Guest bob_barron Posted July 17, 2003 Report Posted July 17, 2003 All of the info is- http://espn.go.com/mlb/roseontrial.html This sounds very interesting to say the least and if this is good I hope ESPN does more of these.
Guest Choken One Posted July 17, 2003 Report Posted July 17, 2003 It looks Professional...I have a feeling Cincy will be the #1 market demo after the ratings report come in...Most of us likely think it's a REAL trial.
Guest bob_barron Posted July 17, 2003 Report Posted July 17, 2003 Okay- Johnnie Cochran is a damn good attorney. And they're going to commercial? Fuck that
Guest Choken One Posted July 17, 2003 Report Posted July 17, 2003 Is there a real reason for this? No one will change their opinion.
Swift Terror Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 I live in Cincinnati. Most of us here do not have much interest in this--I only heard about this a few days ago and I listen to a lot of talk radio. Everyone here has made up their mind and this mock trial is not really something we are jacked up about. As you can guess, most people here are in favor of Pete, mainly for sentimental reasons (he's a hometown boy) and because we still worship the Big Red Machine. We're just not interested in seeing these two flap their gums over it. Rose: "I haven't missed a game in two-and-a-half years. I go to the park as sick as a dog and, when I see my uniform hanging there, I get well right now. Then I see some of you guys (media) and I get sick again." "Somebody's gotta win and somebody's gotta lose and I believe in letting the other guy lose."
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 God, I was flipping channels and came across this. For the few brief seconds I tuned into this I got the same feeling many get when approaching a car wreck. I flipped back to Judge Judy and laughed at some redneck whose parents were suing him for not paying back a car loan...
Guest bps "The Truth" 21 Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 I was always against the idea of letting Rose back in until MLB let him back in both times a credit card company was paying them to. Either bury him and don't trot him out when someone is lining your own pocket...or screw the whole thing and let him back. Either way you make yourself look bad.
Guest Youth N Asia Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 The previews looked too stupid and didn't get me to watch it.
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 Jesus, it's 10 p.m. How long is this going to be on? Every time I flip the channel there's Johnny going "If the betting slip don't fit you must acquit..."
Guest treble charged Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 They should make a deal with Rose: You can go into the Hall of Fame IF you go in as an Expo.
Guest Anglesault Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 They should make a deal with Rose: You can go into the Hall of Fame IF you go in as an Expo. ... That's a tough decission.
Guest Lightning Flik Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 They should make a deal with Rose: You can go into the Hall of Fame IF you go in as an Expo. That's just LOW.... Sadly if that were to happen, he'd probably be the last player to get into the HOF with an (Montreal) Expo uni.
Guest Anglesault Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 And of course, baseball fans would riot over, arguably, the crown jewel of the Big Red Machine going in as anything else.
Guest Vern Gagne Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 Gary Carter is going in this year. Andre Dawson has shot of making it and going in with the Expos. I hate things like this. It changed no one's mind. Cochran's strategy of bringin former players to tell the court that Pete Rose played hard and should make the HOF...even though that has nothing to do with Rose was on "trial" for. Oh. That haircut Rose had should keep him out of the HOF.
Guest The Grand Pubah of 1620 Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 I thought that Rose never bet on a game his team was envolved in. So what's the big deal? If that's the case then he should have never got banned to begin with.
Rob E Dangerously Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 I thought that Rose never bet on a game his team was envolved in. So what's the big deal? If that's the case then he should have never got banned to begin with. They produced stuff that showed Rose bet on the Reds to beat the Expos. You see, one thing is that Rose was supposedly having money problems and he also had a gambling problem. Even ASSOCIATING with gamblers is a big no-no in Baseball. I'd say there is alot to say that Rose did more than that. One problem wth betting on your own team is that it will manipulate your decision making as a manager. Plus, you'll probably give out hints about the team (like who is playing) to the gamblers to help them win money. The "jury" decided nothing really, they thought Pete Rose should be in the hall, and they also thought he bet on baseball. I don't get the "If he just admits it, everything will be fine" mantra. If he admits it, you're going to put him in the hall anyways? You're going to put a man who violated that rule in the hall of fame. I missed most of the trial since there was a Royals game on and there was no chance of Johnnie Cochran showing up in the middle of that game. Did both sides forget that the Hall of Fame is a private organization and that it's not really controlled by major league baseball? that the hall changed their rules when Rose was about to get in. So, what this shows is that I can get 4,000 hits and then bet on my team and I should "pay the price" (what has Rose paid? lost money from selling his stuff? jail for income tax stuff?) and get into the hall of fame? Let's reinstate the Black Sox then, they paid their due, right?
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 Cochran's strategy of bringin former players to tell the court that Pete Rose played hard and should make the HOF...even though that has nothing to do with Rose was on "trial" for. OMG! A defense lawyer trying to tug at the heartstrings of a jury?!?! Stop the presses. Oh, when was this garbage finally over?...
Guest alkeiper Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 I thought that Rose never bet on a game his team was envolved in. So what's the big deal? If that's the case then he should have never got banned to begin with. There's a written rule in baseball that if you bet on baseball of any kind, you've broken the rule. Its posted in every clubhouse.
Guest Vern Gagne Posted July 18, 2003 Report Posted July 18, 2003 Rose betting on his team one game might also mean, he doesn't care has much about winning a game he doesn't have a bet on.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now