Bloom Is Off the Rose, but Many Say He Still Has a Place in the Hall

The opinions are numerous and most seem to favor the induction of Pete Rose into the Hall of Fame despite the revelations of his gambling crimes. One argument, presented in your paper, compares his behavior to those players who have been suspended for drug violations. Why, it asks, should drug violators be reinstated while Pete Rose is banned for life?

A distinction must be made between these two types of activities. A ballplayer who succumbs to the addictive pleasures of drugs is committing a crime that is largely self-directed. A player or manager, however, who gambles on his own sport commits a crime with much broader and destructive implications.

Sports fans watch the game for its inherent action and drama that we presume to be honest and true. When somebody like Pete Rose undermines that presumption by utilizing his insider status to place self-enriching bets, that trusting relationship is destroyed. No doubt, an athlete’s performance on the field should be the primary criterion for determining eligibility for the Hall of Fame. But should someone be rewarded for playing the game brilliantly while all the while he stabbed the game in the back off the field?

ROBERT DEFULGENTIIS

Los Angeles