1.. He still has more hits (4,256), more games played (3,562) than anyone in Major League Baseball history and never gave the slightest hint on the field that he wasn't giving 100 percent in an effort to win.
2. As damning as the new evidence appears to be, it is circumstantial at best and the hand writing belongs to a convicted felon.
3. While John Dowd didn't have the proof that ESPN alleges to have uncovered when he authored the report that led to Rose's banishment in 1989, the inference was there all along and the probability of Rose betting on baseball as a player already was part of then-commissioner Bart Giamatti's decision.
Reasons to not support Rose:
1. If the new evidence is, in fact, proof that Rose bet on baseball while he was a player, it will be the second outright lie he has told to investigators, the office of the commissioner and you, the public.
2. While the evidence suggests he never bet against the Reds, it's irrelevant because the decision to not bet on his team on certain days creates its own inference of malfeasance.
3. The new documents show Rose betting at a staggering rate in terms of frequency and volume, and losing that much money at that rapid of a pace and associating with bookies who have ties to organize crime creates too much doubt for any rational mind to ignore.
About the Author