,935
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Systems Analyst
    Location:
    Beaverton, Oregon
    Pete Rose NEVER cheated!
     
  19. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    29,913
    Likes Received:
    13,552
    Trophy Points:
    113

    ...lol...and 1000's of other players not named Pete Rose, weren't convicted of betting on Baseball.
     
  20. TorturedBlazerFan

    TorturedBlazerFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2018
    Messages:
    19,824
    Likes Received:
    23,356
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Baby Daddy
    Location:
    Chasing my kids
    Is sign stealing even against the rules...? I googled and it didnt like it. So basically they “cheated”, but didn't break the rules...?
     

Share This Page