George Steinbrenner, Peter Rose and Shoeless Joe
- 2010/07/16 13:15:38
- Read all 24 opinions
George Steinbrenner, Peter Rose and Shoeless Joe
The late George Steinbrenner was one of the most dynamic owners in the
history of baseball. In the long run he will rank with Branch Rickey,
Bill Veeck and others who changed the game. He was the first modern
owner who actually took his role seriously. Like any CEO watching the
bottom line, "The Boss" believed his team should be successful. He
understood that the "bottom line" for a baseball team was in wins and
losses and World Series rings. Winning for him was the most important
thing. He was willing to invest in the team -- investing huge amounts
of money to win. But, he also understood that winning wasn't the only
thing.
Profits did matter and so he brought his very considerable
entrepreneurial skills to the business of baseball. The result was a
fabulous marriage of winning, innovation (such as his YES network), and
profits. Even those who hated George Steinbrenner -- starting with
frustrated Boston Red Sox fans and owners -- will in the end miss him.
The owner of the Red Sox called the Yankees under Steinbrenner the
"Evil Empire'," But without the formidable "Boss" as Darth Vader, the
Red Sox would have just been another losing team, instead of ther
heroic (in the minds of Red Sox fans) underdogs. Even for those who
hated him, Steinbrenner made the game more exciting, more interesting,
and more profitable for everyone. Indeed, he forced the other teams to
compete to the point that in 2004 even the once pathetic Red Sox
finally won a World Series by out Steinbrennering The Boss himself.
By all rights George Steinbrenner should be elected to the Hall of
Fame the first time he is eligible. I hope he gets in, and with him
they induct Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson. They are not in the
Hall of Fame. Instead, they are banned from baseball. Why, because they
broke some baseball's rules about gambline and embarrassed the game.
They consorted with gamblers, and because Rose actually bet on his own
team. Baseball is harsh to those who break the rules.
Right.
Except George Steinbrenner was a convicted felon. In 1974 in an
elaborate plea bargain the owner of the New York Yankees pled guilty to
one felony count and one misdemeanor for his role in the Watergate
Conspiracy. Yes, George Steinbrenner the ultimate American patriot and
baseball leader, tried to undermine the American democracy by illegally
giving contributions to Richard Nixon's reelection campaign.
Steinbrenner also pressured his own employees to lie to government
agents and to the grand jury about his illegal activities.
George Steinbrenner was also guilty of consorting with gamblers --
kind of like Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose. In 1990 he admitted to paying
a gambler he had hired to dig up dirt about one of his own star
players, Dave Winfield. Why? Because Steinbrenner did not want to pay
$300,000 to Winfield's charitable foundation, as required by Winfield's
contract. Winfield had to sue for the money and that led Steinbrenner
to become involved with a gambler, who was himself involved with
organized crime.
So, how did baseball treat its most famous owner after his felony
conviction and later his admission of consorting with known gamblers.
For the felony -- a felony that was directed at the people of the
United States, the Constitution, and our system of government --
baseball suspended Steinbrenner for two years, and this was later
reduced to one year and three months. Steinbrenner was then back in
baseball, running his show. For the gambler who was an owner, the
suspension lasted three years; for the players like Jackson and Rose
the suspension is forever.
Apparently being a felon, trying to undermined the government of
the United States, and consorting with gamblers did not embarrass the
game sufficently to keep Steinbrenner away.
Shoeless Joe Jackson was banned from baseball for life (and remains
banned from the Hall of Fame even though he is dead) after he allegedly
accepted a bribe to throw the World Series. He had one home run, six
RBIs and hit .375 in the Series. It is hard to imagine he was throwing
the game. A jury did not think so, since he was acquitted in a court of
law. But baseball has its own law and Shoeless Joe was banned forever
from the game he loved. He is still not in the Hall of Fame although
everyone knows he should be. So, of course, should Pete Rose. He was
one of the greatest hitters in the game and one of the most exciting
players to watch. He stupidly bet on his own team. It made him more
competitive since he had even a greater stake in winning. But, he is
still banned from baseball and not in the Hall of Fame.
In 1989, just as he was leaving office, Ronald Reagan pardoned
George Steinbrenner for his felony conviction for his role in
Watergate. That was just before he consorted with a known gambler with
connections to organized crime in his unconscionable effort to defame
Dave Winfield. No one pardoned him for that, but he was back in
baseball three years later.
As we mourn George "the Convict" Steinbrenner (and I do mourn him)
isn't it time for baseball to pardon Jackson and Rose? Or, will Major
League Baseball continue to have its great double standard, that allows
convicted felons and those who admit they have consorted with gamblers
to be in upper management, but punishes a few hapless players,
including those who like Jackson, who have been acquitted of any wrong
doing?
