Here we go again

Once again, the debate begins anew.

ESPN debuted the movie "Hustle" last week after the Penn State/Wisconsin game. After the movie, Jeremy Schaap hosted a short call-in show asking the question whether or not Pete Rose should be allowed into the Hall of Fame. In addition, Outside the Lines did a special on Pete Rose as well.

The great argument surrounding Rose will probably continue until some kind of resolution is reached. Sports thrives on controversy, so maybe it is in Rose's best interest to never be reinstated.

Personally, I am sick of him. After he was banned by the late Bart Giamatti in 1989, supporters and detractors have been rallying the troops on both sides. Current members of the Hall of Fame, former teammates, and members of the baseball media have come down on both sides, usually with the elder statesmen against Rose being enshrined, while the "younger" generation say let him in. There are exceptions on both sides, of course.

As a young baseball fan, there was a time when I would have been in favor of Rose being in the hall. He was a record setter. He was Charlie Hustle. On the field, he played hard and worked hard to overcome what he didn't have in natural ability. As someone who didn't have a lot of natural ability, I thought that he was someone that I could emulate, even if I didn't witness most of his career. I had my dad to tell me all about him.

However, there is one crime that you cannot commit as a baseball player. You cannot bet on the game, whether you are betting on your own team or not. You are not supposed to consort with known gamblers. Anyone who has any knowledge of the game knows what the deal was with the Black Sox. Rose knew more about the game than any player of that era. He knew his stats, he knew your stats, he knew the stats of everyone else in the league. He should have known about that.

It was hubris, and the same aggressiveness that he displayed as a player, that ultimately has led to his current exile from the game he loved. He is now an outsider trying to find a way back in.

His book that came out in January was supposed to provide a key to opening the door to the Hall of Fame. But again, the ego and arrogance of Pete Rose snapped that key off in the lock.

Honestly, the issue with Pete Rose, I don't think, is that he bet on baseball. I think the issue, the problem with Pete Rose is that he won't admit what he did. He won't tell the truth. Pete Rose won't allow Pete Rose to get into the Hall of Fame.

Rose has blamed baseball for his current "plight" as he perceives it, saying that if he was a drug addict, this wouldn't be an issue. On one level, he is right. Baseball has been very forgiving of people with drug problems in the past. Take a look at the second chances offered to Dennis Eckersley, Dwight Gooden, Darryl Strawberry and the poster child for multiple chances, Steve Howe.

Yet there is, to me, a fundamental difference between their issues and Rose. Through drug tests or through interventions, all of the people mentioned above were forced to face their demons (some multiple times) and enter rehab. Pete refuses to acknowledge that he has, or has ever had, a problem. And I don't think that he ever will.

Fifteen years ago, if Pete had just said to Commissioner Giamatti, "Sir, I have a problem. I am addicted to gambling and the rush it provides me. I have caused embarrassment to myself and the game. I know that I have to enter treatment in order to better myself. I am truly sorry," then I think that Pete would be in the Hall of Fame today. He would have been suspended, probably for about five years or so, and if he was seen as clean and not gambling anymore, I think he would have been welcomed back into the family of Major League Baseball.

However, in a game that is willing to give second chances to the members of its family that have had issues in the past, in a situation that requires a little humility and some passive acceptance, Pete Rose's greatest asset as a player, his aggressiveness, is exactly the thing that is working against him.