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-finkelman/georg...
Top Opinion
-
Heptarch 2010/07/16 13:23:43+3Joe Jackson never bet on his team. His ban is wrong.
Rose did bet on his team. He undermined the integrity of the game. His ban should stand.
Steinbrenner's felony didn't have anything to do with the game on the field. He shouldn't be banned for it. And while I hate the man for what he did to the game I love, he shouldn't be left out of the Hall. He's the modern era's most influential owner.
About Me
Recent Posts
-
Who Is Your Favorite DWTS Winner?
-
Who Is The Sexiest Athlete?
-
Which Star Has the Sexiest Feature?
- View more slideshows »
News
-
Beyoncé Cancels Tour Due to Doctors Orders: Do You Think She’s Pregnant?
She may run the world, but today she’s on bed rest. Doctors advised Queen Bee to cancel her performance Tuesday evening in Antwerp.
-
Was American Airlines Right to Kick Woman Off Plane for Singing?
An American Airlines flight from L.A. to New York made an emergency landing on Thursday... when a female passenger refused to stop singing Whitney Houston. Um, what?
Politics
-
PUBLIC OPINION > Rand Paul Is the Future of the Republican Party
Ever since President Obama's re-election back in November, the media hasn't stopped reporting about the ruffled course of the Republican party. So who's the future face of the GOP? Find out how the public voted.
-
PUBLIC OPINION > Chris Christie Should Stay a Republican
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has been at the center of media coverage for a while now. But more recently, the buzz has been about his proclaimed political party -- and whether or not he should change it.


















Perhaps Judge Kennesaw Mountain Landis wanted to establish himself as the 'man-in-charge' and therefore, decided to ban Joe, etc. to prove a point. Joe Jackson's ban from the Hall of Fame is an injustice.
Meanwhile, the media has been expounding on Steinbrenner's largess to athletes.
I guess time will tell!!
As far as Steinbrenner's "largesse" - let's ask Dave Winfield about that one :)
I believe that Steinbrenner deserves to be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame.
I also believe that Pete Rose and my absolute favorite ballplayer, "Shoeless" Joe Jackson, should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame.
Thanks, SG.
I think Shoeless Joe Jackson's ban is probably the greatest injustice in sports history, especially considering that he was acquitted of any wrongdoing by a jury. Both Rose and Steinbrenner were actually convicted of crimes, and while I'm not suggesting that ANY conviction automatically means ineligibility, I think the fact that Jackson was clearly innocent of everything he was accused of DEMANDS that he be exonerated, even if it is decades after his death.
I can't say I agree that Steinbrenner deserves the Hall of Fame. I think right now everyone is trying to remember the positive things about his life, but in a year or so when it's not so "fresh" in our minds, the negatives will once again outweigh the positives. As I said somewhere else on this thread, if anyone in America is annoyed at the fact that the average family of four can no longer even afford to go to a baseball game, I hold Steinbrenner largely responsible for it (along with Marvin Miller and Charlie Finley). When the WORST player in the major leagues has a starting salary that's more than the President of the United States, there's something wrong, and that too is in my opinion Steinbrenner's fault. When I was growing up the members of my team (the Mets, of course!!) were almost like family. I l...
I think Shoeless Joe Jackson's ban is probably the greatest injustice in sports history, especially considering that he was acquitted of any wrongdoing by a jury. Both Rose and Steinbrenner were actually convicted of crimes, and while I'm not suggesting that ANY conviction automatically means ineligibility, I think the fact that Jackson was clearly innocent of everything he was accused of DEMANDS that he be exonerated, even if it is decades after his death.
I can't say I agree that Steinbrenner deserves the Hall of Fame. I think right now everyone is trying to remember the positive things about his life, but in a year or so when it's not so "fresh" in our minds, the negatives will once again outweigh the positives. As I said somewhere else on this thread, if anyone in America is annoyed at the fact that the average family of four can no longer even afford to go to a baseball game, I hold Steinbrenner largely responsible for it (along with Marvin Miller and Charlie Finley). When the WORST player in the major leagues has a starting salary that's more than the President of the United States, there's something wrong, and that too is in my opinion Steinbrenner's fault. When I was growing up the members of my team (the Mets, of course!!) were almost like family. I looked forward to seeing Ed Kranepool every Spring, and I actually shed a tear or two when Tom Seaver was traded. Nowadays, every Spring I have to spend a week just figuring out who's on my team, and the very concept of "team loyalty" is pretty much nonexistent, with VERY rare exceptions. And that, too, I blame on George Steinbrenner.
And when you add a felony conviction and two separate bans from baseball, I can't see how Steinbrenner should even be considered for the Hall of Fame.
Rose did bet on his team. He undermined the integrity of the game. His ban should stand.
Steinbrenner's felony didn't have anything to do with the game on the field. He shouldn't be banned for it. And while I hate the man for what he did to the game I love, he shouldn't be left out of the Hall. He's the modern era's most influential owner.
You also have to remember the circumstances of his ban in the first place. Although it was a "lifetime ban", it's fairly certain that he and Commissioner Giamatti both understood that the ban would be "reviewed" in a few years so long as Rose didn't get into any new trouble. Then Giamatti died, and Fay Vincent wouldn't uphold the "understanding".
...
You also have to remember the circumstances of his ban in the first place. Although it was a "lifetime ban", it's fairly certain that he and Commissioner Giamatti both understood that the ban would be "reviewed" in a few years so long as Rose didn't get into any new trouble. Then Giamatti died, and Fay Vincent wouldn't uphold the "understanding".
As for Steinbrenner, it is true that his felony didn't have anything to do with the game on the field. But to that I'd have to say, so what. The man committed crimes against the United States of America, and to me that's a little more serious than a "crime against baseball." It isn't that he was a disgrace to baseball so much as he was a disgrace PERIOD. Being "influential" is not necessarily a good thing. Steinbrenner was primarily responsible for the fact that the average family can no longer even afford to go to a game. He is the reason why the minimum salary in baseball is higher than any rational maximum salary ought to be. He turned a pleasant game that enriched the lives of millions of kids into little more than an excuse to sell t-shirts and hats. Even were he not a felon, I would never consider him "hall-worthy". Given the felony conviction, I don't even think its worth debating.
But that's not really the point, SG. The point is that baseball is a game based, at its core, upon it's rich history. That history manifests as statistics that can be compared from era to era. The integrity of those statistics must be beyond reproach for that model to work.
Whether Rose affected those statistics personally or not is immaterial. By betting on his team he COULD have had a hand in them. It's more about the perception of integrity than the act itself. Because even if Rose didn't affect the stats, can you guarantee that the next person like him to bet on games will not? HAS not? It may very well be true that the league made an example of Pete Rose. I'm fine with that. It NEEDED to make an example of him to protect the future of the game.
Does he deserve to be in the Hall based solely upon his numbers? First ballot, 100% all the way. Does he deserve to represent baseball as a Hall of Famer? Not a chance. He defamed the game.
I suppose you may be right about Steinbrenner, however. The more I think on it, if you deny people the Hall based on whether you consider them to be representative of the game's integrity, maybe he shouldn't be there.
I'm not sure I know the answer to that. Certainly Ty Cobb did little off the field to enhance baseball's reputation and integrity. He was a drunken brawler in and out of various jails, admittedly never for anything like murder, but still, hardly a role model. Denny McLain, baseball's last 30 game winner, went to jail for tax fraud, yet he's still eligible for the Hall. I'm sure we can each come up with other examples of Hall of Famers whose character is nothing to be proud of. Hell, OJ is still in the NFL Hall of Fame and he murdered two people.
It seems to me that if OJ Simpson is a hall of famer, and if Ty Cobb is a hall of famer, it's kind of hypocritical to keep Rose out. As I said, I'd have no problem with continuing to ban him from participating in the game now or making appearances on behalf of baseball, but I do think that his accomplishments as a player deserve to be recognized.
I think that's too simplistic. I think it most has to do with how well they played the game (or contributed to it in their sphere), yes. But I think that if you take too much away from the game in how you conduct yourself, or undermine the integrity of the game itself, then your stats mean nothing. That's why I think McGwire, Sosa, Bonds et al should never be inducted.
Agreed. That's why I said "et al". hehehe
"These players cheated, plain and simple."
So did Rose, in his way. Betting on the game IS cheating, just in a different context.
"but I still don't see where there's a single statistic anywhere that's called into question because of Rose's off-field activities."
The point isn't whether you can say that about Rose, but whether you could say that of any other player tempted to bet on games in the future. If you pardon Rose, you set a TERRIBLE precedent.
Also - I suspect that if someone is determined to break the rules, the fact that Pete Rose is not in the Hall of Fame is probably not going to stop them.
Likely. But it doesn't mean MLB needs to sanction the rulebreakers by allowing them in the Hall.
I think you and I will simply agree to disagree on this one. ;)